perko90

Well, you do a few things. Similar to Precision, you divide your range, so that pass is weak, Dbl is semi-positive and up. The higher the interference, the stronger the minimum for your Dbl needs to be. It's no fun having the 15-17 balanced without a stopper when ptr doubles, but that's just life. However, unlike Precision, you can't reserve suit/NT action for GF hands. You gotta get in there. So, a min NT bid is whatever would be enough to play it there opposite a 15-17 balanced hand (which is the case, as I calculate it, 42% of the time). So, 1NT = 6-9 or over 2-level interference, 2NT = 8-9. Always try to bid NT instead of doubling when holding a stopper to avoid putting ptr in a bad spot. Minimum suit bids at the 2 level are 8+ and if at the 3 level, it's GF (but usually it's right to stretch a little, so 9+). Over 1-level interference, when opener holds 17-19, you can bid 1NT even if ptr passed, and bid 2NT when ptr doubles. Over 2-level interference, if it's passed around, double (takeout) is the only active option or just pass and sulk quietly as you defend. If ptr doubled, you can bid 3NT or cue-bid their suit without a stopper/5-card suit.

5♣ in a heartbeat - all forms of scoring. Those 4 baby hearts never looked better. Cyberyeti summed it up well. I either have a chance at making 5♣ or 4♥ is making.

Wow, N & W are sharing ~6 HCPs. N would have run to 2♥ if holding 5+. So my ptr has 4+ (likely 5+) hearts. I don't want to dbl and have ptr take it out to one of my stiffs, 2♦ is wimpy, so it's gotta be 3♦ - tells the story.

I looked into semi-positive responses to 1♣ some more. I found 2 suggestions that seemed interesting but I don't think are viable under the GCC: 1) 1♦ = double negative or GF with most of other responses showing the semi-positive. *** I believe this won't work because an integral part of that proposal was a 1♥ rebid by opener essentially asking responder to clarify (which is not allowed under the "no relay" clause of the GCC) 2) Another one included transfers where 1♦ = double negative or hearts, 1♥ = Xfer to spades and 1♠ = semi-positive or some such approach *** This gets a bit murky as to whether the 1♦ response would be allowed under GCC or because the response doesn't actually promise Hearts this too would be considered a relay. I'm not sure. So, I might be constrained to: 1♦ = 5-9 semi-positive 1♥ = unbal GF 1♠ = double negative 1NT = bal GF or some such more straight-forward approach

Vote away - your choice now available :) However, I may have more trouble with a wider range 2D, which in my proposed system would have a 17 upper bound.

Is your question really getting at: What does it mean (if not discussed previously)? or What should it mean? Without any discussion, I would think "bid your best minor" is the most obvious choice. But if you're asking what's the best meaning for 2NT, I'll defer to Ken & Co.

Thanks for the feedback so far. Love it! I'm definitely flexible on my approach to the unbalanced 1♦ opening (thus the poll). I figured I would start w/ a Miles style suggestion and see where the discussion went. But let's say I adopt the Precision 2♦ opening, and thus have an unbalanced 1♦ that promises 3+ (and 4+ if 15-17). I know I'm breaking my own rules, but now comparisons to Precision are inevitable. To me, I see the 1♣ bids as a wash. My system has a wider range of NT to deal with (neg) and a weaker club rebid (neg), but has stronger Major rebids (pos) and better ways to handle canape and 4-4-4-1 hands (pos). I see the unbalanced 1♦ as a big upgrade to the nebulous Precision one (I love having a 1NT rebid available, for ex, when holding (31)(54) shape and ptr bids the singleton). And I'm a big fan of the advantages of weak NT (another big plus, IMO). Of course, my 1M bids aren't as limited as Precision (neg), but I'm content with them. I believe the make or break part of the system is establishing the responses to 1♣. It's been pointed out in these forums and elsewhere that strong club system results from 1♣-1♦ auctions often can't match the results of natural systems. If I simply expand the range of the 1♦ negative, it makes the problem worse. That's why I was thinking I need to do 1 of 2 things: 1) Adopt Polish Club style responses, where any non negative response is only GF opposite the 18+ hands (it may wrong-side more contracts, but it should be "with the field" more often than not) 2) Improve the 1♦ negative with an immediate 2nd negative. I know the HUGE advantage of having an immediate 2nd negatvie available in 2/1 2♣ auctions, but I have no experience with using it in strong 1♣ auctions. I'm pretty sure Zelandakh does not approve of option 1, but that was my thought process.

