[benlessard]

Those who want to browse my system you can go to

http://bridge.downag...tem=sj9y7vnv0pi

(edited)

Hand we got monday.

Qxx
Ax
KJxxxx
xx

AKxx
xxx
Axxx
AQ

1C--------2C(6D w of GF)
2D(15-20)-2H (bal GF)
2S(D keyc)--3K (2noQ * and at least slightly slammish)
3H(Kh ?)----3S(no)
4D(Kc ?)----4H(no)
4S (Qh?)----4Nt (no)
5C (extras ?)---5H (yes Q of S)
6D --wich was worth all the MP

OUR 1nt structure isnt there however. im in the process of updating it.

[Crunch3nt]

So if partner had SJ and CJ instead of SQ, you would have got bottom in 5D?

[Phil]

Slam is good, WD. Would you have the same auction if responder held Qx Axx KJxxxx xx?

Feels strange to ask for keys and then spiral scan for top cards without more reference to shape.

[akhare]

FWIW, in our system it would have gone:

1♣ (16+) - 2S (6+ diamonds, no short)
2N (ask) - 3S (3=2=6=2, 6 QPs, A=3, K=2, Q=1)
4C (DCB) - 4N (odd AKQ parity in ♦, ♠, ♥, even in ♣)
6♦ -> must be K♦, Q♠, A♥ because no other combination of 6 QPs with that parity is possible)

Note that slam would be hopless after a 4♦ response after 4♣ (which would mean either a junk ♦ suit or KQ of ♦, both of which aren't very interesting).

Also, in this case, opener decided to go on holding only 18 QPs, but the known 10 card diamond fit makes it possible to scramble to 5D.

[benlessard]

the 2C bid is weak or GF so opener acceptance of transfer is limited to about 20 pts. If responder has no slam aspiration he just lie about the number of keycards, when he showed 2 he has at least some slight slam aspiration, i did took some time before bidding 5C (because i could have passed 4Nt) but i figured that partner had to either have the Q of S+1J or a 7th diamonds.

Quote

Slam is good, WD. Would you have the same auction if responder held Qx Axx KJxxxx xx?

Feels strange to ask for keys and then spiral scan for top cards without more reference to shape.

Yes, If partner is balanced and we have a fit i wont be able to know where is 3 card suit is (or if hes 7222). In my experience, being able to keycard lower is a greater advantage than getting full shapes when you have a sure fit, but in the end its tough to tell. However when opener has a stiff D and a suit of his own, responder will be able to show fit or not.

EX

1C--1Nt(clubs)
2C--2D (bal Gf)
2S (S suit but not 6 good S & often stiff C) here responder options are no fit, no fit but my clubs are AKQTxx or better, responses in keycard, if fit in S or Hx and extras values.

[benlessard]

Im going to do all the hands from this article http://bridgewinners...am-trial-finals

Vul:All
DealerW

NORTH
9
T 7 6
A Q 5 3
T 9 8 7 2

SOUTH
A 8 6 5 3
A J 5
void
A K Q J 6

p-1S
1Nt-2Nt (S+C low short 18-22)
3C-3Nt 5305
4H--4S (14)
5C--5H ( i had 4!, + Q trumps no K of S
5S (K of H ?)--5Nt (no)
6C

when opener rebid 3nt its possible that 3nt is better than 5C but i think aiming for 5C is reasonnable, here slam is unlikely because of D waste but it cost nothing to check just in case partner is perfecto. Here relaying with 3C is a bit dangerous in case partner response is 6304 (wich i still hope 5C is going to be better than 3nt)

Note here that for us its 1S opening (11-15 or 18-22) despite playing strong clubs.

[awm]

A few points/questions:

1 Who are you bidding with? In general it is easier to construct a reasonable auction to the top spot looking at both hands than to bid single dummy with a real partner.

2 What is happening on the many hands you don't publish?

3 Different systems have different blind spots. These hands are probably selected because they are tough for "expert standard" bidding; no surprise they are easy using a different approach (but your approach may have trouble on some other hands).

4 It will not surprise anyone (on this forum) that relays are great for unobstructed slam auctions. Usually when relays suffer is in competition or in "Choice of game" auctions where location of values matters.

5. Your particular methods seem to suffer on hands that are "invitational" over one of the ranges. For example, a balanced 11 opposite 1s is not enough to GF relay but too much to make a preference bid. A balanced 5 can easily make game opposite a 20-22 1s but if you relay youmust GF opposite 18 too.

6. There is also some question about freak hands; for example a 6-5 12 count might make game over 1s-1n-2d-2h but you don't really want to show 18-22 there.

