Welcome to the Forum Marcus.

Excellent discussion question to boot.

Since Oliver is a world-class player and originator of the system, it is hard to disagree with him - especially when he emphatically puts it as "rebid 1 20 times out of 10!" 

However, I prefer bidding 1NT. IMO, the problem with the 1 Opening is its nebulous nature. In that regard, I think Opener's first duty should be to show partner his true hand type. IMO, bidding 1NT makes it easier for Responder to take appropriate action - bidding 1 still leaves the waters muddy.

That said, I am nowhere near the caliber of player as Oliver. Actually, I am your ordinary simple patzer - who frequently goofs on his Declarer play and quite a bit more on his defensive play. However, I do let my partner know that in the 1 -1 -1NT sequence, my 1NT bid does not deny a 4-card  suit.

John

I have a question about a 1D sequence, if you open no-Vul 1D as 13-15 nt hand, p responds 1H and you have 4spades (without high honours) do you respond 1S or 1NT? Here is the full hand:
  J987
  K10
  QJ10
  AK102
Thanks for answers!

Are we awake yet?  Thanks for the quick and direct response.   

In essence,  I whole-heartedly agree with your approach to identifying the singleton K.   Thought your example hand for responder would be improved if it contained the following:

If I have

  QJxxx
  AQxxxx     (changing the KQxxxx to AQxxxx, since opener had the singleton K)
  void
  AQ

I didn't mean the two hands to be related - the hand immediately above was just a random example.

that would have the two hands being:


  AKxxxx                     QJxxx
  K                            AQxxxx
  AJ10x                      void
  xx                           AQ

Now,  it was probably late when I responded and a little tired.  I was looking at the quidelines for using FNT  (shown below)

Forcing 1NT Response
In response to an Opening Bid of 1♠ (or 1♥), 1NT is an artificial 1-round force following which both partners in turn clarify their hand-types. The kinds of hand that generally use a Forcing No Trump are as follows:

  1.  Balanced hands with 8+ hcp and Spade Support
  2.  Balanced hands with 12+ hcp but no 'good' support for Spades
  3. 16+ hands with (or without) Spade support
      A weak hand with no tolerance for Spades and a long (6+-card) suit elsewhere.
  4.  (Note: This hand type can only be shown via the Forcing No Trump if Asking Bids are not being used, or when Responder is a
       passed hand)

Unfortunately,  I used the term balanced hand.  What I meant to infer is that since options 1,2,&4 do not apply (in this example), then option 3 is when responder is going to be the "asker" and it would be important to know all the controls.   

Thanks for tolerating my inexperience using this system. 

That aside, if I were to find a partner to play this system and could find to time to learn it, I think I would show the singleton K

Question:  Can you think of an example where responder has option 1 or 2 and would still activate a Beta Ask?

I think it's possible. If responder has a maximum of type 2, bids 1NTF and then hears opener jump shift, showing a maximum with at least 5-5 in two suits, then I can certainly see beta being used if responder has a good fit for the second suit. 

Hello Brain, 

I looked up the Asking Bid Guidelines for activating Beta's and found this statement for counting singletons:

"Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, we do not count a singleton King as 1 Control unless Partner has shown strength there (eg: an earlier trump ask in that suit) or we know they are strong balanced (and so are likely to have one of the adjoining honours). "

My question is...……………..

Does this statement "or we know they are strong balanced (and so are likely to have on of the adjoining honours" cover your example hand since responder used a "Forcing 1NT" to start the sequence. 

Thanks.

No, absolutely not. The forcing 1NT is a totally artificial bid and (particularly if it's used to switch on the asking bids) absolutely does not indicate a balanced hand. Let's take an example.

If I have

  QJxxx
  KQxxxx
  void
  AQ

that's hardly balanced, yet if partner surprises the hell out of me by opening 1 then I'm bidding 1NT and then using gamma in  over the rebid, both to check for  AK and to switch on the asking bids, with absolutely no other options for bidding the hand.

If you follow the guidelines in the notes, then you absolutely would not count a stiff king in the

1M-1NTF
(rebid)-(gamma ask)
(relay beta)-<??>

sequence. You have no grounds for thinking that responder has length in the suit or an adjacent card.

Georgi and I discussed this, and we decided that, if responder was strong enough to switch on the asking bids, the odds were that a stiff King would be worth something, and we were happier with having an accurate count of Aces and Kings held by Teller, and Asker could worry about a King being singleton if it mattered.

So far, I cannot recall this tweak to the system having caused us a problem due to a singleton King, and Georgi and I usually get through close to 100 boards per weekend.

It's another thing to remember. The usual advice still applies - before you think of tweaking the system, make sure that you've a sound knowledge of the unmodified system. Georgi and I are a couple of incurable system tweakers, and a lot of the ideas we come up with don't last the course, but this modification is one that I think we're sticking with! 


Afterthought

I shouldn't post replies before I'm properly awake! What I wrote above about there being no alternative way to bid the hand would have been correct until relatively recently, but of course the example responding hand I gave does have a second possibility, which is 4 Exclusion Beta in response to the 1 opener.

My thought was the other possible holding(s) being the singleton King .

It would not be counted as a control. And even if you counted an additional 3 HCP at the beginning it would still be a 1 Opening.

I originally inferred the  as Qxx in showing a 3rd round control and not a doubleton because without the Queen of  Opener would be a tidge short in HCP to open 1 . But Brian is correct. Take those 2 HCP and split them into two Jacks - one for each black suit

John is also correct, if you're following the system as written. I'd missed this third possibility (stiff King) because this is one of the places where Georgi and I deviate from the notes. It's our opinion that, when responder is strong enough to switch on the asking bids after a 1 or 1 opener, the odds are in favour of the stiff King being worth something. We feel particularly safe in doing this when opener (teller) has extra trump length, because you're unlikely to be susceptible to a forcing defence if the stiff King falls under the Ace and teller then has to ruff.

I can think of one circumstance (prompted by a recent hand which didn't have a stiff King) where it could possibly come back to bite you. As opener, you hold

  AQxxxx
  K
  AJ10x
  xx

You open 1 , 1NT from pard, 2 from you, partner switches on the asks with 2 , you show your  HHxxxx. Now partner knows that you're at least 6-4 in  and  , because you wouldn't show only a three card  suit in front of six card  . Pard continues with relay beta over the gamma response, and now here's the significant difference.

If you are playing as per the website, and if partner has sufficient of the high cards to know that your fifth control has to be the  or  King, then partner knows that your King must be guarded. Georgi and I do not have that information, for us the King could be a stiff with a small doubleton in the other suit, as above. Can this cost? I think so, I think it's probably possible to construct a hand for Asker such that 6 is a good contract with Kx and a singleton in Teller's hand, but not with a stiff King and a small doubleton. I admit this is just gut feeling, I haven't put sufficient thought into this to construct such a hand.

All I can tell you is that I'm not aware of the way that Georgi and I count stiff Kings in relay beta (and a few other places!) ever having cost us.