XYZ and 2 way NMF. Thoughts and questions. And responses to 1C.

[kenberg]

[I just edited the title to include "responses to 1C".]

After an auction that starts 1X-1Y-1Z there can be 2 way NMF if Z is NT and XYZ if Z is H or S. Sometimes 2 way NMF is called XYZ over NT, but the situations for Z =NT and Z=M  are different, as Larry Cohen notes.  See https://www.larryco.com/bridge-articles/xyz

I have sometimes played 2 way NMF after opener rebids 1NT. It goes like this (my understanding of it):

After the 1NT rebid, a bid of either 2C or 2D by responder is artificial.
After 1X-1Y-1NT, the bid of 2D is an artificial game force and opener further describes his hand.  Example: 1C -1S-1NT-2D
We will be playing this in game somewhere probably either in S or NT, but we start with opener bidding 2S if he has three spades.
After 1X-1Y-1NT, the bid of 2C is artificial and demands that opener respond 2D.
With a weak hand and diamonds, responder can pass 2D. This is especially useful if the pair is playing in the Walsh style where the auction might begin 1C-1S-1NT with responder holding four spades and long diamonds. Over 1NT he then bids 2C, forcing a 2D response, which he then passes.
After 1X-1Y-1NT-2C-2D, if responder now does anything other than pass, his call is invitational.
So 1C-1S-1NT-2C-2D-3C is natural and invitational.
And then, since 1C-1S-1NT-2D-something-3C is forcing (2D set the game force), it follows that 1C-1S-1NT-3C is weak (since we have a route to handle both the forcing and the invitational hands).

Ok, I have played this and it is a reasonable convention with its good points and bad points.  But now how about XYZ?

Suppose the auction begins 1C-1H-1S.
According to the LC article above, 2C forces opener to bid 2D, and responder can pass this.
But wait! After 1C-1H-1NT, responder knows that opener has 2 or 3 diamonds and 12-14 highs. After 1C-1H-1S, responder knows much less. Opener might have four diamonds, opener might have no diamonds. Opener might have a 12 count, opener might have an 18 count. How often does responder have a hand where he thinks "Well, I don't care if pard has four diamonds and an 18 count or no diamonds and a 12 count, I want to stop in 2D"? But if he does anything except pass 2D then he is inviting game and his hand might not warrant that.

So: The fundamental difference between 2 way NMF and XYZ is that after the 1NT rebid by opener the responder is in a pretty good position to see if he wants to be in game, invite game, or sign off, and he knows a fair amount about opener's distribution. After 1X-1Y-1Z, where Z is H or S, responder knows much less about opener's strength.  After 1C-1H-1S, responder knows opener has 4 spades, lacks 4 hearts, and probably has 4+ clubs and that's about all he knows.

Obviously those who regularly play XYZ have thought this through, but that's not me. 2 way new minor I have played, XYZ with Z being H or S I have not played.

I seek good references on how this convention is played.

[jcreech]

Hi Ken,

Try http://bernardmarcoux.blogspot.com/2013/04/xyz-convention.html for XYZ. 

[kenberg]

Yes, that is  a very nice article. I notice that there are no examples where it goes 1C-1H-1S-2C(demanding 2D)-2D-Pass. Well, I did not see any 1C-1S-1NT-2C-2D-Pass examples either, but those I can easily imagine.

I read the comments from readers and one of them reminded me that I had read something about XYZ before. An example auction is 1C-1H-1NT-2C-2D-3C, explained as invitational (because of the 2C) and 5-5 in hearts and clubs. I remembered that I saw this before and remembered that I was wondering why it shows five hearts. Suppose you are dealt a 2-4-1-6,  pard opens 1C. After 1C-1H--1NT you might well have invitational values. An immediate 3C is weak and if bidding 2C->2D and then 3C shows 5-5, what do you do? Maybe it's just you can't have everything and so it  was decided it shows 5-5.

Anyway, this is definitely a useful article.

[Masse24]

I saw this before and remembered that I was wondering why it shows five hearts. Suppose you are dealt a 2-4-1-6,  pard opens 1C. After 1C-1H--1NT you might well have invitational values. An immediate 3C is weak and if bidding 2C->2D and then 3C shows 5-5, what do you do? Maybe it's just you can't have everything and so it  was decided it shows 5-5.

Playing both Two-Way NMF or XYZ, I play 1 - 1 - 1NT - 3any as slammish. To get out with a "weak" hand with clubs, go through 2NT which puppets to 3 .  So:

1 - 1   - 1NT - 2NT (puppet to 3 )
3

I think I first learned it (XYZ) reading Inquiry's version, but did not play it until recently. Lots of variations available, so this is one of those gadgets with endless possible tweaks.

