[nige1]

Echognome, on Nov 10 2009, 01:27 PM, said:

For what it's worth, I played the Stevenson 1♠ opening for several years when I lived in England.  It has a definite purpose.  Consider our 1-level openings at the time:
1♣ ART, 16+ hcp
1♦ 4+♥, 10-15hcp, may be canape
1♥ 4+♠, 10-15hcp, may be canape
1♠ no 4cM, 10-15hcp, unbal --> one or both minors
1NT 12-15 bal or semi-bal

So the 1♠ opening freed us up from having to use 2♣ and 2♦ to show constructive openings (and indeed we used them for preempts).  It was a very constructive bid.  We played over 1♠:
1NT GF Relay
2♣ Pass/Correct
2♦ 5+♥, INV+
2♥ 5+♠, INV+
etc.

Then we could relay out partner's exact shape for game/slam purposes.  We had a low level pass/correct.

Basically it fit nicely into the system.  It may not be what a particular pair enjoys playing, but we certainly did and I'm thankful someone had applied for the license.

The Stevenson Spade is an interesting convention, not primarily destructive, and Echognome's excellent system shows that it can be used constructively to good effect. The authorities should encourage such innovations.

Now that I've buttered you up, Bluejak, please tell us your alert-improvement suggestion

[bluejak]

I merely suggested that as in the ACBL a bid of the opponent's suit should only be alerted if it was natural.

[nige1]

helene_t, on Nov 10 2009, 06:51 PM, said:

I can't make much sense of the word "random" in this context. Maybe if we have the agreement that after opps unfavorable vuln strong 1♣ opening, with certain hand types we just pick a random bidding card between, say, 1♦ and 2♦, i.e. an extreme example of a mixed strategy. But if what is meant is "catch-all", then "random" is a weird word to use.

In a Bridge context I think a "random" means "undefined" or "ill-defined". For example, I think Tony Forrester advocated a random 1♠ overcall over opponent's strong club. Presumably, some other actions were defined and 1♠ was a catch-all that could be bid on any of the remaining hands. If so, then Helene_t's "catch-all" would be a more accurate and informative description.

[paulg]

bluejak, on Nov 30 2009, 09:30 AM, said:

I merely suggested that as in the ACBL a bid of the opponent's suit should only be alerted if it was natural.

And they sent you to San Diego for that? At least it is warmer than Coventry and Siberia at the moment.

[bluejak]

It rained the day before yesterday, heavily. I am looking for the young lady I met on the plane to sue her: she promised no rain. A friend of mine who is a lawyer asked if a gave her "a consideration" for the advice. I said I smiled at her: he said "That will do.".