[straube]

Some of my friends use the following structure after 1C

.....1D-0-7 or 8+ 4441s
..........1H-stronger
...............1S-second negative
.....1H-8+ spades
.....1S-8-13 bal
.....1N-8+ clubs
.....2C-8+ diamonds
.....2D-8+ hearts
.....2N-14+ bal
.....other-natural semipositives

I dislike this because (for example) it leaves too much room for S+ and too little for H+. It also leaves S1 for opener to show a fit (which sacrifices S1 for when they don't immediately find a fit).

Remembering that they are not interested in relaying, I thought to recommend something like...

.....1D-8+ GF other
..........natural
.....1H-5-7 any
..........1S-artificial GF
..........other-natural and limited
.....1S-0-4
..........2C-artificial GF
.....1N-8+ 5+/4+ majors
.....2C-8+ six diamonds
.....2D-8+ six hearts
.....2H-8+ six spades
.....2S-8+ six clubs
.....other-4441s

Keeping in mind that both utility and simplicity are goals, any suggestions? I'd also be interested in Meckwell Light if someone has a good description.
Thanks

[Siegmund]

Quote

...I dislike this because (for example) it leaves too much room for S+ and too little for H+...

Well, why not explore the most obvious fix for that?

1D = hearts, strength undefined
1H = spades, strength undefined
1S = negative without a major.

Opener rebids 1C-1D-1H or 1C-1H-1S if he's willing to be dropped there by a bust (for instance, opener had a strong notrump pattern), otherwise bids his own suit.

I explored this in the context of a system where 1C=15+ balanced or 18+ unbalanced (which turned out to have too low of a frequency for the 1C bid for me to be happy with the rest of the system.) It might be somewhat less appealing if it leads to more wrongsiding than it does transferring. Similarly it might be more appealing if 1C included more weak/medium balanced hands, or even a fullfledged 2-way club.

Incidentally, are we only concerned with your friends' tastes and memory capacity, or also with system regulations?

[akhare]

Actually, since they aren't relaying, how about:

1D: Any SP
......1H is GF
..........Add continuations of choice

1H: GF spades OR GF clubs OR bal 8-13
......1S asks
..........1N = GF spades
..........2C = GF clubs
..........2D+: Bal hands, a la Stayman
1S: Junk hand
1N: GF Hearts
2C: GF Diamonds
2D: GF 4441
2H: 14+ bal

BTW, I am guessing that they require 5+ for the major suit showing responses..

[straube]

akhare, on Sep 12 2010, 11:30 PM, said:

Actually, since they aren't relaying, how about:

1D: Any SP
......1H is GF
..........Add continuations of choice

1H: GF spades OR GF clubs OR bal 8-13
......1S asks
..........1N = GF spades
..........2C = GF clubs
..........2D+: Bal hands, a la Stayman
1S: Junk hand
1N: GF Hearts
2C: GF Diamonds
2D: GF 4441
2H: 14+ bal

BTW, I am guessing that they require 5+ for the major suit showing responses..

Yeah, they want 5-cd majors.

That structure gives more room to the semipositives and less to the GF hands.
I would be concerned that after 1C-1H opener is almost compelled to rebid 1S to find out what sort of hand responder has. If instead opener showed his own suit (say 1C-1H, 2H) then responder would have to show what he initially had as well as react to opener's suit.

I kind of like your idea of using 1N to show a 5-cd major.

Maybe

1D-GF other
1H-semipositive
1S-neg
1N-GF 5H
2C-GF 5S
2D-GF 6C
2H-GF 6D

[blahonga]

How about

1D negative
1H bal or 4441
1S hearts
1N spades
2C clubs
2D diamonds

or

1D negative
1H no 5+major or 6+minor
1S hearts
1N spades
2C 6+ clubs
2D 6+ diamonds

[petterb]

straube, on Sep 12 2010, 06:19 PM, said:

Some of my friends use the following structure after 1C

.....1D-0-7 or 8+ 4441s
..........1H-stronger
...............1S-second negative
.....1H-8+ spades
.....1S-8-13 bal
.....1N-8+ clubs
.....2C-8+ diamonds
.....2D-8+ hearts
.....2N-14+ bal
.....other-natural semipositives

From an old (2006) Meckwell CC:

1H 8+ 5+ spades OR 11-13 balanced
1S 8+ 5+ hearts
1N 8+ 5+ clubs
2C 8+ 5+ diamonds
2D 8-10 balanced
2H 14+ balanced

[Free]

If you don't want relays, wtp, respond your number of controls and bid natural...

