Overview

Uncontested Openings Summary

1♣ Weak Strong

1♣–1♦

Negative 1♦ with 0–7 hcp or flat 8–9(10) hcp semi-positive no 4cM. The semi-positive includes very limited 8 hcp hands and invitational NT hands ~9(10) hcp.

For opener's continuations:

Weak/Intermediate 14–15 NT:

Strong balanced:

Strong 4–4–4–1 hand:

Very Strong ~22+ 4–4–4–1 hand:

Limited strong one suiter:

Acol two strength one suiter:

GF moderate one suiter, 5+ suit:

GF self-sufficient one suiter:

Limited strong 5–4/6–4 moderate two suiter or 5–4–4–0:

Acol two strengh 5–4/6–4 moderate two suiter or 5–4–4–0:

Note, system expects 6♥s + 4♠s Acol two to canapé 1♠ first

Limited 5–5 two suiter:

Acol two strength 5–5 two suiter:

Acol two strength 6–5 two suiter:

4th Interference

1♣–1♥♠

1♣–1NT

♣ transfer

Interference over 1♣–1NT

1♣–2♣

♦ transfer

Interference over 1♣–2♣

1♣–2♦

Responding:

Interference over 1♣–2♦

1♣–2♠

Interference over 1♣–2♠

1♣–2NT

2NT system on for responses and interference handling.

1♣–3NT

1♣–4♣♦

1♣–4♥♠

1♣ Interference

When responder shows a weak hand such as the following and the opponents interfere...

...opener essentially bids as if the opponents opened the bidding, so our same defences to their opening bids, except we know that the opener will be strong 16+.

Where transfers are used after interference, it is completed with 2–3 card support and raised one more with 4+ card support. The weak NT hand may also bid 1NT with 2–3 card support and good stops. Strong hands may break transfers in more interesting ways...

Note, 1♠ is the most disruptive 1 level (suit) overcall, possibly psychic or a poor 4 card suit, though expect to see less pure disruption against a weak-strong club. Bids below 1♠ are not disruptive unless the opponents raise further.

Differences with 1♦ interference

Compared to the 1♦ opening interference:

2nd and 4th interfere, Responder Passes

4th interferes, maybe 2nd, Responder positive

X by 4th after some 1 level transfer bid, e.g:

X by 4th after some 2 level transfer bid, e.g:

1 level takeout by 4th:

1 level overcall by 4th:

Suit bid where opener can support responder at 2 level after interference:

Good-Bad 2NT response to opener's re-opening double:

2NT over 2♦♥♠ interference by 4th hand:

Treated as weak two opening, so natural ~16–19

Suit bid where opener can only support responder at 3+ level, e.g:

Jump interference:

Double jump plus interference:

4th interferes after 2♥/2♠/2NT positive response

4th interferes after 3♣♦♥♠/3NT/4♣♦♥♠

After 3♣♦♥♠ bid as if partner opened a preempt, e.g.

See 3♥♠ opening interference

For the 3NT/4♣♦♥♠ responses it should be easy to place the contract or slam try or X for penalty.

4th Interferes after Responder Negative

Bid as if they opened.

1♦ Opening

Short / Nebulous ♦ for flattish or 3 suited or both minors or extreme shape maximum 6+♦ and 5♥/♠ hands.

Other bids:

1♦–1♥

Natural, 4+ cards, maybe longer minor canapé

1♦–1♥–1♠

1♦–1♥–1NT

1♦–1♥–2♣

Remember any maximum 5–5+ minors hand rebids 3♣ over 1M, so a shapely 5–5+ is minimum hcp

1♦–1♥–2♦

1♦–1♥–2♥

1♦–1♥–2♠

1♦–1♠

Natural, 4+ cards, maybe longer minor canapé

1♦–1♠–1NT

1♦–1♠–2♣

1♦–1♠–2♦

1♦–1♠–2♥

1♦–1♠–2♠

1♦–1NT

Natural, up to 11 hcp, no 4 card major

1♦–2♣

Invitational plus.

1♦–2♦

Invitational plus.

1♦ interference

Opener's cue bid

When partner bids 1♥/♠ and the opponent bids (double or overcall) at the 1 level, or with less nuance if they bid at the 2 level.

Still on if 2nd position overcalls and advancer only bids 1NT/2♣/2♦ in 4th.

When they only overcall 2x then our cue bid is less nuanced at the 3 level. It is NOT a stopper ask, as only natural invitational 3♦ rebids (e.g. xx/Axx/AKQJxx/xxx) would benefit.

Support doubles and redoubles by opener

Extended to the 3 level, (note penalty unlikely with an artificial 1♣ system) but with more strength/shape:

Extended through to 4♥, again more strength needed so not doubling does not deny 3 card support:

Includes 4th hands bids where 2nd hand does not bid at all:

Extra trump redouble after settling in 2♥♠

Good-Bad 2NT over 2♦♥♠ interference by 4th hand

Choice of game 4x cue bids after Thrump double

By responder example:

1♥ Opening

1♥–1♠

1♥–1♠–1NT

1♥–1♠–2♣

1♥–1♠–2♦

1♥–1♠–2♥

1♥–1♠–2♠

1♥–1♠–2NT

Maximum, 6 loser, 6(7)–4 with a minor. The reasonable alternative is a good max 6/7–3 (3 card ♠ support).

1♥–1♠–3♣

1♥–1♠–3♦

1♥–1♠–3♥

1♥–1♠–3♠

1♥–1♠–3NT/4x

1♥–2♥

Single raise, 3+ cards

1♥–1NT

"Semi" forcing NT:

Responding:

1♥–2♣

Natural 2/1 GF (Reverse Drury by passed hand).

By a passed hand 2♣ Reverse Drury shows a 9–10 hcp limit raise with 3 card support. Opener bids 2♥ (fast arrival) with a (sub)minimum hand.

1♥–2♦

Natural 2/1 GF, always 5+ cards.

1♥–2♠

6+♠s, ~(5)6–9 hcp, semi-weak, no ♥ fit

1♥–2NT

invitational plus raise 3 (GF) or 4 card support.

The response structure has just enough room for the 18 different hand types opener could show whilst remaining below 4♥:

2NT Invite Plus Interference

1♥–3♣♦

Limit jump shift, 6 card suit invitational, denying major support

1♥–3♣

1♥–3♦

Similar to 1♥–3♣:

1♥–3♥

Mixed raise (weak limit raise) – ~7–9(10) support points, 7.5–9 losers, 4+ cards

1♥–3♠

Unknown singleton splinter, 10–13 hcp, 7 loser hand or better.

Splinter bids typically have fairly evenly distributed strength amongst the side suits as otherwise a 2/1 GF bid of the strong suit is often better (unless the strong suit is mostly self-sufficient).

Splinter bidder promises 3–4 cover cards outside of the shortness, e.g. Kxxx/Axxx/x/Axxx. After asking for the shortage opener counts losers in other suits and with 6+ losers signs off, e.g. Jxx/KQxxx/KQJ/Qx easy to sign off v.s. ♦ singleton. 5 losers is hardest to judge as opener needs to make a slam try and let responder bid on with 4 cover cards or a void. Responder can always bid on once with 5+ cover cards, though won't have that hand for a low tier 10–13 hcp splinter. When responder bids on opener is ok with having 6 losers.

1♥–3NT/4♣/4♦

Short ♠/♣/♦ splinter, upper-tier ~13–16 hcp, 4.5+ cover cards. Possibly > 16 hcp if judge best route, but will be driving to five level at least. Possibly void and needs to decide if should drive to five level.

1♥ interference

Second round bids ignore the T/O X if advancer bids nothing, e.g. 1♥–(X)–1♠–(P)–1NT–(P) then 2♣ is a puppet to 2♦ as per normal system over the 1NT rebid.

4th only overcalls:

responder passing, 4th hand reopens

Responder can also re-open on their second bid, X takeout at the 2 level, but penalty at the 3 level.

1♠ Opening

1♠–1NT

"Semi" forcing NT:

Responding:

1♠–2♣

2/1 GF (Reverse Drury by passed hand).

By a passed hand 2♣ Reverse Drury shows a 9–10 hcp limit raise with 3 card support. Opener bids 2♠ (fast arrival) with a (sub)minimum hand.

1♠–2♦

Game-forcing. Usually five cards. Could be 2–4–4–3.

1♠–2♥

2/1 GF, always 5+ cards, 9–10 by passed hand

1♠–2♠

Single raise, 3+ cards

1♠–2NT

invitational plus raise 3 (GF) or 4 card support.

Interference

See 1♥–2NT Invite Plus Interference examples

1♠–3♣♦

Limit jump shift, 6 card suit invitational, denying major support

1♠–3♣

1♠–3♦

Similar to 1♥–3♣:

1♠–3♥

Not as much suit quality required as the minor bids - directed to a major game instead of NT

1♠–3♠

Mixed raise (weak limit raise) – ~7–9(10) support points, 7.5–9 losers, 4+ cards

1♠–3NT

Unknown singleton splinter, 10–13 hcp, 3–4 cover cards outside of shortage

Splinter bids typically have fairly evenly distributed strength amongst the side suits as otherwise a 2/1 GF bid of the strong suit is often better (unless the strong suit is mostly self-sufficient).

1♠–4♣

Maximum splinter in ♣ or ♥, upper-tier ~13–16 hcp, 4.5+ cover cards. (Fit jump by passed hand)

1♠–4♦

Maximum splinter, short ♦, upper-tier ~13–16 hcp, 4.5+ cover cards. (Fit jump by passed hand)

1♠–4♥/4♠

To play, always. By a passed hand 4♥ also implies some sort of ♠ fit, e.g Kxxxx/QJ10xxx/x/x

1♠–4NT

Normal Blackwood. Responder can bid their own suit at 5/6/7 level after opener shows aces.

1♠ interference

Similar to 1♥ interference.

responder passing, 4th hand reopens

Responder can also re-open on their second bid, X takeout at the 2 level, but penalty at the 3 level.

NT Ranges and Scheme Situations

Blanket approaches to bidding when natural 1NT and 2NT bids made by our side.

1NT Opening

Opening:

Responding:

1NT–2♣

Stayman, promissory, maybe weakish 4–4–4–1♣

1NT–2♣–2♦

1NT–2♣–2♥

1NT–2♣–2♠

1NT–2♣–2NT

1NT–2♣–3♣

1NT–2♦

Responder's 2NT vs 3♣♦ rebid preferences after transfer:

Responder's 2NT vs 3NT 5–3–3–2 rebid preferences after transfer:

1NT–2♥

1NT–2♠/2NT

1NT–3♣

Puppet Stayman

1NT–3♦

1NT–3♥

1NT–3♠

1NT–4♣♦

To play a major game, preemptive or good values.

