My forcing pass system notes

[Kungsgeten]

Hi!

 

I posted some information about my forcing pass system in various threads, and some people seemed interested in the "does such a system exist"-thread. I've recently started to rewrite the system notes in English, and have decided to post the first version here. Pass 2000 system notes

 

In summary: A forcing pass (weak or strong; 0-7 or 17+) system with limited (8-11) opening bids and a catch-all 1♣ opening (12-16 unbal or 15-17 bal). Uses transfer style openings to the majors and a "majors first always" approach (unless 4432 or 4333). The main tool for slam and game bidding is symmetric relays.

[antonylee]

Thank you very much, the presentation is nice.

[awm]

What's your experience with the 1C opening? This sort of bid has always seemed really bad to me, especially if opponents take some action over it, because it has a very wide range of hand types.

 

I'm sure opening the 8-11 hands with 1d/1h gets you some good results, but I also feel like since these openings are "almost forcing" due to their artificial nature and also will require some unwinding rather than bashing fairly often because they encompass a wide range of shapes, you might lose little by widening the range to something like 8-14 or even 8-16.

 

I'm also curious whether you play some silly partials with a bit less than half the points (like say 1S on two balanced hands with 18-20 hcp and 5-6 combined trumps) since it looks from my reading like this is possible. Obviously you have run outs if doubled but playing 1S instead of a normal partial could easily lose 3-5 imps on a partscore deal.

 

You also have no bid with 5-7 hcp and a long major (well 3M I guess but on a lot of these its too much) and with 8-10 and a long major you are opening 1M-1 instead of 2M (or multi). Your 2M opens are much rarer so you lose a lot of preemption here.

 

The above issues seem common to this style of system and yours seems as good as any... I'm just extremely unconvinced. Haven't had much practical experience with these methods due to local system regs though.

[Kungsgeten]

The 1C opening is the weakest point in the system. We expected to

loose a lot from this, but so far it has worked pretty well. If

the opponents interfere, responder can bid with 8--11. If less

than 8, we pass. This doesn't feel good, since the opponent's

started to exchange information about suits and we haven't. It

may be hard for opener to re-open, especially if the opponents

find a fit (and it may be hard for us to compete). This has

happened sometimes, but hasn't turned too bad. The upside is that

opener and responder are pretty limited. A bit of a double-edged

sword is that opener hasn't revealed to much about her hand when

it is the opponents' board. I think I'd rather bid 1C limited

than Pass 13+ as seems to be "standard" in most forcing pass

systems.

 

I've tried playing 8--14 transfer style openings, but I like

8--11 more. I found it pretty hard to compete to the appropiate

level when the opponents interfere. When partner opens 8--11 you

have a pretty good picture if you want to opt for partscore, game

or slam. In the system with 8--14 I played pass as 15+ any and 1C

as a fert. Playing opening bids with such a narrow range (even

pass, which most often is 0--7, especially if opponents compete)

often makes it easy for partner (in my experience).

 

Yes, we do play some silly partials, which is true for many

systems I believe. It is uncommon to be passed out at the

1-level. I would say we gain overall in partscore battles, since

we often begin showing our hands earlier than the opponents.

 

Not having a weak two-bid might be a loss. In the original system

which this is derived from 2M are weak with 3--7 hcp. It is very

workable to play this way, you only have to change a few things

in the relay structure. It happens that we upgrade normal weak

twos to an 8--11 opening, but we loose some of the

preemption. We've gotten good results from opening 2m "weak".

 

I understand completly being unconvinced. I'm not sure if I'm

convinced myself yet. I've not tried playing it at IMPs yet, only

matchpoints. The results may depend on the field, perhaps the

system is worse with good opposition. In my experience the system

is fun to play, and I really enjoy (once again) the limited

openings.

[the hog]

I would suggest that the opening pass is by far the weakest bid in the system. A umber of years ago, British internationals Nardin and Lodge played a form of Precision where a 1C opening was 0-7 or 17+. This proved unplayable against good opposition. Your opening pass would suffer the same fate. Also you have eliminated the use of the fert, one of the major reasons for using a strong pass system. Bidding over a fert frequently forces the opponents to make an immediate decision. There are many chances for them to get it wrong. I have rarely been hit in a fert; it does happen, but not often.

