[Trick13]

I developed these responses about four years ago while trying to: (1) merge 2/1 responses into Precision, (2) eliminate some of the things I didn't like in the standard CC Wei response structure, (3) keep it simple, (4) see if transfer responses could be made to work, (5) take additional advantage from the weak opening - bid with some very weak hands with support or shape that you would otherwise pass. We are happy with the results and have no plans to change. Note these responses will not be legal in some jurisdictions and make sense only opposite a limited opening.

After 1♠ (5+♠, 11-15 hcp):

1NT - forcing inquiry. Most weak invitational hands go via here. Opener will not respond above 2♠ without a freak (7♠, 6♠-5m, 5♠-6m). Responses show min/max/4♥/6♠

2♣ - either a hand that wants to play in 2♦, or 5+♣, 12+hcp
2♦ - either a hand that wants to play in 2♥, or 5+♦, 12+hcp
2♥ - either a hand that wants to play in 2♠, or 5+♥, 12+hcp

Opener will always complete the transfer unless he has a freak (as defined above), or excellent ♠ and 0-1 in the weak suit.
If responder has the weak suit he won't bid again, and opener is encouraged not to compete to the 3-level without something special.
With 12-13 responder will bid 2NT, which opener can pass with 10-11. This also suggests holding 0-1♠: 1♠ 1NT; 2x 2NT suggests 12-13 with 2♠
With anything else responder bids a suit - this is GF, e.g. 1♠ 2♦*; 2♥* 3♣ = GF with 5♦ + 4♣, 1♠ 2♦*; 2♥* 3♦ = GF with 6♦. Thereafter natural bidding ensues.

Raises
We have plenty. All immediate responses from 2♠ onwards show support, and also some sequences that start lower.
1♠ 1NT; 2x 2♠ - this would include a very balanced 8 count with 3♠ amongst other possibilities
1♠ 1NT; 2x 3♠ - a very balanced 14-15 count with 3+♠
1♠ 1NT; 2x 4♠ - sound hand 5♠, weak slam interest
1♠ 1NT; 2x 2NT - 12-13 count with 2♠, not really a raise
1♠ 1NT; 2x 3NT - to play as direct 3NT was artificial, not a raise


1♠ 2♣*; 2♦* 2♠ - GF, 4♣, 3+♠
1♠ 2♣*; 2♦* 3♠ - GF, 5♣, 3+♠
1♠ 2♣*; 2♦* 4♠ - GF, 5♣ poor club suit just 1 of top 3, 3+♠
...same pattern as above but with a ♦ or ♥ suit

1♠ 2♥*; 2♠* Pass - 2-level preempt. We are using this more recently with just a small doubleton in support, no regrets so far.
1♠ 2♠ - 9-11, 3+♠, no shortage. We use 3-way trials after this.
1♠ 2NT - mini-splinter 7-9 in unspecified suit 3+♠, or unspecified void splinter; relay asks
1♠ 3♣ - 12-13 with 3+♠ - we can play in 3♠ if opener has 10-11, or GF with support no more descriptive bid. Like 'Jacoby' with invite+: 3♦=min, 3♥= unspecified shortage, ...
1♠ 3♦ - prime 10-11 with 4♠
1♠ 3♥ - GF good unspecified suit with 2 or 3 of top 3, 3+♠; relay asks
1♠ 3♠ - preempt to 3-level
1♠ 3NT - midi-splinter 10-13 in unspecified suit; relay asks.
1♠ 4x - maxi-splinter 14-15
1♠ 4♠ - pre-empt to 4-level, or good hand with no slam interest

Same pattern after 1♥: 1♠ is the enquiry, 1NT is weak ♣ or strong with ♠, 2♣ is weak ♦ or strong ♣ etc.
We also use a similar pattern after 1♦ (0+♦) also, but 4 transfers starting from 1NT.

It's hard to be objective about this. Every system has occasional hands that are hard to bid, and after a while you stop noticing and bad results, how frequent is this and is it outweighed by gains elsewhere?

