Another system

[EarlPurple]

Opening bids:

 

1NT: 15-18 balanced. If 15, contains a 5-card suit. If 18 does not contain a 5-card suit.

 

1♣: promises a 4-card major. 12+ but if 12 must contain a 5-card minor (in addition to 4 card major).

 

1♦: denies a 4-card major. 12+ but if 12 contains a 5-card minor. May be 5-3-3-2 balanced with 12 points and a 5-card minor. If balanced, maximum point count is 15 (no 5-card minor). If unbalanced, maximum point count is 17, but unbalanced hand would have to be minor-orientated.

 

1♥, 1♠: 5 card majors. Limited to 17 points. 5-3-3-2 hands of 15-17 points would be opened 1NT so if balanced is no more than 14.

 

2♣ is the mini strong bid, 18+ (unbalanced)-22. 2NT rebid shows 20(5-3-3-2)-22 (4-4-3-2 or 4-3-3-3). But can also be weak 2 bid in diamonds (and will be a lot of the time, so beware coming in over it with any old rubbish). Responder bids 2♦ when he is happy to hear partner pass with a weak-2 in diamonds. If it's one of the strong bids, opener bids on to describe his hand.

 

2♦ is the big strong bid (balanced hands 23+ or 5-3-3-2 22-count, or unbalanced 23+). But can also be a weak 2 in either major. Responder bids assuming weak 2 in major (is most of the time!) if it's the strong option, opener breaks the sequence.

 

2♥ = hearts and a minor

2♠ = spades and another suit.

 

These bids will be normally 8-11 points and show at least 5 in the major. You may play them as always 5-5 if you prefer.

 

2NT opening: maybe a bit controversial but is 18 (5-3-3-2) - 20 (4-4-3-2 or 4-3-3-3). That may seem a bit weak for a 2NT opening but if you are going to play to open 1♣ or 1♦ then rebid 2NT you will probably end in 2NT anyway, or, with a weak hand, partner may pass you in a minor neither of you have. Significantly though, 3rd player will often get the chance to bid 1 of a major for a lead, whereas the 2NT bid forces him to come in at the 3-level (possibly playing in 3 of his suit doubled). In addition, this way we are also keeping the 1♣ and 1♦ bid strictly limited, which is very good for competitive auctions.

 

_______________________________________________________________

 

Responses to 1♣:

1♦ promises a 4-card major.

 

If 1♣ is overcalled with 1♦, Dbl is "stolen bid" and so promises a 4-card major and bidding 1 of the major shows 5. (I know that in standard bidding this method is considered inferior, but here we know partner also has a 4-card major somewhere and also know he is limited, so the situation is different, we want to try to find it).

 

If 1♣ is overcalled with 1♥ or 1♠, Dbl shows 4 cards in the other suit. (I guess it might be sometimes a 5-card heart suit when the overcall was 1♠).

 

These responses apply over 1♦ as well:

 

1♥ and 1♠ promise 5 card suits.

 

1NT response to 1♣ usually shows about 6-9 points and opener should pass

 

2♣ response is 10-11 points, no 5-card major (or 4 card over 1♣, generally start of an invitational sequence, though opener may pass with a minimum hand and long clubs.

 

2♦ response is 12+ game-forcing, no 5 card major (or 4-card over 1♣), not necessarily diamonds.

 

2♥ and 2♠ are weak jump-shifts, about 6-9 points, 6 card suit. Opener should pass, though (after opening 1♣) holding a maximum and 4-card support, you might make a game try.

 

___________________________________________________________________

 

Some situations that need discussion still:

 

When 1♦ is overcalled with 1♠, does Dbl show 5 hearts (pointless to show 4) or a general willingness to compete? Does 1NT promise a stopper. 2♣ could be used as a general competitive bid but would it necessarily be 10-11 points now?

 

Perhaps Dbl should be around 7-9, 2♣ is 10-11 and 2♦ 12+. 2♥ will show a 5-card suit but will be 10+ thus forcing though not to game.

[Free]

Looks like modified MAF :)

[pclayton]

With a limited 2♣ opening (good!), responder shouldn't have to scrape up a response on a 4 count, except, but may need to because of the (possibly) short 1♣/1♦. This is one of the advantages to playing the lighter 2♣ opening.