[bhtf]

like that following structure after 1C (15+), a little "spécial",
but very comfortable for me :

.....1D 0-5 or FG 9+
.....1H by 4+, 1S by 4+, all 5-9 & not GF
.....2C by 5+, 2D by 5+, all 6-8 & not GF
.....1N-flat 6-8H, not forcing
.....2H 4144, 2S 1444 : 6-8
.....2N 55+ minor 6-9
.....others : solid AKQ by 6+

and after 1C-1D :
.....1H by 4+, 1S by 4+, all 15+ & not forcing
.....2C by 5+, 2D by 5+, all 15+ & not forcing
.....1N-flat 15-20, or 444 short major 17-20, not forcing
.....2H 4+, 2S 4+, 3C 5+, 3D 5+ : all GF
.....2NT GF, 25-27 or 31+
.....3H 4144, 3S 1444 : GF
.....3NT 28-30

other flat hands openings:
1NT or 1D : 12-14 [*]
2NT 21-22
2D Multi then NT : 23-24

[*] or white : 1NT 11-13
[*] or red : 1NT 14-16, no S 4 (like Chagas)

simplicity ? i think so, but ........ )))
friendly all

[straube]

petterb, on Sep 13 2010, 02:58 AM, said:

straube, on Sep 12 2010, 06:19 PM, said:

Some of my friends use the following structure after 1C

.....1D-0-7 or 8+ 4441s
..........1H-stronger
...............1S-second negative
.....1H-8+ spades
.....1S-8-13 bal
.....1N-8+ clubs
.....2C-8+ diamonds
.....2D-8+ hearts
.....2N-14+ bal
.....other-natural semipositives

From an old (2006) Meckwell CC:

1H 8+ 5+ spades OR 11-13 balanced
1S 8+ 5+ hearts
1N 8+ 5+ clubs
2C 8+ 5+ diamonds
2D 8-10 balanced
2H 14+ balanced

I like Meckwell, but the continuations are probably more complex than they would like.

[straube]

Siegmund, on Sep 12 2010, 10:55 PM, said:

Quote

...I dislike this because (for example) it leaves too much room for S+ and too little for H+...

Well, why not explore the most obvious fix for that?

1D = hearts, strength undefined
1H = spades, strength undefined
1S = negative without a major.

Opener rebids 1C-1D-1H or 1C-1H-1S if he's willing to be dropped there by a bust (for instance, opener had a strong notrump pattern), otherwise bids his own suit.

I explored this in the context of a system where 1C=15+ balanced or 18+ unbalanced (which turned out to have too low of a frequency for the 1C bid for me to be happy with the rest of the system.) It might be somewhat less appealing if it leads to more wrongsiding than it does transferring. Similarly it might be more appealing if 1C included more weak/medium balanced hands, or even a fullfledged 2-way club.

Incidentally, are we only concerned with your friends' tastes and memory capacity, or also with system regulations?

They'd be concerned about system regulations.

I think the difficulty with that structure is that it doesn't create low level forces.
For instance 1C-1D, 1H seems like it needs to be a forcing bid (whatever its meaning).

[straube]

blahonga, on Sep 13 2010, 02:51 AM, said:

How about

1D negative
1H bal or 4441
1S hearts
1N spades
2C clubs
2D diamonds

or

1D negative
1H no 5+major or 6+minor
1S hearts
1N spades
2C 6+ clubs
2D 6+ diamonds

I kind of like those for simplicity. I was hoping, however, to have an immediate semipositive because it ought to help them prepare for competition.

One thing they do is...

1C-1S (bal 8-13), 1N=exactly 16. With more than 16 they usually bid 2C (stayman/strength ask). They like that they get to play 1N with 16 opposite 8 but I think this sequence could be used for something better.

[hrothgar]

straube, on Sep 13 2010, 02:19 AM, said:

Keeping in mind that both utility and simplicity are goals, any suggestions? I'd also be interested in Meckwell Light if someone has a good description.
Thanks

As I recall, Berkowitz's book has a good treatment of non-relay Precision.

Have you considered just pointing your friends at that?

[kayin801]

hrothgar, on Sep 13 2010, 08:52 AM, said:

straube, on Sep 13 2010, 02:19 AM, said:

Keeping in mind that both utility and simplicity are goals, any suggestions?  I'd also be interested in Meckwell Light if someone has a good description.
Thanks

As I recall, Berkowitz's book has a good treatment of non-relay Precision.

Have you considered just pointing your friends at that?

My regular partner and I play our club system without relays with Berkowitz-Cohen at its core and love it. It's simple and flexible.

[straube]

kayin801, on Sep 13 2010, 11:49 AM, said:

hrothgar, on Sep 13 2010, 08:52 AM, said:

straube, on Sep 13 2010, 02:19 AM, said:

Keeping in mind that both utility and simplicity are goals, any suggestions?  I'd also be interested in Meckwell Light if someone has a good description.
Thanks

As I recall, Berkowitz's book has a good treatment of non-relay Precision.