1NT Interference and Lebensohl

Lebensohl variations are played in a number of blanket NT and other places where the idea is relevant. Most important is its use against weak twos and after we have made natural opening strength (or better) 1NT bid / overcall.

Our (1) main variant (note: Lebensohl variants) is a form of transfer Lebensohl. There are other variants that are used in specific situations - (2) when FORCED to bid over a major preempt and (3) partner is likely unbalanced and we may pass or double, so NOT forced to bid

The custom structure to the (1) main transfer Lebensohl variant is:

For variant (2) when we are FORCED to bid OVER a MAJOR preempt, then there is Better Minor Lebensohl.

The variant (3) RLEB is typically (1M)–X–(2M), but could be (2D multi)–X–(2M) or (1m)–2m, where we can pass, maybe double (responsive / flattish), show NT interest plus stop with invite plus values immediately or the final option is to bid a suit without any invitational nuance before opener gets in the way again (decide to punt game or just compete immediately)

Over a balanced hand

Over a Weak 2♦ takeout double

Better Minor Lebensohl over a major preempt takeout double

Better minor makes no sense over a weak two ♦ preempt, and there's no space for better major, which is why 2♦ can be such an effective preempt

Reversed Lebensohl RLEB

Having said all the above, there is more invitational nuance when the opponents bid the lower suits, ♣s, ♦s and ♥s. It might be better to play these jump 3x bids as GF with possible slam interest instead of invitational, but that would be rarer. A GF 5+ card hand with stop can bid 2NT first, and without a stop start with a cue bid and hope to resolve e.g. both majors vs one major slam try later

Overcalls of our NT

What is our first double?

The default is negative, meaning any of:

Any negative double at the 3 level (especially 4 level!) is basically GF and starts to lack clear shape information, mostly being used to show values.

Priority order meta agreement (that works in other situations such as us opening 1HS and opponents bidding 2 suiters) for 2 and 3 level interference:

  1. two specific suits, e.g. 2♣/2♦ majors, 2NT minors – values, system off even over 2♣
  2. over double or 2♣ interference – system on, stolen bid double
  3. artificial, may show some other suit, e.g. transfer overcall, (X) major + minor, or 2♣ ♥ + any, or 2♣ any single suiter, or 2♦ multi – biddable natural suit
  4. natural catchall, e.g. 2♦ ♦ + any, 2♥ ♥ + any – negative

What is a redouble?

A redouble of a non-penalty double has the same meanings as double. The exception is a redouble of an artificial bid cannot show a biddable suit so it is again values showing.

When the opposing double is penalty/values we naturally use the 1NT Escape module.

What is our second double?

negative double responses

Natural mainly but

what is a generic cue bid?

Where the cue bid does not have a specific meaning (such as directly over 2C showing majors):

NT Interference

1NT Escape

Situations include:

when opponents run after we have showed values

This is when we pass or XX with values and our side is done with the first round of bidding, meaning our side is happy to sit in 1NT double or redoubled - no need to escape and no GF offensive hand.

when opponents run immediately and (semi)naturally to 2♦♥♠

With (1NT)–X–(run), or rarely (1NT)–P–(P)–X–(run) our combined strength is less defined. Length is promised in the suit bid.

This is a Lebensohl situation.

when opponents run immediately artificially to 2♣♦♥

For example, 2♣ scurry with no 5 card major.

when opponents run immediately with transfer escape

when opponents run immediately to 2♠ or higher

2♣ Intermediate Opening

2♣ = (10)11–15 hcp, 6+ card ♣ suit. Maybe leading directing 5 card ♣ suit in 3rd.

Responding:

2♦ enquiry

2♣–2♦–2♥

2♣–2♦–2♠

2♣–2♦–2NT

2♣–2♦–3♣+

2♣ Interference

2♦ Intermediate Opening

Responding:

There are space limitations compared to the 2♣ Opener and so fewer constructive options.

2♦ Intermediate Interference

2♥♠ Weak Openings

1st/2nd style

The style is to use a slightly narrower (more constructive) but frequent hand strength range without the drop in frequency of 2/3 top honour requirements.

3rd/4th style

Responding

2♥ Opening Responses

2♠ Opening Responses

NV 1st/2nd 5 or 6 card Extension

Adjustments to playing mixed 5/6 card major weak two bids in 1st/2nd position non-vulnerable only.

Still ~7–10, rarely 6 hcp if 5–5 shape. Differences to the standard 6 card only definition:

Responding:

2♥♠ interference

2NT Opening

Responding:

2NT–3♣

2NT–3♦

2NT–3♥

2NT–3♠

minors, 5–4+, often slam try

2NT–4♣

♥s, Lissabon slam try

2NT–4♦

♠s, Lissabon slam try

2NT–4♥

♣s, Lissabon slam try, one suited

any = 2NT Lissabon Auto RKB

2NT–4♠

♦s, Lissabon slam try, one suited

any = 2NT Lissabon Auto RKB

Minor slam tries module

After muppet stayman and responder voluntarily continues over 3NT, responder may have ONE OR BOTH minors (they may have only 3 cards in a major, e.g. 3–1–5–4). Note 5–5 minors with a 3 card major is awkward, but should probably respond 2NT–3♠ to show both minors.

2NT interference

3♣♦ Openings

Constructive preempts in 1st/2nd usually 6 cards, good chance to play 3NT.

3♥♠ Openings

3NT Opening

In 1st/2nd:

In 3rd/4th:

Note 3NT Alternatives

4♣♦ Openings

4♥ 4♠ 5♣ 5♦ Openings

Control Asking Bids Over Preempts

Specific suit asks:

4NT Opening

Competitive Auctions

We Overcall or X/XX Summary

Minimum Level Conversion and Takeout Doubles

Cue Bids and Jump Overcalls Summary

Two Suiter Overcall Strengths

Hand examples:

After minor openings:

After major openings:

We Open they Interfere Summary

4th balancing of 1x openings

Follow up responses are roughly 1 point more conservative

responding to 4th balancing takeout X

responding to 4th balancing jump bid

responding to 4th balancing 1NT

Passed hand balancing

Law of Total Tricks Bidding

Normal advice about bidding to the level indicated by the law of total tricks applies.

However, re-evaluating hands in any competition or after just one bid from the opponents is important.

Adjust / downgrade:

Upgrade influences:

We Open with Fit and Slam Potential then 4th Hand High Level Interference

The primary situation is 1♥♠–2NT, but there's other situations. In summary:

Continuations in general:

3 level rebid available

3NT bid available

No 3NT bid available

Pass used to show a control in the overcalled suit.

HCR cue bids and 2NT Raise in Competition

Either when we open and 2nd position overcalls, or when we overcall and later advance the bidding, there is often a choice between a HCR cue bid and a 2NT support bid.

This mostly applies to 1♥♠ openings or overcalls, but (1♣)–1♦ is also possible.

A 2NT bid is natural in very few places - only when we overcall at the 2 level, 3rd hand passes and advancer bids 2NT. As 3rd hand has passed it can be reasonable to assume we can have the combined values for 3NT.

The meanings applied when we open v.s. overcall are different:

When We Open

When we open 1♥♠ a 2NT bid after competition from 2nd hand is always support showing. What's the difference between a HCR and 2NT? Contrary to the common style of distinguishing 3 vs 4+ card raising we currently experiment with:

The differences depend on length in the opponent's suit, strength, offensive/defensive ratio

When We Overcall

The bids change in meaning compared to when we open and face an overcall. We may have a lot of tempo (e.g. responder passes and partner overcalled 1♥♠ giving us space and time), or we may be under pressure in a live auction (e.g. the opponents have a fit and have raised or even preempt raised the auction - (1♦)–1♠–(3♦)).

When Responder Passes

We have maximum tempo, so:

When Responder Bids

Advancers Support Tools

Some may not be available depending on how high responder has pushed the bidding and so you have to blend the meanings

Fit Jumps and Splinters in Competition

When is a jump a fit jump? The following must all be true about the bid:

What about a double jump?

Double jumps below 4♥ are fit jumps iff a fit jump is not available as a single jump, e.g. because a single jump shows a natural invitational suit OR a 1-under mixed raise. Otherwise a double jump is a splinter below 4♥ game (a direct 4♥ could only be a splinter in a slow constructive auction - 2nd rebid e.g. 1♠–2♦–2♠–4♥).

2NT Artificial Scrambling

There's a list of situations where 2NT is used for Lebensohl. Other times it maybe used for raising our partner's suit in competition whether we open or overcall. Additionally after opening 1♣/1♦/1♥ opener may use Good-Bad 2NT to allow competing in new suits or good raising. Other times 2NT maybe natural.

A scrambling 2NT shows:

Overall it is rare as 2NT is usually forced after a double (so a better minor Lebensohl 2NT) or it is by a hand that can reasonably have a natural 2NT bid (when the opponents have opened first we often pass with 11–14 balanced)

P–(1H)–X–(2H)– 2NT = scrambling, not forced, passed originally so limited strength

Major Opening and Responder's 4♣♦ Slam Try

We open 1♥/1♠ and opponents interfere with a 2♠ jump overcall OR specific two suiter bids, e.g.

Note, it's possible to play these over single suiter 3 level jump overcalls, but we use Relay Lebensohl Doubles in those situations along with a natural GF 4♣♦ bids.

One known opponent's suit (whether showing one or two suiter)

Two known opponent's suit

Bidding to 4♣♦ over 3♥♠ competition is Invitational

E.g. (1S)–2♦–(2S)–3♦–(3S)

Designed for IMPs, only in matchpoints might it be worth to compete to 4♦ - in IMPS 3♥♠ is never a great final contract as it risks going one off or worse making a game.

4NT is it a Stronger Raise or Unusual in Competition

by Responder it follows the slam bidding 4NT rules

Unforced Rebids Show Extra Length, Not Values

E.g. (1C)–1♠–(P)–2♥–(X)

Opener's Second Round Double - After Partner's 2 Level WJS

Double shows support and extras in shape or HCP

Opener's Renegative Double for Both Majors

Opener's Good-Bad 2NT Rebid in Competition

Example after 1♦ opening

Opener's Good-Bad 2NT Rebid After Major NF

Main examples:

Einar Cue Bid

I.e:

Typically shows:

Advancer's 2♣ Relay

Examples:

Advancers 2♣ Relay Interference

Doubles

Live auction 4x pressure examples:

Blanket Rules

Where the above do not apply.