+ If you have one of the weak hands, this should be good. Opponents need to start exploring at the 3-level.
+ If you have support it should work out well - we have the raises covered: although some of the sequences quickly get you quite high, there are ways to establish forces at a low level too.
+ Increases variance. For us, this is a positive.
? Maybe most of the benefit comes just from making a limited opening ... not getting too high, or jumping to game without revealing your hand.
? It seems a little backward in a constructive auction, that opener has already made a good start describing his hand then responder takes over the next two rounds describing his hand. I concede that a full relay system starting with say 2♣ is likely to be better, but that violates the 'keep it (reasonably) simple' rule that we need.
? Some shapes work better than others - 1♥ 1NT*; 2♣* 2♠ - GF with 6+♠ seems like a great start; but 1♠ 2♦*; 2♥* 3♥ - GF with 5♦ + 4♥ is not so good.
- Overall slam bidding must suffer a little, compared to 2/1 at least.
- If for you 1♥ 2♠ or 1M 3m is a pre-empt then you lose that.

One of the difficulties with a 'roll-your-own' system is that you don't have a body of people contributing improvements: where would standard bidding be without check-back, fourth suit forcing, reverses, splinters, conventional 2NT, etc? If anybody is interested in trying this, there is not much more to it. I can set out the relay responses we use, and a few notes about competition.

[Kungsgeten]

I've seen this structure played a couple of times, but I have no experience with it myself. I do play 1♠-2♦ as 5+♥ though, but its not two-way. I think it could work, but like you say yourself there's a bit of a one-way communication which may be bad in natural bidding?

Not sure if this is better or worse, but an alternative could be (over 1♠):

2♣ = Weak with diamonds or 12+ minor single-suiter or both minors
2♦ = Weak with hearts, or 12+ with 5 hearts, or GF 6+ hearts.
2♥ = Weak spade raise, or INV+ with 4 hearts (balanced or longer minor).
2♠ = Constructive raise.
3♥ = INV with 6+♥

The 2♣ response is more muddy, but 2♦ always show hearts and the 2♥ response is less cluttered. The idea is to reduce strain on the higher bids.

1♠-2♣; 2♦---
Pass = Weak
2♥ = Clubs, 12+ (opener can bid 2♠ as a relay, then same as 2NT+ below)
2♠ = Both minors, opener's 2NT is forcing but 3m isn't
2NT = Diamonds, INV
3♣+ = Various GF hands with diamonds

1♠-2♦; 2♥ (opener should probably be able to super-accept somehow)---
Pass = Weak
2♠ = GF with 5♥ or perhaps 6 bad. Could have a four card minor.
2NT = INV with 5♥
3♣♦ = GF with 5-5 pattern.
3♥ = GF with 6+♥
3♠ = GF with hearts and spade fit.
3NT = Choice of games with five hearts (and short spades?)
4♣♦ = Long and good hearts, short minor
4♥ = To play

1♠-2♥; 2♠---
Pass = Weak
2NT = INV with 4♥ (or perhaps that hand should start with 1NT...)
3♣♦ = GF with 4♥ and 5+m.
3♥ = 3-4-1-5, GF?
3♠ = 3-4-5-1, GF?
3NT = Choice of games with 4♥ (and short spades?)

[phoenix214]

I have tried playing 1M-2C as GF or weak D.
Somehow I did not like that part of the structure although. The gain seemed to be too small, to be valuable, while it makes some the auctions with strong hands after a bit awkward.
Also you lose the ability to play Gazilli in those sequences.

[nullve]

Opener: 12 hcp, 5314
Responder: 8 hcp, 1453

1♠-2♣
2♦-P

?

[Trick13]

nullve, on 2017-May-02, 03:35, said:

Opener: 12 hcp, 5314
Responder: 8 hcp, 1453

1♠-2♣
2♦-P

?

There is not enough room for any system to always arrive in the best low level contract. Sometimes there isn't one.
With 8 hcp only 5♦ but 4♥, I wouldn't abandon hope on the first round.

