South African Precision

[32519]

Did I read this correct, and there are two responses to the 1♣ opening, 2♣ double negative and 2♦ 4+?

 

I corrected the typo error. This crazy system is far from completion. I keep monitoring this thread for any constructive feedback, much like Zelandakh gave higher up. I always appreciate anything constructive.

[manudude03]

Your 1C responses seem to be like taking all the advantages of playing a strong club, and hitting it with a wrecking ball. The whole point of having the strong bid as low as 1C is so the partnership can use up as much space as physically possible (some even go to strong PASS systems when its legal for that extra bit of room), meanwhile, if 2C and 2D are your only responses, you are not gaining anything. You said that you made the 2C the double negative in order to avoid wrong-siding, but you are doing that anyway with your 2D response. Since 4+ is more likely than 0-3, you are actually wrong-siding it more often.

 

Also, it may help to stop thinking about frequencies and think a bit more about what is useful to the system. As an extreme example, I could have a 7S opening as showing any balanced hand with 4 spades, it will come up a lot, it doesn't make it a good idea though.

 

Also, 1NT-2NT is non-forcing despite showing 14+HCP, really? Yes you say opener won't pass very often, but the fact that he can pass is a major concern. What if responder has a 25 count and wanted to know about a 4 card major in case 7M was on?

 

I'm really not a fan of HCP-before-shape systems, they are simply too vulnerable to competition. The last time I declared a contract with an opp having a monster balanced hand (20 count on that occasion), I ended 4Hx+1 without even extreme shape.

[32519]

Also, 1NT-2NT is non-forcing despite showing 14+HCP, really? Yes you say opener won't pass very often, but the fact that he can pass is a major concern. What if responder has a 25 count and wanted to know about a 4 card major in case 7M was on?

 

Thanks for this. It was such an obvious oversight on our behalf that we have corrected it immediately. 1NT-2NT is now forcing.

 

Regarding the responses to 1♣, you are correct here as well. Will relook at that.

 

No doubt once we start playing this at our local bridge club other obvious oversights will jump out of the woodwork (paperwork?). Nonetheless, it was still fun to do.

[gwnn]

At the risk of stopping trolling on your system, I have a real question about it. What do you do with hands that fit the HCP range but not the description? With 10 hcp of course you can pass, for instance, but what of the 1♥ opening?

1♥=13-15 with "both suit length and strength concentrated in the majors, or balanced"

 

What do you do if you have a 13 count that is unbalanced but it does not have length or strength concentrated in the majors?

[32519]

At the risk of stopping trolling on your system, I have a real question about it. What do you do with hands that fit the HCP range but not the description? With 10 hcp of course you can pass, for instance, but what of the 1♥ opening?

1♥=13-15 with "both suit length and strength concentrated in the majors, or balanced"

 

Regarding the 1♥ bid, I am looking for some suggestions from MOSCITO players. The bid is designed to be semi-destructive to the opponents. The easiest hands to cope with are those containing 5♠ or balanced.

When the bidding goes:

1♥ (13-15 artificial)

1♠ (0-6 negative) it is easy to (a) pass with a 5-card ♠ suit, or (b) bid 1NT with a balanced hand. When the opponents enter the auction showing some values, with the right sort of ♠ holding it should be possible to push them out of their comfort zone into the 3-level.

 

When the bidding goes:

1♥ (13-15 artificial)

1♠ (0-6 negative)

1NT (balanced)

Responder can still strive to improve the auction with Jacoby Transfer bids; 2♣ = transfer to ♦, 2♦ = transfer to ♥, 2♥ = transfer to ♠. With a 6-card or longer ♣ suit, 2♠ is used to transfer to 3♣.

When 1NT is doubled for penalty, we are considering various escape routes:

Option 1: Redouble = Lebensohl demanding opener to bid 2♣. This might be the only way to keep opener as declarer on level 2 when responder has a long ♣ suit. Transfer bids are otherwise unaffected.