Blanket rules apply up to 2♠ - if not sure above 2♠ assume penalty (others play this to 3♠). "All doubles of bids through 2♠ are takeout UNLESS":

  1. It's defined above as one of Negative, Competitive or Responsive
  2. partner responded 1NT/2♣/2♦, doubler sitting over. Compare when open or overcall – Overcalls of our NT first double is takeout, second penalty.
  3. our side bid and raised a suit. So, 1♥–(P)–2♥–(2S)–X should be penalty, whereas 1♥–(1S)–2♥–(2S)–X is competitive.
  4. our side redoubled
  5. our side made a penalty double or penalty pass
  6. the bid doubled was artificial
  7. partner preempts
  8. our side are in a GF (1♥/♠ + 2/1, 1♣–1NT/2♠)
  9. our side invites 3NT (1♣–2♠, 1♣–2NT)
  10. our side limits hand with no major (1♣–1NT/2♣ is no major OR maybe major but already in a GF)
  11. a passed hand doubles their solo rebid, (1H)–P–(P)–X–(2H)–X

Takeout Doubles

Modern standard:

Consider a takeout X (and maybe later DAB cue bid) instead of a 1NT bid with 4–4–3–2, the other major and the sort of hand where partner should play NT (we have Axx they Qx)

Relay Lebensohl Doubles

Note, over 3♠ double can be competitive relay like, but we initially assume it's asking for a stop (Thrump).

It's conceivable to play this after we open 1♣/1♦/1NT, but without a known long suit finding a stop or checking for a 4 card major should be more frequent and useful than just having the option to compete, certainly for IMPs.

Examples:

When we open and the opponent jump bids, it's often a preempt (maybe intermediate). Here, it's good to have a way to find a slam and not preempt a preempt. E.g.

When they open a slam is very unlikely for our side and a penalty double will rarely be useful. E.g.

Optional Extension After 1♣ Opening or 1♦ Opening

Given that a 1♣ and 1♦ opening can be ambiguous, the relay double can be extended to auctions such as:

Responder has shown a suit and the opponents have pushed to the 3 level. Given that 1♣ (and less so 1D) are quite vague we can treat opener as having not bid.

Responsive Doubles Style

A standard responsive double is a form of takeout with focus on the unbid major(s). When partner makes a takeout double advancer's double is a form of re-takeout. Sometimes it is more values, perhaps with a single minor suit, tolerance for partner but lacking a stop for NT.

What about when there is no unbid/implied major? For example, (1H)–1♠–(2H) or (1S)–X–(2S). Should our responsive double be used to cater for minor hands with values?

Pushed to the 3 level, things are different. Here we choose to play Relay Lebensohl Doubles to allow competing in partner's suit or a different suit.

The double is always more value showing as it gets high level, especially over 3♠. At the 4 level we just call our double "values" showing instead of responsive.

What about when the opponents raise a minor?

When we bid a minor?

When we start with a takeout double:

Takeout over a major:

Activity Doubles and Splinters

When the opponents show a short suit that does not make much sense for us to lead, such as a splinter, then despite us apparently lacking strength, double should be for activity, in this case a potential sacrifice

Note, an alternative is takeout, e.g. ♠s if they bid ♥s and more general takeout if they have the master ♠s

Activity Doubles by Weak Often Preempt Hands

A weak hand that has already described some offensive ability, such as a weak two, cannot reasonably have a penalty double of any game the opponents bid, UNLESS partner has had space to show GF values and defense.

So, if we open with a preempt, it is possible for the preempter to double with extreme shape (e.g. 6–4/6–5 after 2HS openings) and shortage in the opponents' suit, which suggests sacrifice unless partner can pass with a penalty trump stack.

Single Raise they Compete We Double

2NT support raise then we Double

Delayed Takeout Doubles

When not doubling on the first round:

Stolen Double by advancer - Opponents' HCR double

Anti-Leading Doubles of Raised or Strongly Bid Suits

The extra length meaning has less value when we have already shown a 6 card suit or our side has raised the suit.

Extra Length 2 Level Double of Cuebid by Opener - Partner not bid

Other examples:

Pass then later X would allow opener to compete in the minors suits.

Double Showing HCR by advancer - Opponents' 3x raise

X then shows a HCR.

Extra trump redouble - we stop 2♥♠ they takeout X

Examples:

FSF Redouble or Other Artificial Forcing Bids

When opponents double an artificial bid for lead direction

Handling doubles of our stopper ask of their suit

Helping to right side 3NT or not play it.

3♠ cue here could be a proxy for a very strong unbalanced hand, not a DAB with something in ♠, but then 3NT will be pulled anyway.

Confidently Bid Game/Slam Contract Lead Directing Doubles

If the opponents bid confidently suit doubles are Lightner and NT doubles have standard meanings (lead our suit/suits, else dummy's first bid suit or the shortest major). See Special Leads.

5 Level Doubles in Competition

Phantom saves at matchpoints are far more tolerable than at IMPs, indeed there are many attempts to go minus 100 insted of minus 110 etc at matchpoints etc. The double game swing (along with slams) is one of the greatest sources of IMP gains/losses, so on highly distributional hands it can pay to ignore the usual caution around phantom saves at IMPs, and bid to go an expected one off in a 5 level contract

We "Own" The Hand

Typically we were expecting to bid and make some 4 level game, or maybe 5♣♦ and then they interfered. In these 5 level situations there is a first and second bidder on our side. For the first bidder:

For the second bidder:

We Do NOT Own The Hand

Generally pass or sacrifice further!

A double is Lightner by default, assuming you think they bid confidently

Opponents open Strong 1♣

Show majors, especially ♠ and bid to limit. Pass then later bid unusual NT if really want to show ♣+♦.

With limited strength may want to hide distribution information and just bid the major (not 1NT / 2NT overcalls).

Opponents open 1♣ Natural / Prepared / Multi

(1C)–X

(1C)–Overcall

(1C)–(Any) Sandwich Position

4th Balancing 1♣

Summary

Opponents open 1♦

(1D)–X

(1D)–Overcall

(1D)–(Any) Sandwich Position

4th Balancing 1♦

Summary

Opponents open 1♥

(1H)–X

(1H)–Overcall

...

(1H)–(Any) Sandwich Position

When we - takeout doubler and advancer have PASSED (or just 2NT bidder) it's also scrambling: (1H)–(any), X then 2NT is scrambling

4th Balancing 1♥

Summary

Opponents open 1♠

(1S)–X

(1S)–Overcall

(1S)–(Any) Sandwich Position

When we - takeout doubler and advancer have PASSED (or just 2NT bidder) it's also scrambling: (1S)–(any), X then 2NT is scrambling

4th Balancing 1♠

Summary

Opponents open 1NT

Competing over 1NT.

Hand strength guide:

Strong NT Defence

When opponents run from 1NT doubled

As 1NT Interference and Lebensohl

Opponents open Intermediate 2♣

Opponents open Strong 2♣

Double always majors and NT minors. Really should be 5–5+.

Opponents open Multi 2♣

Frequently the Weak 2♦, or a standard strong 2♣. Treat as weak 2♦ defence, but with extra takeout option.

Opponents open Artificial Strong 2♣ 2♦

This is a catchall for bids such as

Pass then double could in theory be used as takeout. Mainly just treat similar to Strong 2♣ defence.

Opponents open Intermediate 2♦

As Opponents open Weak 2♦, strength adjusted

Opponents open Precision 2♦

Treat as an intermediate 2♣ opening, with care for bad major breaks.

Opponents open Multi 2♦

Opponents open Weak 2♦ 2♥ 2♠

(or jump overcalled)

Opponents open Intermediate 2♥ 2♠

As Opponents open Weak 2♥ 2♠, strength adjusted

Opponents open 2♦ or 2♥ both Majors

Two or three choices for Ekren (chrisryall.net/bridge/weak.two/generic-defence.htm), even possible to play the Multi 2♦ defence.

Opponents open 2♦ or 2♥ Flannery

5♥–4♠ intermediate (note some play 6♥–4♠ or even 5♥–5♠) hands.

Opponents open 2NT Minors

An alternative would be 3♣ both majors and 3♦ multi-like some weaker major overcall. Less majors definition with 3♣ but advancer can ask for the longest with 3♦.

Opponents open 2NT Natural

X is majors takeout, NT is minors.

Opponents open 3♣♦♥♠

Opponents open 3NT

Whether a gambling solid/broken minor with/without side honour or a similar solid major.

Limited space, so double is rather catchall with 4♣♦ bids special major bids:

Same in 4th.

Opponents open 4♣♦ preempt

Opponents open 4♣♦ SAT/Namyats

Showing good ♥/♠ major preempt, maybe minimum opening values.

Opponents open 4♥♠

Opponents open 5♣♦

Slam Bidding

Meta agreements and some slam finding conventions

General Strategy

What is 4NT?

Natural quantitative, to play, ace asking, key card asking, takeout or other?

Minor Agreed 4NT

2NT Auto RKB Module

Special case - a natural 2NT opening or rebid takes a lot of space and is a bit of a slam killer. Often a minor suit may not be shown until the 4 level making agreeing and using something like Redwood impractical. After showing a new minor at the 4 level:

Bidding 4NT changes to be minor RKB! This is an exception to the general rule of 4NT never being used as RKB/Redwood for a minor - it's normally only quantitative. 5x free bids are auto RKB, similar to the direct bids.

Beware there's a special case in the Minor slam tries module where the next suit is 5♣s instead of last train.

Bidding 4NT changes to be minor RKB! 5x free bids are auto RKB, similar to the direct bids.

PASSABLE. May also escape to the minor (e.g. perhaps they actually had 6 cards) or use Auto RKB.

Usually passed or raised to 6m. Presumably 5NT King ask or a 3rd round control ask are still on if responder is good enough to search for the grand opposite the presumed 2 keycards.

Minor Lissabon follow on

Whilst there's even less room in this situation, the 4NT negative and auto RKB bids also apply after minor showing Lissabon bids (2NT–4HS).

Over 2NT–4♥ there is space for a last train bid, but over 2NT–4♠ it's not available

Major Agreed 4NT

Others 4NT

Cue Bids

Italian style, showing 1st or 2nd round control.

Initiation should not be made with just a second round control or two of course. Initiator probably has 2 first round controls and a second round control in the third suit unless very distributional. Responder can afford to have a less decent hand and let the initiator push them.

Opponents Double Our Cue Bid

E.g. 1♠–2NT...4♦ cue then (X) lead directing

Serious 3NT Replaces Immediate Cue Bid

Slam Convention Interference Defence

Your enquiry asking bids (e.g. RKB, Gerber, Free 5M raise) can disturbed by:

  1. opponents bid their suit(s) below our suit sign off
  2. opponents bid their suit(s) above our suit sign off, or even bid our suit
  3. opponents X the asking bid
  4. opponents X the asking bid and it's above our suit sign off

step response type conventions

Interference for ALL can be done with DOPI / ROPI

Note, if playing more monotonic responses, e.g. 0,1,2,3 then DOPE/ROPE can make more sense over the higher interference, but we do not use standard blackwood or similar conventions

ask type conventions

Queen ask, King ask etc. Interference at this point is extremely unlikely. These bids usually ask for specific information so passing it back around to partner doesn't help

RKB 4NT

4 Ace key cards + King trumps. "1430" step responses.

void response continuation with no room below slam

e.g. they bid 6♦ and ♥s is trumps

Queen Ask

The next/cheapest (non-trump) suit is the Q ask OR trump suit over 3 or 0 response (pass without 3 keycards).

