[Wayne_LV]

Has anyone played or played against Chilli?

http://chillibidding...undamentals.htm

On the surface, it appears to effective and the author of the above website claims to have success with it in tournaments.

Curious if anyone has taken a serious look at Chilli and has opionions as to whether it is worth an attempt to learn.

One seemingly attractive aspect of Chilli is there are few rules to memorize.

Wayne

[gwnn]

Call me opinionated but 1♦=21+ sounds like a bad idea to me. If you are interested in 1♣ and 1♦ both showing only strength, nothing about distribution, why not try magic diamond, which makes much much more sense?

[Free]

Everyone who plays a home made system claims it's perfect. But in reality many just aren't constructed with a solid skeleton, just like this one... 1♣ 16-20 and 1♦ 21+, that's just madness, not to mention the 2♣ opening!

[rory74]

I tried the system some years ago. There are some seriuos flaws in it, although I can't quite remember which ones. The author told me there is a new version. Especially the 1♣ and 1♦-opening. So I think you should contact him and ask for the improvements.

Rory74

[Gerben42]

I've played and played against Magic ♦ which is basically the same but better. I can claim this as it was designed not by me but by someone way smarter

However my version is much simpler for simple souls like myself!

http://www.geocities...dge/magicd.html

[the hog]

Just had a look at this and totally agree with Frederick. This is a very poorly designed system. Everyone thinks their own system is wonderful and it usually isn't. Magic D on the other hand is a real system. Why not stick to something tried and true and build on sound fundementals.

[pbleighton]

1D is a waste of a bid and 2C seems unplayable.

I'm not sure what the advantages are supposed to be.

Peter

[jtfanclub]

Free, on Aug 30 2007, 04:30 PM, said:

not to mention the 2♣ opening!

Since 'only one bid fits', 2 clubs cannot have-

A 4 card major
A 6 card diamond suit
Balanced or semi balanced.

In theory, the only 4 card club suit then you could have is 5431: 5 diamonds, 4 clubs, 3-1 in the majors.

If you define 5431 3-1 in the majors as semibalanced (I would), then there is no possible club suit with 4 cards, and the only possible ones with only 5 cards would also have 5+ diamonds.

So 2 clubs does look playable, it's just the description is lacking.

[MickyB]

jtfanclub, on Sep 5 2007, 08:02 PM, said:

Free, on Aug 30 2007, 04:30 PM, said:

not to mention the 2♣ opening!

Since 'only one bid fits', 2 clubs cannot have-

A 4 card major
A 6 card diamond suit
Balanced or semi balanced.

In theory, the only 4 card club suit then you could have is 5431: 5 diamonds, 4 clubs, 3-1 in the majors.

It's clearly better to stick the (31)54s into 2♦.

[jtfanclub]

MickyB, on Sep 6 2007, 07:03 AM, said:

It's clearly better to stick the (31)54s into 2♦.

I'm not sure. If 2 diamonds is an inquiry of some sort, then it's better to stick it somewhere else. If 2 diamonds is suit preference (the 2C opener will have 3+ diamonds a very large % of the time) then I suppose it will live just fine in 2 clubs.

You're always going to have some garbage hands that you'd just as soon ignore so as to increase the purity of your bidding system. I am not convinced that making 2D and 2C both somewhat impure (6+ most of the time) is better than 2 diamonds pure and 2 clubs very impure. You just bid as if partner had promised 5+ clubs and 3+ diamonds and if doesn't have that, you'll find out soon enough.