Tarting up the top tools

Having given 3NT values-for-four a good long workout over the last year or so, we have finally given it the thumbs down.

Let me explain first why it was there in the first place. In a sequence like 1 - 2NT, opener with extras needs to say 'opposite your raise to at least three, I have enough for four'. But if he has nothing to splinter at the three-level, without values-for-four he would need to bid 4.

What's the problem, you may ask? Well we have spent quite some time engineering Chilli so that keycard asks can be made below game, so that with an unfavourable response we may still be able to stop in game or 4NT, rather than be forced to the five-level. In the given sequence (and many others like it), responder is unlimited and may well be interested in going to slam. If opener does indeed rebid 4, responder can no longer ask at the usual safe level.

So 3NT was given a conventional meaning of values-for-four in some fit auctions. The 'some' is the root cause of our eventual disillusionment. It was clear from the start that 3NT should be to play in some other fit auctions, most obviously minor fit auctions, but also situations where partner could have no interest in going to slam, or where the fit was 5-3 and the hands were balanced. Each exception was logical and well defined and tied into the concept of hard and soft fits.

But the end result was too much thinking about rules at the table – just what Chilli is not about. So we are abandoning it, and 3NT returns to its former glory of always being to play in all types of auction.

Our sense of relief at this outburst of simplicity has been enhanced by the re-discovery of the extra nuances this allows. Consider this sequence, for example: 1NT - 2; 2 - 2NT; 3 - 3; 3NT. Opener has shown three hearts and an empty diamond suit, and has suggested 3NT as an alternative to 4, so is probably 3334 or perhaps 3343. This leaves responder ideally placed to choose. (We do better here than with standard transfer technology, which would go 1NT - 2; 2 - 3NT, and now it is opener that has to decide, with less information with which to do so.)

We've retained the idea of soft and hard fits, but they now differ only in the meaning of the three-level side-suit bids – empty suit (soft) or splinter (hard). That also means that we can re-classify some fits as hard when the only reason for their being soft was that 3NT needed to be to play.

To minimise the downside of all this, we have clarified the rules about the four-level bids for when partner (or the opposition) eats up our space. When there is only one side-suit left at the four-level, it is the keycard ask – we don't need a values-for-five. When there is no side-suit left at the four-level, 4NT is the keycard ask.

Then we aim to get the most out of the keycard ask responses. Usually we use the Chilli three-step responses, which generally perform better than the traditional four steps. But when the ask happens to be exactly one step above the trump suit, four steps are more effective, and we use those. (Five minutes with pencil and paper should convince you that this combination is optimal.)

So in our first example sequence, 1 - 2NT; 4, 4NT is now the keycard ask and the responses are zero, one, two no queen and two with queen. Does that sound vaguely familiar?

Alan Williams
July 2008

The Chilli bidding system is described and defined at chillibidding.org.

Soft fit, hard fit

Chilli Two makes a distinction between major and minor fit auctions, the differences being that in a minor fit 3NT is to play (rather than values for four) and three of a suit shows an empty suit (rather than a splinter).

It's clear to see that these are good variations, but we can get more mileage out of them if we make them characteristics of a soft fit. The point is that we can characterise all minor fit auctions as soft, but then add some major fit auctions that would also benefit from these variations.

The first addition is a major fit established after a suit-setter. It's clearly a good idea after such a unilateral action to let reluctant partner have a small say and be able to nominate 3NT as a sensible contract, and we can do this by making the fit soft.

An example: 1 - 1; 2 - 2; 3 - 3; 3NT - pass.

(While we're on suit-setters, we've decided to try to increase the frequency of delayed premature suit-setters by allowing them to be bid missing any single honour, not just the ace.)

The second addition to soft fits is cleaning up what is currently an exceptional rule, and that is that 3NT is to play if partner has just made a non-forcing bid of the trump suit. By defining the non-forcing bid as making the fit soft, we get the exceptional rule rolled up into the general one.

An example: 1 - 2NT; 3 - 3NT; pass.

We may come up with some other applications of soft fits. The important thing is that there must be clear and concise definitions for when the soft fit applies.

Alan Williams
June 2008

The Chilli bidding system is described and defined at chillibidding.org.

Unscrambling the scramble window

Putting up the Chilli Two site involved an intense review of the system, and – you'll never guess – we've already come up with some improvements! Most of them are simplifications, which are always popular. Over the course of this week I'll be posting on this blog as I put in the changes.

The first change is an important one, and that is to simplify the scramble window idea. It worked very well for its original purpose, which was to provide a special environment after a 2 invitational relay was declined. Everything in the window (2 to 3 inclusive) was then natural and to play, although a raise such as 1 - 2; 2 - 3 would be a repeat invitation, asking for reconsideration on the basis of the fit.

Unfortunately and incorrectly I then complicated it by also including two other types of sequence:

1. one in which someone jumped into the window without using a relay (e.g. 1 - 2)
2. continuations after 1 such as 1 - 1; 2
or 1 - 2; 3

The problem in both cases is that one hand is unlimited. To cope with strong hands we had to specify that bids that went beyond the window were forcing. But that was still clumsy, as these bids are all suit-setters: it left us badly placed if we wanted to explore for fit, or to strongly agree a suit (because it was a scramble, 2NT was natural).

So the fix is a three-parter. First, we've reverted to the simple window I described at the top, specifically for when one hand invites with 2 and the other declines.

Second, a jump into the window in sequence type 1 is now a disturbing bid. You'll find that this gives you all the tools you need to carry on when you have a strong hand opposite partner's space-stealing but highly descriptive bid; and there's no real need for scrambling, as partner's bid has already identified the strain in which we can play if are going no further.

And finally, we have to deal with the continuations after 1.

1 - 1/1; 2 shows a minimum hand with 5-4 in the minors and no three-card fit for partner's major. Again, we want to be able to manage responder's strong hands constructively, but we don't want to lose scrambling here – we want to be able to choose between opener's minors, or play in two of a major or in 2NT. As opener has defined his hand quite well, the best solution seems to be to make 2 an artificial game force, and to treat all other bids in the window as starting a scramble. In other words, continue as if the 2 bid is an invitational relay. This works well except in one small respect – we are forced to 3 if we want to play in diamonds. I think that is a small price to pay for having a really economical route forward when responder is strong.

1 - 2/2; 3/3 is a bit easier: we simply make the final bid disturbing.

Alan Williams
June 2008

The Chilli bidding system is described and defined at chillibidding.org.