When can sign off at 5 level

When forced to slam

King Ask

Show ask for specific kings (not count of Kings)

Following on, any suit is a King request to bid grand (do you have this specific King?)

??? 6x-6other-6n as yes have 2nd king but cannot bid 7 in case of 6NT probe

New Suit 3rd Round Control Ask for Grand

Spiral scan without Q/K asks? Spiral scan also exclusive to this? Hmm, maybe Queen only? More complicated responses are: (1) Make a first step response, including 6NT with third-round control Qx(x), Ax, AQx (2) Make a second step response with second-round control Kxx(x) (3) Make a third step response with Kx (4) Raise the ask bid with KQx and JUMP to the trump suit with a singleton

The subletly is when the free bid is a sign off or not. For simplicity, then assume it's a natural sign off even after RKB bids involving a different suit if:

Redwood for minors

4♦/♥ as RKB for ♣s/♦s (or 4♠ for ♦s when ♥s is natural)?????????????????????

Furthermore:

Still, if a natural 4♠ is not illogical, then only 4NT can be used as ♦ RKB. E.g. 1♠–2♥–3♦–4♥, either 4♥ or 4♠ suggests an alternative game.

Cue Opponents Suit in Competition is Control Bid not Kickback/Redwood

E.g. 1♠–(P)–2♣–(3D)–4♣–(P)–4♦ responder shows a ♦ control and 4♥ is Redwood RKB.

When ♥s and opponents bid ♠ - 1♥–(P)–2NT–(3S) then later 4♠ bid is a control and only 4NT is RKB for ♥s.

??????????????????????????????????????

Baron over 4NT Quantitative

Jump Cuebid in Competition

Always a splinter

Double Fit RKB

Beware of counting extra length as Queen with double fits, unless there is extra length in both suits or the other Queen can be seen as the tricks must run from those two suits.

Double Fit Queen Ask

Step responses:

EKB Voidwood

Shows a void in the suit bid and asking for keycard showing step responses using 03/14 keycard, not the usual 1430 style. Primarily a jump bid, higher than a typical splinter bid, though could be a raise of a shortage bid.

Other points:

Non jump bid EKB exceptions

Competition from the opponents then cue bidding their suit "above game" (above Redwood for minors):

Transfers over NT hands:

EKB Responses

tinyurl.com/y6yv5m8r

EKB King Request when no 5NT available

Preempt RKB

Specific situations when responder is known to be weak (opening a preempt). Steps responses limited to 2 keycards:

Lackwood

Responses:

Free 5x Major Raise

This asking bid can be given a multi meaning (control of opponents or unbid suit), but for ease, normally used only as a trump quality ask.

Iff it's obvious to both players that we have all the top 3 honours, it could be used as a 2nd round or better control ask for some other suit, which should also be obvious.

5NT Pick a Small Slam

Sometimes pick a small slam makes zero sense:

5NT v.s 6other in Competition - Turbo Inspired

Turbo is the Italian slam bidding conventions where bidding 4NT shows even keycards and bypassing it to normally cue bid at the 5 level shows odd keycards. This can be a good convention to generally play (instead of RKB) if you have a good handle on the point counts one another has, and so can distinguish e.g. 1 vs 3 keycards. Even without playing the main part of Turbo, it has utility in competition.

Sometimes the opponents really preempt our space and we are considering a small slam vs grand slam. Specifically, we have not been able to use 4NT RKB bid as they have preempted to the 5 level. At that point:

Double of Opponents' Slam

As arguably it does not make much difference if a slam goes one off doubled vs not doubled for freely bid slams (not sacrifice), X is used to ask for an obscure lead (*Lightner*).

Of Suit Slams

Of NT Slams

Forcing Pass Auctions

When opponents have competed and our side has the large majority of values

Splinter/Cue bid and Losers/Cover Cards etc.

Cover cards (and maybe losers - losing trick count) is mentioned in some contexts such as splinters over 1♥/1♠ opening. Mostly useful for game/slam suit contract evaluation, but may still have some relevance for NT, though the tricks need to be quicker and not based trumps or shortages.

Responder shows some cover cards and opener looks at their losers to calculate the expected trick count.

LTC

Losing trick count is an old method defined as

LTC honour values: - Void = 0 - A = 0 - A K = 0 - A K Q = 0 - A K x [x x. . .] = 1 - A Q x [x. . .] = 1 (tripleton or more) - A x = 1 - A x x [x. . .] = 2 - K = 1 - K x = 1 - K x x [x. . .] = 2 - K Q = 1 - Q J [x. . .] = 2

Side suit adjustments to LTC include:

Cover Cards

Cover cards are easier to calculate and reason about than LTC, so whilst opener may define themselves in terms of losers, responder may quantify their strength in terms of cover cards, essentially playing tricks.

(Opener's LTC - responder's cover cards) = total losers

Naturally, responder may need to re-evaluate cover card usefulness if partner shown to be short in a suit

Suit raises are roughly:

1♥♠ Slam Tries

Splinters or new suit 2/1 GF or Jacoby 2NT? In general note:

With 3 card support

With 4 card support

Picture Raises

Jump bidding partner's suit after showing a side suit

Picture Raise Jump level

Single Raises Ambiguous with Picture Bids

An auction like 1♠–2♣–2♠–3♠ is more ambiguous as the only jump is to game, denying outside controls. Therefore the 3♠ bid example could be a good hand with side suit and outside controls interested in slam, or it could just be waiting on the way to game

1♥–1♠ auctions?

Serious 3NT

Last Train

With parallels to Serious 3NT, more bids to show extras that have not been communicated. The 4x Last Train bids show too much to sign off, but too little to bid RKB. The main Last Train bid is one step below game with an agreed major:

Additional variations used in less obvious auctions include, 3x and 5x Last Train bids:

System Philosophy

This details of this system were initially taken from the Revision Club (v4.0 by John Montgomery) system, but with some minor and notable changes. The 1♦ and especially 2♦ intermediate openings are influenced by IMPrecision (Adam Meyerson) with the rest of the 1♥ through 4♠ openings initially taken from Revision Club. 1NT over a 1♥♠ opening is "semi" forcing instead of forcing as in Revision. Swapping Revision's strong only 1♣ for a Swedish weak strong club (based on Erik Sjostrand's write up) is the most obvious point of change. In many ways it's easy enough to swap back to a strong only 1♣ opening, again potentially at the cost of having opponents bid more destructively over 1♣ and making the 1♦ opening rather overloaded if we still want to open most 11–12 balanced hands. The competitive bids are heavily influenced by Mat Nilsland's "Competitive Bids The Scanian Way" book and the 1NT/2NT responses are based off Nilsland's notrump bidding books.

Leads, Signals and Discards

Given the style variability of top players, a clear understanding often matters more than the agreements themselves. Whilst reverse (upside down) attitude signals seems better overall than standard attitude, most other choices are more about partnership preference than any evidence for being "better". Some give count as the primary signal, others give attitude and at times weight suit preference more highly. Some signal count mechanically, others are more flexible.

Discards - General Advice

Opening Leads - General Advice

Opening Lead Strategy

Follow Up Plays

Attitude Signals

Encouragement is one of:

Count Signals

Count Mechanics

In theory suit preference would be the fallback if count and attitude are known, iff both partners can see the need for it

Count Philosophy

When to give count voluntarily? There is some merit to the notion of when partner needs it or with more nuance, where it probably helps more than it hurts. The assumption is that getting a general count on the hand helps defenders more than it hurts, so where is it less useful, or hurtful?

A weak hand typically does not need accurate count information from a strong hand (though you may argue that a weak hand protecting two honourless 4 card suits may still need help, e.g. in a squeeze). Neither partner need give count on a suit if it's expected to be calculable from other distributional information such as the bidding or there is a notable danger of declarer playing the suit better with real count help.

Some places where it's often really needed:

Where the need is less obvious but overall likely beneficial:

As an aside, the philosophy can be applied to opening leads balancing general attitude leads instead of 2nd/4th or 3rd/5th leads. Attitude leads are reverse attitude information but no count information, perhaps creating difficulties for both declarer and the opening leader's partner. 3rd/5th and 2nd/4th both give count but the 3rd/5th leads give clearer immediate count.

When you are the "strong" defending hand it can help to randomly lie. This can be extended to false carding the opening lead.

Suit Preference

Often the lowest priority signal, but there are specific situations where it is the primary signal

Suit Preference at NT

Rarely useful!

Trump echoes

Typically 2 different meanings. They may both require careful consideration as we generally lack cards to make clear signals in declarer's suit

Count Trump Echo Situations

Suit Preference Echo Situations

Unclear Trump Echo Situations

If in doubt and neither count nor suit preference seems obviously useful then the meaning may be extracted from the order of the cards.

If lacking any other clear information, then no delayed echo and seeing partner play 3 insignificant trumps may suggest suit preference (revolving) for the next relevant suit down. All speculative.

2nd Hand Plays

Covering honours is about the potential for promotion of other cards. Any advice is relative to how many tricks you need (e.g. don't duck when declarer is sneaking an extra trick to make their contract that should go off)

Times to consider playing high:

3rd Hand Plays

In general play high by default, maybe even overtaking or playing an unnecessarily high honour to unblock

Some places not to play high

Our Suit Contract Agreements

3rd and Low (not for Partner's suit)

Leading Partner's Suit

When leading partner's 5+ card unsupported suit normally lead an honour, otherwise count from small cards. Honour does not promise a sequence and the signal should be reverse attitude (not count on your K lead etc.)

When we supported partner's suit we lead reverse attitude - top from (x)x+ and low from Hxx(x). An honour lead does show a sequence and can use the usual A/Q/J attitude and K count signal semantics

Note, leading our own long suit, supported or not follows the usual 3rd and Low.

MUD from xxx in new suit

Beware small tripleton leads are awful for communicating your holding at trump contracts.

Ace Lead for Attitude

King Lead for Count

Count asking from from AK+ or KQ+

As with NT leads, an alternative method to clear up this ambiguity when playing King count lead is some Rusinow style leads, Q from KQ, J from QJ, 10 from J10 and 9 from 109. Harder to decipher when leading a doubleton, which is more common in suit contracts than NT (e.g. from 10x or 9x).