It might be an interesting exercise to pull toghether an IAC concensus on these toys.

[kenberg]

As is often the case, I am fine with something that is well-documented.
For the X-Y-1NT case, the article Jim cites seems to fill the bill.
The X-Y-1M is clearly more complex since opener's is not nearly as well defined as it is after 1X-1Y-1NT, but the article makes a case for it maybe being worth the effort. But I do think effort is required. After 1C-1D-1M-2D we know we are in a game force but it is far frmo clear whether opener is thinking of game in C, in D, in M, in NT, and maybe he is not yet certain of the strain either. So clearly there has to be some advance discussion of what means what after the 2D.

It could be interesting to post some hands that arise in actual play.

[kenberg]

I edited the title to include "responses to 1C". Just how we respond to 1C has an impact on what happens next. If we frequently skip over to bid a major then, after 1 -1M-1NT it is  very possible responder will want to get out in 2 , and 2 way NMF allows this to happen. This occurred to me as soon as I learned of 2 way.

Now, thinking about XYZ, I have another thought. Consider 1 - 1 - 1M - 2 . As written, this demands that opener rebid 2 after which respnder will either pass or make some invitational call. But wait. This is different from 1 - 1 - 1NT - 2 , where opener surely has 2 or 3 diamonds. On 1 - 1 - 1M - 2 opener need not have any diamonds at all. Moreover, if we are playing in a walshie style that 1M call by opener showed at least a somewhat unbalanced hand. The 1 !G by responder allowed opener to skip over a major to rebid 1NTand his choice of bidding 1M rather than 1NT suggests unbalance.  So now let's imagine opener with a 2=4=1=6 shape and a fairly  minimum count.  Does he really want to bid 2 and have partner pass? If partner is not going to pass the 2 then he is going to make some invitational call, maybe 2NT. I am not so sure we want to play this in any number of NT. So maybe after 1 - 1D, opener holding this 2=4=1=6 should just rebid 2 ?  Maybe so. But he could also bid the 1M and then, if partner bids 2 , just pass the 2 . Yes, responder said to bid 2 but opener does not think highly of playing 2 and he also does not plan on accepting any invitation that might be put forth over 2 , so he could just get out now.


Now this brings up the question of just how walshie we are. Here is BWS:

"In response to one club, with four of a major and four-plus diamonds, responder bids: one of the major with four diamonds, one diamond with invitational-plus values (otherwise one of the major) with five diamonds, one diamond with six diamonds."

This seems sensible Yes, it says that with a 1=4=6=2 shape you bid 1 over 1C. And yes, in theory partner might then bid 1NT even though he has four card support for your major. But will the really happen? Not often. We are assuming responder has six and opener rebids 1NT. And, for there to be a problem, we also assume opener and responder have a 4-4 heart fit. So our side has two eight card fits, opener has minimum values and responder has a hand weak enough to sign off early. Are the opponents unconscious? Why are they not in this auction? Sure, it could happen but with the hyperactive modern bidding style I think the chances are low of the opponents not being in the auction when we have two 8+ fits and minimum count.


I am still thinking about just how the Walsh style responses influence XYZ and I very much welcome other thoughts.  And I do think the NWS approach for responses is better than strict Walsh where you skip over a diamond suit of six to the AK to bid a heart suit of four to the 8.

[Masse24]

Steering the conversation back to Two-Way New Minor Forcing, here is a well laid version as described by Gavin Wolpert on Bridgewinners:

Two-Way New Minor Forcing

Some good content, too, in the comments below.

[kenberg]

Thanks.
Reading Wolpert's stuff it is one more example of different people playing a convention in different ways. A dramatic example: Wolpert plays 1C-1M-1NT-3C as a slam try, the article Jim posted, and the way I learned the convention. is that the 3C is a weak bid, not even invitational since to invite it goes 1C-1H-1NT-2C-2D-3C.

Bottom line: It simply does not suffice to just agree to play 2 way NMF, there needs to be discussion of what those words mean. And surely XYM requires more discussion.

I am glad I started tis thread, now the job is to make some practical use of it.

[blubayou]

The BWS "almost-walshie" agreement on skipping a 1D response -- or NOT    is a bastardization that will be removed in "BWS2028" or whatever.   Your observation that we will so seldom have the auction to ourselves when we have  two 8+ fits so will seldom screw ourselvs out of a 4-4 spade fit is well taken though.  Still,  this messy part of bws2017 annoys me second only to the section addressing WOLFE SIGNOFF [also  "almost"]    Try reading THAT section to your grandkids or bridge-201 students  and not go crazy:)