[straube]

I complimented benlessard on a particularly successful auction the other day and he kindly provided me with a link to his notes. Since we've started discussing it on another thread, I thought we might move further discussion here. Below I'm going to argue my reservations about it, but I think his system is interesting and I'd like to hear what he has to say about it.

So here are the responses to 1C....

1D as H or SP
1H = S weak or GF
1S = No M w or GF
1NT = clubs w or GF
2C = D W or GF
2D = 6H W or GF
2H = 6S w or GF

1. So I can see how usually 1C-2C as weak or strong 6 diamonds is usually a winner. Most of the time opener will accept the transfer. If responder bids again, I suppose he's relaying his shape? So this is single-suited diamonds (if strong)? or could it be like 6D/4+C? In any case, things don't go as smoothly when opener has a good suit of his own (no relays now when responder is strong) or when opener makes a rare 2N GF ask...because responder has to sort out whether weak or strong...or very strong...as well as the rest of his pattern. We're very high.

2. The sequence 1C-1D, 1H seems like it needs to be forcing. Responder has shown like 5+ hcps. Shouldn't 1H be a relay of some kind? Like a GF relay? I think 1C-1D, 2D as GF is too high.

3. 1C-1D seems overloaded. No worse maybe than 1D (0-7) but still overloaded.

4. How do you continue over 1C-1S? 1S doesn't promise enough for opener to describe his hand. Like I'm thinking how our system allows for reverse relays (as does Moscito). Here, opener just can't bid very high for fear that responder has a very weak hand. You can have a constructive GF auction, but not a relay auction (for either hand).

Seems like a lot of energy is being devoted to weak hands showing some suit feature when that space could be used for something more frequent and useful...like GF symmetric relays. We, too, can stop in 2M pretty easily, but not so 2m and not sure how valuable that is. In competition, I would think you're well-placed after 1 2X response (found your likely fit anyway), but poorly placed after a 1X response. You haven't established a force.

[rbforster]

1D as I read it promises 0+ points and includes very weak H hands with less than 6♥. Competition is easy after anything but 1♦ since you don't need to force - responder is forced to bid if he's got the GF, so openers actions can be pure.

After 1S, I think opener bids 1N a lot and gets dropped there, or rarely bids a strong 2C relay. He could bid 2X too with a 6 bagger, knowing responder is usually weak balanced when they're going to pass.

[straube]

rbforster, on 2012-May-21, 21:42, said:

1D as I read it promises 0+ points and includes very weak H hands with less than 6♥. Competition is easy after anything but 1♦ since you don't need to force - responder is forced to bid if he's got the GF, so openers actions can be pure.

After 1S, I think opener bids 1N a lot and gets dropped there, or rarely bids a strong 2C relay. He could bid 2X too with a 6 bagger, knowing responder is usually weak balanced when they're going to pass.

Yeah, you read it better than I did. I was thinking 1D was semipositives or GF hearts (like yours) but this includes the very weak with fewer than 6 hearts...so maybe 1C-1D, 1H can't be a relay.

[benlessard]

First of all my system is far from being a conventionnal strong club. 1C start at 15 and many strong unbalanced hands are open 1D/1H/1S.

1D is at least 4...unbal 11-22 like polish but wide ranging, ive said it many times IMO PC players are really on the wrong track here , with 18-20 pts and 6D why the #%^& would you prefer to open 1C rather than 1D showing at least 4 ? Its even worse with 5D+4M hands.

1H is 10-14 or 18-22 unbal
1S is is 10-14 or 18-22 unbal

The goal of split range is that like in PC a strong hand mesh well with a minimum hand.

1S--(xy)--??

you dont need to invite very often (11-bad12) you can make neg free bid knowing partner is going to pass or bid again with a strong hand.

If you want to check the system its at

http://bridge.downagain.be/FD/

under public under Chapi (next time its going to be called Comedy Club)

1S--(3y)-- you can bid 3S with 5 to 10 pts without worry. The worse is being in game 18-5 or missing a game 10-14.

In uncontested auction 1C served like a pre-Gazilli. So when we open 1S--1Nt--?? We have no extras or a lot of them. With a 15-17 pts hands we would have opened 1C not 1M.

so in the end 1C is very often bal and very often in the 15-17 range.

Quote

If responder bids again, I suppose he's relaying his shape?

yes
1st step is bal
low short
middle short
high short
low void..