I'm trying to find / create a system that has the following characteristics: Must Haves: 1) GCC Legal 2) Strong 1♣ 3) Weak NT 4) Unbalanced 1♦ Highly Desirable: 1) 5-card majors 2) 2♥/2♠ = weak 2 3) lean toward natural bidding 4) flexible enough to go strong NT (14-16 or 15-17) in 3rd/4th seat (assuming relaxing requirement for 5cM and/or unbalanced 1♦) Wiggle Room: 1) Ok for slightly off shape 1NT (for ex 5-4-2-2) 2) Ok for 2♣ to show 5 club / 4 diamond hands, if needed (but of course, would rather promise 6) 3) 2♦ can be whatever it takes to make the system work Approach: I'm looking at this as trying to improve 2/1 and Polish Club and not trying to compare to Precision or any other strong/multi club system. As such, I'm not really interested in working in ultra aggressive opening 1 bids and I'm perfectly fine with 11-17 1M openings. When there's a choice, I'd like to have any system weaknesses (hopefully few) tucked into the same places you'd find them in 2/1. If there's an existing system that meets the criteria, I'll gladly look at that. I've already drawn some inspiration from Miles' "Unbalanced Diamond" (UD) and Varvel's An Unassuming Club (AUC). Here's my 1st try: Opening Bids 1♣ = balanced 15-17 OR 15-17 5+ clubs (no 5cM) (also 4=4=1=4) OR 18+ any distribution 1♦ = 11-14 artificial, unbalanced hand (no 5cM) OR 15-17 4+ diamonds, unbalanced (no 5cM) 1M = 11-17 5+ M 1NT = 12-14 balanced 2♣ = 10-14 6+ clubs 2♦ = whatever 2♥/2♠ = weak 2 Responses to 1♣ (redone based on feedback) 1♦ = 7+, 4+ hearts (6 & 5+ hearts ok) 1♥ = similar to above w/ spades 1♠ = art. neg., 0-6 OR 10-12 bal GF 1NT = 7-9 bal no 4cM 2♣ = 7+ 5(6)+ diamonds (no 4cM) 2♦ = similar to above with clubs 2NT = 13-14 balanced Also considering an approach very similar to SPRY: 1♦ = 5-9 waiting 1♥ = 10+ unbalanced, artificial, GF 1♠ = 0-4 (no A), artificial, bust 1NT = 10-12 OR 15+ balanced GF Rebids After 1♣-1♦/1♥(Walsh Relay) 1M (accept Xfer) = 3+ M, 18+ GF ... [Responder bids 2M as a general purpose confirmation of 8+ card fit; other bids tend to indicate only 4] 1♠/1♦ = usually exactly 4 spades and a canape bid, 15+ 1NT = 15-17 Balanced (not 4 M) 2♣ = natural 5+, either 15-17 w/ exactly 3 M or 18+ w/ 0-2 M ... [Responder can bid 2♦ to ask: ...... 2M = 15-17 w/ exactly 3-card support ...... anything else = strong misfit hand ......... (exception: 2♥ when responder's suit is spades may be as low as 15) 2M (super-accept Xfer) = 4 M, 15-17 (either bal or w/ clubs) 3♣ = natural 6+, 15-17, 0-2 M Other bids = natural, 0-2 M, 18+ GF Hopefully, that gives a good idea where I'm heading. Questions to ponder: 1) Any glaring errors so far? 2) It seems this forum tends to see a natural 1♦ as a net big plus. Is the artificial unbalanced 1♦, which clears up tremendously after a rebid, still too vague to be useful? 3) Any tips on improving responses and rebids after 1♣ opener

@gnasher: Perhaps I could have worded my set-up better. His point on easy for beginners was well taken. I used "kinda" in the context of "kinda, sort of, but not really" but maybe that was too subtle. I'll edit it. Anyway, I'm much more interested to hear an expanded answer on what makes PC not suited for advanced partnerships.

