[Cyberyeti]

pescetom, on 2020-March-03, 14:33, said:

Either I misread or I'm not sure what you guys are smoking?
for most of us who play 2/1, 1D - 2C unpassed hands is game forcing and does not guarantee clubs (even if Bridge World Standard only conceded recently). But precisely because of that, North could never respond 1C here even with a passed hand. It would be 1S or 1NT, according to agreements. Still not an awkward auction though.

Do people still play FG by a passed hand ? I'm no expert on 2/1 but didn't think they did

[pescetom]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-March-03, 15:23, said:

Do people still play FG by a passed hand ? I'm no expert on 2/1 but didn't think they did

No. The passed hand is shaded and no longer GF, but still needs to be close, unlike this.

[Cyberyeti]

pescetom, on 2020-March-03, 15:46, said:

No. The passed hand is shaded and no longer GF, but still needs to be close, unlike this.

And this was the point made if 2♣ is not GF and 2N would be 12-14 then you want to open 1♣ not 1♦, if you play weak NT you can happily open 1♦ as 2N rebid is GF.

[pescetom]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-March-03, 16:30, said:

And this was the point made if 2♣ is not GF and 2N would be 12-14 then you want to open 1♣ not 1♦, if you play weak NT you can happily open 1♦ as 2N rebid is GF.

Playing 2/1 I don't see that it makes any difference if you open 1♣ or 1♦, although the latter is the systemic choice for most - both lead to 3N.

[dsLawsd]

GIB is GIB. But the 8 HCP hand was discounted to less (perhaps correctly because of flat shape and 2 Queens.)

The opening hand has a defect with 7 points in a doubleton. I would therefore open with something besides 1NT. That something depends upon the type of event and type of partner.

Often you would rather overbid at IMPS because your opponents are likely to do so. I like 1♦ because it is lead directive and leaves open a response in a major. If I had short spades I would vote for 1♣ intending to reverse or bid 2NT.

Given the "bots" poor hand evaluation in general sometimes you are the statue and sometimes you are the pigeon.

Good discussion hand. 8 points is just a useful guideline for using stayman- some values are promotible in a distributional responder hand.

[Vampyr]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-March-03, 08:48, said:

Over a 2 level response (and was talking about 1♦-2♣-2N) weak NT Acol has always played 2N as GF.

Oh, I hadn’t realised that the context was after a 2/1 response. But “always” is an overbid. I believe that when the requirements for a 2/1 were considerably weaker, 8HCP or thereabouts, a 2NT rebid was not GF. And I believe that some people still play it that way.

[PhilG007]

pilowsky, on 2020-March-02, 03:49, said:

I'm going to stick my head on the block here and say that most people would accept that 2C Stayman in response to an opening of 1NT (15-17 or 18) indicates - at the very least - 8 HCP. Some would say it ought to include a 4 card major. Certainly, that's what the GIB system card promises ("2♣ Stayman (promises at least one 4-card major unless inviting 3NT)." To be fair, A lot of resources are a bit louche on the 8 HCP bit and one Expert (who ranked in Australia's top 5 last year) told me they would bid 2♣ on less. But my card play is not that good. Jeff Tang's Bridgebum doesn't provide a lower limit, but the lowest I can see in his examples is 8.

So what's my beef? As usual, I made a bidding error in practice against the 'prime robots' and called 1NT on a balanced hand with 19 HCP. When I checked the results, I saw that the more experienced people stretched to 2NT (which is what I usually do) or opened 1♦ or the incorrect 1♣ (see eg learnbridge.NYC). Am I wrong, or should my partner Stayman with 4♠ and 8HCP? I was pretty disappointed to make 1NTS+3 for -5 IMPs while everyone else was in 3NTS. Even Wikipedia agrees.