With all that said, I do think your methods are among the best and most interesting proposed on this forum. I'm just not sure these bidding challenge "triumphs" mean anything.

[benlessard]

I agree with 99% of what you say especially the part where you say

Quote

your methods are among the best and most interesting proposed on this forum

1&2 -Most of the hands come from bidding practice and some come from play, we practice a lot more than we play unfortunatly so 75+% of the hands come from bidding practice. Some of the interesting hands we made a bidding mistake in real life (1- complex system,2-big parts of the system are new 3- 1 year only partnership) and i bid what i think should happen if we knew the system better. But im not afraid to show the close call we have. Honestly i much prefer not choosing my hands, so any hands you would find interesting to bid it will be my pleasure. (I strongly believe confirmation bias is very hurtful for improving at bridge & in an any aspect of life, its the easiest way to illusionate yourself.)

3- I know the blindspot of my system very well (we still play/practice a lot of hands) so of course when a hand fall into the hole, im biased in the sense that ive got little to gain by publish it (unless im looking to solve a problem). Many of the holes ive accepted them and im willing to live with them so for "ME" its not a problem to be biased there. What is more important for me is that the hand is likely to teach something rather than trying to mean something like selling an opinion or a bridge system. Also my system have some unusual feature that I like to highlight rather than interesting hands where our trajectory is going to be similar to everyone else. Of course I expect nobody to believe hands or comments in any forum by anybody to be totally unbiased.

4 We do better in competition than most strong clubs at a 99% certitude. I know very well that non-competive hands are the exception and that 75% of the imps will swing from competitive bidding.

Our drawbacks in comp bidding are
a- opening 1Nt with any bal 5M 12-14 V&NV This is a big penalty and is by far our biggest handicap, nothing come even close IMO.
b- not really able to open subminimum, I belive being able to open any hands that you would consider to be a sound overcall is a plus but im not a LOB aficionado
c- vulnerable to 4th seat bidding. LHO overcall we do very well, 1x-(P)--relay--(Y) we do fairly worse than average.
d- A bal 15 pts is a very frequent hand type to have in 1C, I sometimes envy those who have a strong clubs+strong NT.
e- 11-14 hands that get upgraded by 2/3 pts based on opps bidding we clearly have no solution for this.

5-

Quote

5. Your particular methods seem to suffer on hands that are "invitational" over one of the ranges. For example, a balanced 11 opposite 1s is not enough to GF relay but too much to make a preference bid. A balanced 5 can easily make game opposite a 20-22 1s but if you relay youmust GF opposite 18 too.

Over 1C/1D we are very well placed and miss very few great games (in non-comp bidding), over 1M we know the opener second suit before making a GF or pref decision. We can also inv with perfect 10/11 but in the end I believe its not a really profitable proposition. I give little values to inv bid that put you at the 3 level, I think you could play standard american without limit raises (GF or constructive raise) as long as you have drury in 3rd 4th seat and find the losses surprisingly acceptable. IMO the inv that are really worthwhile & necessary are the INV that allow you to play 2M.

6-

Quote

6. There is also some question about freak hands; for example a 6-5 12 count might make game over 1s-1n-2d-2h but you don't really want to show 18-22 there.

At first i thought it would be a quite costly hole in the system but so far the losses are acceptable. A very top notch director told me its tolerated to open 1C with 13 and a shapely 2 suiters (ive never found a clear definition on a Strong clubs in the ACBL/WBF rules BTW i know at one point it was pure 16+HCP) any hand willing to play game vs 2 random A + with 13 pts 6/5 we open 1C and for 11-12 we hope the hand is a big misfit or the opps get into the bidding (70%+ at least is my estimation) We pre-alert our 1C and say that frequently upgrade.

7- Other drawbacks of the system

a-is we give a lot of infos on some non-slammish hands when we wrongside. Its sometimes totally ridiculous and very random. But since we rightside very often in the end its ok. I strongly believe that transfers in all suits over a strong club are must.

b- weak Nt vul in 3rd seat. Im a big fan of weak nt but red in 3rd seat its a loss.

c very complex system, so errors are going to be more frequent, no way to avoid it no need to deny it. Luckily my partner has a great memory, is young and is already a top notch card player so im patient.

D- For Nationals or top leagues otherwise non GF relay make it totally non-midchart.

E- Many of the inferences are tough to spot (or in practice unavailable) & i sometimes do feel some parts of the system lead to a bit of unethical situations.

[straube]

I've always enjoyed reading your posts, but I have some criticisms of your system.