Option 2: Redouble = Requiring the of bidding 4-card suits up the line searching for a 4-4 fit. We are not to keen on this option, instead trying to limit the damage for the doubled contract. (Someone else may have a better suggestion here).

 

The problem hands occur where opener has a 5-card ♥ suit and the bidding goes:

1♥ (13-15 artificial)

1♠ (0-6 negative)

?

When the hand is semi-balanced, 1NT may be the best option. With a good ♥ suit or a 6-card ♥ suit, we don’t hesitate to rebid 2♥. It is descriptive of the hand and also consumes bidding space for the opponents.

 

I’m hoping the MOSCITO players can provide some better continuation bidding sequences for the 1♥ bid.

[gwnn]

why do you quote my question if you aren't going to answer it?

[straube]

I think the OP obviously hasn't spent much time thinking about his system and hasn't thought to debug it. He isn't the first person who has posted a garbage system and then partially excused it being garbage because he is "having fun", but most people on this forum are interested in discussing systems that have at least some theoretical merit. I think he's wasting everyone's time.

[32519]

I think the OP obviously hasn't spent much time thinking about his system and hasn't thought to debug it. He isn't the first person who has posted a garbage system and then partially excused it being garbage because he is "having fun", but most people on this forum are interested in discussing systems that have at least some theoretical merit. I think he's wasting everyone's time.

 

This is an extremely selfish statement to make. You are implying that whenever you designed a new system, you got it right the first time. If we got it right the first time there would be no need to come to the forums.

 

The OP stated that we were having difficulty with the continuation structure after the 1♥ opening. Thanks to other posters we believe that we are well on the way to resolving this. Go back two posts and see the reply to gwnn. Our initial thoughts were channelled into a different direction by others. This tells me that the forums work.

 

Gwnn possibly missed an earlier post to the minor suit orientated hands in the 10-15 HCP range. These are opened 2♣. In any system (including regular Precision with the nebulous 1♦ opening) you will be dealt hands that don’t optimally fit in anywhere. So before deciding on what to open, consider what your second bid will be after partner’s response. Based on that, make the appropriate opening.

[hrothgar]

Speaking for one MOSCITO player, I ain't touching this with a 10 foot pole

[32519]

You guys seem to be getting unnecessarily tangled up in the 1♥ bid. Well let me untangle it for you.

Here’s the deal:

1♥..13-15 HCP, either 5+♥ suit, 5+♠ suit, balanced or semi-balanced

..2♠..0-6 Negative

....Pass = 5+ ♠ suit. With the right sort of hand and/or favourable vulnerability, the auction can be lifted to 2♠ pushing the opponents out of their comfort zone into the 3-level.

....1NT = balanced/semi-balanced

.......2♣2♦2♥2♠ all transfer bids to improve the auction

....2♥ = Good 5-card suit or a 6-card suit, competing for the part score

..1NT..7-10 HCP minor suit orientated hand

..2♣...7-11 HCP 3+ support for a ♥ suit

..2♦...7-11 HCP 3+ support for a ♠ suit

..2♥...7-11 HCP 3+ support for both ♥♠

..2NT..11 HCP, invitational, minor suit orientated hand

..3♣...GF, 12+ HCP 3+ support for a ♥ suit

..3♦...GF, 12+ HCP 3+ support for a ♠ suit

..3♥...GF, 12+ HCP, 3+ support for both ♥♠

..3♠...Minor suit Stayman, mild slam try

....4♣♦ = Minor wood for the suit bid, accepting the mild slam try

....5♣♦ = To play, hand not suitable for 3NT

..3NT..To play, 12-16 HCP, minor suit orientated hand

 

So what do you do with only 12 HCP and a 5-card ♥ suit? Here are some options to consider:

1.) Do you have a 4-card side suit? If yes, the hand meets the Rule of 20 requirements. Open the bidding.

2.) Is partner already a passed hand? If yes, the hand probably belongs to the opponents. But that doesn’t mean you need to pass and make life easy for them. Open with 1♥ and keep them guessing.

