[kiwinacol]

Hello all. Except for the internet I'm pretty bridge isolated so I use my computer programs a lot. A problem hand for me.

North (dealer) hand.

S K
H KT953
D AKJT2
C QT

For interest here is South’s hand but I’m mainly interested in Norths actions.

S AJT
H 876
D 6
C A98632

An older copy of Bridge Baron bid the hands as: 1H - f1N; 2D - 3H; 4H - P.

Also set to 2/1, my new Jack program produced: 1H - f1N; 3D - 3H; 4H - 4N; 5H - P. 5H = 2 no Q. With 3D being identified as 18+. To me 3D is aggressive with the KS and ordinary H suit. Neither program uses Gazzilli 2C.

Firstly with the singleton spade how much is North’s hand worth? Some players in a Precision group I attended would initially discount the KS to virtually zero. I would rather have it than the opponents so it must be worth something but how much? I guess Jack allowed more for it than BB. I ran the hand through an evaluator on Richard Pavlicek’s site (http://www.rpbridge....cgi-bin/xhe1.pl) and it generated 17.3 using Kaplan-Rubens methods. With the f1N I'm none the wiser about the worth of my KS. So is it a poor 3D or a 2D bid with plenty to spare?

Secondly I’m experimenting with Gazzilli 2C* (1 of major, forcing 1N, then 2C* as 16+). North’s hand is 2D and 1/2 and should be one that Gazzilli assists with. Now I need some guidance from Gazzilli users. Would you downgrade the hand to 1H - f1N; 2D or perhaps bid 1H - f1N; 3D (not forcing)?

Another possible approach is to use Gazzilli (and counting some value for KS): 1H - f1N; 2C* ,an advantage being that responder can now bid an artificial 2D with 8-10, or make a weaker bid, or a strong limit bid like 3H that shows 3 trumps and below 2/1 requirements. BTW I use revBergen so I can’t bid 1H - 3H. Bidding with or without Gazzilli these hands, NS are going to game anyhow. Would you use Gazzilli 2C’s though? i.e. 1H- 1N; 2C*- 3H; 4H

What if North was:
S x
H KT953
D AKJT2
C KQ

but South holds 5 - 7 with no good fit? Without Gazzilli it might go 1H 1NT; 3D[GF] - ?

thank you
from Gazzilli experimenter
kiwinacol.

[perko90]

In a standard | 2/1 context, the N hand is well short of a game-forcing 3♦ rebid; 2♦ is fine. But as most people know, the wide range of a 1M-1NT; 2m auction is not a strength of standard(ish) approaches. Nonetheless, on the actual hand in question, the Bridge Baron auction seems very normal without any gadgets.
I'll let others comment on the Gazzilli in's and out's and hypotheticals.
It's also worth noting that in a Precision context, the North hand is a great candidate for a 3♦ rebid (showing 5-5 shape and a nice 14-15 HCPs (note: here, it's fair to discount the K S by 1 pt but not more)).
And in your last example, N is still short of a 3♦ GF rebid. If you're light on HCPs, the hand should be a 4 loser. If you instead just bid 2♦, ptr will strain to keep the auction alive w/ 8+ HCPs. So, you're not going to miss much.

[bravejason]

I like the Baron bidding. It seems to go straight to the point.

Don't understand the bidding by Jack unless it thinks North is worth 21+, which it might be if it counts the singleton K and doubleton QT at full value. I evaluated North to be 19 points. I wonder if 5H makes (I'm guessing the auction ended there due to missing A and trump Q).

[rmnka447]

I would bid the hand as the Bridge Baron did.

Stiff Ks and Doubleton Qs just don't carry full wait. The important thing is not counting them as both HCP and distributional points. I'd probably figure total they are worth 2-3 HCP and would reevaluate if partner's bidding indicated they were more valuable.

Often LTC is a good backup evaluation method to help you with a hand. The original hand you cite is a 6 loser hand using basic LTC because the stiff K and doubleton Q just don't count as winners. That makes it more of a better than minimum but not game forcing hand. This would push me toward just a simple 2 ♦ rebid.

The modified hand you suggest (x K109xx AKJxx KQ) is a 5 loser hand so definitely very close to a 3 ♦ rebid. Whether you bid 3 ♦ or not depends on your bidding style. With a somewhat weak ♥ suit and KQ tight probably not worth full weight, I'd tend to bid 2 ♦ with this hand and be aggressive over any positive response.

And if the hand were x KQ10xx AKJxx Kx, it would be a 4 loser hand and certainly a 3 ♦ rebid.

I'm not a Gazilli player, so can't comment on what's right playing it.

[kiwinacol]

thanks for the replies, pero90, bravejason and rmnka447. kiwinacol

[rhm]

bravejason, on 2016-July-18, 13:39, said:

I like the Baron bidding. It seems to go straight to the point.

No it does not.
After 1♥ South should not be willing to stop below game in hearts.
He should simply bid 2♣ (game forcing) and then support hearts.

The bidding is poor hand evaluation and shows an over reliance on point count. The South hand is clearly worth more after partner opens 1♥.
If South red suits were reversed 1NT would be fine.