1♠ -1NT*
2♣* - 2♦ :: 2♣ = min, no 4♥ or 6♠; 2♦=suggest to play
2♥ - P :: 2♥ = since partner didn't bid 2♣ on the first round and I hate ♦ and have denied 4♥...

[yunling]

I play

1♠-
……1NT=forcing, weak w/o much shape or GF 0-3♠
……2♣=weak with ♦ or inv with 4+♥
……2♦=weak with ♥ or inv with 0-3♥
……2♥=5♥-2♠ or 5♥-5m, weak
……3♣=natural weak

I think it is better to mix the invitational hands with weak-one suiter since they are limited and you can clean up a range and reserve some space for your 1NT response.
Have not learnt your structure in detail but I suspect it might be unfriendly to GF balanced hands and superaccepts.

[Kungsgeten]

yunling, on 2017-May-04, 03:15, said:

I play

1♠-
……1NT=forcing, weak w/o much shape or GF 0-3♠
……2♣=weak with ♦ or inv with 4+♥
……2♦=weak with ♥ or inv with 0-3♥
……2♥=5♥-2♠ or 5♥-5m, weak
……3♣=natural weak

I think it is better to mix the invitational hands with weak-one suiter since they are limited and you can clean up a range and reserve some space for your 1NT response.
Have not learnt your structure in detail but I suspect it might be unfriendly to GF balanced hands and superaccepts.

Seems interesting! What continuations do you play after the 1NT response?

[Zelandakh]

Kungsgeten, on 2017-May-04, 05:15, said:

Seems interesting! What continuations do you play after the 1NT response?

The same as mine would seem logical - 1st step GF relay, others weak and natural.

For what it is worth I will throw my usual hat into the ring even though it is designed for a slightly different hand set (adding 16-17 point hands; removing all 5332s):-

1♠
==
1NT = INV+ relay
... - 2♣ = min with <4 hearts
... - ... - 2♦ = GF relay
... - ... - 2♥+ = nat, INV
... - 2♦ = 4+ hearts
... - ... - 2♥ = GF relay
... - ... - 2♠+ = nat, INV
... - 2♥+ = GF with <4 hearts
2♣♦ = weak, 4+ suit
2♥ = weak, 5+ suit
2♠ = weak raise
2NT+ = various other raises

[nullve]

Zelandakh, on 2017-May-04, 06:10, said:

For what it is worth I will throw my usual hat into the ring even though it is designed for a slightly different hand set (adding 16-17 point hands; removing all 5332s):-

1♠
==
1NT = INV+ relay
... - 2♣ = min with <4 hearts
... - ... - 2♦ = GF relay
... - ... - 2♥+ = nat, INV
... - 2♦ = 4+ hearts
... - ... - 2♥ = GF relay
... - ... - 2♠+ = nat, INV
... - 2♥+ = GF with <4 hearts
2♣♦ = weak, 4+ suit
2♥ = weak, 5+ suit
2♠ = weak raise
2NT+ = various other raises

Opener: 12 hcp, 5314
Responder: 8 hcp, 1453

1♠-2♦
2♥*-P

* scrambling

?

[Trick13]

yunling, on 2017-May-04, 03:15, said:

...
I think it is better to mix the invitational hands with weak-one suiter since they are limited and you can clean up a range and reserve some space for your 1NT response.
Have not learnt your structure in detail but I suspect it might be unfriendly to GF balanced hands and superaccepts.

There are no super-accepts because our weak hand does not even include a weak invite. It's 0-7 rather than say 6-8. I prefer our range but that is a design choice. I did quite a bit of frequency analysis when designing responses initially.

No problem with balanced GF, although with slam interest you might start by showing a minor even with just a 4-carder.

[yunling]

Kungsgeten, on 2017-May-04, 05:15, said:

Seems interesting! What continuations do you play after the 1NT response?

It has been discussed here:
http://www.bridgebas...onse-structure/