2-under-transfer openings

[helene_t]

In a 5-card-major system (SAYC, Precision etc.) most of the time when you open (or fail to open), you tell partner little about your distribution (and major suit length in particular), unless you hapen to have a 5-card major and HCPs in a certain range. After having read Points Schmoints I realize that it should be different.

 

A transfer system in which all hands without a 5-card are opened 1♣ would be a step in the right direction, but in a transfer system a minimal opener with 4M+5m should be opened canapé, and also with a 4441-shape it is better to tell partner about a 4-card major than calling one's hand "ballanced". So a transfer to a major should promise 4+, which we might then just as well do with ballanced hands, too. Then, the transfers to the majors should be 2-under (1♣ for hearts, 1♦ for spades) to compensate for their vagueness. This leads to the following opening scheme:

1♣/♦: 4+ hearts/spades

1♥: (Semie)-balanced, no 4-card major

1♠/NT: 5+ clubs/diamonds (often 6-card )

[Flame]

Hi

I am in the same path for system designed for last few months At the begining i really liked the 2 under transfer idea, but i found there is a problem with opening 1h/1s with the kind of hands you mentioned or any other 2 under systems that use them for clubs and diamonds (Tarane, and utopia are two nice examples)

the problem is you let the opponents an easy way into the bidding when they got the major suits , they can double you.

This problem lead me to look at one under transfers where this problem is minimize because when you bid 1h with spade or 1 diamond with heart , they can double but you know you got the higher ranking suit ao you have an advance over them in the, and will win most of the comatitve contests.

After some work i found that those arent so good either for example, i found out that making all your openings forcing is a big problem, because you lose the ability to cut off all the really weak hands like you do after a normal opening bids.

I have finnaly manage to get a system i like, im still writing it, i hope to publish a site with this system and get help from everyone in making it the best system, and maybe form a club of the system players.

Hope to get your help with it.

[Danlo]

You may want to check my site for the B Sharp system, a system I am developing to exhibit the system design features I'm exploring.

 

The site is Bidding by Design and on the first page is a link to the B Sharp section. There is a B Sharp system summary, showing the current state of the system.

 

Note that I do not believe the opening bids are leading in system design, they are mostly a consequence of the methods you want to apply later on. Furthermore, my primary interest is not in designing a bidding system, but in the principles underlying the design. I want to chart how certain design rules (like MAF) impact on a system, and how certain systems are related but use (slightly) different design rules priorities.

 

I'm currently working on an article clarifying some of my design notions, but that is still some way from being finished. There are some snippets on the site, but they are not definitive.