While I prevaricate for a time on valuation methods and stronger responses to the 1NT opening, it seems an ideal opportunity to discuss and outline 3rd and 4th seat strong and intermediate range openings.
In DIP, 4 card major suits openings are emphasised in 1st and 2nd seat. The as yet undiscussed weak range 2D and 2H openings also emphasise 4 card majors as well. So, once you get around to opening in 3rd and 4th seat, it is assumed that many possible 4-4 fits with moderate strength or better between the two hands have already been discounted. Remember, there are some balanced hands in the 10.0 to 11.8 fpc range which will have been passed, but if they contain a major, they can only be 4M333.
The number of hands which would naturally need to relay after an intermediate range opening has also effectively been reduced to nil. As such, the benefits of transfer style openings in the majors has also largely been lost. Further, because partner would have opened the majority of 10.0+ fpc count hands, there is little reason to stretch to open. So somewhat antithetically to normal methods, DIP practitioners should go more conservative in 3rd/4th seat intermediate range openings than “normal” bidders.
With respect to the strong range, there are not too many hands which could easily FG relay opposite a 15.0+ fpc opening. Whilst there are quite a few semi-POS possibles, there are fewer competitive advantages to be gained from a semi-POS structure, with at least one opponent and possible both already having been silent. This suggests a possible switch to a more classic 1D ART & NEG, 1H+ FG POS relay structure, opposite a slightly stronger 1C opening (to bring more of responders potential hands into the FG POS picture).
Where does all the above lead to? A 17.0+ fpc strong 1C opening and mostly natural 11.0 to 16.8 fpc intermediate strength openings. Also, it is not incumbent to open 11.0 to 12.8 fpc hands if you don’t like the feel of them (which would likely mean in practice not opening if forced to show a bad suit, or to open 1D if you don’t have many of them, 4405 being the worst case scenario).
With 13.0+ fpc, you should always open. Remember, the “best” hand that partner can come up with after having passed is an 11.8 fpc 5m4m22, so you shouldn’t miss a game if you pass a “bad” 12.8 fpc or worse in 3rd or 4th seat.
Speaking of “bad”, Thomas Andrews describes the ranges between points as follows
- 12.2 fpc:: “a good 12 count”
- 12.4 fpc:: “a very good 12 count”
- 12.6 fpc:: “a very bad 13 count”
- 12.8 fpc:: “a bad 13 count”
This seems a not unreasonable explanation method to adopt, when needed.
There are a few other residual points to consider for the intermediate range openings. The first is the 1NT opening. 11.0 to 16.8 is clearly too wide a range for this. As such, BAL hands are split into two ranges:
- 11.0 to 13.8 fpc
- 14.0 to 16.8 fpc
For 3rd and 4th seat openings, one of these BAL hand ranges is opened 1NT and one is slotted into the now slightly catch-all 1D opening. There are two conflicting theories as to how one might allocate the above.
- If the opponents are known to be going to compete, it would be better to have the stronger range in 1D: then partner with diamonds can act, realistically hoping for one of (i) genuine diamonds, or (ii) a strong(ish) hand. However
- If the opponents might double you for penalties, it would be desirable to have 1NT containing the stronger range: this reduces the chance of getting in serious trouble.
As is often the case, the solution is a compromise, though a fairly optimal one I believe. In 3rd seat (when the 4th hand opponent might still be very strong) 1NT gets the 14.0 to 16.8 range and 1D defaults to the 11.0 to 13.8 range. In 4th seat, when both opponents are known not to be very strong, we try to capture the auction, with 1NT instead getting the 11.0 to 13.8 fpc range. We put the stronger range into the 1D opening, to get the potential advantages if the opponents compete as discussed above.
Another residual point to consider is what to do with 4D5C hands. In 1st and 2nd seat, these are put into the 2C opening. Many other MOSCITO-like relayers would put these in with 1S(=D) but I think that cripples the 1S opening in competition: 4+ diamonds with a median of 6 diamonds is too great a range to handle. By doing what DIP does, the minor suit showing openings average about 5.8 cards in the shown suit, which I think is quite workable. However, with the ability to open 1D “sort of” showing diamonds in 3rd/4th seat, I think the balance changes considerably. So, in 3rd and 4th seat, DIP opens 5C4D hands that are unsuitable for 1NT with 1D. Consequently, 2C guarantees 6+ clubs, which is of course another good thing in competition.
The final residual point to consider is what to do with the two level pre-empts in 4th seat. The answer is somewhat like most systems: don’t have them. The question is, what to use them for, or more accurately, how to use them to better define other bids. The current proposition is to use 2D, 2H and 2S to show 14.0 to 16.8 fpc hands with good suits (probably KQxxxx or better). This means that a same suit rebid of 2D, 2H or 2S either is minimum or doesn’t contain a good suit. This should stop responder pushing too hard. As always, there is a conflicting alternative: play them as minimums, somewhat like Strong WK 2’s (for competitive reasons). However, in 4th seat, the constructive use is preferred, so strong with good suit it is!
There is a case for making 2D, 2H and 2S similarly constructive in 3rd seat. However, there is a competing case for maintaining pre-emptive weaponry in 3rd seat as well and currently, that case is deemed more compelling.
Please read the front page which contains the system for the net effect of all the above. I’ll updating it fairly soon.
Regards, DipBridge.