3.) At favourable vulnerability and partner already a passed hand, open 2♥. Don’t roll over and play dead.

 

The fact that this system violates much of what is considered normal, doesn’t automatically classify it as unworkable. How many play T-Rex? Outside of New Zealand, probably not that many. Maybe this system should be renamed “The Rhino.” At the rate these animals are being poached, the species will soon become extinct as well.

 

Many of my threads have been posted to find out the thinking behind certain conventions. In particular here are the threads on Flannery and Gerber. I wanted to know what all the fuss was about regarding all the Flannery/Gerber bashing. Turns out much of the bashing is completely unfounded. Many top USA players have Flannery on their CCs. I have absolutely no idea who started the Flannery/Gerber bashing. Maybe it was some or other bridge guru who decided that his appraisement of Flannery was better than the USA players using it. Then other self-appraised bridge guru’s also started jumping on “Bash Flannery/Gerber” bandwagon. Another example of a convention falling into disfavour is Cappelletti. Even the creators of Cappelletti don’t use it anymore. I’ve already had a go at Jacoby 2NT. Fred Gitelman’s modification was the only version that managed to find the ♥ slam. Maybe it was a bit much suggesting to dump J2NT altogether. But at least rethink if your version is optimal or not. I am lining up to have a go at the Multi as well. From all the feedback received to that thread, the downsides for Multi outweigh the upsides. Yet it remains popular. Why? I have absolutely no idea. Perhaps those still playing it haven’t yet figured out that the downsides outweigh the upsides. Or maybe no one has yet bothered to put in the effort to come up with something else where the upsides outweigh the downsides.

[antonylee]

Let's see how this fares opposite a tiny little bit of preemption.

1♥-(2♦)-...

You hold xx-KJxx-Kxx-Kxxx. Now what?

1/ You pass. Too bad, it goes (3♦)-P-(P) and you miss game opposite Ax-Axxxx-xx-Axx

2/ You X for T/O (???), and again 4th hand bids 3♦. Now what if opener has 5♠? Can he bid them at the 3-level? Or, if he has to pass, what if he has 5♥?

3/ You bid 2N (NF I assume), and again 4th hand bids 3♦. Again, what does opener do with 5♠? With 5♥?

[32519]

Let's see how this fares opposite a tiny little bit of preemption.

1♥-(2♦)-...

You hold xx-KJxx-Kxx-Kxxx. Now what?

1/ You pass. Too bad, it goes (3♦)-P-(P) and you miss game opposite Ax-Axxxx-xx-Axx

2/ You X for T/O (???), and again 4th hand bids 3♦. Now what if opener has 5♠? Can he bid them at the 3-level? Or, if he has to pass, what if he has 5♥?

3/ You bid 2N (NF I assume), and again 4th hand bids 3♦. Again, what does opener do with 5♠? With 5♥?

 

Now this is good. It tells me that you have been thinking about this madness. Before answering your question, let’s see how the auction would progress in 2/1, etc.

The bidding would go:

1♥-2♦-3♦-X

3♥-?

 

The 3♦ bid being a cue-bid raise.

The X showing ♦ support.

At favourable vulnerability, the 2♦ overcaller may push on to level 4. Your assumption of missing a game contract in ♥ with a combined 22 HCP count is based on the belief that the ♦A is held by the overcaller. That isn’t necessarily true although probable. It’s also based on the assumption that the ♥Q is dropping underneath the AK. There is no guarantee that standard bidders will reach the ♥ game.

 

Now to your question:

The opposition interference has disrupted normal communication channels. So now they change. X would indeed be for takeout with 7-11 HCP and support for BOTH majors. Here you can support only 1, so just bid it, 2♥ in your example hand. Fourth hand also enters the auction with a 3♦ bid. A ♥ fit is known and you can compete for the part score in 3♥. Same result as in standard bidding.