1) not sure what you do with 4414
2) 2C has been called the Achilles heel of strong club systems. Your 2C doesn't promise 6 clubs and you will frequently lose superior and major suit fits. Forced opening of 2C with AKxx Kxx x Qxxxx seems wrong.
3) 1C at 15 (and apparently you shade with distribution) means that you will have more difficulty establishing a GF than if 1C was stronger. You'll have more 1C-1D sequences than I would like.
4) 1C-1D, 1H or 1S or 1N or 2C all as nf is very wasteful. Whatever one's system, 1C-1D, 1H as nf is wrong use imo.
5) I don't understand dividing hands between good and bad and using 1C as the intermediate. If instead you limit your non-club openers to 14 or 15 or so, then responder has more freedom to preempt against them (1H-4H for example or 1D-3C to play as another) or pass when game seems unlikely (seems your responder must bid with a 5 ct in order to protect against the big hand). Also, if you used limited (and not 2-way) bids, then when opener bids and bids again in competition, responder can infer a distributional hand instead of a giant hand.
6) You can't open balanced 11s. At some point it's just bad bridge to open a marginal hand. At the same time, one mark of a good system is that it can successfully handle light openings. When yours can't handle balanced 11s, it's like an admission that something is wrong.

I think you should do a frequency analysis for your openings and see what you get. I think your 1D will be less frequent than is optimal and your 2C will be more frequent than is optimal.

[Crunch3nt]

Hi Ben,

I agree you play interesting methods and do appreciate that you share them on this forum.

"Our drawbacks in comp bidding are a) opening 1NT with any bal 5M 12-14 V&NV This is a big penalty and is by far our biggest handicap, nothing come even close IMO."


In crunch we duplicate 11-14 5332 major shapes in the relays, holder can choose to show as either a) balanced (ie in our weak 1NT opening) or b) as unbalanced single-suiters 1st step. This makes the 6322s and 6331s come out higher, but 5332s are so common we find the trade-off worth it.

[benlessard]

1) not sure what you do with 4414

with 12-14 we open 1nt, not a big loss althought sometimes we play 2D in 5-1 fit. I like to have 2D/2H/2S as preemtive natural and hate most form of multi and really hate flannery/2D precision/mexican/French GF 2D. I undestand the need for a system to have some 2 level constructive bids but for me its a loss that i can avoid at a lower cost IMO.

with 15+ its 1C very little cost here. At one point the 18-22 range was here http://bridge.downag...D.php?bod=1HP1S
as you can see 2S and over is H+S GF and we have the space (the 5602 is at 3nt and could easily be at the 4 level). But its an exception and ive decided to remove as many exceptions as possible keeping only the {5440} shapes as changing the whole shape order.

Quote

2) 2C has been called the Achilles heel of strong club systems. Your 2C doesn't promise 6 clubs and you will frequently lose superior and major suit fits. Forced opening of 2C with AKxx Kxx x Qxxxx seems wrong.

2C is a weakness, especially with most 2C responses structure wich IMO are really weak. But with a good structure i prefer to have 1D = 4 and 2C =5 than 1D =2 and 2C = 6. the important point over a 2C opening is allowing responder to be able to inv and stop at 2M with a 4M. 2M in 4/3 fit play better than 2Nt since opener is likely to be (134)5. Look at our responses scheme there is a lot of interesting stuff there.

Quote

3) 1C at 15 (and apparently you shade with distribution) means that you will have more difficulty establishing a GF than if 1C was stronger. You'll have more 1C-1D sequences than I would like.

We have huge amount of 1C-1D-1H starts and that why i think our system is very strong as we are very well placed after this start (at the cost of sometimes play 2H in 4/3 fit) . Since many hands 16-22 with Diamonds, 16-22 with both m, 18-22 with long M are not in 1C, our 1C really tend to be more balanced or 15-17 than reg precision so we can afford to lower the range to get a similar frequency. At first i wasnt convinced of 1C at 15+ but now im convinced its superior (if you play weak Nt). Its also surprising the amount of games our opponents missed because they like to bids like zombies so they dont have the way to show real values.

Quote

4) 1C-1D, 1H or 1S or 1N or 2C all as nf is very wasteful. Whatever one's system, 1C-1D, 1H as nf is wrong use imo.

responder is inv & he will bid again or has 4H 0-bad 5 pts so why not being able to stop at 1H/1S ? Often the opps balanced and go -500 against a partscore (even -1100 against an unbidabble game). True GF hands (even if responder has 0-1 pts and misfit) are really rare so it doesnt bother me if ive got (13)54 with 25 pts and im forced to bid 3D its going to be tough for us but it wont happen often. Most important imo is to deal with much more frequent case of almost GF hands. 1- being able to bid the best game on those & not missing slams and to be able to stop at 2M 3m if partner is broke. I ve played 1C-1D-1H as forcing for much more longer time than NF (and i was also considering 1H forcing as obvious) and we the first session we switched to NF we got like 3 good boards just by being able to stop in 1H making or because they balanced too hard. After we did pick up some obscure case where its profitable, then ive considered 1H as NF an great improvement of our system. But youll need to tried it otherwise you wont be convinced. In the end its a small detail as im sure both ways are playable.

