[straube]

It looks like there's difficulty establishing a game force. Also trouble sorting out ranges when responder can be 0+ and opener is strong.

1D-1X, 2C is set up for opener to describe...and consequently opener has pretty much wasted responder's information. If instead 1D-1X, 2C were your strong balanced hand, responder could continue to describe his hand.

Here's a question...do you really want to use your bidding machinery for when opener has a weak NT and responder is very weak (0-5?). You'll occasionally find a better part score, but that's at the cost of being able to pass one of your 1m openings...so maybe not worth it.

[dcrc2]

 straube, on 2017-December-07, 13:02, said:

1D-1X, 2C is set up for opener to describe...and consequently opener has pretty much wasted responder's information. If instead 1D-1X, 2C were your strong balanced hand, responder could continue to describe his hand.

I don't disagree with that. But I think that if you're happy opening 18-19 balanced at the 1-level, you can just play Polish or Swedish Club. I suppose you might still ask, could we switch the minors around and play "Polish Diamond" instead? But that loses you the opportunity to play 1NT with 18-19 balanced, and I don't really believe that the possible advantages of the switch will make up for that.

But the premise of this system was, what should you do if you decide you want to open 18-19 balanced with 2♣? I think that's a reasonable choice, due to its effectiveness in competition, even if the constructive sequences are slightly less efficient.

 straube, on 2017-December-07, 13:02, said:

Here's a question...do you really want to use your bidding machinery for when opener has a weak NT and responder is very weak (0-5?). You'll occasionally find a better part score, but that's at the cost of being able to pass one of your 1m openings...so maybe not worth it.

Not especially, no. But it mostly comes for free. I think you must have chosen a bad example, because "opener has a weak NT, responder has 0-5" doesn't actually use up any bidding machinery at all. These hands are bid the same way as if responder had 6-10: there's no need for opener to know the difference.

I'd have said that the bigger problems are when opener has something like 17-20. Then opener's life would be easier, when partner responds, if he could know that this promised some values. But then again, the methods that standard systems have for these situations are rather crude, so I'm not convinced that we're losing much, even if we have to go more slowly to take account of responder's possible 0-5.

[benlessard]

One great idea of my friend system is something like

1C = strong or diamonds or some bal hands (with 4M or a certain range im not sure)

its great to have 2C artificial by either players to sort hands out.


1D = clubs unbal (C+M or 6C) you keep 2D as the artificial bid.

You are losing the 1D--pass option but gain more precision on the 1C.

[nullve]

 straube, on 2017-November-29, 09:47, said:

Curious why you don't switch the 18-19 bal with the 6 club hands (maybe 11-15 range). I think (like little club) you're trying to encourage responder to compete as in
1D (2D) 2M
where 2M is nf, but opener can have long clubs and a very wide range here. A potential misfit and a lot to sort out.

 dcrc2, on 2017-November-29, 10:26, said:

Yes, you've got it, this is exactly the sort of sequence where the system is supposed to do well. The non-forcing 1♦ (2x) 2M sequences (and 1♦ (1♠) 2♦ transfer to hearts) are the number one reason for playing this.

The "solution" is just Lebensohl: opener's 2NT rebid in competition shows (normally) a minimum with 6 clubs, and a direct 3♣ shows a better hand with 6 clubs. Note that opener will have 6 clubs here, otherwise he would be passing or raising partner's suit. That's precisely why all of those three-suited hands were taken out of the 1♦ opening.

In my system, a MIN 1♣ opening contains 2+ S unless Opener has 6+ C, and a MIN 1♦ opening 3+ H unless Opener has either 6+ D or 5D5C, so it seems these ideas involving NFBs, transfers and lebensohl could be used after a 1♣ opening when Responder has 5+ S, and after a 1♦ opening when Responder has 5+ H.

[glen]

Interesting thread, thanks!

I would like 2X+ as anything you want, and

1♣: 5+♦s unbal without 4+♣s, or 17+ Bal or any game force, or 4-4-4-1 exactly 17+
1♦: 4+♣s unbal less than a game force, including longer ♦s, or 11-13 Bal or 4-4-4-1
1M: 5+M
1NT: 14-16 Bal or 4-4-4-1 exactly

Over 1♣ 1red are transfers, and 1♣-1X-2♣ is either 14 or less with 5+♦s or 22+ any

Happy holidays everyone!