Have you considered just pointing your friends at that?

My regular partner and I play our club system without relays with Berkowitz-Cohen at its core and love it. It's simple and flexible.

What's the outline of Berkowitz-Cohen?

[hrothgar]

straube, on Sep 13 2010, 08:58 PM, said:

kayin801, on Sep 13 2010, 11:49 AM, said:

hrothgar, on Sep 13 2010, 08:52 AM, said:

straube, on Sep 13 2010, 02:19 AM, said:

Keeping in mind that both utility and simplicity are goals, any suggestions?  I'd also be interested in Meckwell Light if someone has a good description.
Thanks

As I recall, Berkowitz's book has a good treatment of non-relay Precision.

Have you considered just pointing your friends at that?

My regular partner and I play our club system without relays with Berkowitz-Cohen at its core and love it. It's simple and flexible.

What's the outline of Berkowitz-Cohen?

It's ably documented in a book by Berkowitz and (Manley?)

http://www.icanfixyo..._Precision.html

[straube]

I looked at Berkowitz-Cohen and I don't think that their initial responses are better than what my friends play now. Berkowitz-Cohen wrong-sides everything.

A compensating advantage to B-C is that opener's next bid is not acceptance of a transfer. But one could use 1C-2C (diamonds), 2D (hearts) as does Meckwell.

[Diogen_]

Strong Club - FG+ responses:

1D: NEG
1H: FG+, 5+S
1S: FG+, 5+H
1NT: FG+, 5+M-4+M
2C: FG+, (4441); 4M-5+m (2D ask inv Ms)
2D: FG+, BAL
2H: FG+, 5+C, w/o 4+M, UNBAL
2S: FG+, 5+D, w/o 4+M, UNBAL
2NT+ = whatever you like

Strength solution after 2 level responses: 2NT=any S/T, rest nat w/o S/T


Strong Club Semi-Positive responses:

1D: NEG; INV, w/o 4+M
1H: INV+, 4+S
1S: INV+, 4+H
1NT: INV+, 4+M-4+M
2C: FG+, 8-10; 14+, BAL, w/o 4M
2D: FG+, 11-13, BAL, w/o 4+M
2H: FG+, 5+C, w/o 4+M, UNBAL
2S: FG+, 5+D, w/o 4+M, UNBAL
2NT+ = whatever you like

[straube]

Diogen_, on Sep 13 2010, 05:40 PM, said:

Strong Club - FG+ responses:

1D: NEG
1H: FG+, 5+S
1S: FG+, 5+H
1NT: FG+, 5+M-4+M
2C: FG+, BAL (2D STAY, inv Ms)
2D: FG+, (4441)
2H: FG+, 5+C, w/o 4+M, UNBAL
2S: FG+, 5+D, w/o 4+M, UNBAL
2NT+ = whatever you like

Strength solution after 2 level responses: 2NT=any S/T, rest nat w/o S/T


Strong Club Semi-Positive responses:

1D: NEG; INV, w/o 4+M
1H: INV+, 4+S
1S: INV+, 4+H
1NT: INV+, 4+M-4+M
2C: FG+, 8-10; 14+, BAL, w/o 4M
2D: FG+, 11-13, BAL, w/o 4+M
2H: FG+, 5+C, w/o 4+M, UNBAL
2S: FG+, 5+D, w/o 4+M, UNBAL
2NT+ = whatever you like

FG responses-I think the 1H response needs to be reserved for something that occurs more frequently that a S+. I'm also concerned about having to bid 2S with something like Axx x KQxxx Qxx because we're running out of room too fast. Using 1N as 5M/4M seems duplication because this structure lets responder name his 5-cd major cheaply enough.


Semipositives-I would worry here about being able to enter a GF after any of the 1-level responses.

[straube]

ok. Let me attack this another way. Let's say I was married to these club responses....

1D-GF
1H-any 5-7 hcps
1S-any 0-4 hcps
other-GF

How would you assign 1D, 1N, 2C, 2D, etc?

[kayin801]

straube, on Sep 13 2010, 01:17 PM, said:

I looked at Berkowitz-Cohen and I don't think that their initial responses are better than what my friends play now. Berkowitz-Cohen wrong-sides everything.

A compensating advantage to B-C is that opener's next bid is not acceptance of a transfer. But one could use 1C-2C (diamonds), 2D (hearts) as does Meckwell.

B-C have a section in their book that suggests transfer responses as a potential alternative to natural responses. This is what I started out using.




If you liked those particular responses to 1C (I don't) then I think Richard's MOSCITO has similarish responses to start, which could then be tweaked? I could be horribly mistaken though and I'm definitely far too lazy to look up if I'm right or not