[kes]

After some experiments and experiences the bidding system MALEX
(Major's Length Exact) has these opening bids

1C each hand with 13+ HCPs

Rule of 18 up to 12 HCPs :
1D with 4= Hearts & 0-3 Spades - may be balanced , may have a longer minor
1H with 4= Spades & 0-3 Hearts - may be balanced , may have a longer minor
1S with 4+ Hearts & 4+ Spades - with 6+4= Majors you may decide to open 2M

With 8 - 12 HCPs :
2C with 5= Hearts & 0-3 Spades
2D with 5= Spades & 0-3 Hearts
2H with 6+ Hearts & 0-3 (may be 4) Spades
2S with 6+ Spades & 0-3 (may be 4) Hearts

With 10 - 12 HCPs :
1N semi-balanced , not 4333 (4432 , 5422 , 5332 , 6322) , no 4card Major
2N with 5+ Clubs & 5+ Diamond - may be 4= D & 5= C , but not 5= D & 4= C
3m with 6+ cards

Pass up to 12 HCPs (good 12 are always 13) and
with 31= Ms & 5=Ds & 4=Cs (no place to open , sorry)
and with 4333 (4= minor) and with each other ugly hand

[Free]

Isn't your 1♣ opening extremely hard to handle? Even without interference, opener has a lot of hands he needs to be able to bid... From the moment opps intervene it may even be easier...

[kes]

Quote

Isn't your 1♣ opening extremely hard to handle?

I don't think so . After a positive response opener will look for a fit in a major .
Afterwards opener can ask for the (nearly) exact strength . His partner will answer in steps - about 11 HCPs - about 13 HCPs - about 15 HCPs - and so on .
Now opener can settle in game or go on investigating slam .

[hrothgar]

kes, on Aug 24 2007, 04:36 PM, said:

Quote

Isn't your 1♣ opening extremely hard to handle?

I don't think so . After a positive response opener will look for a fit in a major .
Afterwards opener can ask for the (nearly) exact strength . His partner will answer in steps - about 11 HCPs - about 13 HCPs - about 15 HCPs - and so on .
Now opener can settle in game or go on investigating slam .

I hardly know where to start:

I am going to restrict myself to two comments

1. There is a reason why forcing passing systems were based on a pass rather than a 1C opening. It’s extremely difficult to build a good system for all 13+ HCP hands when you start with pass. I can’t imagine doing after a 1C opening. The fact that you dismiss this so blithely and superficially gives me real pause for concern
2. Are you seriously advocating using a step response system to show hand strength measured in HCPs? I’ve seen a lot of systems that suggesting this type of structure. Very few of them were any good. The best of the lot were systems like ultimate club that were good for their day, but are considered quite dated.

Have you actually played a well designed light opening system? I’d seriously recommend investing a few months playing a system like Carrotti, Regress, or No Name before you invest much time trying to reinvent the wheel.

[Free]

kes, on Aug 24 2007, 02:36 PM, said:

Quote

Isn't your 1♣ opening extremely hard to handle?

I don't think so . After a positive response opener will look for a fit in a major .
Afterwards opener can ask for the (nearly) exact strength . His partner will answer in steps - about 11 HCPs - about 13 HCPs - about 15 HCPs - and so on .
Now opener can settle in game or go on investigating slam .

Bidding after strong hands is always, whatever method you use, easy... The question is: can you handle weak and semi positive responses as well? Can you handle intervention (whatever kind your opps playing - constructive/destructive/intermediate)? There not much room after 1♣-(3X)-... to investigate, you don't know anything about the Majors, responder doesn't know what to do,...

Making a system is not so much about getting a good opening structure and a scheme for a strong responder, these days it's all about handling intervention! You can show your exact Major length for all 8-12HCP hands, great, but what if you get competition and you don't have a fit? What if you need to find a minor suit contract, with or without intervention? What if they screw up your nice relays?
You don't give any response structures for weak responders, no intervention handling, nothing. If you play a light opening system, you'll get even more intervention than when playing sound, so this should really be a priority!

[kes]

Quote

1. There is a reason why forcing passing systems were based on a pass rather than a 1C opening. It’s extremely difficult to build a good system for all 13+ HCP hands when you start with pass. I can’t imagine doing after a 1C opening. The fact that you dismiss this so blithely and superficially gives me real pause for concern
2. Are you seriously advocating using a step response system to show hand strength measured in HCPs? I’ve seen a lot of systems that suggesting this type of structure. Very few of them were any good. The best of the lot were systems like ultimate club that were good for their day, but are considered quite dated.

Have you actually played a well designed light opening system? I’d seriously recommend investing a few months playing a system like Carrotti, Regress, or No Name before you invest much time trying to reinvent the wheel.

Ad 1 : Malex uses relays (of course) , but it is not a relay-system ; we decided not to use the complete stuff .
That is the reason for having enough place to investigate the exact strength in steps still below 3N .
And that may be the reason , it cannot be a good system (as you told) .

Ad 2 : Poorly expressed by me - please replace "HCPs" by "points" . Important is having a question for strength during the bidding with step-answers - narrow steps , just two points . The advantage is , that the first positive (nearly game-forcing) answers to 1C are easier . They show (something about distribution and) just 11+ HCPs - the exact strength will be investigated later (and only if nessesary) .

No , I didn't reinvent the wheel . I just play a bidding-system in which the hands in the main area (up to 12 HCPs) with -
4 Hearts - 5 Hearts - 6+ Hearts - 4 Spades - 5 Spades - 6+ Spades - both Majors - all are strictly separated . Is that new ?
No , there is nothing new in bridge . I have studied the description of many systems , all systems I could find at the Internet .
Now I can't remember , from where I got this idea - may be , you can tell me ?

[kes]

Hi Free - many questions , here are some answers :

Of course , Malex has an answer-system to 1C also for a weaker partner .
An example : 1C - then with 5-7 P 2C (with 5=Hs) / 2D (with 5=Ss) / 2M (with 6+cards) .
You recognize the structure of the openings at level 2 ; we use these relays as often as possible in our system .

If we open 2C (with 5=Hs) / 2D (with 5=Ss) / 2M (with 6+cards) and there is no fit , we look similarly to EHAA
in this situation . I think our bids are a little bit better , because we seperate 5= / 6+ and 2C / 2D are non-forcing
- all on the cost of the minors , that is evident .

Because of (40 - 13) : 3 + 13 = 22 < 25 reasonable opponents will expect us to have only a partscore .
Because of the low-level 1C reasonable opponents will not exclude , that they have still game .
Therefore reasonable opponents may bid , but they will not throw trash into the bidding .
BUT if an opponent has the hand for 1C (3S) , YES that hurts .