1-We cannot have 64 unless the 6 is near solid. 1C--2S and higher is both m GF with C}D while 1C--1S is no M weak or GF D=}C. IMO true GF hands are overrated. The frequency is really low & vs a broke hand slam is unlikely, in those case finding the best strain isnt too tough. IMO Putting your focus on 21-23 hands is more important than on pure GF imo. EX playing standard strong 2C...2C--2H direct double neg. Do you think 2S & 3m need to be forcing ? I dont. My guess is that opener is 5 times more likely to have a partscore hand 22-23 pts that a 100% GF hand.

Quote

2. The sequence 1C-1D, 1H seems like it needs to be forcing. Responder has shown like 5+ hcps. Shouldn't 1H be a relay of some kind? Like a GF relay? I think 1C-1D, 2D as GF is too high.

responder has show H OR pts, he may be broke with H. Ive always liked that 1D always show some pts for comp purpose (at the cost of weak hands with 4-5 H are in 1S DN) however I now believe that showing 4/5H is as good as showing pts. As for 1H forcing ive played both ways. Im pretty sure 1H non forcing is superior. Pass is often the best DN but its mostly because it allow...

1C-1D-1H-1S as inv no M or GF bal. Opener bid 1NT with 15-16 will force to game with 19-20 and make an inv with 17-18 and 4H.
1C-1D-1H-1NT inv with 4/5S (but non forcing) wich is also good way to stop at 1NT and keeping S in the picture.

In our system 1C-1D-1H is a very frequent start and I can assure you that we are doing pretty well after this start.

Quote

3. 1C-1D seems overloaded. No worse maybe than 1D (0-7) but still overloaded.

It is. 1C-1S and higher are not frequent enough.

after 1C--1S

1NT 15-20 many shapes
2♣ natural at least 5 card 15-20, possibly bal
2♦ art near GF or clubs suits
2♥ 15-17 6H
2♠ 15-17 6S
2NT 21-22 bal
3♣ art GF unclear hand (3 suiter or 55)
3♦ GF D is trumps
3♥ gf H is trumps
3♠ GF Good S
3NT 25-26 bal

like ive said these never happened. Only the 2C/2D/2Nt sometimes happen.

Note that sinceresponder bid his suit even with a DN, 6-4 hands by opener do not pose problems since the 4-4M fit dont exist or is already found. Strong 5/5 are a problem, however responder will be able to transfer or bid a 3 card major. But imo these are really rare IRL.

By far the biggest drawback of my system is that 5M332 are opened 1C or 1Nt and that opener might not be able to show his 5M if the partnership is not GF. 1C/1NT at our table versus 1M at the other is where we lose the most.

The 2nd is that sometimes we cannot reevaluate the hand over an overcall.

AT9xxx
AQT
AQx
x

1C-(P)--1D--(2H)
??

here if we bid 2S partner is going to expect 15-17. If we bid 3S he is going to expect 22+

3rd is that the system isnt designed to open super light. AT98x x AQxx xxx is borderline for us.

4th its tough to learn.

Edit my experience tell me that

1C--1S(no M, not inv)
1Nt-- all pass is tough for the defense. Im sure those who play 1S DN have reached the same conclusion.

Also our responses over 1C are Majors first. With 4S and 6D we bid 1H (showing 4S)

[straube]

Well, I forgot that your club is usually in the 15-17 range. Your responses make a lot more sense. It's like they're opposite a 15-17 NT (not always I know).

I agree with you that PC should use a wide-ranging natural 1D. What pressure they put on their club!

I see the advantages of the 1X opening that may be weak or big (but not intermediate or super big) but not sure that I'm sold on it.

Thanks for discussing the pros and cons of your system. If you want to play against foobar and me sometime, I'd like that.

[Zelandakh]

What I have seen of Ben's system suggests to me that it is generally pretty efficient but has (imho) too high a reliance on RKCB for slam investigations. I think he has enough space in almost all auctions to add a relay continuation route. The other reservation I have is that, as far as I have seen, there are no relay breaks to ask about stoppers. In other words, the system is designed almost purely around the concept that we will have a fit somewhere. Whenever there is no fit there are potential issues cropping up. Overall though, I think the system design has merit and is worth developing further. There are almost certainly still some major improvements to be found here too.

[benlessard]

Quote

but has (imho) too high a reliance on RKCB for slam investigations

When ive learned about relaying I was tought Spiral scan by my mentor and its a that point that ive tasted the possible complexity of bridge. It made a lasting impression on me, so when it come to slam methods im biased.

One of my hope is that someday we will be make a 100 hands contest with the same shape getting out at the same spot and check for optimal slam bidding and draw some conclusion.

