[TylerE]

People often play 5 card majors...but how about 5 card minors?

How does this sound? Haven't given any thoughts yet to the followups, but I like it! The strong hands will be awkward to an extent, but I think this approach has merit, especially for matchpoints)

1♣ - 11-15, 5+ ♣ or 16+ Unbalanced (Promises singleton/void)
1♦ - 11-15, 5+ ♦ or 16+ (Semi) Balanced (6M322, 5422, 7222, etc ok)
1♥ - 11-15, 4+ ♥
1♠ - 11-15, 4+ ♠
1NT - 13-15 (Pass with 11-12 and No 4CM, can open 1m with a 5 bagger)
2♣-2♠ - Preempts
2NT - Both Minors, 11-15

[kenrexford]

But, why? What are the "merits?"

[TylerE]

My ideas are as follows:

4 card majors (Not saying any more, don't feel like starting that holy war today)
Entire 2 level natural and preemptive.
Forcing minor openings that are more sharply defined than Polish, but less preemptiable than precision.

[awm]

In general "multi-meaning" type bids are much more vulnerable to preemption. You can't just define a bid as "either A or B" (where A and B are completely different) and expect to somehow survive in the very frequent competitive auction.

Polish Club is actually quite clever, because since the 1♣ opening is always either strong or balanced it is fairly safe for responder to bid with a mediocre hand and a long suit (because opener will either have a fit or game values). This isn't the case here at all, where the options for 1m that aren't strong tend to be shapely hands which could easily be a total misfit for responder.

It is also far from clear how the follow-ups are supposed to work. It seems like you may have to adopt a canape style, since otherwise it is hard to distinguish in auctions like 1♦-1♥-1♠ whether opener has 5+♦ and 4♠ or has 5+♠ and 16-18. And bidding when opener has a strong hand with a minor will be very ugly.

[jdonn]

I think Adam put it perfectly. The minor suit openings would work very badly both in an out of competition.

[the hog]

Seriously don't see the point of this.

[kenrexford]

It seems rather premature to come up with an opening bid structure based on some random alternative without any specific theorectical reason and without any specific follow-up sequences. I see nothing wrong with taking a premise and running with it. Generally, that premise should be based on some theoretical goal, but there is some merit to simply pursuing a train of consciousness and thinking through what might happen if you branch out into new theory.

For example, it might be worthwhile to construct an entire approach where you open with your third-best suit. Why? I have no idea. However, if I were to actually develop a set of opening bids based upon this premise and then test out how the ensuing auctions would play out, I might suddenly discover some fascinating principle that was previously unknown and that somehow creates some amazing result. Great! Brainstorms might work.

However, this simple approach seems unlikely to really stir things up in any interesting way. If I see this correctly, it is not canape, thus limiting the 1M openings to 5-card suits or 4-card if balanced. So what? Then, 1NT is limited to 2344/3244 just about, or 3334/3343. What does that gain, except rarely opening 1NT? The minor openings look like a disaster waiting to happen. I gain the dubious advantage of a weak 2♣ opening, when people who have no other meaning for 2♦ other than weak often play something different just because they think a weak 2♦ is a waste of time. There will be no eureka moments here -- just a realization that some auctions are difficult for no particular reason or reward elsewhere.

[MickyB]

Agreed, the 1C opening would be *terrible*. 1D ok perhaps.

In a similar vein, but more workable IMO -

1C strong
1M can be four if 11-12 bal or unbal with clubs (possibly also with diamonds)
1D nat, or 1D either minor if you want 2C to be a preempt

Likewise -

1C/1D nat unbal or better minor on 17-19 bal. Alternatively, short club and unbal diamond.
1M nat unbal or 11-13 bal
1N 14-16, or 13 with no 4M

Trouble with that is you start wanting to open three-card majors, which is generally frowned upon

[NickRW]

TylerE, on Nov 11 2008, 01:27 AM, said:

People often play 5 card majors...but how about 5 card minors?

How does this sound? Haven't given any thoughts yet to the followups, but I like it! The strong hands will be awkward to an extent, but I think this approach has merit, especially for matchpoints)

1♣ - 11-15, 5+ ♣ or 16+ Unbalanced (Promises singleton/void)
1♦ - 11-15, 5+ ♦ or 16+ (Semi) Balanced (6M322, 5422, 7222, etc ok)
1♥ - 11-15, 4+ ♥
1♠ - 11-15, 4+ ♠
1NT - 13-15 (Pass with 11-12 and No 4CM, can open 1m with a 5 bagger)
2♣-2♠ - Preempts
2NT - Both Minors, 11-15

Not really sure why you want to do this - not sure if you can provide a good argument for what it gives you over other multi way club systems.

Also not sure you need 2NT as a constructive bid. Also not sure you can make a sensible response/rebid structure with 2♣ and 2♦ as weak only. Also not sure you can live with the strong options all starting at 16 - this is very low for a multi way club system given that you have to sort out the weak from the strong in the ensuing auction.

I think maybe, just maybe you can knock this into shape:

1♣ - 11-16, 5+ ♣ or 17+ Unbalanced (Promises singleton/void) or 16-18 bal
1♦ - 11-16, 5+ ♦ or 17+ (Semi balanced 6M322, 5422, 7222, etc ok) or 19-21 bal or 24+ bal
1♥ - 11-16, 4+ ♥
1♠ - 11-16, 4+ ♠
1NT - (12)13-15 (Pass with 11 or average 12 and No 4CM, can open 1m with a 5 bagger) [You simply can't pass better looking 12s - you'll miss games]
2♣ = 11-15, 6♣s no 4cM (16 with 6♣s goes via 1♣, 3♣ rebid)
2♦ = multi, weak 2 major or 22-23 bal or 17+ 4441 shape
2♥, 2♠, 2NT - 2 suited pre-empts

But I'm not going to do the responses and rebids for you - but I think this stands a chance of working. Whether it is actually any sort of improvement over Polish or AUC would still remain to be seen.

Nick

[Flameous]

I know a pair who plays 5 card minors for fun. It's basicly all natural approach but major suit opening can be 3 cards. They have very good follow ups and the system seems to work well occasionally. They are also really good players so I guess that helps a lot