[Kungsgeten]

We haven't had any trouble with the pass opening, in fact I really like it. It's a theory similar to Swedish Club (1C as 11-13 bal or 17+); protecting the strong opening from interference. When partner pass, the opponents will usually assume it is weak (as do I) and make normal opening bids. The downside is when they do open, partner passes and they get a response and you're strong (especially if they preempt), which is also the case of Swedish Club. I had this hand the other day (matchpoints, red vs white):

 

AKx

ATxxx

AQx

Kx

 

I opened pass as East and South opened 1D. Partner passed (we play normal overcalls here, assuming partner's pass to be weak) and North responded 1S. Our agreements are that the weak hand can not act, and that the strong hand must act. Strong club openers has the upside here, since they can pass with a minimum. On the other hand, my partner's holding is probably mediocre since opponents are bidding on values in a constructive sense (at least I think they are). I had a choice between 1NT and 2H. I landed on 2H, but believe that 1NT might be better (the field probably opens 2NT with my hand). Now we met weak opponents and they somehow landed in 3NT, doubled, 3 down.

 

Against stronger opposition the opening probably is worse (as most openings are). However there have recently been two pairs in the Swedish national top division playing pass as 0-7 or 17+, and it works well for them.

 

I haven't tried playing with a fert, but I guess it preempt the opponents. I actually consider our system as being pretty constructive; we show partner our hand. I haven't seen strong club players using a fert, even though it would be possible:

 

Pass - 8-10 hcp any

1C - 15+

1D - 0-7 any

1M - 10-14, 4+M Magic Diamond-style (like our transfer bids, but not transfers)

1NT - 11-14

2m - 10-14, Natural unbalanced without 4 card major

 

To me, a fert seems more like a necessity to make the system possible (weak limited openings).

[the hog]

The problem Nardin and Lodge had was that interference caused great problems in sorting out hand types. You can't really compare your system to swedish Club, because the openinf 1C bid has a higher range.

After playing strong pass systems, (WOR, Regres), and the dreaded T-Rex for many years, I have come to the conclusion that the pass is the weakest part of the system. The strongest are the limited openings. The fert gained a bit, but not that much.

[Kungsgeten]

How do you mean when you say that 1C has a higher range? In Swedish club, 1C is most often 11-13 balanced or 17+ (almost) any. In our case pass is 0-7 any or 17+ (almost) any. Do you mean if the opponents interfere and the passed hands partner has a great hand, it being hard to know if opener is really really weak or has some values? 0-7 is an eight point range, compared to the 12 point range in natural (0-11).

 

Aren't WOR and Regres "strong" pass systems, where pass shows 13+? I do not know about T-Rex. 13+ is a huge range, and I'm sure interference is hard to handle. 17+ is tighter.

 

Playing 1C as 0-7 or 17+ seems hard, I believe you need the extra step you gain from pass for sorting out what opener/partner actually has.

[lycier]

very good,I have downloaded it,if you can post the second version,can you tell me?

I suggest you can post the full text of your bidding system on Chinese Forum,many chinese players surely like it.

Thank you very much.

[the hog]

What I meant was that SC starts at a 4 point higher range.

Yes, Regres and WOR are strong pass systems. However, you know that pd has an opening; it is not an 'either or" hand.

[Kungsgeten]

What I meant was that SC starts at a 4 point higher range.

 

No it doesn't. Our pass (when strong) is 17+, Swedish club (when strong) is 17+ too.

[the hog]

Your pass is 0-7 or 17+, WOR pass is 13+

[Kungsgeten]

I am aware of this. You said "You can't really compare your system to swedish Club", but I believe I can. The reason for putting a weaker hand into the strong club was to make it less profitable for the opponents to interfere. For this weak/strong pass, the same could be said. Take the following auctions, with weak/strong pass, Swedish Club (or even Polish Club I guess) and Precision-esque:

 

Swedish Club

 

1C-(1S)-pass-(2S);

With the strong variant, opener probably needs to find a bid (partner plays you for 11-13 balanced, so game might still be possible). 1S is probably natural (5+S) and constructive, but is at the 1-level so the range might be 8-16 hcp. We do not know the values of the 2S bidder, depending on their methods, but probably 3+ support and 4-9 hcp. If we have 17, this leaves at most (40-17-8-4) 11 hcp for partner.

 

Pass 2000

 

pass-(1S)-pass-(2S);

Here we have the same problem as above, if holding the strong hand. Partner will play you for weak, so we need to bid something. However, game is probably less likely than above. The normal defense would be to ignore the pass opening (assuming it is weak) and open 1S with 11+ hcp (assuming natural). Responder probably holds 5-9 hcp with 3-card support, if playing standard. If we have 17 hcp, this leaves at most (40-17-11-5) 7 hcp for partner.

 

Precision

 

1C-(1S)-pass-(2S);

Compared to the above, we have an advantage since partner knows we're strong. Depending on agreement, partner probably holds 0-4 hcp. We also have the advantage of being able to pass.