[gurgistan]

May I ask what is the most common non-natural system?

I just took it for granted it was Precision.

Does anyone have any stats for the popularity of various non-natural systems?

Much obliged.

[cloa513]

 gurgistan, on 2011-March-22, 06:29, said:

May I ask what is the most common non-natural system?

I just took it for granted it was Precision.

Does anyone have any stats for the popularity of various non-natural systems?

Much obliged.

What's a non-natural system?
Precision has one non-natural standard bid but so does standard american and ACOL as standard. Is 1C shown 3 clubs natural, precision probably has to have one more 1D or 2D?
Fantunes bidding at the one level is most natural but the options for two and possibly higher are generally not.
Mosquito and other transfer systems are less natural, EveryHandAnAdventure and forcing pass systems are much less natural.

[helene_t]

Huh? Every Hand An Adventure (EHAA) is the only system I know of which has only natural opening bids. The only artificial bid in EHAA is Stayman (and Blackwood if you play that).

Fantunes has a semi-natural 1♣ and some artificial follow-ups but the opening scheme is clearly more natural than Standard American as they don't have any artificial 2-bids.

Anyway, there may be no reason to assume that semantics is logical. Precision and WJ are generally considered non-natural, at least in countries where beginners are taught something with a non-forcing 1♣ opening.

[hrothgar]

 gurgistan, on 2011-March-22, 06:29, said:

May I ask what is the most common non-natural system?

I just took it for granted it was Precision.

Does anyone have any stats for the popularity of various non-natural systems?

Much obliged.

Not sure whether there are any good statistics available...

If I had to guess, I'd say Precision or Polish Club

Precision has been around a while. Moreover, a lot of players in China used to start by learning Precision.
Polish Club has the (obvious) advantage that its quite popular in Poland and has been leaking out to other parts of the world.

[Free]

If you consider 5 card Majors 4 card ♦ (5542) as non-natural because the 1♣ opening can be a doubleton, then I guess this will be a clear winner.

If you consider it natural on the other hand, I'm not sure which "system" is most common. You should probably think in terms of which "type of system" instead of "system", because pretty much everyone plays something else. I'm pretty sure Precision-like and Polish Club-like systems are most common.

[gnasher]

 Free, on 2011-March-22, 08:23, said:

If you consider 5 card Majors 4 card ♦ (5542) as non-natural because the 1♣ opening can be a doubleton, then I guess this will be a clear winner.

Arguably that's more natural than SAYC, because in SAYC 1♣ and 1♦ are both artificial. Acol is more natural than either.

[awm]

This is going to depend on the meaning of "non-natural", the meaning of "system", and the meaning of "common." However I would give the following rough ordering:

(1) Five-card majors, 2♣ (and maybe 2♦) strong artificial. This style includes the standard systems in North America and the standard French system. These methods seem to be increasingly "expert standard" throughout much of the world.

(2) Four-card majors, 2♣ (and maybe 2♦) strong artificial. This style is the standard system in England as well as some former colonies (prominently Australia and New Zealand). It's also the old Goren style played by a number of casual rubber bridge players throughout the world. However, it seems to be fading in popularity among the expert crowd.

(3) Five-card majors, 1♣ strong artificial. This is the "Precision" family of systems. Apparently this approach is standard in China and parts of India. This approach is also popular with a number of prominent expert pairs in the United States (i.e. Meckstroth-Rodwell, Greco-Hampson, Grue-Cheek). Depending on your definitions, this may well be the answer to your question about the most common non-natural system.

(4) Five-card majors, "two-way" 1♣ which can be strong/artificial or a weak notrump (or maybe some other types). This is the "Polish Club" family of systems, and is standard in Poland. They also have some following in other parts of Europe (there's a Swedish Club that's similar, for example). A number of top Polish pairs play some variant of this method, but it doesn't seem to be very popular in expert circles outside that part of the world.

(5) Four-card majors, 1♣ strong artificial. This includes the famous Blue Team Club, but seems to have fallen out of favor somewhat in expert circles (and was arguably never common among club-level players). You still see it from time to time; I think Auken-Von Arnim may be the most prominent expert pair playing this style today.