I appreciate your point regarding PC's suitability for beginners, however, I'd like to hear more on the above comment. Just in comparison to 2/1, do you think that PC is less attractive for pro/very serious partnerships? (I don't want to detour into a strong club discussion) And if so, I assume that means in your estimation the weakness of PC 1♣ to preemption and the clumsiness of the 2♣ (when including 5-club & 4cM) out-weigh the "swiss cheese" weaknesses of 2/1? Or are there other factors that come to bear as well? Or do you think that (with a lot of work of course) 2/1's weaknesses can be patched up better than PC?

Phil's on to something with the chance of playing clubs for no losers is more than just a 3-3 split. Also, the chance of dropping the K is more than stated above. It happens 1 out of 3 times that spades break 2-1, which is (33%*78%) 26% of the time. Nonetheless, I'll leave the mathematical heavy lifting for another time/person. At the table, I would finesse the spade, knowing that even if the club finesse works, I'm a bit less than 50-50 for making.

I think I'm more disciplined with my splinters than most. This doesn't qualify on 2 accounts: < 10 HCPs and each side suit is not headed by at least the Q. I know that's not everyone's taste, but for eating up so much space, I like it to be a picture bid. Imilne's 1st suggested auction is along the lines of where I'd go, but I'm not sure I'd sign off at 4♥. I would be tempted to take another shot: 1♥-1♠; 2NT-3♥; 4♦-4♠??; 5♦-5♥ Although in some past partnerships, continuing to cue bid beyond game implied no quick 2 losers in any skipped suit, and that's not the case here.

The 4♠ bid is nuts - even if trying to swing. 1♠ is enough. As for your XX, whether swinging or not, you need to have a plan if the opp's don't sit for it. Here, you don't have a clearcut answer. When you look at your hand and imagine ptr's (expecting 7 spades, for example), you have to guess that you may have only 1 defensive trick in clubs but also don't belong in slam yourselves. So, you should have been very happy w/ 5♠X. Pass, instead of XX, was clearly indicated. Nonetheless, you put the partnership in the situation, so you need to act like you had a plan. X of 6♥ seems best after the mistaken XX - at least it has a chance of working out. As to whether it's a forcing pass situation ... under normal circumstances, you shouldn't XX and pass. When the rules are thrown out the window in your swing situation, who's to say which ones are still in force?? Who knows?!

There's some good advice! 3♣ is definitely the culprit.

Wow! you got me on that one!

Yes, that's an easy 2♥ bid at any colors.

OMG! That's some dreadful declarer play!!

Yes! Me too. But it gets messed up all the time with people thinking it's a fast arrival situation.

Double. Cooperative; ptr can pull if weaker than expected amd/or has a 5th H. 4-3-3-3 hands like to defend. It's a bit risky, of course, but it's matchpoints and I like my chances of defeating it.

Some fun ones. I'll take a stab ... 1) strong diamond raise (prob Kxx support or such) suggesting diamonds are running looking for 3NT. 2♠ shows a solid stopper and indicates spades stronger than hearts. 2) Without the X, assume the passed hand bidding shows a max; 3♣ asks for a stopper for 3NT. With the X, I'm lost. 2♠ might be an invisible cue bid of the TO doubler's spade suit? And 3♣ would be natural (denying support for H's or a stopper in S's). But I'm totally guessing. 3) Depends on system. Hopefully, 3♣ isn't cheaper minor 2nd negative - in which case 4♦ is natural, but the auction is ugly. In a 2♦ = GF, waiting; 2♥ = bust paradign (strongly preferred), 3♣ is natural and 4♦ would have to be discussed. I would prefer 4♦ is control showing, agreeing spades. 4) 4♥ totally depends on agreement in #3. If 4♦ was natural, so is 4♥. If 4♦ is a control, so is 4♥.

