my system thoughts

[Robert]

Hello David C

 

I never had any doubts about your comments about areas of possible(or likely)concern in a 'different' approach to system building methods.

 

Your comments have been 'right on the money' from my viewpoint. We merely had different views 'when' I did not study(read?) the details of the awm system post. You had some doubts about parts of the system and I shared most(all) of your concerns. We only had a major difference of opinion when I did not realize that 1S*-2C showed 'spades. Me bad. Sorry.

 

I collect bidding systems. I often build or modify whole systems or conventions.

 

Sometimes I spent several happy(?) hours trying to write a new approach to bidding only to discover the logic is fine, however, the bidding space does not allow the use of the new bidding.

 

Sometimes I decide to throw the whole effort out when I discover that I am thinking, "What was I thinking?"

 

I find that the study of a system sometimes shows me a new convention 'that I like.' My normal style is to modify to suit my own bidding style.

 

awm appears to have put in a lot of work on his system. If he enjoys playing it, more power to him.

 

My system choices have varied over the decades. I tend to change systems fairly often. I have played a lot of KS, Precision and Blue Team Club.

 

I have tinkered(and played) Roman Club, a forcing pass variant, many Precision type base systems, Power, Goren, Standard American, an almost pure canape system(with and without the forcing pass), Roth Stone and also some Acol. I left out Polish Club and a couple of others, but you should get the general idea.

 

Sometimes I played opening 1NT ranges down to 8-10HCP . Opposite a forcing pass, an 8-10 'opening bid' is fairly safe. i was a bit worried about playing an opening bid of !C* to show 0-9HCP(playing a forcing pass system), however, we did not often come to grief and the system was a lot of fun to play.

 

awm likely has that same feeling about his system. awm build an unusual system, which I normally like to read. I tend to 'copy' ideas or conventions that suit my bridge style.

 

I would be very nervous about the other pair doubling for takeout. If one opponent 'hears' that his partner has values, the rebid of 1NT showing 11-13 or

17-19 might start a 'doubling party.'

 

They could rule out responder's 12+ range and often rule out openers 17+HCP range. That would leave the system players with 0-5HCP opposite 11-13HCP with at least one opponent reaching for a Red card.

 

Even an overcall might 'turn loose the doubling dogs.' If even one of my current 8+HCP overcalls recieved a HCP showing double, a peek at my 15HCP overcall would strongly suggest that we do not have a fit and that we also have game(near game?) values. A Red card would be picked up, hopefully in tempo.

 

I did find awm system notes of some interest. It is not a system that fits my style, however, if I find one idea(convention) that I like, I am well pleased. awm has good ideas, the whole system just does not fit into my bridge playing style.

 

Regards,

Robert

[awm]

Well, I didn't really expect anyone to fall in love with this transfer method and want to adopt it. I'm just trying to present a contrasting view, because I've noticed certain approaches gaining a great deal of popularity in these forums. In particular:

 

(1) Strong or prepared 1♣ openings.

 

(2) Four card majors with possible canape.

 

(3) Highly artificial preempt structures.

 

Personally I'm not a huge fan of any of these approaches, and I wanted to float some ideas about how to design a system which is substantially different from both standard bidding and the systems which seem to be "popular."

[Flame]

Nice system awm dont take the silence the wrong way.

Thought of tranfers FN last week too (im guessing lots of systems freak has similar thoughts) you give some excelet bidding sequences there.

I wouldnt play exactly the same but might steal parts of it.

Thx

[Robert]

Hi awm No offense intended. I am a die hard transfer fan. I read a double transfer concept at the Cambridge web site a couple of years ago which changed my bidding style.

 

I have added layers of new meaning into my bids over 1NT. If you play a double transfer system, you gain additional meanings and also additional 'branches.'

 

Other places sometimes gain by adding double transfer sequences. Just getting a single step back is a system designers dream. With double transfers, you sometimes get several additional steps/meanings.

 

I really like to keep the bidding under 3NT and double transfers often give me the additional room.

 

Anyone reading my system notes could make a comment that I am completely mad. I have many long strings of 'double' transfer bids that convey a lot of information, however, they are not for the timid. One slip and the whole thing falls apart.

 

I change back and forth in my system 'likes.' I played a lot of weak four card majors when I played Blue Team Club. I converted to 5 card majors when I played Precision or KS.

 

My opening NT ranges from 8-10HCP to 17-20 in Roman Club or the Power system. I have also tinkered with Romex and its forcing 1NT opening.

 

When I played Roman Club, you sometimes have to open in a 3 card major. That is the system bid with3=3=2=5 because you cannot open 1C and you are playing a canape system. You open 1H and rebid 2Cs.

 

I modified the system into a 4 card major system with a 'shorter' 1D opening after making a major preference with 4 card support and found partner with a 3=3=2=5 shape.

 

Roman Club was fun to play, but that auction had to go.

 

Regards,

Robert