 

I don't care for the 2N opening. Fundamentally its flawed with 18-20. 20-21 is bad enough to play opposite a bust.

 

Re: the 1♣ opening; could that show a 4-4-5-0? Yikes!

 

Other than that the ideas are intriguing.

 

I can see you working canape into this structure. Maybe used the 2 of a major as a single suiter opener, instead of 2 suiters. I've been playing a lot against Jimmy and Mike's canape and it can be a bitch to defend against.

[EarlPurple]

Looks like modified MAF

Don't know MAF. I do know there is a system already where you open 1♣ with a 4-card major and 1♦ without one (is that MAF?) and may buy the notes.

 

With a limited 2♣ opening (good!), responder shouldn't have to scrape up a response on a 4 count, except, but may need to because of the (possibly) short 1♣/1♦. This is one of the advantages to playing the lighter 2♣ opening

You might pass the 2♣ opening with xx xx xx QJTxxxx but I can't see you passing it that often. With 4 points you will often have game, but if after you bid 2♦, partner shows one of the stronger hands, you may pass with absolutely nothing.

 

I don't care for the 2N opening. Fundamentally its flawed with 18-20. 20-21 is bad enough to play opposite a bust.

Then you'll probably go 2 or 3 off, hopefully (and most of the time) undoubled. Partner is slightly less likely to be totally bust (you have 2 points less so that's 2 more than partner might hold). And if partner is totally bust he may at least have a 5-card major to run to. Maybe we'll lose on this particular part-score deal, although it may play no worse than declarer in his 3-2 fit in his prepared minor at the other table.

 

Re: the 1♣ opening; could that show a 4-4-5-0? Yikes!

Yes it could. Although I said the 1NT response is about 6-9, you might bid it also with just 5 points, hoping it plays better than clubs when partner doesn't have them. 1NT is to play and partner is expected to pass.

 

Other than that the ideas are intriguing.

 

I can see you working canape into this structure. Maybe used the 2 of a major as a single suiter opener, instead of 2 suiters. I've been playing a lot against Jimmy and Mike's canape and it can be a bitch to defend against.

The "canape" only occurs in that you bid 1♣ to show the 4-card major even if you have a longer minor. You can show the minor suit later.

 

With a single-suiter weak 2 opening you open 2♦ (a multi bid).

[EarlPurple]

Yes I've found MAF now here: http://web.inter.nl.net/hcc/M.A.F/index0.htm

 

Yes, my 1-bids are similar, I'll have to look at that system in more detail. Mine is supposed to be very simple though.

[luke warm]

because of my playing the weiss club, i believe if i was designing a system now i'd start with a weak nt AND canape 1 bids... way back when i was looking at changes to 2/1, those pesky 4522 hands kept bothering me... i didn't want to open them 1nt, and opening 1m didn't seem much better... this solves that problem, tho in a pinch i'd open 1m with 4 spades and 4522 hand... can't get hurt there, playing walsh

 

i like the idea of all bids but one being limited, always have... and if structure over interference is good enough, the lower that strong bid the better... the only thing we can't do is open a preemptive 2 bid, tho i'm wondering if 2d can be 11-16 with 6+ diamonds OR a weak 2 in a major... i thought i'd miss those more than i have

[EarlPurple]

Actually the idea for this system came from a topic in another forum about what would be the simplest system to teach.

 

So toying with ideas my first thought was the simplest way to find the major suit fits. This system. like MAF, is designed to find major suit fits more often than not. In particular responder can show for certain a 5-card suit after partner opens 1 of either minor, something not present in mainline systems. Opener can happily support with 3 knowing they have found an 8-card fit.

 

The next thing is to keep almost all the bids limited. Have 1-bids sound, 2-level bids multi covering both the pre-emptive and the strong hands.

 

In simulation the only weakness I have found is the 2♥ and 2♠ bids. When partner has reasonable values, 2 card support of the bid major and big support of the minor, do you risk looking for the minor? Odds are that partner does not have a fit with your minor.

 

Example:

 

You open 2♠ with this most pure of hands:

 

♠ KQJxx ♥ xx ♦ xx ♣ KQxx

 

nice 11 count, all the points in your suits. Doesn't qualify for 1♠ bid in our system.

