tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8276785354801124344.post1270322865370754681..comments2023-09-28T15:26:07.006+00:00Comments on DavidC's Bridge Blog: 1M:2C Artificial: ContinuationsDavidChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14978451945191931557noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8276785354801124344.post-55192680479888749042007-06-27T09:53:00.000+00:002007-06-27T09:53:00.000+00:00Hi David i adopted the developments you suggested ...Hi David i adopted the developments you suggested under my favourite convention on your web page and it seems to work fine. We play an ambra based system (so 2D over 1S shows H and 2H shows D and the 2C relay structure fits very nicely)the only minor ajustments i have made are to use 1M/2D/3S,3NT,4C to show 7M4C11 min,7M4D11 weak, 7M4D11 max (the direct 4D was consuming too much space) and likewise 1M/2H/3NT and 4C show major 7411 min max. So far we do not use QP for slam bidding but instead standard kickback (4D club kick back, 4C then bid other kickbacks, other direct bids natural). Would be happy to share what i have but document is in french (and is not very different from yours) . Thanks for sharing your favvourite convention :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8276785354801124344.post-74107503945498455982007-05-24T09:38:00.000+00:002007-05-24T09:38:00.000+00:00I was forgetting that 2C was balanced if relaying ...I was forgetting that 2C was balanced if relaying - in fact even in pure relays the range benefit is so great I seem to remember deciding to do this.<BR/><BR/>A potentially playable purely symettric 1S - 2C:<BR/><BR/>2D Min, 2H 4+H any, Rest max: 2S 6+S, 2NT 5xx4/5x4x/5332, 3C = 55+, 3D = 55+, 3H = 51(43)/50(53) etc.<BR/><BR/>Should work OK?!Martin Carpenterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17111397654552314982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8276785354801124344.post-29264893364028223592007-05-21T13:18:00.000+00:002007-05-21T13:18:00.000+00:00"I'm pretty sure there isn't (quite) space to do t..."I'm pretty sure there isn't (quite) space to do this below 3NT.<BR/>(iirc it involves putting 6430's & 7321's onto 4C bids - which should normally work OK.)."<BR/><BR/>Yes that's right: I very carefully said "below game level" and not "below 3NT" :)<BR/><BR/>It works because when opener has a 6-4 shape or similar and responder has a balanced hand, you're never going to want to play in 3NT.<BR/><BR/>---<BR/><BR/>The problem with making 2C - 2D symmetric with 2C - 2S+ is that either you have to make the 2S bid nebulous or you have to use 3-level responses a lot; either way you're making life difficult for yourself when responder is unbalanced and would prefer not to relay. Note that my example scheme *is* symmetric, just in a slightly different way to what you're suggesting ...DavidChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14978451945191931557noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8276785354801124344.post-59153395348015766482007-05-21T10:57:00.000+00:002007-05-21T10:57:00.000+00:00A minor quibble - is there really enough space to ...A minor quibble - is there really enough space to sort out range and full shape after 1H/S - 2C(GFRelay)?<BR/><BR/>I'm pretty sure there isn't (quite) space to do this below 3NT.<BR/>(iirc it involves putting 6430's & 7321's onto 4C bids - which should normally work OK.).<BR/><BR/>Of course once you stop trying for full relays things are much easier.<BR/><BR/>Being a symettric relay type I'd rather have 2C - 2D fully symettric with 2C - 2S+ (say same shapes min/max) and then have 2H as unlimited with some shape (which you later discover the range of.).Martin Carpenterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17111397654552314982noreply@blogger.com