But what if opener’s suit is ♠? Up to the 3♦ bid the auction remains unaltered. Opener will pass the 3♦ bid knowing about the major suit misfit. With a combined 22 HCP count, we now switch to defence and try to get the plus score by defeating the contract.

[antonylee]

Now this is good. It tells me that you have been thinking about this madness. Before answering your question, let’s see how the auction would progress in 2/1, etc.

The bidding would go:

1♥-2♦-3♦-X

3♥-?

 

The 3♦ bid being a cue-bid raise.

The X showing ♦ support.

At favourable vulnerability, the 2♦ overcaller may push on to level 4. Your assumption of missing a game contract in ♥ with a combined 22 HCP count is based on the belief that the ♦A is held by the overcaller. That isn’t necessarily true although probable. It’s also based on the assumption that the ♥Q is dropping underneath the AK. There is no guarantee that standard bidders will reach the ♥ game.

A decent 4th seat won't X with any raise, that would give waaaay too many possibilities to opener (who can now use P, XX, 3H as different kinds of hands that do not have to commit to game). At imps playing some natural system it looks normal to go to game on the second round no matter what happens (except if 4th hand doubles and opener now has some way to show a sub-minimum opening :P)

By the way, the hand I gave opener isn't even 13-15, you can replace the ♥J by the Q or the ♦K by the A for a decent 23-pt game.

 

But more importantly:

Here you can support only 1, so just bid it, 2♥ in your example hand.

Oh, really? Now what do you do holding Kx-KQxxxx-Kxx-xx after 1♥-(2♦)? Bid 2♥ and hope that at some point, after enough ♥ rebids, partner understands that it was a minimum 6-card suit, not a 4-card suit? Or say, likewise, after 1♥-(2♦)-2♠-(P), what does opener do with a hand with ♥s and no ♦ stop? Oh, I'll cue-bid 3♦ and suddenly we're at the 3-level scrambling for a non-existent fit with barely game-invitational values...

 

Sure, have fun designing your system (I'm all for experimentation) but make sure it can withstand at least non-preemptive competition (because I haven't even talked about 3m overcalls yet...).

[mgoetze]

I am lining up to have a go at the Multi as well. From all the feedback received to that thread, the downsides for Multi outweigh the upsides. Yet it remains popular. Why? I have absolutely no idea.

 

If you were capable of reading that thread properly you would know. But since you choose to only consider those statements which in some way, especially when ripped out of context, support your foregone conclusion, it remains a mystery to you. You absolutely ignore basic premises such as the fact that almost everyone wants a way to show a weak 2 bid in a major, and then when someone says the reason to play multi is that you free up 2♥ and 2♠ for something else you conclude there is no reason to play multi at all.

 

Now this is good. It tells me that you have been thinking about this madness.

 

The only thing he's been thinking about more than the rest of us is how to explain to you that this system is hopeless.

[32519]

A decent 4th seat won't X with any raise, that would give waaaay too many possibilities to opener (who can now use P, XX, 3H as different kinds of hands that do not have to commit to game). At imps playing some natural system it looks normal to go to game on the second round no matter what happens (except if 4th hand doubles and opener now has some way to show a sub-minimum opening :P)

By the way, the hand I gave opener isn't even 13-15, you can replace the ♥J by the Q or the ♦K by the A for a decent 23-pt game.

 

Reply

I think you’re losing sight of some basics. Bridge is a partnership, exchanging information by both partners during the auction to reach the best spot. The 1♥ opening exchanges the first bit of information, 13-15 HCP. This already conveys a minimum of 2 additional HCP over a natural 1M in Precision and other standard players who open with an 11 count. After the 2♦ overcall, responder only able to support ♥, simply bids it. With or without the 3♦ fourth seat intervention, opener raises to 3♥ announcing the fit. Now other bridge basics kick in: distributional points by responder, extra trumps, judgement, etc. Excluding judgement, the hand you submitted has 4 things in its favour which all justify the game bid; (1) 10 HCP (11 on the revised one), (2) an additional trump, (3) the probable favourable placing of the ♦K after the overcall, and (4) ♠ shortness.