 

Partner has

 

♠ Ax ♥ xxxx ♦ Ax ♣ Axxxx

 

and 5♣ is cold (as is 4♠ probably). But if partner has 5 spades and 4 diamonds (which you fear he does) then where are we going with this? (If you don't like opening 2♠ with 11 points, then move one of the jacks across and you get the same problem).

 

None of my simulations have yet run into any problems opening 2NT. Yes you could run into a disaster, but it doesn't happen often enough to worry about.

[Flame]

This is like MIDMAC, Maf or the french system WEB.

Midmac 2c/2d are natural 6 cards suits.

1nt is the strong bid 20+

Also the system is based on a evaluation system which is abit more agressive then your style.

take alook at the short version in Gijs page (you can buy the detailed version for 12$)

I played it with Gijs ,it was fun and we had good results.

[GijsH]

Thanks for plugging my MIDMAC book Flame!

The link is: http://www.midmac.tk

[helene_t]

With 18-20 ballanced you could open 1♣ and rebid 1NT over p's 1♦, couldn't you? Normally you would show your 4-card major so 1NT should be a strong bid.

 

I wonder if this system is allowed, I thought the WBF definition of a HUM was a.o. a 1-in-a-suit opening that shows length in either of two known suits unless played in combination with a strong 1♣. You may have a problem with the 1♣ and 1♦ opening. If that's the case, you could open 2♣ with a 6-card clubs and put the semi-GF hands in the 1♣ opening.

 

How would you open a ♠-♥♥♥-♦♦♦♦♦-♣♣♣♣ with more than 17 points? (Well, that's a problem in many systems with a limited 1♦ opening).

[EarlPurple]

With 18-20 ballanced you could open 1♣ and rebid 1NT over p's 1♦, couldn't you? Normally you would show your 4-card major so 1NT should be a strong bid.

Yes, you could. Needless to say you'll need "checkback" now to find if you both have the same major, i.e. if you have one. (Presumably without one you are still opening this 1♣). What if partner does not respond 1♦? 1♥ and 1♠ would be showing 5-card suits? Must I now jump to 2NT with no support, and to 3 of his suit with support? (or make some other jump bid to show a strong hand)

 

How would you open a ♠-♥♥♥-♦♦♦♦♦-♣♣♣♣ with more than 17 points? (Well, that's a problem in many systems with a limited 1♦ opening).

At the moment, you'd open 2♣ then 3♦ over the likely 2♦. Yes it is a pain that you are so high and haven't shown partner your clubs.

[helene_t]

With 18-20 ballanced you could open 1♣ and rebid 1NT over p's 1♦, couldn't you? [....]

Yes, you could. [....] What if partner does not respond 1♦? 1♥ and 1♠ would be showing 5-card suits? Must I now jump to 2NT with no support, and to 3 of his suit with support? (or make some other jump bid to show a strong hand)

It looks as if the 1♥/♠-responses to 1♣ show 0-33 HCPs. Is that correct? In that case you would probably have to bid an artificial 2♥ over 1♠ with a strong ballanced hand without a 3-card spade support. Responder could sign off in 2♠.

[EarlPurple]

I haven't put it in the system, but I have assumed that you might play weak jump shifts over 1♣ and 1♦ openings, so 1♣-2♥ and 1♣-2♠ would be bid on many of the weak hands with a 6-card or longer suit. You cannot claim LAW-protection as partner is not guaranteed doubleton support, but you might take your chances with it anyway even on a very weak hand.

 

1♣-2♦ is a game-forcing response with no 4-card major so it cannot be used on weak hands with diamonds. So with such a hand, you might agree that 1♣-1♦-1M-2♦ shows simply diamonds and does not guarantee 4-cards in the other major, but then what do you do with 6 diamonds and 4 spades if partner is 4-4 in the majors, and you'd have to decide whether or not this sequence is forcing. The other option, if you don't want to pass 1♣, is to bid 1NT and hope it plays well.

 

The system has been primarily designed to find major-suit fits and it does it very well but it makes it harder to find minor fits at part-score level. That might be fine when the opps don't compete, as you can often end up in 1NT and will often make it when the hand belongs to you. When the opps do compete, it's probably easier now to compete in the minors, using good-bad 2NT to differentiate between game-going hands and competitive hands.

 

By the way, I don't believe the system would not be licenced at the 1-level. What might not be licenced are the multiple 2-bids, so anyone wanting to play it should obviously check first.