Some simple questions about BBO Advance

[Wackojack]

I have been studying conv card FD version of 2/1 GF, because I would like to play this system on-line. Here are some basic questions:

 

1. 1c opening: I have read somewhere to open 1c with 4432 not 1d. FD says 1c promises at least 3. Is this the concensus? What are the relative advantages?

 

2. FD says respond 1nt with 8-10 in all positions. How do you respond with 5-7 and 3334? The answer can't be 2c because FD shows inverted minor suit raises. It can't be 1d because FD says this must be a 4-card suit. The same question applies to a response of 1nt to 1d only more so. If you have 6-7 with 3334 what do you do? Shouldn't the range be 6-10?

 

3. FD says 1h 1s open in 3rd and 4th could be a 4 carder. This is interesting and going back to Acol type openings although nowdays because 12-14 1nt is so popular with Acol players most would open 1nt with a balanced 12-14 even at red. Now I see why 1nt response here is not forcing and the need for the 2c limit raise and the 2d rev Drury. So I have no questions here.

 

4. Capelletti has been universally slated by your posters. Is Capelletti then going to be removed from BBO Advanced?

[inquiry]

1. 1c opening: I have read somewhere to open 1c with 4432 not 1d. FD says 1c promises at least 3. Is this the concensus? What are the relative advantages?

Some people prefer opening 1♣ on two cards suits. I don't anticipate that is part of BBO advanced nor SAYC.

 

2.  FD says respond 1nt with 8-10 in all positions.  How do you respond with 5-7 and 3334?  The answer can't be 2c because FD shows inverted minor suit raises.  It can't be 1d because FD says this must be a 4-card suit.  The same question applies to a response of 1nt to 1d only more so.  If you have 6-7 with 3334 what do you do? Shouldn't the range be 6-10?

 

This is probably an error. 1C-P-1NT is that, 1D-P-1N is more wide ranging (your 6-7 included). With 6-7 balanced over 1C, bid 1D even on a three card diamond suit,

 

4. Capelletti has been universally slated by your posters.  Is Capelletti then going to be removed from BBO Advanced?

 

I don;t like capelletti so the first thing I ask my partners is can we change it. It is easy to repace the bidding tree over their 1NT and add something else if you like.

[mikeh]

Ben has done a good job (as usual) in dealing with the suggestions as to BBO advanced, and I play no role in the system.

 

But as for the question about opening 1♣ on 4=4=3=2 and why some players do so, I feel as if I can help, because that is my preferred approach.

 

There are several reasons, not all of which may be applicable to you (and not to BBO advanced either) while some will be.

 

1. If opener has to bid 1♦ with 4=4=3=2 minimum, responder has to bid 1N with 5+-10 or so (the end points of the range depend on style and agreement). This gets the worng hand on play of 1N is the final contract: it is usually, altho not always, better to have the stronger hand as declarer.

 

Also, altho in my view of lesser significance, if responder has a long ♣ suit, and a hand such as 3=1=3=6 with a weak hand, he is stuck over 1♦. So increasing the frequency of the 1♣ opening reduces that problem: note that with equivalent ♦'s responder has no trouble over a 1♣ opening.

 

 

2. It maximizes the reality of the ♦ suit. Playing 3 card majors, responder is often unable to safely raise either major in a competitive sequence. By ensuring that 1♦ shows 4, the partnership increases its ability to compete in that suit, while further reducing its already impaired ability to compete in ♣: whether that trade-off works for you is a question of style and experience: it works for me.

 

 

3. This is unlikely to matter to most, but there are some systemic advantages that can arise after a 1♣ opening that are unavailable for technical reasons after 1♦. Thus some top pairs (and others, I assume) are using transfer responses to 1♣ openings. I have heard of no successful effort to develop transfer responses to 1♦. I personally do not play these transfers, but I do play transfer jump shifts: responses of 2♦ and 2♥ to 1♣ show the next suit, either weak or strong, and these, altho rare, are powerful bids. They do not work after a 1♦ opening because of the need to preserve a ♦ raise.

 

There may be other reasons, but these are the ones that drove me to switch.