Quote

5) I don't understand dividing hands between good and bad and using 1C as the intermediate. If instead you limit your non-club openers to 14 or 15 or so, then responder has more freedom to preempt against them (1H-4H for example or 1D-3C to play as another) or pass when game seems unlikely (seems your responder must bid with a 5 ct in order to protect against the big hand). Also, if you used limited (and not 2-way) bids, then when opener bids and bids again in competition, responder can infer a distributional hand instead of a giant hand.

lets say your partner open 1S (11-15) and you have 7 pts with 2344 do you pass ?
Why would a 2542 with 19 pts would be better in a strong 1c than 1H are you afraid of playing 1H making 4 ?
1S--(2H)--?? You have 9-11 pts without a S fit. Do you prefer partner to be 10-15 or 11-14/18-22 ?
1S--(3H)--?? you have 8-11 pts with a S fit. Do you prefer partner to be 10-15 or 11-14/18-22 ?
1C---(2H)-- ?? you have 5 pts and 4333 (you pass)-- opener bid 2S and its back to you so you raise, but are you really happy about it ?
1H--(3S)--- youve got a heavy 4H bid (16-17 HC&D) do you prefer him to be 10-15 or 11-14/18-22 ?
+
The key point is that a little extra is tough to bid but a lot of extras or no extras are easy to bid. In standard 1H-1S-?? having 11-14 or 18-22 isnt a problem, while having 15-17 might lead to play 2nt in misfits hands or to play 2H/2S making 4. This is especially true for a system like mine where opener can make a forcing rebid. Its a sort of pre-Gazilli if you like.

1H--(X)--4H (can be heavy to unlikely to make it) is ok as long as opener has enough extras to make the 5 level safe. So 12-14/18-22 is working ok here.
with total preemptive crap we have to tell partner that we expect him to be 18-22 by bidding 4D)

As for 5 count after 1M opening we have a weak single raise (3-7) and some strong 21-23 pts are in 1C followed by 2D to show near GF hands (like a French strong 2C with a M). the biggest problem are strong both M where 1S all pass while 4H is making but luckily for us the trend now is very agressive balancing.

Quote

6) You can't open balanced 11s. At some point it's just bad bridge to open a marginal hand. At the same time, one mark of a good system is that it can successfully handle light openings. When yours can't handle balanced 11s, it's like an admission that something is wrong.

Ive got stubborn ideas about weak bal hands.

A- passing bal 12 pts is barely playable (so i much prefer 12-14 and 1C at 15 rather than 13-15 and 1C at 16)
B -in 3rd seat vul weak NT is playable but costly.
C- opening 11 bal vul is a losing proposition (except maybe in 4th seat or if the suit you open happen to be a 5 card suit in a nat system)
D- NV weak is superior to strong NT or to 14-16.
E- 10-12 1Nt isnt working against good opps (destructive values are good but not enough constructive value for the system as a whole + theyll draw inferences on the hands you dont open).
F- with 11 bal i much prefer 1Nt than 1D. (Why opening light in a non-suit that give no lead direction value and little preemptive effect) Of course if you are Meckwell or pros at "terrorist" bridge its a different story.
G- removing a weak bal from 1D + overcrowding 2C is less costly than playing neb 1D if you have a good system of responses over a natural 1D 4+. IMO Polish club will be a deadly weapon the day theyll start playing some real stuff over their 1D opening.

[the_clown]

Ok, I play a strong club and there are a few things that I like in my system, that I cannot do with yours.

The ability to open light- the constructive bidding is more difficult for the opponents while we can find our fit rly fast and probably make them guess.
Playing 2♦- weak 2 in 1 major and 2M as two-suiter 4-9 HCP has the same goal.

When partner opens 1♥ I can bid with 4♥ 0 count and 5card support and with 13 count and 4333. And if I have nothing and I see they have game, I can respond a forcing 1NT or 1♠, knowing that partner will never force me beyond the 2 level.

Even more important, when partner fails to open a strong club, and ops interfere I can just bid game in our fit and I dont need to worry about missing a slam. In a natural system I probably will have to start cuebidding and the auction may get very ugly.