(6) 1♣ strong artificial with transfer-oriented openings. This style is popular among some top players in Australia, with Moscito being the most prominent system under this heading. It's too much work for casual bridge players (so will never be common at the club-level).

There are some "weirder" system variants that have seen some popularity at some point in their lifetime. The Fantoni-Nunes style (natural forcing one-level bids) has a small following due to that pair's success in recent events at the top level. Forcing pass methods had a brief bout with popularity in expert circles before being banned from almost all levels of competition (there may be a few practitioners left in Poland and/or Australia where regulations are laxer). There have been a few strong diamond systems in serious competition over the years too.

[gurgistan]

 awm, on 2011-March-22, 10:26, said:

This is going to depend on the meaning of "non-natural", the meaning of "system", and the meaning of "common." However I would give the following rough ordering:

(1) Five-card majors, 2♣ (and maybe 2♦) strong artificial. This style includes the standard systems in North America and the standard French system. These methods seem to be increasingly "expert standard" throughout much of the world.

(2) Four-card majors, 2♣ (and maybe 2♦) strong artificial. This style is the standard system in England as well as some former colonies (prominently Australia and New Zealand). It's also the old Goren style played by a number of casual rubber bridge players throughout the world. However, it seems to be fading in popularity among the expert crowd.

(3) Five-card majors, 1♣ strong artificial. This is the "Precision" family of systems. Apparently this approach is standard in China and parts of India. This approach is also popular with a number of prominent expert pairs in the United States (i.e. Meckstroth-Rodwell, Greco-Hampson, Grue-Cheek). Depending on your definitions, this may well be the answer to your question about the most common non-natural system.

(4) Five-card majors, "two-way" 1♣ which can be strong/artificial or a weak notrump (or maybe some other types). This is the "Polish Club" family of systems, and is standard in Poland. They also have some following in other parts of Europe (there's a Swedish Club that's similar, for example). A number of top Polish pairs play some variant of this method, but it doesn't seem to be very popular in expert circles outside that part of the world.

(5) Four-card majors, 1♣ strong artificial. This includes the famous Blue Team Club, but seems to have fallen out of favor somewhat in expert circles (and was arguably never common among club-level players). You still see it from time to time; I think Auken-Von Arnim may be the most prominent expert pair playing this style today.

(6) 1♣ strong artificial with transfer-oriented openings. This style is popular among some top players in Australia, with Moscito being the most prominent system under this heading. It's too much work for casual bridge players (so will never be common at the club-level).

There are some "weirder" system variants that have seen some popularity at some point in their lifetime. The Fantoni-Nunes style (natural forcing one-level bids) has a small following due to that pair's success in recent events at the top level. Forcing pass methods had a brief bout with popularity in expert circles before being banned from almost all levels of competition (there may be a few practitioners left in Poland and/or Australia where regulations are laxer). There have been a few strong diamond systems in serious competition over the years too.

This is a detailed and considrered post.

Allow me to thank you for this.

[hrothgar]

 awm, on 2011-March-22, 10:26, said:

(5) Four-card majors, 1♣ strong artificial. This includes the famous Blue Team Club, but seems to have fallen out of favor somewhat in expert circles (and was arguably never common among club-level players). You still see it from time to time; I think Auken-Von Arnim may be the most prominent expert pair playing this style today.

(6) 1♣ strong artificial with transfer-oriented openings. This style is popular among some top players in Australia, with Moscito being the most prominent system under this heading. It's too much work for casual bridge players (so will never be common at the club-level).

I would actually classify MOSCITO under strong club / 4 card majors...
The transfer openings are a relatively recent innovation
Moreover, the transfers are primarily motivated by the choice to use 4 card majors

4 card majors in a majors first style implies

1. Very frequent openings that show a major
2. Relatively rare openings that show a Diamond suit

Pushing the rare Diamond openers into 1♠ and using 1♦ to show a major makes the relays much easier

Conversely, if you're playing a Precision style, the Diamond opening tends to be badly overloaded
(FWIW, I don't know any systems that combine transfer openings and 5 card majors)