[fromageGB]

jillybean, on 2013-July-27, 17:03, said:

Can you read it again, I think it does say the 2♥ puppet to 2♠ followed by 3♣ does show hearts and clubs.

I'm glad we agree. But the part I quoted was done by cut and paste (adding the coloured symbols afterwards) and not touching the words "Spades and Clubs". It is definitely a typo in the bridgeguys site.

[jillybean]

Ok, I will work on Kokish so we can ditch the 2nd negative responses before we get a chance to use it

I think we can handle the 2 puppets and I do like the switch for hearts+clubs, and hearts.

[jillybean]

fromageGB, on 2013-July-27, 17:07, said:

I'm glad we agree. But the part I quoted was done by cut and paste (adding the coloured symbols afterwards) and not touching the words "Spades and Clubs". It is definitely a typo in the bridgeguys site.

You're right I didn't read far enough, the error is later in the text under

Kokish Relay Bidding Example for Unbalanced Holdings

[jillybean]

What have I missed?

Kokish for balanced hands:

2C 2D
2N (22-23)

2C 2D
2H 2S (puppet)
2N (24-25)

2C 2D
3N (26-27)

2C 2D
2H 2S (puppet)
3N (28-29)

Kokish showing major, or 2 suited M+m, S+H

2C 2D
2H 2S (puppet)
3C (hearts) 3H (hearts+clubs) 3D (hearts+diamonds)


2C 2D
2S 2N (puppet) note responder can raise spades with spade support
3S (spades) 3C (spades+clubs) 3D (spades+diamonds) 3H (spades+hearts)

[aguahombre]

What you will not miss is the best part....CHO getting in the way before you can launch your sequence.

[jillybean]

pesky opponents

How do you handle single suit minor hands...

2C 2D
3C/3D 22-23
4C/4D 24-25 (self sufficient suit) and so on?

[aguahombre]

jillybean, on 2013-July-27, 22:01, said:

pesky opponents

How do you handle single suit minor hands...

2C 2D
3C/3D 22-23
4C/4D 24-25 (self sufficient suit) and so on?

The pesky opponent I referred to was the Center Hand Opponent.

As for the minor single-suiters, I think it might be best to just bid the one you have at the 3-level to set trump, and let a control showing/asking mechanism take over. Exact point count will probably not be of concern.

[jillybean]

aguahombre, on 2013-July-27, 22:21, said:

As for the minor single-suiters, I think it might be best to just bid the one you have at the 3-level to set trump, and let a control showing/asking mechanism take over. Exact point count will probably not be of concern.

Unless partner is bust and opener has a 24+ count

[aguahombre]

Which brings us all the way back to what a 2C opening should look like with a minor one-suiter. Our choice is ten tricks opposite a dog, but on occasion we do it with 9 and pray for something favorable to be over there.

[fromageGB]

The summary post of #44 is how I played it when I used the unspecified (waiting) 2♦ response, but without the 3♣/3♥ inversion. I guess you don't need to do the same thing with spades and a minor, because a hand with decent spade support will show it immediately instead of bidding 2NT.

When opener has a minor, I play it the same as aguahombre, expected to be a 10 trick hand, but may be 9.5! More commonly 10 assuming responder has a 3 card support. How responder continues is debatable. You probably need to have opener's 3m (with all strengths) as forcing, with responses showing whether a fit or not, and whether controls or not, to allow opener to bid 4m+1 as kickback ace ask or 4m as signoff. This is the simple approach, the alternative is to just bid controls and do it all with cue bidding.

This then conflicts with the bridgeguys method of responder transferring on the SECOND bid (having bid 2♦ initially) when responder has a 6 or 7 card suit. My preference is to bid a transfer at the first bid, 3♦ for hearts.

What is more difficult is when opener has shown a major and a minor, say 2♠ then 3♦. Now you want to choose either (you may not have good spade support, eg xxx, and were hoping for a better second suit, but still prefer spades to diamonds) as well as indicating strength/controls. You don't want to bid 4♦ or 3♠ with a control, as that could be a sign-off. Needs discussion and probably artificiality. (This is one reason for my preference for 2♦ negative and 2♥ positive.)

Incidentally, you have the same problem with the 3♣/3♥ inversion. After 2♥ 3♥ you want to bid 4♣ as a sign-off, and 4♣ as preference with control(s)!

[Fluffy]

I strongly advice you to play 2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠-2NT as 24+ GF, forbidding jumps, its more important to find a fit at the 3 level than showing strength which can be done later reopening.

[fromageGB]

Fluffy, on 2013-July-28, 10:37, said:

I strongly advice you to play 2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠-2NT as 24+ GF, forbidding jumps, its more important to find a fit at the 3 level than showing strength which can be done later reopening.

I've never tried this, does this work? When there is no fit I play at a level of NT dependent essentially on the combined hcp. With opener defining his hand by the rebid(s) possibly 3NT or 4NT, it is a simple matter for responder to add his values, and finalise the contract accordingly. With an unlimited 2NT, it is not so easy.

