[arvie]

For the first time in more than 10 years I will be playing with someone who is interested in something else then standard 2/1 GF. But my knowledge of more 'exotic' systems seems a bit outdated. So I like some recommendations based on our wish list.

We like to open light, prefer a weak notrump (12-14 but if possible 10-12 in some positions), and prefer a multi-club above a strong club, and as much 2-openings available for some preemptive meaning. We have both experience with non-natural systems but not with relay systems. So probably that is too heavy to start with. HUM is not allowed but no further restrictions.

That gives is something along the lines:

1♣ - several meanings

1♦ - ??

1♥ - NAT, 10-??

1♠ - NAT, 10-??

1NT - BAL 12-14 but 10-12 NV 1/2 seat

2♣ - ??

2♦ - some preempt

2♥ - some preempt

2♠ - some preempt

2NT - some preempt

On a side note. Has anybody experience (good or bad) with The Unbalanced Diamond from Marshall Miles or The Martens System from Martens as described in their books?

[glen]

arvie, on 2012-June-08, 04:09, said:

... along the lines:

1♣ - several meanings

1♦ - ??

1♥ - NAT, 10-??

1♠ - NAT, 10-??

1NT - BAL 12-14 but 10-12 NV 1/2 seat

2♣ - ??

2♦ - some preempt

2♥ - some preempt

2♠ - some preempt

2NT - some preempt

...

What do you think of Varvel's Unassuming Club?

http://bridgewithdan...systems/UAC.txt

You could play your system as it is:
Pard: 1♦
You: Alert!
Opp: Yes?
You: ??
Opp: ???
You: Yes
Opp: Director! He made a questionable bid!

[MickyB]

Most decent multi-club systems use 1C as either a weak NT or a strong hand. If you want to play a weak NT opening, then you are probably best with something like Millennium Club -

1C = 15+clubs/15+balanced/any GF
1D/H/S = unbal 10-21
1N = 12-14
2C = 6C or 5C4M 11-14

Or you might remove the unbal D/H/S GF hands and open them 2D, that way, sequences like

1C-(4H)-P-(P); 4S

can show 6+C4+S, not just a hand too strong to open 1S.

[perko90]

I think Varvel's An Unassuming Club (AUC) system fits your desires best (assuming you like 5-card majors).

multi-club - check
weak NT - check
all 2 bids (except 2C) available for preempts - check

And it has some pretty sound theory to it.

As for Miles' Unbalanced Diamond, I've read the book and discussed the system with those who've played it, but I haven't played it myself. I like the 1♦ bid he suggests. He outlines its impact to the rest of the auction well (e.g. 1NT is now forcing!). But bidding a potentially ultra short 1♦ isn't everyone's cup of tea. And that mechanic is only in place to preserve the 1♣ bid as purely strong (which is not your desire). Also, I wasn't a fan of the strong 2♦ concept and from my discussions with others, this seemed to be the least favorite aspect for them as well.

Anyway, I'd definitely recommend AUC.

[the hog]

Definitely look at Svan. This is far better designed than AUC and has been tested and tried in world class competition - unlike the former.
You can find it on Dan's system page.

[glen]

arvie, on 2012-June-08, 04:09, said:

... prefer a weak notrump ...

the hog, on 2012-June-08, 21:37, said:

... Definitely look at Svan ...

eyes without pupils

[arvie]

Thanks for the replies so far. Seems that there are some very interesting systems available.

At a first glance Swan seems to fit my 'requirements' the best. (Even the 1NT-opening is still strong.) I like the very limited 1M-openings and the protection of the 1C opening with the 11-13NT. And the overall natural feel of the system.

UAC seems a little more complex and the 1M has a higher upper bound. And the MC has no weak variation in the 1C opening, and I don't like the 12-15 NT range.

[arvie]

glen, on 2012-June-09, 04:28, said:

eyes without pupils

Seems I can't quote you're whole post.

Have to disagree. Even the NT doesn't fit my request I did like the suggestion. Looking at the suggestions I realized that the I like the limitation of the 1M-opening. Even at the expense of a higher NT-range. Maybe my original requirements are not completely accurate or complete.

[glen]

arvie, on 2012-June-09, 04:38, said:

... At a first glance Swan seems to fit my 'requirements' the best. ... UAC seems a little more complex ...

In use, you will find Swan/Svan more complex than UAC

arvie, on 2012-June-09, 04:50, said:

... the NT doesn't fit my request ... my original requirements are not completely accurate or complete ...

Try restating the requirements, and/or look at the systems on Dan's page and tell us what you like. For example, what do you think of:

http://bridgewithdan...ntoni_Nunes.txt

and

http://www.clairebri...agicDiamond.pdf

[mgoetze]

I've played a system based on Swan and I think it needs some work. I do like Swedish Club in principle but there were quite a few sequences in Swan which I didn't like in practice and wanted to or did change (and I'm talking only about the 1♣ module, I didn't even bother with the rest of it).

[Flameous]

Depends how far off from standard 2/1 you want to wander.
I'm playing 2/1 with some tweakings:

1♣ = Nat or 14+ bal
1♦ = Nat, unbal, may have longer clubs
1♥/♠ = nat
1NT = (10)11-13
2♣ = GF

Even though the openings are nowhere special, the continuations have some quite interesting nuances I can expand on.
You could easily go including GF hands in 1♣ and open 2♣ with min club hands if you'd prefer that kind of approach but I don't find natural 2♣ opening that big a winner on its own.

Obviously you gave pretty inaccurate specs, if you want to limit your major openings, you must play strong or 2/3-way club.

[blackshoe]

Svan? Or Swan? I found the latter, not the former.

[MickyB]

arvie, on 2012-June-09, 04:38, said:

I like [...] the protection of the 1C opening with the 11-13NT.

It seems you are under the impression that 17+ hands will do as well, or better, having opened 1C showing 11-13 NT or any 17+, than having opened a pure 17+ 1C. This is not the case.

After you've opened a two-way 1C in first seat, the next hand has to be more constructive, I admit. However, when they do preempt, you are in a worse position, as now partner is bidding assuming you have an 11-13 NT, so you will almost certainly have to take another action on a 17-19 hand. Compare that with opening a strong club on a flat 18 count and seeing the next hand bid 3S. If partner doesn't act, you have no more interest in the auction, you have shown your hand already.

Worse still is when you open a two-way 1C on a 17+ hand in second or third seat. Now you'll get a lot of preempts from the next hand, who is no longer worried about missing game.

The advantage of a two-way 1C like Svan is very much in the <17 hands. Compared with Precision with a 14-16 NT, you get a much better initial description on both 11-13 NTs and unbalanced hands with diamonds.

Quote

the MC has no weak variation in the 1C opening, and I don't like the 12-15 NT range.

You could play it as 12-14 [or 10-13/11-13 1st NV if you preferred] without any problems.

Balanced hands should, as far as possible, show their strength with their first bid. Precision with a 14-16 NT is good for this - 11-13, 14-16 and 17-18 can all make their opening bid then let partner take control. Meckwell take this a step further, they open 2NT with 19-20, so it's only 21+ balanced hands that will need to take positive action.

This is why, with a weak NT, it's good to play 1C as 15+, clubs or balanced. You've got the strength of the 15-17 NTs across to partner with your first call.

[the hog]

glen, on 2012-June-09, 04:28, said:

eyes without pupils

Mouth without brain. Read my post, or perhaps English is not your first language?

[Hilver]

Look at http://www.clairebri...setsystemes.htm for The Revision Club. Maybe you don't like this bidding system but every seroious bridgeplayer should at least read forword and introduction of John Montgomery's well designed bidding system.

Jan