Help
An alternative Hardy suggests to splinters and jacoby 2nt with any gf response with 4 trump, was inverted trump swiss with balanced gf responses using 1M 4m as showing 12-15 with crappy trumps and 1M 4om with 12-16 great trumps and 1M 2NT with a good 15+ then incorporating over and under jump shifts. I have never seen anyone play this. Why didn't it catch on?
Page 1 of 1
Reading Hardy raises Questions Why didn't inverted trump swiss catch on
#1
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 272
- Joined: 2005-May-17
Posted 2007-July-12, 07:09
http://badmonsters.blogspot.com probably will not change your life.
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,080
- Joined: 2005-May-16
- Gender:Male
Posted 2007-July-12, 07:22
People like splinters as they are "hot". P.Hilton
The Grand Design, reflected in the face of Chaos...it's a fluke!
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 4,153
- Joined: 2003-May-14
Posted 2007-July-12, 08:56
Didn't catch on since inverted trump swiss is not very useful? You chew up a ton of space, leave little room for cue bidding, without passing very useful information IMO. Who cares partner has good trumps/bad trumps? With a 9 cd fit guarantee, the odds heavily favor you not being in too much trouble with trump losers, and you will find out using RKC. If opener has unbalanced hand, he is much more interested in whether the bal min GF opposite has wasted values opposite his stiff, not whether his partner has good trumps. So better to use Jacoby 2nt/some lower raise, just use improved response structure from the std so that opener can differentiate minimums/maximums, doesn't always have to reveal shape if odds of slam are low, and doesn't destroy cue bidding room by having opener jump to 4M so often.
Instead of using available steps for trump swiss, break up your splinter pt ranges (tiered splinters), the idea of multiplexing some splinters into one bid is common & not bad, just use the 4c/4d bid for the weaker range of splinter instead.
Instead of using available steps for trump swiss, break up your splinter pt ranges (tiered splinters), the idea of multiplexing some splinters into one bid is common & not bad, just use the 4c/4d bid for the weaker range of splinter instead.
#4
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 272
- Joined: 2005-May-17
Posted 2007-July-13, 07:14
Still just on page 86 where this comes up:
1M 1nt (f) 2nt and now all responses are transfer responses. What are the pros and cons of this agreement with a regular p?
1M 1nt (f) 2nt and now all responses are transfer responses. What are the pros and cons of this agreement with a regular p?
http://badmonsters.blogspot.com probably will not change your life.
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,151
- Joined: 2003-June-11
- Location:Southern California
Posted 2007-July-13, 10:42
Badmonster, on Jul 13 2007, 05:14 AM, said:
Still just on page 86 where this comes up:
1M 1nt (f) 2nt and now all responses are transfer responses. What are the pros and cons of this agreement with a regular p?
1M 1nt (f) 2nt and now all responses are transfer responses. What are the pros and cons of this agreement with a regular p?
This is something that has caught on. The advantages are many: The strong hand can play the contract, Responder can either signoff at the 3 level with a weak hand, make a mild slam invite, or more. Responder can also show weak and strong raises of opener's major.
The only 'con' I see is not being able to play 3♣ after 2N.
"Phil" on BBO
#6 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-July-13, 11:32
Badmonster, on Jul 13 2007, 08:14 AM, said:
Still just on page 86 where this comes up:
1M 1nt (f) 2nt and now all responses are transfer responses. What are the pros and cons of this agreement with a regular p?
1M 1nt (f) 2nt and now all responses are transfer responses. What are the pros and cons of this agreement with a regular p?
This is an excellent agreement and has almost no cons and all the pros in the world.
Page 1 of 1