[Cyberyeti]

eagles123, on 2025-November-29, 12:06, said:

It seems to me completely unplayable. Let's say we have 9 points in response - do we invite or do we get to a hold load of crap 15 opposite 9 games that everyone else is avoiding? Is partner supposed to bid game with 16? Equally with 7 points, we surely can't pass in case partner has the 18/19 hand? What does partner do with 17? I just don't see how that's ever workable.

Crowhurst, with 7 you invite and play game opposite 17 but not opposite 15-16.

Extremely crap 15s you may have downgraded, normal 15s usually play fine in game opposite 9.

We've been playing it as a partnership for 30+ years and haven't bookmarked so many occasions where it's been an issue that we've thought about changing it. You do get a little bit of variance where you occasionally play a 4-3 major suit fit instead of 2N, and this has been a plus more often than a minus.

[eagles123]

Cyberyeti, on 2025-November-29, 13:24, said:

Crowhurst, with 7 you invite and play game opposite 17 but not opposite 15-16.

Extremely crap 15s you may have downgraded, normal 15s usually play fine in game opposite 9.

We've been playing it as a partnership for 30+ years and haven't bookmarked so many occasions where it's been an issue that we've thought about changing it. You do get a little bit of variance where you occasionally play a 4-3 major suit fit instead of 2N, and this has been a plus more often than a minus.

So with the 17 opp 7 you're playing 3N when the rest of the room is in 1N. This seems completely flawed, especially at MP as it turns these boards into complete top or bottoms.

[Cyberyeti]

eagles123, on 2025-November-29, 13:43, said:

So with the 17 opp 7 you're playing 3N when the rest of the room is in 1N. This seems completely flawed, especially at MP as it turns these boards into complete top or bottoms.

In the US or in London it may do, a lot of good 17s get upgraded out of a strong NT, some really bad 17s we might bid as 15-16 so not as much as you might think, here it doesn't, most play weak NT, and 15-18 is not uncommon (as is 12-16 so they're rebidding 2N). Also our system is teams oriented, and overbidding slightly into particularly vulnerable games is not terrible

[DavidKok]

I think these methods are poor but not unplayable, and not quite for the reasons other posters suggest. The discussion has shifted entirely to balanced hands - does that mean there is a consensus that this hand should be treated as balanced?

[Tramticket]

 DavidKok, on 2025-November-29, 16:03, said:

The discussion has shifted entirely to balanced hands - does that mean there is a consensus that this hand should be treated as balanced?

No consensus from me. I understand that Cyberyeti opens fewer four-card majors than we do, but it seems strange to hide a six-card heart suit when our opening bid has only promised four cards. Rebidding 1NT would never occur to me, the choice is only between rebidding 2H and 3H. For me, this hand isn't worth a 3H rebid.

The lack of honours in the heart suit is a problem, but it is an indirect effect. Ten of our points are in our two doubletons and these cards are not doing the heavy lifting that they would be doing in a long suit.

[mikeh]

DavidKok, on 2025-November-29, 16:03, said:

I think these methods are poor but not unplayable, and not quite for the reasons other posters suggest. The discussion has shifted entirely to balanced hands - does that mean there is a consensus that this hand should be treated as balanced?

Depends on the definition of unplayable. Obviously it’s not literally unplayable and I’d hope readers understand that nuance. However, it’s a method that creates bad results on hands where, given the methods, neither opp did anything anti-systemic. It creates this by causing the partnership to get too high when responder invites or missing games when he doesn’t. Presumably Cyber thinks that there are offsetting benefits, but the only one he mentions is playing in 1N when opener has a bad 18-19 and responder (I infer) a 6 count. Talk about a narrow target! Meanwhile they play 2N with 15 opposite 7 and miss 3N with 6 or a poor 7 opposite 19…when 3N will often make even if opener has 18.

In tough team competition, missing games that are routine for the opps is my definition of a method that, lacking significant offsetting benefits, is ‘unplayable’. Like going into a wrestling match with one arm in a sling. Ok, that was hyperbole.

As for 3H, while I agree that suit quality isn’t the best all and end all of jump rebidding a suit, it shouldn’t be ignored either. Give me, as responder, a borderline game bid over 3H and I look immediately at my heart fit. Give me a top honour (AKQ) and I’ll bid aggressively. That may not work well opposite J10xxxx even with all his (short) side cards. In-out valuation remains a valid approach.