 

But more importantly:Here you can support only 1, so just bid it, 2♥ in your example hand.

 

Oh, really? Now what do you do holding Kx-KQxxxx-Kxx-xx after 1♥-(2♦)? Bid 2♥ and hope that at some point, after enough ♥ rebids, partner understands that it was a minimum 6-card suit, not a 4-card suit?

 

Reply

Let’s see how the auction would progress in 2/1, etc.

The bidding would go:

1♠-2♦-2♥-3♦

In standard bidding the 2♥ bid would show a 5+ card suit and 10+ HCP. With a minimum and no ♦ stop, opener will most likely pass. Now it goes back to responder to make the next decision. 3♥ easy with a 6-card suit. The 4♥ contract will now be bid.

 

So how does this change with this crazy new system?

1♥-2♦-2♥-3♦

P-P-?

 

Let us analyse the auction thus far from responder’s point of view:

1). Responder knows about a minimum combined 24 HCP between the hands. In the right combination it should produce game.

2.) Opener failed to support the 2♥ bid, pointing towards a ♠ holding by opener.

3.) Responder is holding a ♦ stop AND a 6-card ♥ suit AND an unbalanced hand.

4.) Both opponents are bidding ♦ and responder holds 3. The odds of opener holding a stiff are greatly increased.

5.) Opener didn’t bid 3♠ (which would indicate a 6-card suit and maximum) over 3♦; indicating a 5-3-1-4 holding.

6.) Responder has a number of options now. Bid the 3NT game OR invite game in ♥ by bidding 3♥ OR bid 4♥ directly. With opener’s probable holding already deduced from the bidding, there is no need to invite game by bidding 3♥. So with the hand you gave, a jump to 4♥ now will be easy.

 

Or say, likewise, after 1♥-(2♦)-2♠-(P), what does opener do with a hand with ♥s and no ♦ stop? Oh, I'll cue-bid 3♦ and suddenly we're at the 3-level scrambling for a non-existent fit with barely game-invitational values...

 

Reply

Let’s see how the auction would progress in 2/1, etc.

The bidding would go:

1♥-2♦-2♠-P

?

The meaning of the 2♠ bid in standard will have a major impact on how the auction progresses. It could mean one of the following:

1.) A negative free-bid. Here it will then need to be a 6-card suit with 5-9 HCP

2.) Natural and game forcing.

 

Let us assume that it is natural and game forcing. Then it will be a 5-card suit and 13+ HCP. You end up in game, either 3NT or 4 of a major.

 

So how does this change with this crazy new system?

1♥-2♦-2♠-P

?

You rightly say that the auction can now easily be pushed to level 3 on a non-existent fit.

This is how I see it:

1.) With a minimum response (7-8 HCP, no ♥ support and poor ♠ support), Pass is always an option. You are now looking at playing in a 5-2 ♥ suit when opener rebids 2♥ over 2♦. Should opener perchance show a ♠ suit, you are now looking at a delayed raise. With minimum values the auction will die in 3♠.

2.) With 9-11 HCP and a couple of ♠ honours, bid the suit.

3.) Opener does not yet know what the upper end of responders hand is, neither if responder has a ♦ stop. 3NT may still be on. So the 2♠ bid will end up being forcing for 1 round.

 

So how should the bidding now continue? Well obviously it depends on your holding.

1.) With no other bid available, 2NT would be the only option. With no ♦ stop in either hand, the contract is going down at least 1.

2.) With a 5-card ♣ suit, show it. Give responder a choice of suits.

3.) With a 6-card ♥ suit, bid it on level 3.

 

 

[gwnn]

I think you’re losing sight of some basics.