So, what does our expert panel think? Here's Aaron Stayman singing about coffee to help you think.
https://tinyurl.com/vf75fg5

---

The idea that you need x number of points to use Stayman is a mythical fallacy. Stayman is an excellent convention but,like all conventions,it has to be used sensibly.
I well remember reading about a hand thus ♠xxxx ♥xxxx ♦xxxx ♣x Your partner opens 1NT (any strength strong weak or variable.)
what (if any) action do you take?. A novice would simply regard the hand above as a yarborough and pass without any hesitation. A expert would immediately see
that 1NT left to play would be utterly hopeless and partner would be,in effect,playing one handed. He would therefore bid 2♣ Stayman and PASS ANY RESPONSE
including the 2♦ negative. The presence of a trump suit makes a profound difference as declarer can now enter dummy by ruffing clubs.. Of course,he may still go down
but not by as much as in No Trumps. The lesson is HCP are not the be all and end all in hand assessment. They are the cavier of the game but who can live on just caviar alone (?!)

[Zelandakh]

Vampyr, on 2020-March-03, 17:59, said:

Oh, I hadn’t realised that the context was after a 2/1 response. But “always” is an overbid. I believe that when the requirements for a 2/1 were considerably weaker, 8HCP or thereabouts, a 2NT rebid was not GF. And I believe that some people still play it that way.

This is true. The original Weak NT Acol (played at the time only non-vul!) had 1X - 2Y; 2NT as invitational and non-forcing. It is a comparatively recent (early 1980s?) development to up the minimum requirements for a 2 over 1 response and make the 2NT rebid game-forcing.

In terms of the discussion on 2/1, it is worth mentioning that not even everyone playing 2/1 GF plays 1♦ - 2♣ as game-forcing. It is one of the auctions that one should typically ask a new partner about. For a passed hand, the auction 1♦ - 2♣ has a couple of specialised possibilities beyond pescetom's "shaded" definition. Some, particularly those who play 1♦ - 3♣ by an un passed hand as invitational, move that hand down to 2♣ for a passed hand and keep the rest of their system essentially the same. Some others, particularly those who like to play 1M - 2♦ as their passed hand Drury, use 1♦ - 2♣ from a passed hand to show the equivalent of a Weak 2 opening in clubs. I think most common though is to revert to SA a response style structure, leading to the potential rebid issue CY is referring to.

[Zelandakh]

PhilG007, on 2020-March-04, 14:27, said:

The idea that you need x number of points to use Stayman is a mythical fallacy.

This depends completely on the version of Stayman being used. The Stayman responses most popular in some countries, such as France and Germany, absolutely force Responder to have invitational+ values before using the convention. In Britain and America, where almost everyone limits their possible responses to 2♦♥♠, Exit Stayman is a completely normal part of the convention and 2♣ does not therefore promise any values.

[Cyberyeti]

Zelandakh, on 2020-March-05, 04:56, said:

This is true. The original Weak NT Acol (played at the time only non-vul!) had 1X - 2Y; 2NT as invitational and non-forcing. It is a comparatively recent (early 1980s?) development to up the minimum requirements for a 2 over 1 response and make the 2NT rebid game-forcing.

In terms of the discussion on 2/1, it is worth mentioning that not even everyone playing 2/1 GF plays 1♦ - 2♣ as game-forcing. It is one of the auctions that one should typically ask a new partner about. For a passed hand, the auction 1♦ - 2♣ has a couple of specialised possibilities beyond pescetom's "shaded" definition. Some, particularly those who play 1♦ - 3♣ by an un passed hand as invitational, move that hand down to 2♣ for a passed hand and keep the rest of their system essentially the same. Some others, particularly those who like to play 1M - 2♦ as their passed hand Drury, use 1♦ - 2♣ from a passed hand to show the equivalent of a Weak 2 opening in clubs. I think most common though is to revert to SA a response style structure, leading to the potential rebid issue CY is referring to.

In that case it's always as far as my lifetime goes, I learned bridge from my grandfather with a 16-18 no trump and a "phoney" 3 card club, only starting to learn Acol in the very late 70s (and only learning it properly in the 80s).

[Vampyr]

Zelandakh, on 2020-March-05, 04:56, said:

In terms of the discussion on 2/1, it is worth mentioning that not even everyone playing 2/1 GF plays 1♦ - 2♣ as game-forcing. It is one of the auctions that one should typically ask a new partner about.

A friend of mine, a very fine player, plays 2/1 GF but plays neither this auction nor 1♠-2♥ as GF.

[pescetom]

Vampyr, on 2020-March-05, 10:33, said:

A friend of mine, a very fine player, plays 2/1 GF but plays neither this auction nor 1♠-2♥ as GF.

