[RunemPard]

Hello, and thank you for taking time to read/comment.

I have been working on a bid in me and my partner's system. First I will provide a full system opening bid chart to give a good overview.

1♣: 12-19 (4 card)
1♦: 12-19 (4 card)
1♥: 12-19 (4/5 card)
1♠: 12-19 (4/5 card)
1N: 15-17 (balanced)
2♣: 12+ (6 card major)
2♦: 20-21 (unbalanced) OR 22+ (balanced)
2♥/♠: 6-11 (6 card)
2N: 20-21 (balanced)
3♣/♦: 6-11 (6 card)
3♥/♠: 6-11 (7 card)
3N: DIRECT ACE
4♣/♦: 6-11 (8 card)
4♥/♠: 6-11 (8 card)
4N: DIRECT KING (4 ACES) OR (ACES+VOIDS)


The 2♣ opening bid promises an opening hand with a 6 card major. I have been modifying the reply bids to try and make it as effective as possible, while not causing problems with the bidding. The reply bids are as follows:

2♣: 12+ HCP (6+ card major)
- 2♦: 0-8 HCP
- 2♥: 9-11 HCP
- 2♠: 12+ HCP (single ♥)
- 2N: 12+ HCP (single ♠)
- 3♣: 12+ HCP (void ♥ or single w/ A)
- 3♦: 12+ HCP (void ♠ or single w/ A)
- 3♥: 12-14 HCP (2+ in both majors)
- 3♠: 15-17 HCP (2+ in both majors)
- 3N: 12+ HCP (single ♣)
- 4♣: 12+ HCP (single ♦)
- 4♦: 12+ HCP (void ♣ or single w/ A)
- 4♥: 12+ HCP (void ♦ or single w/ A)
- 4♠: 18-19 HCP (2+ in both majors)(5♥=STOP)
- 4N: 20+ HCP (2+ in both majors)(BLACKWOOD)


I am looking for flaws in the bidding replies or ways to make them better. I greatly appreciate all comments and suggestions.

[straube]

I think it's very bad. For starters, I'd rather play 5-cd majors than 4-cd majors because opening 1M is so preemptive for further bidding. You'll have a lot of 1M-1N, P auctions. I can understand folks who play 4-cd majors in a strong club system or even in a natural system. But If you play 4-cd majors within a natural system, you ought to have some quality requirement for them so that partner can safely raise with three trump...and this means that you need occasionally open a 3-cd minor.

What do you do with your unbalanced hands of 22+? I guess some of these are handled with 2C. In any case, 2D doesn't leave much room for your unbalanced hands to describe their shape, especially if 22+ balanced hands also have to be described.

I think you'd be better off play 2/1 or a simple Precision system.

[RunemPard]

Thanks for the reply. I prefer 5cM, however my partner does not. When we open a major, we will rebid if we hold 5 or partner may even rebid the suit if they hold 3. Not normally many problems, but it does take getting used to. Unbalanced hands of 22+ are opened with 2D (2C). Same as always just the reply bids are slightly different. Hoping for more feedback on my reply bids to 2C.

[Zelandakh]

First of all, welcome to the forums.

I have to admit that I honestly cannot see the point of the 2♣ opening in this system. Let's compare the system with Benji Acol since this is probably one of the closer major systems in character. Here a 2♦ opening shows any GF. By comparison this system has 2♦ as 22+ bal or 20+ unbal (and not 1-suited). Much worse. And this is in an already cramped opening.

Comparing the 2♣ openers is only slightly better. In Benji a 2♣ opening shows a strong 2 in any suit or ~22-23(24) bal. You can play with the NT ranges but the basic character is clear. Quite a popular way of adapting this with weaker players is for 2♣ to cover most of the stronger 1-suiters as well as some NT range. If you do this you get a poor system that resembles the OP even more. Even now the 2♣ opening is covering alot less ground than any major 12+ though. This just seems close to unworkable for me but your playtesting will find this out better than I can judge it on paper.

The positive for the system is that these 1-suiters get taken out of the 1 level openings. The trouble is that this makes these openings less homogenous, not more, which is something I woudl regard as a negative. You also have to come up with some way of using the now free rebids such as 1♥ - 1♠; 2♥/3♥. I think the extra use of these bids has to be pretty stunning to make up for the negatives. Finally, if you want a 15-17 NT then I think you should absolutely be playing 5 card majors. If you want 4 card majors then I would suggest dropping down to a 12-14 NT range unless you switch over to canape openings (which is certainly one way to try to make more from the 2♣ opening).

[straube]

I agree with Zelandakh.

If you decide to play this anyway, I would change your response structure to 2C. Something like Multi 2D responses...

2D-wants to know which major responder has, shows interest
.....2H-minimum, 6 hearts
.....2S-minimum, 6 spades
.....other bids showing maximums
2H-says pass or correct
2S-says game invitational only in hearts

[RunemPard]

Thanks for replies. I would like to do a 5cM with this as well. After 2D opening partner can show a 5 card major with 2H or 2S, 2NT is negative, 3C is asking for majors, 3D/3H show 5 card major (transfer).

I like that suggestion as well straube, but I have been looking for ways to allow partner to immediately show singles/voids in their reply ASAP. I have played a different version of this with relatively good success for awhile, but the major flaw is that we sometimes come to situations where partner may have a single heart to complement my 6 suited hearts.

The bid is to work as an offensive/defensive bid. Mostly for club play as it would not be allowed in most tournaments I would assume. If the LHO bids 2H/2S, My partner should double with a decent point holding. If the double is passed, I then go into control to pass the double (if my suit), or correct to the other major. For the LHO to bid a minor, this goes directly to the 3 level. Any double of a minor overbid shows 9-11 (usually 2/2 or greater in majors), while any pass shows 0-8.

It needs some work and testing. Appreciate all comments on the theory and will be hoping to test them all.

[RunemPard]

@straube, I also had an idea for a 2D waiting bid reply, however, I decided that it is best to have partner of opener show information ASAP and put opener in the driver's seat. This helps get information out before the RHO can disrupt. A 2D waiting works well for a strong 2C, but when the opener can hold 12 HCP this leaves room for opponents to come in with bids.

[RunemPard]

I have also debated having the 2C bid be a weak/strong 6 suit major. Allowing for other bids for 2H/2S. For example...2C=6+ HCP (6 card major).

The partner can then reply with points as before. The 3S/4S point reply would need to be adjusted to allow for a stop at 3H/4H however since I may hold 6 points.

If replacing the weak major openings, I would add a 10/14 5/5 major and lower opening.

2C - 6+ HCP (6 card major)
2D - 20-21 (unbalanced), 22+ (balanced), or STRONG GF
2H - 10-14 HCP (5/5 hearts+lower)
2S - 10-14 HCP (5/5 spades+lower)
2N - 20-21 (balanced)

[mgoetze]

RunemPard, on 2012-January-11, 16:06, said:

I am looking for flaws in the bidding replies or ways to make them better.

Why are you asking about this part specifically - are you happy with the rest of the system?

Quote

I greatly appreciate all comments and suggestions.

My suggestion is to bin it and start from scratch.

[Free]

I don't see much wrong with anything, except the 2♣ and 2♦ openings. Oops, that's probably the core of the system. So I agree with mgoetze: bin it and start from scratch.