BBO Discussion Forums: Gucci Lebensohl - Fast and Slow - BBO Discussion Forums

Playing Gucci Lebensohl, it doesn't seem to make sense that either (2M)-X-3NT or (2M)-X-2NT; 3m-3NT should deny a stopper. How do people use these sequences? I'm thinking the former could be based on a running suit and the latter on a strong balanced handtype.

Also, ideas for (2M)-X-3M and (2M)-X-2NT; 3m-3M? The former perhaps asking for a stopper and the latter a good hand with the other major?

I typically play that bids going through 2NT show exactly 4 cards in the other major.

In a similar vein, (2H)-X-(P)-3S is invitational with 5+ spades.

Is this Jlall way still in vogue?

I know it is not GUCI but perhaps there are analogous auctions.

 sfi, on 2015-September-19, 09:04, said:

To be clear, when I write (2M)-X-3M I'm talking about cuebids.

Thanks for the link, broze.

 mgoetze, on 2015-September-19, 12:49, said:

I understand. So after (2H)-X-(P):
3H=FG, doesn't have exactly 4S
3NT=heart stopper, 0-3S
2NT/3H=FG, exactly 4S
2NT/3NT=heart stopper, exactly 4S

The other auction I gave was an extension of the idea.

Edit: Justin's method looks like it has the same meanings for the various ways to get to the cues and 3NT.

You need to go with a method that is similar as possible to related sequences in your partnership system.

In regards to this situation I would recommend a convention I call "Liggins Gerber" - a jump to 4♣ shows a good 13+ with at 5 cards in the unbid major (ie a slam try). With a game force in clubs we can bid 2NT then 4♣ with a slam try or follow one of the flexible routes when trying to keep 3NT in the picture.

Liggins Gerber is also useful in many other auctions, most commonly after 1♥-3♠ or the converse: 4♣ now shows a slam try in hearts and 4♠ shows a slam try in clubs.

Regarding the rest, 2NT then 3NT feels like a minor oriented hand with one stop. A cue feels like a game force with 4 of the other major and possibly a stop, and the cue via 2NT shows a minor oriented game force with no stop, but my views are based on how I play similar sequences.

 PhilKing, on 2015-September-19, 16:22, said:

Ah, well, there's the rub - partner has finally agreed to learn Transfer Lebensohl over 1NT-(2x), and as we don't play good-bad 2NT there's not going to be much left in terms of related sequences.

Thanks very much for Liggins Gerber, which looks like an excellent convention. Partner has previously resisted my suggestion of 1NT-(3♠)-4♣ = hearts and 1NT-(3♠)-4♥ = clubs so I'm not optimistic that we will adopt it, but I shall save it for future reference.

You can of course still play transfers after a weak 2 as well, although they are less effective because you give up a constructive 3♣ advance. I think it is worth learning different methods for the different situations but that is an alternative if your partner can only handle one structure.