[Jinksy]

Has anyone tried/got a strong view on whether a non-2/1GF Fantunes system would work, esp as an easier to pick up version for people new to the system?

It seems like one of the most painful aspects of the system is after 1M and to a lesser degree 1D, the 1N bid is almost devoid of information, putting you at the two level without any sense of whether you’re already too high or whether game is on. And since it’s forcing, your rebid is going to contain very little info for p.

Learning Gazzilli seems like it would help a lot, but a simpler approach – that might even be more effective? – is just to let responder bid 2/1 on hands analogous to those that would in 2/1GF, but with a K or so subtracted from the upper point range (I like to play 1 level bids as slightly stronger than in Gerben’s version, more in line with the 14+ on the online Fantoni Nunes card). So 1S P 1N would show 0-6 or so, and opener could pass it with clean conscience (thoroughly wrongsiding the contract, but making the defence’s life very hard with such an obscure hand hidden).

1C P 1N might stay the same, since (at least in the simplified version I'm learning), it’s already got a lower upper limit (0-7 IIRC).

Thoughts?

[Free]

First remark: 1♣-1NT is GF in the standard version.

Second remark: making the auction GF makes the bidding very easy. Responder doesn't have to show he has true GF values. All 1-level responses are 0-9HCP (except 1♣-1NT) which also makes it easy for opener. There's no need to invite with 16-17HCP, because responder with 8-9 will invite himself. Just learn Gazzilli (strong hands 18+HCP), it's a simple method which works briliant. If anything, this system requires it.

[Gerben42]

I play that with an advanced partner. We play Fantunes to stop him opening 2♦ for both majors on crap hands, but for the rest we kept "his system", which includes light 2/1 bids (9+). It doesn't cause much trouble, even though it is not optimal.

[helene_t]

IMHO to get the most of the advantage from playing ultra-sound opening bids you really need multiple bids by responder that create an immediate GF. Playing Fantunes with 2-level responses as only a one round force sounds like the disadvantages of Fantunes without the advantages.

Why do you think playing non-2/1 will make the system more accessible? Non-2/1 is actually very complicated since you never know which follow ups are forcing or not. Which of these are forcing:
A: 1♠-2♣-2♦
B: 1♠-2♣-2♠
C: 1♠-2♣-2NT
D: 1♠-2♣-3♣
E: 1♠-2♣-2♠-2NT
F: 1♠-2♣-2♠-3♠
G: 1♠-2♣-2♦-3♦
H: 1♠-2♣-2♦-2NT
I: 1♠-2♣-2♦-3♠
J: 1♠-2♣-2NT-3♣
K: 1♠-2♣-3♣-3♠
L: 1♠-2♣-2♥-3♥
M: 1♠-2♣-2♦-2♠
N: 1♠-2♣-2♦-3♣
O: 1♠-2♣-2♠-3♣

In SAYC the answer is (A,B,C,D,I,K), in Biedermeier Groen it is (I,K), in Biedermeijer Blauw it is (A,I,K), in Biedermeijer Rood it is (A,D,I,K,L), at my local club where people play acol it is probably (A,C,I,K), in Lawrence's original system it is (A-M). with a random partner on bbo who just says "SA" or such I would assume (A,I,K) but would probably be wrong. And now there are probably someone who will tell me that I am wrong about several of them.

[MickyB]

What do you open with 5M332 15+? It affects my answer. I assume it is normally 1M, which makes things slightly more complex.

[Jinksy]

MickyB, on 2011-September-17, 05:22, said:

What do you open with 5M332 15+? It affects my answer. I assume it is normally 1M, which makes things slightly more complex.

At the moment with 15-17(18) we open 1C, only opening the major with stronger hands, for precisely this kind of reason.

[Jinksy]

helene_t, on 2011-September-17, 04:35, said:

IMHO to get the most of the advantage from playing ultra-sound opening bids you really need multiple bids by responder that create an immediate GF. Playing Fantunes with 2-level responses as only a one round force sounds like the disadvantages of Fantunes without the advantages.

Why? Clearly when you do have a GFing hand, the sooner you GF the better, but it seems equally as clear that when you don't, the more available bids you have to describe your hand, the better. How can we be confident the first consideration outweighs the second?

In general any 2/1 GF system seems to suffer to me on hands where you have around a 12-13 count (or whatever's equivalent to take you to 24/25 points opposite P's min) and most of your length in 1 or both of the minors. Now when you GF and find that you have a misfit and a wide open suit in NTs it seems like a disaster.

[Jinksy]

helene_t, on 2011-September-17, 04:35, said:

IMHO to get the most of the advantage from playing ultra-sound opening bids you really need multiple bids by responder that create an immediate GF. Playing Fantunes with 2-level responses as only a one round force sounds like the disadvantages of Fantunes without the advantages.

Why? Clearly when you do have a GFing hand, the sooner you GF the better, but it seems equally as clear that when you don't, the more available bids you have to describe your hand, the better. How can we be confident the first consideration outweighs the second?

In general any 2/1 GF system seems to suffer to me on hands where you have around a 12-13 count (or whatever's equivalent to take you to 24/25 points opposite P's min) and most of your length in 1 or both of the minors. Now when you GF and find that you have a misfit and a wide open suit in NTs it seems like a disaster.

[helene_t]

Jinksy, on 2011-September-22, 12:32, said:

Why? Clearly when you do have a GFing hand, the sooner you GF the better, but it seems equally as clear that when you don't, the more available bids you have to describe your hand, the better. How can we be confident the first consideration outweighs the second?

I can't be 100% sure but ...

The GF hands are more frequent playing 14+ openers than playing 11+ openers. And many if not most strong pairs playing 11+ openers play 2/1 GF so it can't be grossly inferior.

Now there is a problem with that argument, namely that playing Fantunes the non-GF bids have to accommodate the 0-4 han-ds that would have passed if you were playing standard. For 1♥-1♠ and 1♦-1M it doesn't matter since those would be 0-9 regardless but the 1M-1NT response now becomes 0-9, as opposed to 5-12 in standard. This is a wider range so it would help to limit the 1NT response to 7 points. I concede that.