However I can safely say that I much prefer RKC low than cuebidding and I dont think its close at all. When you have 3or5 keycards cuebidding only help the defense for the lead. Also Its quite rare that slam is bid with 4 keycards without the Q of trumps (even if sometimes those are 75% slam)

So imo cuebidding is mostly useful when you have exactly 4 keycard with the Q of trumps, or to show a filler in partner suit (especailly those nasty stiff K/Q). There is a lot more 5 level contract going down because your missing too many keycards & trump queen than contract going down because of xxx vs Qxx (where you hold all the rest).


For controls I find that asking for a specific control can be easy after you had the chance to ask for side king.

ex a 5422 is one of the worse shape for control. 5422 has 3 suits to worry (other than trumps) and for us M+M are described late.

1S-1Nt (nat,relay)
2D-2NT (4H, art GF)
3D-3S (5422, H RKC)
4D-4S (2noQ, K of S ?)
5C- (yes but no K of clubs)

If responder hand is something like

xx
AQJxx
xx
AKQJ

Here the A of D is the best card in the deck since its worth 2 tricks. However here we only have enough space to ask for extras. We Would need 2 extras space for asking the K of D & a D control. But if S were trump we will likely be ok. So unless we screw up I dont think an uncontrolled suit is a problem.

Quote

there are no relay breaks to ask about stoppers.

Our relay break show real good suits but it might change. In general the frequency of realy break is very low in most cases. Hands that I find a problems are 23 in partner 54.

1S-1Nt
2D-?? (2D is showing H)

2M is preference
2Nt is GF relay
3m are relay break.
3M INV usually with shortness in the other M

you have 2335 with 14 pts and nothing in diamonds. If you relay and partner is 5431/5422 than its easily possible that 4S is cold and 3Nt is awful. However if you make a relay break with 3 clubs partner is going to expect better clubs. I dont really have a solution for this. Note that we are not in a 2/1 framework so a GF responder often cannot show his suit economically however we have a different upside 1S--2D (is not forcing 5-10) wich often lead to better partscore and put more pressure on opps while giving us a start for competitive bidding. Its a tradeoff im willing to live with.

With minor fit we sometimes must guess between 3Nt and 5m. We dont know if the 4th suit is stopped or not but we know the shape so its again a trade off.

1S--2D
3D--3H
3NT

In standard you will know that the clubs are stopped but wont know the shape. Its not because you have a club stopper that 3Nt is better than 5D. Singleton are very important for looking for 5m.

There is 2 other good thing about my system is when its 5m or 6m we are almost always in a better position than the other table because of the early keycarding. Also when we have a M fit but are able to play 3Nt because of 2/3 stopper in partner stiff these hands are huge winners.

Quote

There are almost certainly still some major improvements to be found here too.

agree 100%

[rbforster]

Ben - how do you handle 5/5 majors 15-17? If those go 1♣-1♠-1NT, can responder find the 5-3 fit if he's got a weak hand?

[awm]

Benlessard's method lacks a lot of the traditional advantages of a strong club; because most openings have a wide (split) range you can't blast games or open super-light or pass the opening on marginal hands. A better comparison point might be a more "standard" system.

Here Ben's methods shine on uncontested slam auctions. However, I think there are a lot of potential negatives too. He's using the "old" precision 2c and a weak NT that includes 5M; both of these can easily lose major fits. He is making the step response to 1x on an awfully wide range of hands, which puts him in a hole if 4th hand bids. He has all the typical issues of strong club in competition without the advantages of limited openings. He will have a number of revealing auctions because of the need to relay (in case opener has a big hand) rather than bash. And some of his follow-ups are still mysterious -- say partner opens 1h and I have 11 high with 4 trumps: how do I invite vs 11-14 while still having a sensible slam auction vs 18-22 and preferably not revealing openers whole hand (if he's 11-14 anyway) for the defense?

It's a system likely to do well in bidding contests, but I'm not convinced of the merits at the table.

[benlessard]

Quote

Ben - how do you handle 5/5 majors 15-17? If those go 1♣-1♠-1NT, can responder find the 5-3 fit if he's got a weak hand?

We cant and im not sure that if we could it would be such a good idea. Responder is going to be GF with D+C at least 50% of the times so not bidding 1NT will cost space. Also its a bit risky vs good opps since they can make an inferential double. Its 15-17 vs 0-5 and probably a misfit so its perfect for them to make a positionnal double.

However if responder is inv with no M opener can transfer to 2H and bid 2S when responder dont super accept the H transfer.

1C-1D (strong, H or pts)
1H-1S (at least 3H 15-20, inv no M or GF bal
2D-2H (transfer =6H to play or BAL 19-20 with 5H or H+S, 2H=I was INV and im not 13(54)
2S= 5S+5H (used to be something else that never happenend)

So at least this we might still bid game if the no M hand is a (13)(45)

Quote

you can't blast games or open super-light or pass the opening on marginal hands. A better comparison point might be a more "standard" system.