Queen/Jack for Attitude

primary signal reverse attitude, secondary signal standard count, reverse attitude discards

Cash Out Situation Adjustments v.s. Suit

Ace lead maybe speculative without a supporting honour. Other leads no change.

Our NT Contract Agreements

4th Highest (not for Partner's suit)

With 4th highest (2nd from four cards and 9xxx or worse) leads from broken honour sequences the count is less clear, though the rule of 11 helps (11 minus spot card lead is how many higher cards than the spot lead in the other hands). In NT we are less likely to want to burn a high spot card such as the 3rd highest.

Leading Partner's Suit

When leading partner's 5+ card unsupported suit we lead count (low from xxx or Hxx). An honour does promise a sequence (unlike when leading a partner's unsupported suit at trumps) and can use the usual A/Q/J attitude and K count signal semantics

When we supported partner's suit we lead reverse attitude - top from (x)xx+ and low from Hxx(x). An honour lead does show a sequence (if 3+ cards) and uses attitude signals

Leading our own long suit, supported or not follows the usual 4th highest

Top of nothing from xxx in new suit

King Power Lead

Queen Ambiguity

Due to the King power lead, the queen could be from:

Note, an alternative method to clear up this ambiguity when playing King power leads v.s. NT contracts is A from AK, Q from KQ, J from QJ, 10 from J10 and 9 from 109. As with any Rusinow style leads this can be harder to decipher when leading a doubleton, but that can easily be avoided at NT, plus when leading partner's suits we play standard honour leads

primary signal reverse attitude, secondary signal standard count, reverse attitude discards

Smith Peter (Echo) on declarer's lead

Strong 10 leads in theory make smith peters less important. Much like strong 10s, it may give info to declarer aswell as the defenders. Some times a single card played in declarer's suit is too vague as it is often our short suit.

Cash Out Situation Adjustments v.s. NT

May lead speculatively without a supporting honour

Suit Preference Mechanics

This is arbitrary, mostly for familiarity reasons. McKenney/Lavinthal etc. are just as good.

Cashing cards order and suit preference

Sometimes we have a choice in the order to cash the cards. Standard we would go low to high to show partner that we can win with a low card. Consider an example suit such as AKQxx+ in a trump contract, we want to show partner that we can win with the Queen, so will probably play it on the first or second round, but that still leaves flexibility, any order from:

The simplest approach is to map a low (1st card) high (2nd card) to the usual suit preference mechanics:

5 Lines of Defense Guide

These influence the opening lead, but also what you may switch to on an early trick after evaluating dummy

Forcing Declarer

Running declarer out of trumps and so they may lose control of the hand, unable to cash all their side suit winners and/or the defenders can cash their side suit winners. This requires the defenders to attack a suit that the declarer then has to ruff, shortening their trump length (the long trump hand!).

Conditions:

To force, leads can be aggressive, i.e. from tenace holdings

Active Defense

Attacking immediately, not with thought of forcing declarer. We believe that declarer will setup or immediately dispose of some losers if we do not attack now.

Conditions:

To force, leads can be aggressive, i.e. from tenace holdings

Passive Defense

Opposite approach to active that tries not to give tricks away - lets declarer make the guesses.

Conditions:

Ruffing Reduction

Giving up a trump trick by leading an honour or away from one may gain or at least be even where it's important to cut down on ruffs.

Conditions:

Ruffing As Defenders

Easy to understand, though often an overused desparate action. Trumps promotions and uppercuts may be more probable to succeed than partner having a miracle singleton (especially if they could have lead it themselves earlier).

Condition:

Partnership Leading Style

The 5 lines of defense suggest a general direction, but if unsure of what to do then the partnership style may indicate what we are more likely to do.

Special Leads

Gambling 3NT Types / Long Running Suit Threats

Ace lead without King whe looking for attitude - where is declarer's weakness

NT Slams

Go passive

Suit Grand Slams

Passive Trump

Suit Contract - Doubled Confidently Bid Game/Slam

NT Contract - Doubled Confidently Bid Game/Slam

Alternative Agreements

Notes on variants or alternatives of agreements that have been considered, but we don't actually play.

Mini NT or Any NT weaker than 16–18

It's somewhat a negative not having a pre-emptive weak NT, specifically NV at matchpoints. Outside of that downside 16–18 just fits too well with the other system parts where we force all ~16–20 1♣ opening hands to be unbalanced as 1NT and 2NT handle 16–20 (semi)balanced hands. Hands tend be limited very quickly.

Mini NTs are a fun novelty but hard to construct over. When vulnerable, particularly at IMPs scoring there's too much risk of going for a penalty when defenders X to show 13+ points. When NV it's definitely safer, high frequency and pre-emptive. It also pre-empts partner though, so perhaps better played NV in 3rd position or white v.s. red only. The opponents will declare more often over a mini NT and shape/strength information has been given away. Having two systems for VUL and NV is possible but a chore.

NT Opening Responses

Less considered than other parts of the system - even some fairly basic stayman + transfer responses will go a long way. The main point is that our responses includes more invites/constructive bids than some other options. If we were playing a weak or mini NT then there is more incentive to have a range of immediate escape options, either to avoid an awful NT contract or just to add to the preemption. For example, we do not play some sort of rescue/garbage stayman (even a garbage 3 suiter short in clubs has to be careful as the 2NT/3C responses show both majors). Our stayman 2♣ – 2♦ then 2M is invitational, or transfer to 2♥ then 2♠ is an artificial 5 card invite. 2NT after a major transfer is GF.

When playing 4 suit transfers, as we do, the difference between using 2♠ as a range ask or using 2♣ stayman non-promissory to do a NT invite whilst trying to avoid giving the opponents more informations has arguments either way. We can't use 2♠ as a game try based on ♣s, as it might just be a NT invite without ♣s. How bad that is compared to Stayman telling the opponents what 4 card major opener may have v.s. letting the 4th hand double 2♠ is unclear.

Using 2♣ as 5 card puppet stayman is an interesting alternative, which gives us the 3♣ bid back to use. Puppet stayman may better hide opener's major holding but show responders instead in a paradox auction such as 1NT–2♣–2♦–2♠ (showing ♥s).

The transfer breaks after 2NT openings are similarly constructive focussed showing top HHx+ support and a doubleton. This perhaps fits less well with our 19–20 opening, so the 3 card support HHx type hand should be something special. Its design comes from the Scanian 22–24 NT responses, but we also use 2NT rebids after 1♣ openings with 21–24.

Unbalanced Diamond Opening

Having a natural 4+ 1♦ opening helps define some hand types more quickly and makes competitive inverted minor raises easier, though we'd often try to find a major fit anyway. Our 1NT range of 16–18 would make the weak NT variant of the 1♣ opening too wide ranging though, and the high 16–18 NT range is a central part of the system design that keeps the 1♣ opening unbalanced in the 16–20 range. The range 12–15 is too wide for the weak NT 1♣ opening, though some players don't mind a wider NT range - it seems suitable against weaker opponents only. Even if the 12–15 wider range is acceptable we prefer to be bidding most 11 hcp balanced hands for the same reasons as a weak NT. That naturally leads to a two tier weak NT scheme with 1♦ as 11–13 nebulous (not natural) and 1♣ as (13)–15.

Additionally, 1♦ cannot be 4+ cards natural unbalanced unless playing a 2♣ opening as possibly 5♣s and 4+ major which is difficult to construct over, hence we use a 6+ ♣s intermediate 2♣ opener.

1♣ 11–13 and 1♦ 13–15

Swapping the weak NT ranges around. This is somewhat arbitrary, two sides of the same coin, so may still be experimented with. 1♦ is more pre-emptive with the weaker hand, but with interference over 1♣ it could feel safer to pass with a flat 11–13 hand rather than a 13–15 hand that is close in values to the 16–20 unbalanced strong club range. The 11–13 hand feels no pressure to re-open and compete, but the 1♣ weak NT might want do with 5–3–3–2 and 15 hcp.

Four v.s. Five Card Majors

The pros and cons seem fairly balanced, though this hasn't been considered too deeply, mainly because most artificial club literature uses 5 card majors. Opening 1♥/♠ with a 4 card major will not miss a major fit if you open 4–4 majors with 1♥, but responder does play 1NT more often instead of the stronger opening hand. It is nicer to open a major instead of using a Precision 2♦ with 4–4–1–4 or similar. Promising a 5 card major is very valuable in competition though, and modern bidding involves lighter overcalls. Slam bidding maybe easier with 5 card majors as shape is shown quicker. Playing 4 card majors the 1♦ opening would still be nebulous, e.g. 3–3–2–5 shape. With an artificial club we don't get the benefit of natural systems where all suits are natural 4+ cards. I guess it's possible to play the 2♣ opening as possibly 5 cards whilst denying a 4 card major, so 5+♣–4+♦ hands can be bid more directly (5♣ + 4cM bid canapé style starting with 1♥/♠). Some have experimented with this but a 5–4–(3–1/2–2) with both minors bypassing 1NT and having less room for a 5–3/4–3 major fit finding is perhaps suboptimal, though maybe gains back by preempting the opponent's of a cheap 1♥♠ overcall.

2/1 GF vs NF vs invitational

Note, very little evidence that 2/1 GF vs NF (weak) matters when playing a forcing NT. The old-fashioned ~9/10+ NF invitational style is equally unlikely to make much difference. There is some comfort though in knowing that we don't have to push the bidding high to force to game and can focus on slam finding when playing 2/1 GF. The difficulty with standard 2/1 GF is how opener shows extras, but that's easier with club systems due to limited openings (though can still be challeging after 1M with 11–15 when not playing an intermediate 2HS opening). Conventions like the serious 3NT and last train can convey extras at a later stage.

We play 2/1 GF over a major opening. The major rebid is then shape showing, 6+ cards "Bergen" style, which deviates from the catchall minimum strength showing "Lawrence" rebid style that the Revision club system uses. 3NT will be serious after agreeing a major following 2/1 GF.

1♦ Opening Responses

A 2♥♠ bid could be played as weak ~3–7 hcp. It is often played as weak/invitational with 5♠s 4/5♥s in strong club systems. Even if 1♦–1♠–2♣ denies 3♠s, we could have a maximum ~14–15 4–4–4–1 and so with a possible ♥ fit which can't be found opposite a limited hand as 2♥ is then FSF, and so the 5♠s 4♥s responses help here.

One style is to avoid 3 card raises after 1♦–1♥♠ and also to avoid bidding 1NT without an actual (semi)balanced hand. These restrictions may lead to bidding 2♣ on 3 card ♣ suits. Our style is to often prefer a 3 card raise with a side singleton and also to bid 1NT with a singleton in partner's suit.