Rainer Herrmann

[fromageGB]

kiwinacol, on 2016-July-18, 00:06, said:

S K
H KT953
D AKJT2
C QT
...Secondly I’m experimenting with Gazzilli 2C* (1 of major, forcing 1N, then 2C* as 16+). North’s hand is 2D and 1/2 and should be one that Gazzilli assists with. Now I need some guidance from Gazzilli users. Would you downgrade the hand to 1H - f1N; 2D or perhaps bid 1H - f1N; 3D (not forcing)?

I'm very happy with Gazzilli in all main partnerships, but would bid 1♥ f1NT(or KI 1♠) 3♦.

While Gazzilli is defined as "X+ points", it does not mean that all hands of X+ should bid 2♣. Indeed, one of the advantages is that when you make a rebid >2M it has a definition that is quite tight, and the exclusion of hands of this definition from the 2♣ sequences further tighten those descriptions.

For example, if 2♣ = 16+, then I would play :
1M 1f 3♦ = specifically five diamonds, and a high card strength (no adjustments for distribution) of exactly 16 or 17. This is tightly defined, so it is not forcing.
1M 1f 2♣ 2♦(positive, sets a GF) 3♦ = 16+ with a diamond suit that is 4 cards, or 18+ with a 4+ diamonds. If you subsequently rebid diamonds, then partner knows you are 18+

The answer to your "whatif" is that the bidding using Gazzilli this way is certainly 1♥ 1f 3♦ Pass, if responder prefers diamonds to hearts.

Similarly assign meanings for direct rebids of 2♠, 2NT, and 3♥ rather than going via 2♣.

[fromageGB]

With regard to the actual south hand given, this is not a 1f bid for me. I would bid a mini splinter if I had one, or a game invitational strength 3 card support raise. For me, 1♥ 2NT = mini-splinter in a minor (3♣ asks which if opener wants a resolution for game or slam bidding), but if I did not have that, rather than bid 2♥ = 3 card 7-10, I think it worth a 2♣ bid that is not GF if I rebid 2♥ over the 2♦ relay. If your jurisdiction does not allow that, then whatever bid you use, such as 1f then rebid 3♥ over a 12-15 opener rebid.

Of course, if you were not using your strength-defining gazzilli, then you do that have that alternative, either, so reluctantly, a GF.

[kiwinacol]

Hello fromageGB, thanks for your comments. Its interesting to read your ideas and others to, and the impact your variations have on the rest of the code. With my learners version of Gazzilli I set out to trial it without making major changes to the rest of our 2/1 system, with hoped for easier adoption by my other partners. I've retained the standard meanings of 1D and 1M with GF 2 suit responses, rev Bergen, j2NT and f1nt etc. We are used to the f1NT accommodating weak hands, 3 card major raises and NT and suits/hcp below 2/1 requirements, so 1H 1N; 2H is still 6 cards. I see you also still retain the f1NT though some bidders claim it doesn't work with Gazzilli. I think I've found ways of retaining the meaning of many of those problem major and D/C hands where the minors get lost but my code my be unworkable. Unfortunately discussing these details with many other players readily bores the pants off them. At the moment I've abandoned 1H 1S; 2C sequences as they are just too complex. 1H 1N; 2C now seems fine for me and I'm working on the harder 1S 1Nt; 2C stuff. Perhaps I would send you my work to look at sometime? Thanks, Ash Hailton.

[fromageGB]

Always happy to look at your ideas and make comments. Message me if you like. But remember any convention you adopt means losing something else, and your compromise choice is that you believe the gains outweigh the losses. My style is more awkward because I prefer that 1NT denies a 5 card major, so need a 15+ Gazzilli to cope with those hands, and I lose opener showing all natural M+m holdings in the 12-14 range.

[kiwinacol]

Thanks. I've sent you an email. What other bids do these 12-14 M+m hands get bundled with?

[fromageGB]

kiwinacol, on 2016-July-22, 20:01, said:

Thanks. I've sent you an email. What other bids do these 12-14 M+m hands get bundled with?

I've sent you a message - see your profile - and we'll continue by email as this is probably of no interest to others.

[wank]

The north hand isn't worth gazilli, nevermind a gf

[kiwinacol]

Hello Wank. Thanks for the comment. Yes the singleton KS isn't yet pulling its weight so others advised to downgrade the hand. I was trying to find a cut off point for Gazzilli amongst readers as there seemed to be a number of different versions. Lauria appeared to be playing 15+, at least at the time he wrote the document I use, with I think lighter Precision style openers jumps. Others Gazzilli'ers seem to require higher values for openers jump shifts. Two examples from his work:

1H- 1N; 2S = 6H/4S, 14-15 HCP, concentrated points. Yes he has 15 in the range here but most other strong 2C continuations are listed as 15+.
S AK53. H AK8642. D. 62. C 4.