We still can blast to game (1M-4M, 1M-3Nt) as long as we accept that partner will go on with a 18-22, anyway my guess is sequence like 1M--3Nt are not really a big plus for precision unless your 1M range is old school precision or if you overbid and play like Meckwell.
1M--4M with values and 3-4 card fit is more useful but ive never had the feeling its a big winner anyway. When you only have 3 trumps and pts concentration its very possible 3NT is a lot better, so most of the gain is when you have scattered values and you keep opp in the dark for the lead, otherwise you need partner to open in first seat to really stop an sacrifice/overcall *****. It would be interesting to know how often a pair like Meckwell blast to game and how many imps they get on these boards because of the straightfoward bidding. As for passing marginal we do have weak (3-6 pts) raises for not missing 21-4 games so our only worry is good M+M with few losers, we cant open them 1C since ther are not in 15-17 nor GF and if we open 1S it may lead to 1S all pass rather than 4H, however we have 2NT available(weak preeempt in a long m or both M 3-4 losers). Note that those hands are a problem in all system too. In prec 1C-1D-1H(extras)-1S(DN) here with both M and 4 losers I dont know what is the solution (You might be playing 2S going down rather than 4H making). Playing 1C-1D(neg)-1S as forcing has some inconvenient too.

What is more an incovenient however is not being able to psych 1y-(P)-1Nt when your broke. I dont have enough experience to know how frequent & effective these psych are, especially at the level that im playing.

Quote

A better comparison point might be a more "standard" system.

IMO we are a lot closer to PC in spirit and in frequency of openings (1C,1NT are frequent our 1D = a bit rare)

Also since our 1C starting at 15 (we upgrade good unbal 14 with 6M or 5S5H) its hard for the opps to bid destructively. I still dont know if the opps should play constructively or destructively against our 1C. A fair % of top pairs prefer to bid constructively against our 1C. If I had to take a guess I would think opps do better when they play natural & agressive constructive over our 1C. Anyway I can say for sure that a pure destructive approach is risky for them and ive seen them missed games quite often. Making game vs a 15+ bal is a lot more possible than vs a 17+ bal

Quote

And some of his follow-ups are still mysterious -- say partner opens 1h and I have 11 high with 4 trumps: how do I invite vs 11-14 while still having a sensible slam auction vs 18-22 and preferably not revealing openers whole hand (if he's 11-14 anyway) for the defense?

At imps Im really a 2M or 4M type of guy. I believe that a limit raise(that put you at the 3 level) at imps isnt a very profitable bid, Im sure its has a positive EV its just that getting to know opener 2nd suit before deciding is probably as good as having a limit raise. Our agreement is that an inv bid tend to show shortness in opener non trump suit suit so that with Axxx he can bid game while KQxx he cant. If you dont have shortness just bid game or make a pref.

1H-1S
1NT-3rounded (here opener showed clubs so 3H is inv with C shortness & 3C show 11 with H shortness)

1H-1S
??-2/4H (here depending on what is declarer 2nd suit we might bid 2 or 4 with no remorse)

However since its an unconventionnal idea its hard to evaluate the effectiveness so maybe im in the wrong track and we should really be inviting more but I feel that we are doing well, we are not missing game that often and we are often at a lower level gaining imps so im very satisfied with my "marginal game values" bidding. However when being a passed hand we should really play some sort of inv bid that allow you to stop at 2M but right now we dont. 1S--2H can probably be used as a limit since with any 6H we would have opened 2H). 1H-1NT (usually showing 5S can also be used for a limit at a cost however)

we also have a drury type bid when a passed hand make a GF relay only when its S+D or H+C however.

Quote

It's a system likely to do well in bidding contests, but I'm not convinced of the merits at the table.

IMO the system is at its best when its competitive, esp

1x--(yz)--?? where 1x is 1D,1M or 1C with a bal hand with no 5M. The worst case are 1C and 1Nt with a 5M bal or 1Nt red. I have no strong opinion about 2C (5C+4M) wich have lead to more good boards than bad ones for me in the last years but im willing to conceded that maybe I was lucky and the bad boards are going to take their revenge in the next years.

***** Ive just remember there was a hand in the USBC final Kxxx,void, KQx, Jxxxxx
all NV

P--(1H)--P--(4H)
??

I though X was totally normal since your a passed hand but against a limited opening and a unclear 4H Meck or Rodw passed and didnt find a super cheap save. Do anyone remember this hand ?