Our agreements include 1♦–1♥♠–2♦ as a "better" raise (distributional minimum raise / 3 card maximum raise) - better than 2♥♠, which is usually 4 cards balanced or sometimes a minimum 3 card raise and a side singleton that doesn't want to bid 1NT. In normal precision systems this is usually 6+ ♦s and ~11–13, but we use the intermediate 2♦ opening. This would all be complicated if we decided to open 1♦ with 6♦–4♠, where the theory is we might miss a tight ♠ game by opening 2♦ including 4♠s. A 4 card ♥ suit has the same problem, but shutting out the opponent's ♠ overcall with an opening 2♦ compensates more than shutting out a ♥ overcall does.

Maximum hands with 5♦s + 4♥s can also be awkward after 1♦–1♠. Some styles bid 2♥ with 6–5 or a 5–4 maximum though it can push you too high. Our style is to open a 5–4–2–2 14–15 hcp hand with 1♣ weak strong, whilst 5–4–3–1 with 3 card support can use the special 2♦ "better" raise. Finally, bidding 1NT with 14–15 and a singleton in partner's suit is not too much of distortion due to the misfit.

Starting 1♦–1♥–2NT/3♦/3♥ + 1♦–1♠–2NT/3♦/3♥ are ♣/♦/(other major) mini-splinters. It might be better to hide the short suit unless asked for, e.g. 2NT as some mini-splinter. 3♦ could then be a a fit jump, 3oM as ♣ fit jump. Arguably a fit jump is just as information revealing as a specific splinter and a fit jump is probably 5–4–2–2, often best opened with 1♣. If we were to open 6♦–4♠ with 1♦ then 1♦–1♥♠–2NT would be some minor splinter and a 3♦ rebid would be natural. The 2♦ rebid would likely be a weaker 6–4 rebid making it harder to deal with 3 card raises unsuitable for 1NT rebids.

For the rebids after 1♦–2♣, there's not much variation in responses over a normal precision 1♦. Whether 3♣ shows a (4–1)–5–3 or is just a minimum minors 5–4–2–2 is about it. We open 5–4–2–2 maximums with 1♣, and minimums can show a balanced hand. Playing the intermediate 2♦ opening we have the additional 4–4–1–4 shape to handle, which we can overload the 3♣ call with (or treating as balanced if there's a singleton A/K). In a normal precision 1♦ system the 3♦ rebid would be a natural good 6 card suit, but with an intermediate 2♦ opening it has few uses as it must be GF. It could be a stronger 3♣ bid or a max 5–5 minors that prefers not to splinter. For the 1♦–2♦ auctions 1♦–2♦–3♣–3♦ has to be NF unless the 3♣ bid is GF, so overall to have consistency between 1♦–2♣ and 1♦–2♦ using 3♣ as 5–4–2–2 minimum maybe the best compromise.

Forcing vs "semi"-forcing 1NT over 1♥♠ openings

It makes sense if playing 2/1 GF, as we are, that the bidding with more limited hands is more difficult. The semi-forcing 1NT response (really just non-forcing) allows opener to pass with a flat(ish) 11/12 (maybe bad 13) hand. Typically 5–3–3–2 or maybe 4♠–5♥–2–2 after 1♥–1NT. As the 5–3–3–2 handshape is frequent and hands with values closer to 10 are also more frequent a semi-forcing NT seems valuable as 1NT is often the best place to play with limited values. When responder has a 3 card game invite and opener has a minimum there's also a reasonable chance that 3♥♠ would not have made but 1NT will.

That said, the 100% forcing NT, as e.g. the Revision club system uses, has its benefits. It maybe useful to escape to a weak suit at the two level when dreading playing in 1NT and not wanting to play in partner's major. It may also help in just preempting the bidding a bit with very limited support or general rubbish.

Revision also makes clever use of 1♥–1NT–2x–2♠ as 4 card ♠ suit with 10–12 hcp. It is pointed out that an invitational hand with 4♠ may often go too high in the bidding after 1♥–1♠–2♠. As the 2♠ raise could be done with 3 cards and a singleton, responder with 4 cards will have to bid 2NT even if 2♠ was the best spot or even pass 2♠ with a 7 card fit and a weak hand. It's also possible to push 4–4–4–1 hands (short in partner's major), or other esoteric GF bids, through a forcing NT which makes the 2/1 suit bids clearer.

Multi 2♦, Weak 2♦ opener, 5–4+ Major/Minor Weak Openers

We play 2♦ constructively (intermediate strength) so that the nebulous 1♦ opening is less messy and constructive bidding is easier. So no multi 2♦, or even better, some weak 2♦ variant. The lack of direct pressure on the opponents with a multi 2♦ would make it less desirable as a pre-empt aswell - it's played more for the constructive additions and the extra preempts that can be fit in.

While it hasn't been tried (unlike a precision 2♦ opening which we have played), actually a multi is possible if we play a Precision 2♥ opening, that is a 3 suiter with short ♦s that opens 2♥. As 2♥ is very passable it does put maximum pressure on the opponents. The multi does not apply as much pressure, but it is some what awkward to defend against and gives us an extra constructive bid. It also loses the 2♥ opening preempt, though it has been argued that it is the least useful preempt of ♦s, ♥s and ♠s (it's hard to bid and double 2♦ without both majors and the 2♥ opening almost points the opponents at the higher ranked ♠ suit). A weak only multi would apply more pressure and perhaps be more fun.

5–4/5–5 major/minor two suiters are more frequent than a standard 6 card weak two bid, roughly a 3:2 ratio. Ambiguity in 5 v.s. 6 cards makes safe game constructive bidding a challenge, so we can choose one of 5 or 6 cards in a constructive style or be careful of the hcp and suit quality when bidding mixed 5/6 carders non-vulnerable. We define the style for the stronger hand (the 6 card suit) first and add 5+ carders non-vulnerable as an optional extension with tight quality requirements. In 3rd position anything is biddable of course - mix of 5 or 6 carders.

At the moment the weak two style is reasonably constructive - a 4 hcp 7–10 range. This range is more frequent than 4–6 hcp hands which are more suited to destructive bidding preventing slams.

The 1st/2nd bid quality is lumped together, but really 2nd position should be more constructive than 1st.

Two Suiter Overcalls

We mostly play standard Michaels and Unusual 2NT overcalls. The exception is (1♠)–3♣ shows specifically a non-strong ♥s + ♣s two suiter. Why not two suiter overcalls like Roman or Astro jump overcalls? These alternatives can be used to show 5–4 or 6–4 hands.

An example Roman jump overcall is 1♥–(2♠) showing 4+♠s and 5+♣s. These hands may often have less playing strength than a typical 5–5 hand, but the 5–4 shapes are much more frequent. Apart from the memory load, the obvious downside is losing a normal (weak) jump overcall, so a constructive/destructive trade off. You need reasonable strength to bid like this with a 5–4 hand aswell, so ~5–7 losers. Bids that force to the 3 level would often be 5–5, except unlike Michaels etc, you may include a 6–4 hand.

A downside of the 5–4+ style is that you can never be sure under pressure whether partner has enough offensive strength. 5–5 two suiters make it more likely to bid a tight game that makes on shape instead of strength. The downside of 5–5 two suiters is the ability to clearly show a 4 card major. We play minimum level conversion takeout doubles to mostly deal with this downside - we often takeout double to show a major without tolerance for all 3 suits.

Why not play Ghestem or Extended Michaels to always use a 3♣ overcall to show the remaining 5–5 two suiter? It's a close decision. Would a 3♣ preempt be more useful? It's certainly more frequent. 3♣ forces us to play at the 3 level, in the case of (1♥)–3♣ a normal Michaels bid would allow us to play at the 2 level, so extra strength is required there. Knowing partner's minor after (1♠)–2♠–(4♠) is a nice benefit of Ghestem like bids, and after the opponents open 1♠ we are already forcing to the 3 level. Playing (1♠)–3♣ as the exception to a natural overcall covers this situation. Given the finely balanced pros/cons what is best maybe just what is easiest to remember, which will be the more frequent natural bid.

Advancing Overcalls

Our overcall style is modern standard, i.e. light 1 level overcalls ~(7)8–17 hcp and 2 level overcalls being opening bids. The 2♣♦ overcalls don't have to be sound 6 carders, which may make finding game (often 3NT) a bit harder, but lets us compete and sacrifice more.

In standard, when responder (3rd hand) passes, advancer's suit range is NF and wide, e.g. 1 level ~7–16, 2 level ~10–16 and is combined with strong jump shift responses to handle the GF hands. We give up a natural NF 2♣ response and use it as a strength ask. This means the jump shift responses can be natural NF invitational, both direct and more common than a strong jump shift. Simple new suits are more defined ~8–12 hcp and 1NT can be limited 8–13 without playing a natural 2NT response. The strength ask also allows us to use 2NT as the familiar invitational plus limit raise, which in standard is only used when responder bids (a natural 2NT makes little sense when opener and responder both have values). A downside of using 2♣ as a strength ask specifically after the opponents open 1♣ is the lack of a simple HCR cue bid at that point, though it's ok to show the 3 card limit raise via the strength ask, at least if opener does not preempt the bidding too much.

After our 1♥♠ major overcall a jump raise advance to 3M is cooperative. This is similar to standard except it does not include weak hcp hands. The idea here is that we either bid 4M straight away (maybe 0–4 hcp) or our 3M has a cooperative nature to it allowing partner to bid more with better overcall. This is different to when we open 1♥♠ and the opponents interfere, at which point 3M is ~0–6 hcp (the 11–15 opening range is tighter than 8–17).

Jump Cue Bids After We Open

When we are overcalling and advancing this is commonly a mixed raise for a major (maybe minor) or splinter.

When we open, and the opponents overcall, responder may want to play 3NT, e.g. 13–15 hcp and nothing much else to say. With that sort of hand it's frequently better for the overcalling hand to be on lead, so a jump cue bid could be used as a NT transfer.

We play it as a mild GF 2 suiter after a minor opening, e.g. 1♣/1♦–(1M)–3M, and as a splinter after a major opening. The NT transfer should be more frequent, but having a bid for awkward two suiters helps game and slam bidding.

Fit Jumps and Splinters

We have specific rules for Fit Jumps and Splinters in Competition, basically fit jumps take priority over splinters with higher jumps (if available) being splinters. Other styles may only use fit jumps, with different strengths of fit jumps. This maybe more useful for correctly judging double fits and competition to the 5 level, but must be weighed against it also helping the opponents.

Against light overcalls and raises slam finding can still be important – splinters have value there. When playing splinters it's possible use void only splinters for finding the rarer tight slams.

Mini Splinter Rebids

After a 1♦ opening and 1♥♠ response we do play mini splinter showing bids for various jumps, the structure supports mini splinters and showing 6–5 shapely hands (though not in the most natural intuitive way).