Do you have whoever bids (in the fit exploring sequences) the final normally 3NT only bidding that if he is minimum (ie opener 24/25, or responder 0/1), and instead bidding normally impossible higher bids in 2 point steps, ie 4♣ = 2/3, 4♦ = 4/5 - have to miss out 4♥ because that would be natural in this sequence - have to miss 4♠ because that would be ace asking in this sequence - 4NT = 6/7, etc? That sounds hopelessly confusing and prone to error. And again, if for example 4♦ is normally a slam try in diamonds, you can't use that either. It would never work.

Much simpler is an agreement that over opener's 3NT bid to show whatever greater strength, you just play simple transfers and ace asking.

[Fluffy]

fits are more important than adding values quantitatively.

To be honest, the amount of hands with 26+ I've been dealt in the last 10 years since I play this can be counted with a single hand, so it doesn't matter much, and the sample is too small to compare.

I remember one however which was fun, 2♣-2♦-2NT(unlimited)-3♦-7♥, rest of the field missed the grand on the 5-3 fit (♥AKQ stiff obv), too bad ♥Jxxx didn't fall .

Anyway my point is: overpowered balanced hands should be captain, contrary to slam exploration after a typical 15-17 opening, a 26-28 HCP hand is much better positioned to make informed decisions than the 5 count in front. Those hands are so strong that they are already counting very few losers after finding 4-4 fit.

[aguahombre]

The problem with the unlimited 2NT rebid is that Opener will be unilaterally reraising 3NT just in case Responder has more, and Responder would have had to continue over 2NT with Zero.

[jillybean]

mikeh, on 2013-July-27, 17:03, said:

I do like switching clubs and hearts after 2♣ 2♦ 2♥ 2♠: now 3♣ shows the heart one-suiter, and 3♥ shows hearts and clubs...this allows responder to bid a forcing 3♥ over 3♣, while over a natural 3♥, responder, whose shape is virtually unlimited, can't easily confirm hearts while establishing a force.

We are back tracking and not switching the hearts and hearts+club responses (yet!)
After 2♣ 2♦ 2♥* 2♠* 3♥* (showing single suit, hearts) can responder make a cue in support of hearts? ( or signoff in 4♥ or 3N?)
I can't imagine responder wanting to make a natural minor bid at the 4 level. 3♠ is ostensibly a nt probe
but if responder bids 4♥/3N it becomes apparent the 3♠ bid was a cue.

It's complicated and a problem having to agree the suit explicitly before we can cue or use S3N. Perhaps switching ♥ and ♥+♣ isn't so bad.

[gwnn]

aguahombre, on 2013-July-28, 20:42, said:

The problem with the unlimited 2NT rebid is that Opener will be unilaterally reraising 3NT just in case Responder has more, and Responder would have had to continue over 2NT with Zero.

But this is unlikely.. I like it as 22-24/25+ and opener should only bid on with 28+. First, 28+ is unlikely. Second, even with 28+, usually you find a few quacks in pard's hand. Third, even if partner has 'Zero,' you still make 4NT/5M a fair amount of the time.

[fromageGB]

jillybean, on 2013-July-28, 20:52, said:

I can't imagine responder wanting to make a natural minor bid at the 4 level.

Depends on your policy of responder showing a say 7 card minor. If this is allowed, do you do it immediately (in place of the initial 2♦) or later? Better sort that out. But otherwise 4m has to be a cue.

Quote

It's complicated and a problem having to agree the suit explicitly before we can cue or use S3N.

I can't imagine responder ever wanting to declare in 3NT, so this has to be non-serious/serious automatically agreeing the opener's major. I would think this is true whether opener has shown a single-suited major or a major-minor. To make the best of it, you need some agreement such as a direct cue is one control (only) and 3NT is two or more, in my view.

The difficulty you do need to think about is as I said earlier, handling suit preference AND strength, when opener is 2-suited.

[gwnn]

jillybean, on 2013-July-27, 22:01, said:

pesky opponents

How do you handle single suit minor hands...

2C 2D
3C/3D 22-23
4C/4D 24-25 (self sufficient suit) and so on?

(disclaimer: I did not read all the posts in this thread, maybe I'm repeating.)
You solve a lot of headaches if you switch to (or agree to) "2C=game forcing except for the sequence 2C-2D; 2NT-pass." Even better is "2C=game forcing except for the sequence 2C-2H; 2NT-pass." where 2H is the second negative specifically defined as "I'm warning you, I will pass your 2NT rebid." i.e. you don't even make it with a 5-card major and 0 hcp. So 3C/3D are forcing in this system and opener need not make life harder for the partnership by jumping to the 4 level.

[jillybean]

Phil, on 2013-July-19, 09:56, said:

I suppose I owe partner 4N but this is reason #62 why I hate controls. Knowledge of the ♦A early is so HUGE....GL.

mikeh, on 2013-July-19, 13:34, said:

Run, don't walk, to the nearest booth where they offer better bidding methods!

the hog, on 2013-July-19, 22:04, said:

The method are terrible. So pd has the D A. How many Qs does pd have. I think 4NT is pretty obvious, but I would not play this method if your paid me. (Well, that depends how much, I guess).

aguahombre, on 2013-July-21, 13:54, said:

The Diamond Ace thing is just to add confusion to a simple situation.

I just thought that I should point out that my bad methods have good company - JEC and LAURIA are playing controls.