Kungsgeten

Please do! I'll be happy to hear about your comments.

Well, one aspect of it is to make the 1D opening actually showing diamonds, which I think is good in competition. I usually play a variation of "Swedish standard" (4 card majors, 15-17NT), as does most players in my club. Another popular natural system in Sweden is 5542 (short club), I almost think this is more common than 5533. To open "real suits" is to me an advantage in contested auctions, and it seems most auctions are contested :) The reason why I like the idea of Swedish club is that the 11-13 balanced (without a 5 card major) disappears from another bid, but you can still play 5 card majors. It seems that the balanced hands not covered by 1NT is a bit of a problem in 16+ club systems. Also the opponents can not bid as destructive against this opening, since it may be their hand. Ofcourse, if they do bid you're probably worse of than if 1C was always strong. A third reason is that the system can be used pretty quickly in a new partnership. Ofcourse you can have advanced methods, but the bidding after most opening bids (except 1C) can be very natural. My main arguments against playing strong club ala Precision is the treatment of the minors; I haven't really played it much myself but I do not like the idea of 1D, 2C or three suited 2D (in Sweden the 2D is often multi, and 1D can be down to 1 or maybe even 0).

If I were to play a club system where 1C always is strong, I would probably go with the structure played by Swedish players Nyström - Bertheau: 1♣ - 16+ 1♦ - 11-13 bal OR 10-15, exactly 4 card in either major and 5+ in either minor OR 10-15, any marmic 1♥/♠ - 5+ suit, 10-15 1NT - 14-16 2♣/♦ - 10-15, unbalanced without a 4 card major (at least 5-4 in minors or 6+) Weak twos 2NT - I think it is showing minors... But now I'm discussing the two way club, which includes the 11-13 bal range in 1♣. One of the benefits of this is that 1♦ can be pretty natural, but ofcourse I could play the structure above and just exclude the 11-13 bal from the 1♦ opening, but 1♦ would probably be vulnerable when the opponents enter the bidding.

Straube: You may be right, and this is ofcourse the reason why I'm posting here. The only other opening in this case is the 2♣ opening, which now shows 6+♣ instead of a possible 5♣ and 4♥/♠. Since the latter alternative is pretty common I guess it works but there's many people complaining about this precision/polish 2♣ opening. The 2♣ opening showing a 6+ suit seems to be favored by many. I think I'll try out the 2♥/♠ canapé opening idea. However the bid should be specific, so I think I'll use these "rules": 12-16 hcp, exactly 4 cards in major, exactly 5 clubs If the hand is (24)25 it should be treated as balanced unless the honors are very centered to the long suits (many treat these hands as balanced anyway) Opener can not have 4 cards in the other major, so 4405-hands are excluded (opened 1♥) The 2M-2NT response would be a forcing relay (at least invitational): 3♣ - any minimum, 12 to 14 bad 3♦ - max, 2-2 in other suits 3♥ - max, 3 diamonds 3♠ - max, 3 cards in the non-opened major 2M-2NT; 3♣-3♦ - game forcing relay: 3♥ - 2-2 in other suits 3♠ - 3 diamonds 3NT - 3 cards in the non-opened major I guess another way could be to systematically treat all (24)25 hands as balanced and use a precision 2♦ for the other kinds, but I'm not sure about how sound this would be.

Thanks for your wise words! I've bought your ebook version of MICS Ken, and I can see the merits in it. However, from what I've heard the precise 1M openings are the main reason why players enjoy playing big club systems. I also thought of a opening scheme similar to the one I've described in the two way pass thread, which uses transfer openings which MAY be canapé. These could be used in a two way club system too: 1C - 11-13 bal or 17+ 1D - 4+ hearts, may have longer minor, unbalanced or 5332 1H - 4+ spades, may have longer minor, unbalanced or 5332 1S - 5-4 or 5-5 in minors, no 4 card major 1N - 14-16 2m - 6+ minor, no 4 card major About the wide range of the canapé openings; I've thought about them too, and especially when responder holds game try values and 5+ in the other major. Ofcourse some (42)25 hands could be opened with 1C or 1NT. You could also just pass some weaker hands with these patterns and hope for the best, so 2M would be like 13-16. Or you could just use the traditional precision 2C opening, allowing 5C and 4M. If the alternative is worse, then there's no point :)