After 1♥–1♠ we keep 2NT as 6–4 with a minor and 3♣♦ rebids as 6–5 hands. No space has been left for direct mini splinters even though they are more frequent. Having the jump rebids be shapely hands works with a limited opening system to show offensive hands with limited points. In a natural wide ranging strength system employing Gazilli covers the 16+ hands. We do play Gazilli over 1♥–1♠ so it can be used to show a max 14–15 mini-splinter like raise – opposite the NF responses opener going to the 3 level in a new suit often makes little sense.

2♣ Opening Responses

Generally content with the structure – promising 6 cards makes the constructive bidding much easier than only 5 clubs.

Standard modern precision has similar responses, except 3♦ (instead of 5–5+ majors) + 3♥ (instead of natural invitational) are invite plus transfers. Transfers have the usual downside of more lead directing doubles and bidding space for opponents, but transfers may quickly describe more hands, e.g. one 5 card major and able to go to 3NT for which we must start with the 2♦ enquiry.

SMP uses 3♠ to show 6♠s + 4♥s GF. We have to go via 2NT for 6–4 either way in the majors and for single suited GF major hands. It's not that likely to suffer from difficult pre-emption though – we could double ♦s for takeout or another major overcall for penalty. Unsure if a GF single major would struggle after ♦ preemption and support. Presumably a transfer to ♥s then bidding 3♠ would show 6–4 in SMP.

SMP uses 2NT to show the 5–5 GF type hands, including a major + ♦s which we start via the 3♣ ♦ transfer. Perhaps it's more important to show 5–5 majors directly with 3♦ in case of interference, regardless, our 3♦ is invite plus instead of GF, so perhaps a bit more accurate for major game bidding.

Weak Two Responses

The most common alternative responses use 2NT or the next suit as an ask. Asking for what though? Strength, shortage, side feature (A or K) or suit quality perhaps. Strength is recognised as the most important factor, so responses often combine strength showing with showing one of shortage, feature or suit quality. It can also combine with showing 5 vs 6 card preempts if you play 5 carders NV in 1st/2nd seat.

If your suit quality can be really bad then there is definite benifit in working that out. Our quality is moderate, neither the "good" 2/3 top honours nor awful suits like J10 or worse. If playing wide ranging strength, e.g. 4/5–10 hcp then you may want min, medium and max strength distinctions. Really bad quality and/or wide ranging weak twos make constructive bidding a struggle – it's easy to overreach or underbid. As the suit quality improves and the point range becomes tighter it can then be worth considering side features or shortages. Shortages have more utility when there is a trump fit, especially when looking for slam. Features help to fit with responder's suit, probably looking for 3NT.

When only trying for game then showing shortages may give away too much information to the defenders. Responses can show an unknown shortage and min or max strength, but there won't be room to find out the shortage without going to game, so it won't help you bid a really tight game.

Transfers is an alternative to a general 2NT (or similar) asking bid that can be constructive but also allow escaping to a side suit. In our case the 2NT bid is more of a puppet as it does not always have clubs, but it will be a slam try in that case. Even if every transfer is "normal" showing the next up suit then you have the choice of playing it as invite plus or strength unknown (weak or GF basically). Our style of assumed invite plus (could rebid a minor transfer to escape, which is then in effect a minor preempt if opener showed support) allows opener to consider their strength and fit for responder's suit, often useful when 3NT is considered. Transfers do not give us a way to query opener's suit quality, opener will assume responder is looking for 3NT with at most doubleton support and judge from there. Fit for responder's suit is something that feature asks help reveal. We can do a shortage ask, but it starts via the 2NT puppet bid and is more relevant for slam finding.

With transfers we might worry about giving the opponents more ways to compete (though the artificial responses to asking bids can also be doubled) and the annoyance of opener potentially playing the contract unnecessarily. Even with natural new suit GF responses to a weak two opener it's possible for opener to end up playing 3NT anyway. In general we use the transfers when being constructive - partner has preempted us and we need tools to say more. Note, we always have a 3 level obstructive raise available – perhaps the most important bid.

Some weak two ask examples:

simple shortage / strength showing

Presumably decent suit quality and not too wide range.

hiding shortage / strength showing

Location of shortage hidden unless explicitly asked for.

Ogust

Feature Ask

Side suit showing

Can show side 4 card suit, but then means that showing a shortage does not convey strength, which is fine with a tight range.

2NT "Jacoby" Raise over 1♥♠

We play this as limit plus, not GF. This works better in a limited opening system where opener is unlikely to want to take over and be captain with a powerhouse hand. Playing as limit plus means the opponents are unlikely to make a dangerous lead directing double or overcall in 4th, as we may never have had a game on anyway.

There could be further improvements here. The main thing is that there are bids to show a minimum with specific singletons. This allows finding some tight games. This has similarities to the weak two responses, you cannot stay below 3M whilst hiding the singleton location from the opponents whilst giving responder an opportunity to ask about it. This information leakage is less of a problem in a limited opening system as we will often just bid game with an uninteresting hand that would rarely make slam opposite a shapely maximum from opener.

If less room is given over to showing minimum singletons then it could be easier to distinguish 5–4–2–2 vs 6 card openings without shortages or show a side suit below the 4 level.

Cohen Variation

Needs a bit of tweaking to fit in a limit plus instead of GF only structure.

Scanian Variation

The length of the side suit is less clear here, but there's room for responder to support a minor at the 4 level and even choose an alternative contract. Medium strength matters less in a limited opening system, where we can just use min v.s. max.

Natural Extras

3NT Opening Alternatives

An alternative is to play 3NT as Solid AKQ+ 7 card major with side feature OR solid AKQ+ 8 card major. A solid AKQJxxx 7 carder without side feature is opened 1♥/1♠ and a plain AKQxxxx 7 carder with a standard pre-empt. Note, this could also be played as a solid minor, it's somewhat arbitrary.

Opening 3NT as a 4 level minor preempt is the other common option.

Opening 3NT as a specific ace ask is another option.

4NT Opening Alternatives

Specific Ace Ask:

Or one of these:

The 4NT as an ace ask bid has a larger variety of freak hands where it could be useful (basically around 11 or so tricks regardless of points), but these are still very rare. 6–6 minors is also very rare, ~ 1:1388 for 6–6, one of 6 suit combinations = 1:8333 without considering hcp. Bidding slow with an ace ask type hand is probably harder than a 6–6 minor hand, especially with interference.

The 6–5 minors hand is far more frequent, but is so high level and at some risk of being doubled for penalty that the point range will be fairly constrained, e.g. ~8–10 hcp. Clearly it preempts partner and may skip a very viable 3NT contract, so perhaps makes more sense in 3rd.

A good 5 level preempt would probably be better than 6–6 minors frequency wise. A hand with ~8–8.5 tricks and a solid 8 carder or semi solid plus side trick, or maybe 4 control points. Only pays off if slam was on the cards over the 5♣♦ preempt.

Lebensohl Variants

There's many ways to play it such as:

Within those there could be minor variations around whether fast shows (a stop), slow shows (a stop via 2NT first if 2NT is multi-meaning puppet and not just showing ♣s), slow/fast cue shows a 4 card major or not and stop asks, direct 3 level bids are strong or via 2NT are strong etc. Transfers to the cue suit or transfer through it. Showing competitive hands faster naturally sounds more matchpoint oriented. Focusing on invitational/GF hands better for IMPs. We play a "transfer" variant. The transfer allows the stronger player to declare. Given all the names and variations the name may not label an exact system. If a negative double is available then the Lebensohl bidder has more options/accuracy. (2S)-X takeout is harder and invitational plus only responses certainly do not make sense as advancer is forced to bid.

Short Minor Defence

Currently we just play natural bids over a short/prepared minor. We keep the weak jump overcalls and lose a non-strong both majors michaels overcall. A (1♦)–2♥ bid to show majors is a reasonable alternative to a weak jump overcall, but overall the weak jump is more frequent than both majors, whilst bidding both majors with a 1♠ overcall and then hopefully ♥s later usually works fine, as the opponents will find it hard to preempt after a short minor.

When the minor could be 0–2 cards then similar to the Swedish/Polish club defence variant using a 1NT overcall with a 4 card major and 5 card minor is an option to help competing. Pass then double of their rebid would show a strong NT overcall and afford more options for penalising (assuming a NT rebid is weak). Probably better against a strong NT where the simple rebid NT is weak.

The potential downside remains the opponents claiming 1NT to play or responder being able to show their major after which they find a fit.

1NT Defence Variants

There's a lot of options and the "best" defence is probably scoring specific and NT strength specific.

Good article - www.clairebridge.com/en/defenses-against-1nt/

Woolsey

Nice against Strong NTs getting high frequency 5–4 hands and both majors. The ambiguity of the 2♦ bid makes it vulnerable to further interference though, and the ambiguity gives the opening side space to play penalty/value doubles and takeout doubles (pass then double):

Asptro

Probably the first 1NT defence convention ever played. Ambiguity on 2♣♦ bids. Nice direct 2♥♠ bids, not as constructive as transfer overcalls.

Cansino

Last played system. More for matchpoints or Strong NT aggression given ambiguity of suit lengths. Nice direct 2♥♠ bids. The majors showing bid can be played less aggressively, 5–4+ depending on vulnerability.

Cansino Strong NT / Balancing Variant

More competitive without the penalty X. Master spade suit put in the picture quickly, but lengths ambiguous.

Revision Club Strong NT Variant

Two suiters shown with X then easy enough to find some fit at the 2 level. Ambiguity of lengths. Quick to get in and raise single suiters.

HELLO

A few transfer bids that aid in construction against strong or weak NT, or just to put the strong hand on lead. Nicely maintains a natural high pressure 2♠ overcall. 2♥ showing majors lacks room to show the relative lengths if 5–4, but it's also high pressure on responder as it can be passed.

Meyerson v.s. Strong NT

Easy enough to find some two suiter fit at the 2 level. Ambiguity of lengths over X, but makes the X more frequent. Quick to get in and raise single suiters including ♦s. Much like the Revision defence but 2♣ shows majors specifically. Against a weak NT double would be values at which point it's the Landy convention (2♣ majors) + natural overcalls.

Majors Dual Strength

Nice to have more competitive v.s. constructive distinctions, perhaps more so against a weak NT where we may have game on our way.

Strong Club Defence Variants

Against an artificial Precision club 16+ or similar, natural overcalling is very reasonable, with an emphasis on bidding obstructively as we are unlikely to have a game on. NT advances could still be used as constructive game going responses to partner's often weak overcalls.

Bids of double or 1♦ do not take any room away, (even 1♥ takes little space) so they need to useful, where useful corresponds to goals of bidding, which we think should be mostly obstructive over a strong club - finding a fit and raising to our maximum level. Given the goals strong hands may choose to pass and come in on later rounds if trying to separate out 14+ constructive hands.