1H- 1N; 3S = 6H/5S, 12-14 HCP (stronger hands go via 2C GL), with:
S AK853. H AK8642. D 6. C 4.
Yes its a magnificent hand on shape, and not to be accused of only counting HCP, I wonder if these hands and bids would fall in the same categories for other Gazzilli flavours? Unfortunately Lauria doesn't give many other examples and its less clear what his minimums are for 2C on less extreme hands. Here is another of his hands- S A5. H AK764. D 4. C KJ975. And bidding - 1H-1S; 2C- 2N, 4C- 5C; P, where 2n is described as 4-7 HCP, singleton or void H, no 5S, at least 3C. The other hand was- S K973. H 3. D Q83. C QT642.

S A5.
H AK764.
D 4.
C KJ975. and

S K973.
H 3.
D Q83.
C QT642.

perhaps if responder had bid 2D, 1H- 1N; 2C- 2D; Lauria was intending to bid 2H to show 5H, 4C and weaker hand but his auction over the 2N isn't consistent with that. So his 2C here was bid to reveal the stronger 15+ holding?

Cheers kiwinacol.

[wank]

with the 55 hands. i think 14-16 for a jump rebid is fairly common with anything stronger going through gazilli

as for what range gazilli should be in general, i'd say a good 16+

if you want to take all the 5cM hands out of 1nt openers that obviously affects it, but that's a very bad idea imo

[kiwinacol]

Hello bravejason. I tried just five reveals with mixed EW hands and 5H went -1 DD on all of them.

bravejason, on 2016-July-18, 13:39, said:

I like the Baron bidding. It seems to go straight to the point.

Don't understand the bidding by Jack unless it thinks North is worth 21+, which it might be if it counts the singleton K and doubleton QT at full value. I evaluated North to be 19 points. I wonder if 5H makes (I'm guessing the auction ended there due to missing A and trump Q).

[fromageGB]

wank, on 2016-July-24, 18:21, said:

with the 55 hands. i think 14-16 for a jump rebid is fairly common with anything stronger going through gazilli

as for what range gazilli should be in general, i'd say a good 16+

if you want to take all the 5cM hands out of 1nt openers that obviously affects it, but that's a very bad idea imo

It certainly does affect it, but playing matchpoints I like to not miss the major contracts. Completely different at IMPs of course.
I said above that 1M 1fNT 3m could be 16-17 playing a 16+ Gazzilli (for me 15-16 and 15+ Gazzilli) but I would not argue with 14-16. The point is that it defines a particular hand strength and shape, is a very descriptive bid, and can be passed.

From Kiwinacol's examples, it looks like Lauria bids a jump 5 card suit when less than a Gazzilli strength of 15 or 16, but in the last example he judged his excellent 15 count as too strong for the jump. No doubt over a 2♦ responder rebid he would have bid 3♣ GF.

[Zelandakh]

The subject of evaluating singleton honours is one we have had a time or two here at BBF. I think a decent initial evaluation is to discount a singleton king, queen or jack by a full point but be ready to reevaluate as the auction progresses.

On the given hand, you should not only downgrade ♠K but also ♣Q. Against that the red suits are worth upgrading. As others have pointed out, the Responding hand is much better after a 1♥ opening than it would be after 1♦. It is still not good quite enough for a game force for me though, although I do see the attraction of bidding it that way.

In addition to Gazilli, another gadget that can be used after a 1NT response is transfer rebids. There are similarities to Gazilli in that the jumps are freed up and one school is to throw these intermediate 5-5 hands into them. In general transfers are a little easier for intermediates than Gaz but offer perhaps somewhat less flexibility. Of course the biggest draw of Gaz is that it is easy to find write ups whereas transfer rebids are more of a minority method. On the other side, there are so many versions of Gaz that it can be confusing, which is often the way for coded bidding sequences. The optimal way of structuring the bids does tend to be affected by other parts of the system, which is something you need to be aware of when copying a top pair rather than a generic version.

[kiwinacol]

Thanks Zelandakh. I should have checked the archives about singleton honours. My posts have linked to a member with Gazzilli knowledge so I happy about that. Your tip about copying other top pair versions is valid but LL's article revealed ideas and work arounds I wouldn't have thought of. Regards Kiwinacol.

Zelandakh, on 2016-July-25, 11:21, said:

The subject of evaluating singleton honours is one we have had a time or two here at BBF. I think a decent initial evaluation is to discount a singleton king, queen or jack by a full point but be ready to reevaluate as the auction progresses.

On the given hand, you should not only downgrade ♠K but also ♣Q. Against that the red suits are worth upgrading. As others have pointed out, the Responding hand is much better after a 1♥ opening than it would be after 1♦. It is still not good quite enough for a game force for me though, although I do see the attraction of bidding it that way.

In addition to Gazilli, another gadget that can be used after a 1NT response is transfer rebids. There are similarities to Gazilli in that the jumps are freed up and one school is to throw these intermediate 5-5 hands into them. In general transfers are a little easier for intermediates than Gaz but offer perhaps somewhat less flexibility. Of course the biggest draw of Gaz is that it is easy to find write ups whereas transfer rebids are more of a minority method. On the other side, there are so many versions of Gaz that it can be confusing, which is often the way for coded bidding sequences. The optimal way of structuring the bids does tend to be affected by other parts of the system, which is something you need to be aware of when copying a top pair rather than a generic version.