1♦-2♣ is a standard GF here and I think it makes a lot of sense, but as I mentioned BWS only decided it was GF in the last votation.
I can't see how one can exclude 1♠-2♥ from 2/1 however.

[pilowsky]

Well, I guess one also has to trust one's partner. I took a punt with this hand and bid 'garbage Stayman' the advanced robots in Prime made 2♠+1, but when I looked at the Traveller another Robot made 2♠-1 - a less advanced robot perhaps. Maybe that's what ~~fakebot used to mean in the code, but I see that's been changed in the new version .

[Vampyr]

pescetom, on 2020-March-05, 14:32, said:

1♦-2♣ is a standard GF here and I think it makes a lot of sense, but as I mentioned BWS only decided it was GF in the last votation.
I can't see how one can exclude 1♠-2♥ from 2/1 however.

Mainly both of these bids take up a lot of room. Over a semi-forcing 1NT response it would be worse, but even after a forcing NT responder could bid ♥ with 6 of them and 6HCP. So with 5 (or 6) and 10-11 HCP you will make the same bid or suppress the hearts entirely.

[pescetom]

Vampyr, on 2020-March-06, 05:59, said:

Mainly both of these bids take up a lot of room. Over a semi-forcing 1NT response it would be worse, but even after a forcing NT responder could bid ♥ with 6 of them and 6HCP. So with 5 (or 6) and 10-11 HCP you will make the same bid or suppress the hearts entirely.

With 6 hearts and 10 HCP we bid 1♠ - 3♥ directly, so after 1NT we have 2♥ and 3♥ to differentiate the remaining non GF hearts hands.

[Vampyr]

pescetom, on 2020-March-06, 08:02, said:

With 6 hearts and 10 HCP we bid 1♠ - 3♥ directly, so after 1NT we have 2♥ and 3♥ to differentiate the remaining non GF hearts hands.

Now you are pretty high, though, and may not have a fit. Most people I know use 1♠-3 ♥ as a 3-card spade raise.

[barmar]

pilowsky, on 2020-March-05, 17:47, said:

the advanced robots in Prime

Is there a reason you frequently mention "in Prime" when you talk about the robots? There's only one advanced robot, it's the same in Prime as the rest of BBO.

[pescetom]

Vampyr, on 2020-March-06, 09:26, said:

Now you are pretty high, though, and may not have a fit. Most people I know use 1♠-3 ♥ as a 3-card spade raise.

We aren't going to rebid hearts with no good reason, there is still pass or 2♠ if opps are not aggressive enough.
1♠ - 2NT is INV raise which may be 3-card in absence of interference, then 3♣ is checkback on length of fit and shortage.

[pilowsky]

barmar, on 2020-March-06, 09:53, said:

Is there a reason you frequently mention "in Prime" when you talk about the robots? There's only one advanced robot, it's the same in Prime as the rest of BBO.

Yes, you are obviously right. When I see an interesting hand I collect it and the associated data from the other players onto a Gdoc spreadsheet. I sometimes (often/frequently) notice that the responses (bidding/leads etc) are different. When I look at the 'Traveller', the difference seems to be that one player is 'purple' (presumably playing in prime against advanced robots) and the other is not. So I'm taking a wild stab in the dark and guessing that the 'prime' program plays differently - as I think you have explained elsewhere. Here is a simple example. All I, and the other player, are doing in this auction is passing. In my case, the program ends in 4H for me resulting in -7.7 IMPS. The other player (not purple) ends in 3NT for -9 IMPS. I don't mind - it's just practice. Here are the links (4H, 3NT+2). If there's another explanation please let me know.

[barmar]

Just because a hand was played by a Prime member, it doesn't mean they played it in the Prime club. You can't tell where they played it, or what type of robot they were using.

There are just two types of robots currently: Basic and Advanced. Basic, which you rent for $1/week and are used in free robot tournaments, and Advanced, which cost $1/day and are used in paid robot tournaments. The latter are what you get for free when you play with robots in the Prime club.

I suppose it's reasonable to guess that a Prime member would play against robots in the Prime club, since they can play against them for free there, so it's likely to be advanced.