LOL

[Cthulhu D]

Is that 1H is a wonder bid and probably not legal anywhere at all? The Australia BF definition is "An opening bid of one of a major with alternative possibilities that show length in one specified suit or

length in another specified suit." (in this case hearts or spades). The WBF has a similar regulation and I suspect most national bodies do too.

 

It's tough to tell if you skate through on the fact that you may have length in both suits, but it's something worth checking.

[Ace4hcp]

We have been trying the system for a while now, and all my opponents have been very supporting and tells us that the system is working, even though we have some occasional unfavorable results for us.

 

It feels good to finally have a system that you can count on!

[32519]

Having seen awm’s Recursive Diamond Notes http://cs.ucla.edu/~awm/bridge/rd.pdf , we are going to try some of his ideas here. We are going to reverse our 1♣ and 2♣ bids with a small adjustment to fit in with what we have been experimenting with thus far.

 

Awm’s 1♣ opening is adjusted slightly for our system as follows:

1♣ = 10-15 HCP, balanced or three suiter or minors

2♣ = All 20+ unbalanced hands

The 20-22 HCP balanced hands we will reintroduce via our version of Multi.

 

We also like awm’s response structure for his 1♦ opening bid. We think it will fit in nicely for our 1♦ bid as well. This is what awm suggests:

The most common response to 1♦ is 1♥, which shows any hand with game-forcing strength (9+ points usually) and also any very weak hand (0-4 points). All other bids show the intermediate range! The full set of responses looks like:

1♥ any 0-4 points or any GF

1♠ 5-8 hcp balanced or semi-balanced

1NT 5-8 points, three-suited hand with no 5-card major

2♣ 6+♣, 5-8 points, not balanced

2♦ 6+♦, 5-8 points, not balanced

2♥ 5+♥, 5-8 points, not balanced

2♠ 5+♠, 5-8 points, not exactly 3♥, not balanced

2NT both minors, 5-8 points

3♣ 5+♠, 4+♣, 3♥, 0-1♦, 5-8 points

3♦ 5+♠, 4+♦, 3♥, 0-1♣, 5-8 points

3♥ 6+♠, 3♥, 5-8 points

[32519]

Sure, have fun designing your system (I'm all for experimentation) but make sure it can withstand at least non-preemptive competition (because I haven't even talked about 3m overcalls yet...).

 

I took antonylee’s challenge here to heart[♥] and have been running random hands through BBO’s deal generator, comparing the ability of natural systems to cope with 3-level pre-empts versus this system after a 1♥ opening. Thus far the score is equal with 4 out of 30 hands unable to cope with a 3♦ pre-empt in either system. And then this hand was dealt which I thought worthy of posting for further discussion.

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sa53hqj9742d5caq6&w=s964hkdkt87432ck2&n=sjhat65dq9ct98753&e=skqt872h83daj6cj4]399|300[/hv]

 

In natural systems E/W can find a ♠ game after this sequence:

1♥-3♦-3♥-3♠

4♥-4♠-all pass

 

10 tricks are made with E/W only losing the 3 Aces

 

With this system the North hand cannot cope with the pre-empt. But what does East do now after this sequence:

1♥-3♦-P-?

 

The probability is high that East will pass over the 3♦ pre-empt. South won’t bid again. The end result is that N/S have made a substantial gain here.

 

I’m still running sims through the deal generator. The results of 30 hands isn’t enough.

[DrMunk]

 

The probability is high that East will pass over the 3♦ pre-empt. South won’t bid again. The end result is that N/S have made a substantial gain here.

 

 

 

Sure looks like a big gain for your system.Some south players will make the mistake of leading a diamond against 4 spade. Some will do even worse and bid 5♥.

[32519]

I have run enough random deals through BBO’s deal generator and can give the following feedback:

1.) Natural bidding copes marginally better with 3-level pre-empts than this system.

2.) Amongst the random hands dealt, opening 1♥ in this system dealt the hand displayed 2 posts back where responder was forced to pass unable to cope with the pre-empt. A beneficial score resulted.