For some time I've been interested in playing some kind of forcing club system. However, I am not so fond of the nebulous 1D or the 2C as 5c and 4M or 6+ openings. Some Swedish pairs play 2m as 6+ or 5-4 minors and 1D as nebulous with 11-13 balanced or 4M and 5+m, which seems to fit my taste better. Recently I've read more about the 2-way club, showing 11-13 balanced or 17+ any. This makes the 1D opening (semi)natural (hooray), but the 2C opening is still the same. Therefore I'm thinking about adding 2M as showing exactly 4 cards in the major and 5 clubs, 11-16 hcp. Has anyone tried this kind of opening, do you think it would be playable? In my natural system I currently play 2M as preemptive with 4 cards and a 5+ minor, which works nice. The opening scheme would be: 1C - 11-13 hcp (semi)balanced (no five card major) or 17+ hcp any 1D - 4+ diamonds, 11-16 hcp. May be 4 diamonds and 5 clubs 1H - 5+ hearts or exactly 4-4-1-4 (not suitable for 1C opening), 11-16 hcp 1S - 5+ spades, 11-16 hcp 1N - 14-16 hcp 2C - 6+ clubs, 11-16 hcp 2D - Weak in either major (Meckwell style multi) 2M - Exactly 4 cards in the major and 5 clubs, 11-16 hcp 2N - 21-23 hcp balanced (04)45 hands would be opened 1D I guess. Over 2M I guess 2NT could be used either as some type of distributional relay, or as some kind of range check.

Hi! I've been working on a strong pass system (which should be allowed in Swedish tournaments). The opening scheme currently looks like this: pass - 15+ hcp any (except 21-23 balanced) 1C - 0-7 hcp any non preemptive. May be 8 balanced when vulnerable. 1D - 4+ hearts, may have longer minor. Not 4333 or 4432. 8-14 hcp 1H - 4+ spades, may have longer minor. Not 4333 or 4432. 8-14 hcp 1S - 8-11 hcp (semi)balanced 1N - 12-14 hcp (semi)balanced 2m - 5+ suit, unbalanced, no 4 card major. 8-14 hcp 2M - 3-7 hcp, 5+ suit 2N - 21-23 balanced Over the "unbalanced" openings we play game forcing relays. After the strong pass 1C is negative and the rest is game forcing transfers, similar to the openings. Over the weak club 1D is strong (ca 18+) and others are non-forcing (2C shows both minors and 2 of a major is invitational based on distribution). Over the major showing transfer openings we play transfers. Over the balanced openings we play a standard 1NT response structure. The worst part of the system probably is the 2 of a minor openings, since all responses are game-forcing (the relay) or at least invitational (the rest). The pass is also vulnerable to the opponents entering the bidding, as is any strong opening. Therefore I have thought about another structure, with inspiration from the "Swedish club": pass - 8-11 balanced or 15+ any 1S - 5-4 or 5-5 in minors, no 4 card major. 8-14 hcp 2m - 6+ suit, no 4 card major. 8-14 hcp others - as above Over the minor showing 1S you could play 1N as a weak/strong relay (bid your longer suit, I will pass or relay), 2m would be non-forcing and 2M should probably be invitational with a 5+ suit. Now over the two way pass opening you could use the same structure as the opening bids (but 1C shows 0-8 and the others 9+). The relay could show the strong hand and other bids could show the weak hand. Comments appreciated!

Hi! I recently discovered the Full disclosure system on BBO. I tried using bidedit for a while, but found it pretty slow to work with. I've created a markup language which I call Bridge Bidding Markup Language (BML for short). BML is intended to be easy to write and easy to read. Right now I also have a program written in Python which can convert BML files to BSS (the format used by BBO), and these files can be used while playing online. All features of the Full Disclosure system isn't implemented yet, but the most useful ones (according to me) are. I would be happy if you tried it out and gave me some thoughts. You can download the manual and the converting program from here Just to give you an example, here's what a BML file can look like (including a basic description of a No Trump structure): SAYC A natural system with 5 card majors and best minor 1C; 3+!c, 11+ hcp 1D; 3+!d, 11+ hcp 1H; 5+!h, 11+ hcp 1S; 5+!s, 11+ hcp 1N; 15-17 bal 2C; ARTIFICIAL. Game-forcing or 22-24 bal 2D; Weak 2H; Weak 2S; Weak 2N; 20-21 bal 1N; 2C ARTIFICIAL. Stayman 2D ARTIFICIAL. No 4 card major 2H NON-FORCING. 4+!h 2S NON-FORCING. 4+!s 2D TRANSFER. 5+!h 2H NON-FORCING. 3H NON-FORCING. Super accept 2H TRANSFER. 5+!s 2S NON-FORCING. 3S NON-FORCING. Super accept 2S ARTIFICIAL. Minor suit Stayman 2N INVITATIONAL. Edit 2012-07-20: BML has been updated to version 0.3. Changes include variables and support for BSS suit lengths and outcomes. The manual has also been updated and now has information on bids depending on seat and/or vulnerability. Edit 2013-04-01: BML has been completly rewritten and can now be found at GitHub.