I like the 2♣ bid, but nevertheless, 1♠ isn't unreasonable. With the club void, the hand isn't likely to get passed out, but yes, there is that danger. I'm sure the 1♠ advocates are well aware of it. But it would be easy to get to slam after a 1♠ start and a 3-card LR from N.

We also know a lot about the club suit! Let's take the 5-3 spade break as a given. Opening leader has at least 2 clubs and 3rd hand has at least 3. Each hand has only 1 vacant space! Opening leader can only be 5=3=3=2 or 5=3=2=3 and 3rd hand can only be 3=3=3=4 or 3=3=4=3. It would be a toss up, except as han pointed out, we know Jxx is not onside and Jx is not offside. In a 3-3 situation, Jxx offside is a 50% chance and for the now equally likely 4-2 split the Jxxx onside is a 66.7% chance (a priori suit split chances no longer factor in). So the finesse is a 4:3 favorite (4/6 / 3/6). So, I believe han's 1st post + his follow-up correction tells the story. [bluecalm's mention that opening leader can't have AK tight of clubs probably nudges the finesse to be even a tiny bit more of a favorite.]

1) It's reasonable to not have a great way to show a big 2-suited minor hand when playing weak NT. Minor Suit Stayman (MSS) hands are rare enough facing a strong NT as to make the convention expendable. And with a weak NT, it can be discarded easily. However, if you don't have a way to show a GF minor hand, you need to modify your system. That way, for this hand, you can show the diamonds, then the clubs. But more importantly, allows for slam explorations with the more common 1-suited minor responding hand. FWIW, here's what I play when playing Xfers over NT: 2NT = Xfer to ♣ (weak or slam invite+) (major suit bid follow-up is a splinter; bidding 3NT after a minor Xfer is a mild slam try) 3C = Xfer to ♦ (weak or slam invite+) 3D = 5-5 majors invite+ (opener simply picks the suit and bids 3M if weak and 4M if strong) and then the bid that makes it all come together ... 2♠ = usually an invite without a 4cM (balanced or a long minor) + can also include (an admittedly clumsy) big MSS hand Opener bids 2NT w/ all minimums; responder with an invite passes or bids long minor; with an MSS hand can bid 3M as a splinter, 3NT as a sign-off (hoping ptr had a max), 4m as RKC w/ minor agreed and you could add a few more specialized bids, if so desired. Opener with a max bids 3NT (you can assign the whole 3 lvl to specific types of max hands, too, if so desired, but I don't want to write a book) Anyway, with a single 2♠ bid, you get a flat invite (without having to go thru Stayman and needlessly disclose your major holding), both single-suited minor invites (freeing up 2NT & 3m bids) and a clumsy form of MSS as a bonus that you will hardly ever use. BTW, Danny Kleinman has this 2♠ bid and a lot of other sage advice in his book "The Notrump Zone." 2) As mike777 said, 1♦-1♥; 3NT is supposed to be something close to 3=1=6=3 shape with running diamonds, no interest in ptr's suit and the other 2 suits well stopped. You almost, but not quite, had the right hand 3) Depending if your partnership agreements allow extra shape reverses with light values, S either should open 1♣ and reverse to 2♥ OR open 1♥ and rebid 2♣ (if light reverse isn't allowed). Burying the heart suit with a club opener and rebid is ugly. That said, after 1♣-1M; 2♣ auctions, I highly recommend treating 2♦ as a sort of NMF, artificial forcing, implying a 5cM.

Yup, A from AK, 0 or 2 leads, etc. are off after opening lead.

Almost my whole tournament experience is GCC compliant. As JLOGIC pointed out, pairs events usually require GCC compliance and I admit at teams since the MP payouts are so good (compared to pairs), I don't often compete in the unlimited bracket, although I enjoy the competition. (Mid-Chart or higher is only allowed in unlimited events).