3.) The 1♥ bid here was also showing the following hidden benefit: When the hand belongs to the opponents, LHO doesn’t always have an automatic overcall unsure which major opener has.

4.) However, the BIG LOSER here is the memory work required to cope with a 3-level pre-empt. The bad scores are going to arise, not so much from inability to cope with the pre-empt, but rather from brain drain.

 

So we have dumped the previous 1♥ bid in favour of a natural 1♥ bid.

[manudude03]

Since you're reverting to a natural 1H, how do you show your single suited spade hands in 1st/2nd seats now (that were in the 1H range before)?

 

As for the hand you posted, 4S can be beaten rather trivially. Diamond lead, win the first trump, heart to the ace, diamond ruff, then cash the club for the defense's 4th trick.

[32519]

Since you're reverting to a natural 1H, how do you show your single suited spade hands in 1st/2nd seats now (that were in the 1H range before)?

 

As for the hand you posted, 4S can be beaten rather trivially. Diamond lead, win the first trump, heart to the ace, diamond ruff, then cash the club for the defense's 4th trick.

 

The way we want to play the system at the moment is this:

1.) We still want to keep the 1♠ and 1NT bids available as a mini preempt in 1st and 2nd seat, especially at favourable vulnerability.

2.) The 1♠ bid shows 11-12 HCP and either a balanced hand or a 5-card ♠ suit. The 5-card suit is always applicable in 3rd and 4th seat. But what about 1st and 2nd seat? How does the bidding continue, responder with a bust, not knowing if opener is balanced or holding ♠. We are planning the continuation bidding along these lines –

...a. Pass shows a ♠ bust (at least 4)

...b. 1NT shows values interested in a game try. Openers replies are again the “reverse Stayman” structure higher up in this thread

......i. 2♣ = both majors

.....ii. 2♦ = 4-card ♥ suit

....iii. 2♥ = 4-card ♠ suit

.....iv. 2♠ = 5+ ♠

...c. 2♣/2♦/2♥ are all to play showing a 5-card suit and no game interest

 

Now to your question:

With ♠ being the boss suit, we are comfortable to keep the opponents guessing. The 1♣ bid becomes the catchall bid for all hands in the 10-15 HCP range that don’t fit in anywhere else (or don’t fit in due to seat). You are going to be dealt plenty of hands with a choice of where to open them, 1♣/1♠/1NT. The choice will be governed by seat and vulnerability.

Responses to a 1♣ opening are natural promising at least a 4-card suit and 6 HCP. Opener with a 5-card ♠ can safely bid 2♠ second time round showing the 13-15 HCP range. Your side has a minimum of 21 HCP and the boss suit.

 

With highly distributional hands in the 14-15 HCP range, an artificial 1 ♦can be opened to find out something more about responders hand. You don’t want to run the risk of responder passing these sorts of hands when opened 1♣.

[32519]

After making various changes along the way and dumping some of our original ideas, I believe pard and me now have our own unique system as well. How effective it is will only be discovered once we start actually playing it at the table. I have absolutely no idea if any of these ideas have been tried anywhere else before e.g. “Reverse Stayman” after a mini balanced pre-empt.

 

My next step is to print out this thread and sift through all the constructive feedback, adjusting the original set of system notes wherever necessary. Does anyone know how to do that? Neither the print function, nor the download button seems to work. I posted a separate query for Ben to look into.

 

A special thank you to the following posters –

1.) Zelandakh: His post got us thinking in the right direction, although not fully adopted.

2.) Manudude03: He pointed out some glaring oversights. No doubt we would eventually have corrected them ourselves. But we could do it now.

3.) Antonylee: He forced us into looking closer at coping with pre-empts after the 1♥ opening. The structure to cope with 3-level pre-empts would be unnecessary brain drain and was dumped.

4.) Awm: The 1♣ and 1♦ continuation structure from his Recursive Diamond Notes fit in nicely with what we are trying here. I don’t know if it is ethical to use someone else’s ideas.