kenrexford Posted November 11, 2008 Report Share Posted November 11, 2008 OK. So, I thought this might be funny, having suggested this in a different post. The system? Open your third-best suit first. 1♠ = spades is my third-best suit, and I have at least nine cards in two other suits. If my suits are the minors, I have three spades.1♥ = hearts is my third-best suit, and I have at least nine cards in two other suits. If my suits are the minors, I have three hearts.1♦ = diamonds is my third-best suit, and I have either at least nine cards in two other suits OR I have specifically 4441 shape (any stiff) with four diamonds (or specifically 4450)1♣ = clubs is my third-best suit, and I have either at least nine cards in two other suits OR I have specifically 4414/4405 shape (short diamond)1NT = 4333 or 44322♣ = strong, forcing, artificial2♦ = Both minors, no three-card major.2M = Weak2NT = 19+-21 balanced Why? No reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted November 11, 2008 Report Share Posted November 11, 2008 I actually played for quite some time a system where we open our fourth best suit. The idea was to treat the opening 1-suit bid as sort of like a "takeout double" of that suit, normally promising singleton or void there (most semi-balanced hands opened 1NT). There were actually some nice wins here, auctions where the best fit was in a suit that was hard to find (i.e. would be the 4th suit bid in a natural auction) or in auctions where both partners tend to repeat their suit not realizing there is a void opposite. It also creates a natural cuebid to handle strong hands (i.e. 1♦-1♠-2♦ could not be natural, since 1♦ showed 0-1♦, so it can be used to show a strong hand of some variety). Besides ACBL illegality, there were certainly issues with this system. But it did pick up a number of wins (and losses of course!) when compared to standard methods. And it was amusing to play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glen Posted November 11, 2008 Report Share Posted November 11, 2008 I think this is the 3rd best system I've seen today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickRW Posted November 11, 2008 Report Share Posted November 11, 2008 Not sure why I'm even answering here - but I like Adam's idea better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted November 11, 2008 Report Share Posted November 11, 2008 Also 1NT with 5332's? Biggest problem imo is your NT ladder... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted November 11, 2008 Report Share Posted November 11, 2008 This reminds me on the Dark Site of the Moon's hors d'oeuvre system as described in Jeff Rubin's "Bridge on the Moon":1♣=11-15 any shape1♦=16+ diamonds is my closest-to-average suitetc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted November 11, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2008 Also 1NT with 5332's? Biggest problem imo is your NT ladder... Yes, I had missed that pattern. I decided last night to treat that as an "impossible pattern" because that was more fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbforster Posted November 11, 2008 Report Share Posted November 11, 2008 Regarding breaking ties, do you to this in any systematic way based on suits (majors first?), or is it just on suit quality? Is opener's first rebid their best suit, or their 2nd best suit? Inquiring minds want to know! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dake50 Posted November 11, 2008 Report Share Posted November 11, 2008 Why does this trigger singleton system Delta by Lukasc Slawinski?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted November 11, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2008 Regarding breaking ties, do you to this in any systematic way based on suits (majors first?), or is it just on suit quality? Is opener's first rebid their best suit, or their 2nd best suit? Inquiring minds want to know! This is an interesting question. With 44 in the majors, you would per force have a four-card or five-card minor and would open the minor. So, the "tie" involves two three-card majors and a six-card or longer minor. In that event, it seems that the response and rebid structure would come into play. I would imagine that I would want to facilitate partner's major bidding when he does have one but not both five-card majors. Intuitively, this suggests bidding 1♥. I would forsee 1♠ as a semi-relay, with 1NT by Opener implying a minor with four spades. So, with only three spades, Opener would rebid the minor. However, if Responder has five spades, he could instead bid an artificial 1NT semi-relay, which would allow us to find that 5-3 fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted November 12, 2008 Report Share Posted November 12, 2008 ken, your sistem is "fragment openings". You could go one step further and do "splinter openings". Ok, that's your assignment for tomorrow :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted November 13, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 13, 2008 ken, your sistem is "fragment openings". You could go one step further and do "splinter openings". Ok, that's your assignment for tomorrow :P Splinter openings are too obvious. Anyone could play that! What might be more fun is "typing" systems. For example, 1♠ could promise three suits of the same length (4441, 4333, 7222). 1♥ could show two suits of the same length (4432, 5332, 6322, 6511, etc.). 1♦ could show four suits of different lengths. The rest of the openings could show a precise number of clubs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoob Posted November 13, 2008 Report Share Posted November 13, 2008 one of the very first systems i ever learned was called "more or less" and bidding was based on the number of face cards, 0-16, disregarding high points entirely. it was a blast, but most opponents hated it, go figure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matmat Posted November 13, 2008 Report Share Posted November 13, 2008 one of the very first systems i ever learned was called "more or less" and bidding was based on the number of face cards, 0-16, disregarding high points entirely. it was a blast, but most opponents hated it, go figure. what was the opening with 15 face cards? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.