[gnasher]

I'm not sure how new this is, but what do you think of this idea?

1♥-1NT;2♣ = minimum with six hearts, or the good hands that normally bid Gazzilli.
1♥-1NT;2♥ = minimum with clubs.

The idea is to deal better with responder's 31(54) minimum. Playing standard Gazzilli, if you bid 2♥ with this you risk playing a 5-1 fit opposite x5x4; if you bid something above 2♥ you waste space when opener is strong, and may get unnecessarily high if the 2♣ rebid includes invitational one-suiters.

Similarly, after a 1♠ opening you could play

1♠-1NT;2♣ = four hearts, or the good hands that normally bid Gazzilli. With 0-7 opener gives preference between the majors
1♠-1NT;2♥ = minimum with clubs.

[Kungsgeten]

In Sweden it is common to use 1M-1X; 2C as 6+ major or good hand, 1M-1X; 2M becomes 5M and 4+ clubs. This is often combined with the openings 2H and 2S showing 10-13 hcp with 6+ major. This means that 1M-1X; 2C is either strong or 14-16 with 6+ major.

I haven't seen the idea of 1S-1NT; 2C showing hearts before, but I guess it would work. The problem may be when opener is strong?

1S-1NT; 2C-2H;

In normal Gazzili opener can pass this bid, even if strong (but minimum). Here opener may have to bid, since responder might just have 3 hearts on some bad days.

1S-1NT; 2C-2D;

Now it would probably take some extra artificiality for strong hands, but probably not much:

2H = Minimum, both majors
2S = Strong, both majors (I think that approach is best, since it is important to show hearts)
2N = Strong, catch-all
3m = Strong, 5-5
3H = Strong, 5-5
3S = Strong and good suit

[Cascade]

gnasher, on 2013-December-16, 04:29, said:

I'm not sure how new this is, but what do you think of this idea?

1♥-1NT;2♣ = minimum with six hearts, or the good hands that normally bid Gazzilli.
1♥-1NT;2♥ = minimum with clubs.

The idea is to deal better with responder's 31(54) minimum. Playing standard Gazzilli, if you bid 2♥ with this you risk playing a 5-1 fit opposite x5x4; if you bid something above 2♥ you waste space when opener is strong, and may get unnecessarily high if the 2♣ rebid includes invitational one-suiters.

Similarly, after a 1♠ opening you could play

1♠-1NT;2♣ = four hearts, or the good hands that normally bid Gazzilli. With 0-7 opener gives preference between the majors
1♠-1NT;2♥ = minimum with clubs.

Why are you not bidding 2♦ with your 31(54) minimum? Then you never need to play a 5-1.
The other criticisms still apply to your proposed scheme that you 'waste space' if you bid above 2♥ when opener is strong. If you bid above 2♥ less frequently you lose definition of responder's hand with the change.

Its not clear precisely what you have done in the change with spades. After Gazzilli, you have lost a strong rebid by opener of 2♥ and have not specified what the rebid of 2♠ means through Gazzilli. If these have been swapped it would seem that this is less efficient than 2♠, through Gazzilli, being weak with clubs and 2♥ being some strong hand would be more efficient with the strong hands and therefore on balance better.

[lowerline]

Do you assume a forcing 1nt? If 1nt is not forcing, then opener's 2♥ rebid will always show a 6crd suit.
Intermediate hands (15-16hcp) with 4 in the other major can go via Gazzilli. Weaker hands with 4 in the other major pass after 1♥-1nt and bid 2♥ after 1♠-1nt.

Steven

[MickyB]

Both concepts are dealt with in this thread -

http://www.bridgebas...dified-gazilli/

I think awm has his notes for 1S:1N, 2C online, hopefully he can supply the link.

I'll try to make a more insightful post in this thread when more awake than I am currently.

[phoenix214]

I know in Latvia people play somewhat like the Swedish, although those who do play Gazilli normally do it in a strong club system, with a semi-forcing/non-forcing 1NT response
It goes like this
1♥-1NT:
2♣->2♥ 6+♥ 11-13
2♥-> 5♥-4+♣ 11-13
2♣->3♥- 6+♥ good 13-badish 14
3♥ -> 6+♥ goodish 14-15
2NT was 6-4 if i recall( have not played this myself)
After 1♠ it goes quite similary

[awm]

Using Gazzilli as "6+M or strong" doesn't seem like a good solution to me. I posted about this in the other thread, but I'll (again?) point out the following:

1. One big advantage of Gazzilli is that you can stop in 2M with 17 opposite 5 via the auction 1M-1N-2C-2M-Pass. You cannot do this in standard bidding because 2M has a range of like 5-10 and thus opener must take another call with 17. However, you also cannot do this in the proposed method because 2M will often be based on a singleton and therefore opener wants to take another call with 17 and five-only major. This also muddies the waters about what should be forcing and what should not.

2. One big disadvantage of Gazzilli is the major + clubs hands, but you have not really helped that problem here as you still cannot play in 2C or play in 2D when opener has M+C etc.

3. I would not be that worried about responder's weak 31xx hands after a 1H opening. Yes, he will make a call that takes up some space opposite the strong hand (i.e. 2NT) but this call is very descriptive both in terms of strength (5-7 or so) and shape. It's also a rare sequence. We should be able to sort it out.

The method where 1S-1N-2C shows hearts or 17+ has more promise, and Elianna and I have played this method for quite a while. However we use the 2H rebid as showing 6+S and 2S as S+C. The wins and losses are basically:

1. Keeps the auction lower when responder is weak because he basically always bids 2M.
2. Makes it easier to find heart fits when opener is 5S+4H and like 17 hcp but responder is weak.
3. Makes it harder to find heart fits with 5S+4C opposite 5H.
4. Muddles responder's strength a little when he has a club fit.

The third and fourth ones are potentially much worse if you play a forcing or semi-forcing 1NT response (we don't).