Transfer overcalls try to put the 1♣ opener on lead or provide a basis for constructive bidding. Transfers give the strong clubbers yet another bid to cue, so need to be 1 bid higher to be as destructive.

Hand strengths depend on vulnerability, but generally 1 level bids have some 4/5 card suit and 2 level bids have a 5/6 card suit (NV/VUL). As 1 level bids do not take up much space, if showing a specific suit there would ideally be some lead directing value to them and a choice for advancer to raise the level without much danger when there is a fit.

Semi-balanced and weaker two suiter hands should be careful about bidding, not so much because of penalty doubles (more so when vulnerable), but because the strong club side often win the auction and have gained some shape information on the opponents. Disrputive bids in the assumed fit style of preempts seem better if the overcall style includes semi-balanced 5–4 and 4–4 two suiters. Having bids show the exact two suits makes it easier for strong club bidders (with a prepared defence to interference) to handle higher overcalls, therefore it maybe better when using 4–4/5–4 two suiter showing bids to use ambiguous bids without an anchor suit - e.g. an overcall is majors or minors. The downside is that advancer can only raise the preempt to a level suitable for both combinations - a lot of multi-way ambiguous bids go no higher than the 2 level. Ambiguous bids may be better in that the strong clubbers may not be well prepared for them (but then we also have to remember the defence). Playing a system to beat weaker players is a dubious goal.

More natural overcalls allow advancer to raise the preempt quickly, but again if 2 exact suits are shown it will be easier for the strong club bidders to handle. With a rarer 5–5+ shape then whether to give away shape information should depend on suit qualities and so how likely the overcalling side is to win the auction, as a sacrifice or not. As ever, the majors and the master ♠ suit are important.

From these principles it's not too hard to invent any defence - you decide the balance of giving away information versus hopefully raising the bidding quickly and not being penalty doubled. There's no obvious best defence, but on balance natural high pressure bids and something to show the majors (maybe 2 bids for different strengths) are compelling.

Mathe

Probably the most common defence that is not all natural. The natural 1♦ overcall takes little space but if advancer can raise then it's a win. Any style for the X showing majors minimum strength can be agreed, from 7+ hcp and 4–4+ shape to better, but how well 4–4 works with limited points is debatable as no space is taken and information is given away to the strong clubbers who are often the declaring side.

Majors focus

Lacks a way to show just 4 cards in the master ♠ suit but otherwise lots of high pressure options. 2♥ is thrown in as an amusing high variance destructive single suiter major overcall example - difficult because it can be passed. May not be legal.

Truscott

Specific two suiters style, ambiguous relative lengths so hard to raise that much.

Whirlwind

Two suiter style with one naturally bid suit and the other specific suit depending on strength. The double to show an opening balanced hand is interesting - maybe giving up too much information but hoping partner can preempt further in any suit they like. After a second position bid the defenders should have a much better estimate of overall strength and shape than the opening side.

Modified Truscott

Natural 1x bids, but higher two suiter bids, so less frequent two suiters. Two suiters are natural and clear about the suits, so can be passed or fast raised, but if 5–4 shape then hard to know how high.

Myxo

More ambiguous destructive bids. The canapé like Raptor bids of 1♠ and 1NT are reasonable at taking space though maybe giving away too much shape information.

Crash

A common two suiter defence - Color, Rank, Shape. Ambiguous two suiter overcalls. The 2♦♥♠ bids are not part of crash, just another example destructive overcall, that cause some confusion but are harder to raise.

YAC

Yet another crash. The ambiguous bids start a bit higher, which may mean they need to be a bit stronger. Showing ♥s and ♠s with X and 1♦ lets advancer indicate if they like the suit, for a lead from broken suit, at the 1 level by bidding it or they can bid something else at the 1 level.

another variant

The X and 1♦ bids which take little space are used for constructive strong hands with a minor. The majors showing bid is more preemptive than other defences, but needs some quality to it as it goes to the 2 level.

Martian standard

The 2♣♦ bids are revealing of shape information, but do at least show the specific minor so it can be fast raised. Whether a 4 card ♥ suit can the win the auction is debatable - probably tells the opponents that they have ♠s. Otherwise a likeable defence structure.

Psyco Suction

Confusing the less prepared, probably not much else to say. Will not be easily raised by partner.

some canapé

Bugatti

Ambiguous Overcalls

Fun, but hard for advancer to raise.

Polish / Swedish Club Defence

A two or three way club that maybe strong 16/17+ but is more often a weak NT.

Using the standard prepared club defence is fine - the overcalling side can easily have game on over the common weak NT type hand. Two level bids should be fairly disciplined and constructive, at least if partner has not passed. They work better than over a strong only club as responder must assume opener has the common weak NT, but obviously that's not always true. Two level bids have similar choices as opening those same bids - natural, Michaels, Ekren, Multi 2♦, 5 v.s. 6 card overcalls etc.

As the 1♣ bid is forcing, you can give up a natural NT overcall (which maybe bad in matchpoints if the opening side settle in a 1NT contract that we could have stolen) and pass with strong balanced. A strong shapely hand may need to start with a takeout double as a simple overcall could be passed out. Passing and bidding later with a strong shapely hand risks losing a chance to show your hand, though takeout doubles for strong single suiters can suffer this as well.

Variation with 1NT 4♥ + minor (which could also be played as any 4 card major + 5 card minor):

Variation that gets in both major + some minor combinations, but loses a natural 1x overcall:

More majors focus including two suited transfer overcalls and a natural 1♠ overcall:

2♣♦ Intermediate Openings with 5–4 Minors

We prefer the 2♣ and 2♦ opening bids that show a 6 card minor. The common precision style with 5–4 and possibly a 4 card major is awkward but there's another rare style which allows (3–1)(5–4) openings, so a 3 card major, major singleton plus 5–4 in the minors whilst always denying a 4 card major (even with a 6 card minor).

5–4–3–1 is common (3rd most likely hand shape at 12.9%) and when we deny a 4 card major it is also preemptive. 1NT may still have been the best contract at matchpoints, but we may also shut the opponents out of a major.

Denying a 4 card major in the 2♣♦ opening puts more load on the 1♦ opening, so using the 2NT opening as intermediate with 5–5+ minors seems prudent. 2NT minors opening loses the probably more common natural 2NT opening and there's a lot of benefit to quickly showing shape and points with balanced hands and not giving opponents space to overcall, even if there's always examples where going slow with balanced hands works out better for tight slam finding. Maybe there's a way to allow a 4 card major with a 6 card minor 2♣♦ opening to reduce the load on 1♦? If that's true though, responder maybe even more unsure about whether to rescue to a major (hence this style would play forcing 2HS responses) and play a 5–2 minor fit instead of 5–3 major fit. On principle you have to pass in a 5–1 fit.

The responses I've seen over 1♦ use 1♥ as a relay, maybe natural, maybe balanced game try or general GF. How this copes with competitive pressure is unclear. Unlike most systems the 1♦ opening includes 6♣ or 6♦ with some 4cM and a whole load of other hands.

2♦ Precision Style 3 Suiter

The main alternative to playing an intermediate 2♦ opening bid – main because the intermediate constructive bidding would be undesirably difficult playing some weak 2♦ or multi 2♦ etc with an artificial 1♣ opening and 2♣ opening that is 6+ ♣s. Both bids are for intermediate constructive hands, they just put different constructive meanings into the 1♦/2♦ openings.

(11)12–15(16) hcp, short ♦ 3 suiter, 4–4–1–4, 4–4–0–5, 4–3–1–5, or 3–4–1–5

2♦ Precision Interference

2♦ Multi Opening

Not played anymore - earlier notes on how to play it before we used the Precision 2♦ opening. Given the limited space for bidding strong minor hands after a 1♣ opening, if a 2♦ Multi were played in a weak strong club it's perhaps more useful to play the strong variant as an Acol 2 strength hand in ♦s, maybe either minor, or a limited 5–5 two suiter such as major + diamonds, and throw out the 4–4–4–1 strong variant.

1st/2nd/3rd

Sound 6 card weak Two OR 4–4–4–1 (any singleton), 4+ control points, 17+ hcp

4th

6 card major ~10–13 hcp OR 4–4–4–1 (any singleton), 4+ control points, 16+ hcp

4–4–4–1 Asking Bids

A simpler system is possible but is very vague and space consuming for 4–4–4–1 hands. It's also possible to handle 5–4–4–0 hands but that requires differentiating singleton v.s. void shortage and the 2nd ask responses showing losers are likely too overloaded given the wide range of hands we can open on.

Second ask gives more definition on the loser count:

Third ask checks blue club controls (A=2, K=1):

Fourth ask checks for queens NOT held, grand slam fishing:

interference

2♦ Weak Only Multi

Either major, perhaps 5 cards NV or you can be more constructive and only open 6 carders. Weak only puts more pressure on the opponents as partner can pass the 2♦ opening. As with a normal multi, the stronger hand, the responder is more likely to declare.

Playable if a 2♥ opening is used to show the short ♦ 3 suiter with 11–15 hcp. These responses assume possible 5 carders - the 3♣♦ responses look for a fit in the other major with no way to bid constructively in a minor. As with any possible 5 card weak two, checking for a fit with your own 5/6 card suit and clarifying whether opener has 5/6 cards is full of compromises.

2♥ Both Majors

Not played, but these are the old notes. The ambiguity of the major lengths makes it more suited to an aggressive bidding style, particularly matchpoints. Some pairs play it purely aggressively with a very wide range, e.g. 3–10 hcp and 4–4+ both suits. Very high variance in that case. This can be played as a 2♦ opening, but the 2♥ bid puts immediate pressure on the opponents as it can be passed.

Both majors, longest one unknown.

1st/2nd

3rd

VUL

NV

2♠ Opening - Dutch

Not played, but these handshapes are covered when playing the mixed 5 or 6 card weak twos style non-vulnerable. The Dutch two is specifically only 5 carders, no 6 card weak twos. Nice if can also play something like a multi showing specifically a 6 carder, then it's easier to fast raise knowing the length (but also helps the opponents), whilst also preempting more frequently with both 5 (careful with suit quality when VUL) and 6 carders.

~7–10(11) hcp, 5♠ + ♣/♦ OR generic weak 2♠ in 3rd

1st/2nd

Note, usual undisciplined style in 3rd.

Alerting & Announcing

The basics and some less obvious alerts:

1♣: ALERT

1♦: "may be zero maybe with five clubs"

1♥/1♠: ""

1NT: "16 to 18"

2♣: "Intermediate"

2♦: ALERT

2♥: "Weak"

2♠: "Weak"

2NT: ""

Any Sequence 3NT+: alerted only before opener's 2nd bid

Top