BBO Discussion Forums: Walsh relay for major suit slam tries - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Walsh relay for major suit slam tries

#1 User is offline   wyman 

  • Redoubling with gusto
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,712
  • Joined: 2009-October-19
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, NV
  • Interests:Math, Bridge, Beer. Often at the same time.

Posted 2013-May-17, 12:08

Playing (a flavor of?) WR, we define:

1N - 2D!;
2H - 2S!;
2N! -
... 3C = 6+ clubs, slammish, bad suit [missing (at least?) 2 of the top 3 clubs]
... 3D = 6+ diam, slammish, bad suit
... 3H = 6+ clubs, slammish, good suit
... 3S = 6+ diam, slammish, good suit
... 3N = slammish with 6 solid somewhere [optionally -- I've heard of people just treating this as "good suit"]

And from what I gather, the "full" WR also uses 4C/D/H/S to show major suit slam tries H bad / S bad / H good / S good

So my question is what anyone who plays a full WR now does with the sequence:
1N - 2(M-1);
2M - 4M
since the hand didn't WR.
"I think maybe so and so was caught cheating but maybe I don't have the names right". Sure, and I think maybe your mother .... Oh yeah, that was someone else maybe. -- kenberg

"...we live off being battle-scarred veterans who manage to hate our opponents slightly more than we hate each other.” -- Hamman, re: Wolff
0

#2 User is offline   bd71 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 491
  • Joined: 2009-September-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Suburban Philadelphia

Posted 2013-May-18, 08:52

View Postwyman, on 2013-May-17, 12:08, said:

Playing (a flavor of?) WR, we define:

1N - 2D!;
2H - 2S!;
2N! -
... 3C = 6+ clubs, slammish, bad suit [missing (at least?) 2 of the top 3 clubs]
... 3D = 6+ diam, slammish, bad suit
... 3H = 6+ clubs, slammish, good suit
... 3S = 6+ diam, slammish, good suit
... 3N = slammish with 6 solid somewhere [optionally -- I've heard of people just treating this as "good suit"]

And from what I gather, the "full" WR also uses 4C/D/H/S to show major suit slam tries H bad / S bad / H good / S good

So my question is what anyone who plays a full WR now does with the sequence:
1N - 2(M-1);
2M - 4M
since the hand didn't WR.


Don't know that I have a great answer to your direct question, but two questions/comments:

1. See this recent thread where Jlall throws cold water on the idea of using the transfer-then-bid-4 sequence as "mild slam try." http://www.bridgebas...edium-or-spicy/

2. I've never used this good/bad suit approach for slam exploration in this context or any other. But seems like you have keycard/ace-asking approaches to find out about the top 3 trumps. Is your thinking that this approach adds value because it let's you avoid more 5-level contracts (following RKC sequences that discovered lack of key assets) that might not be safe, or because it solves the minor-suit issues where there may not be room for the full complement of RKC responses?
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users