Being forced to open NT with a low singleton is not a great prospect as well, besides it will often wrongside the contract if p is the one who has the ♦ stop.

In my system I play 1♦ is 0+ and accept that we will sometimes miss our ♦ fit im competition, but we can enjoy all the other advantages.

[straube]

Alright, I'm still being critical but I'll stop after this. Thanks for your reply and I'll address the same numbered points.

1) 4414 in with NT is a small loss (burying two 4-cd majors as well as the stiff diamond flaw), but seemingly every system has a hand pattern that just won't fit. Not a big deal.

2) I still think that the sixth club is important. Opening 1D with 2+ or even 0+ diamonds is hardly preemptive at all compared to opening 2C with 5 clubs. I mean responder can with little strength introduce a major over 1D. Our sixth club means we have an anchor suit. We can explore for a 5/3 or 6/2 major suit fit before returning to clubs. We can make a constructive raise (like 9-11) with only two clubs. I don't think you can do that safely. For example, you have Axxx xxx AJxx xx. Is that strong enough to bid 2S (GI 4/5 spades)? Our constructive raise helps opener to compete for the part score or even bid game with the right sort of hand. What if responder has GI 3352 shape? Let's say I respond 2D (is that what you do?) and opener rebids 2N showing he likes hearts and spades. Well, could he be counting distribution when I really just want values? Even if my examples are off, the point is that your 2C opening by definition does not furnish sufficient point count/anchor suit to support fit-finding...even if your continuations look good.

4) You have a huge amount of 1C-1D, 1H starts but you feel that the 1H bid should not be forcing. I think it's just a fact that 1C-1D (negative) auctions are difficult for a partnership. Nothing is known about the shape of either hand and no GF has been created. The partnership is very vulnerable to a preemptive move by RHO. So the fewer the 1C-1D auctions the better but the more of them you will have with a 15 pt club. Now lots of folks play 15 or even lighter, but it does have this downside. As far as 1C-1D, 1H being forcing or not forcing...the issue isn't whether you have more wins or losses letting responder pass your 1H bid. The issue is how you've decided to use the entirety of your 1C-1D, 1H sequence. Generally (and especially at low levels), there is a huge cost of designing proximate (S1) bids as nf. Here's how our system is set up....

1C-1D establishes a GF and hence 1H etc is forcing
1C-1H (5-7 hcps), 1S establishes a GF
1C-1S (0-4), 1N is nf but 1C-1S, 2L are all forcing bids
1C-1N and higher establish a GF

so the only S1 bid that is nf is after a 0-4 response...and that has to do with the attractiveness of 1N as a place to play.

or here is TOSR

1C-1D, 1H promises 20+ and is forcing
1C-1D, 1S promises a minor and is forcing

or Meckwell

1C-1D, 1M is forcing

But it looks like you don't have a forcing bid except 1C-1D, 2D which is almost but not quite GF. You're rather high up there though and you haven't quite entered a GF or shown suits.


5) You were asking if I had 2344 7 ct would I pass partner's 1S opening? Somewhat frequently, depending on vulnerability and just what those points are. Game is unlikely so the question is whether I can improve our contract or hurt the opponents' contract by bidding. I would even more frequently pass with 5 or 6 hcps and I don't think you're able to do so. You asked why I would prefer to open 1C with a 19 ct 2542. Because (in part) I can show my exact hand pattern and cards to partner or learn his exact hand pattern and cards (for us, the first to start patterning out is the slave hand). More important is that I open 1C with those big hands so that partner knows when I don't that I have a more modest hand. 1C is vulnerable to competition and I've understood that we lose a little on 1C hands so as to gain more on the non-club hands. The other day I held a prime 12 ct with 3-cd support for partner's heart opening and nearly bid 4H directly; this would put the opponents to the guess as to whether I'm bidding game on strength or length and it would prevent the opponents from learning more about my partner's hand (like a side suit for example). It just wouldn't be smart to do that if partner could have 21 points or so. Sure, he could guess to bid on, but bidding 4H would have deprived him of room to describe his shape/shortness/controls.

In general, I like to avoid "two-way" bids because they don't empower partner to consume unwanted bidding room. In effect, if one makes a two-way bid, then partner's better option is to bid cheaply (relay) so that he can learn which hand is held. Your system has these two-way bids of like 11-14 or 18-22 and responder has to cater to both. He has to bid with minimal strength in case partner is strong and he can't preempt for the same reason.

6) You might be right about thinking that opening balanced 11 cts vulnerable is a losing proposition. I'm not sure about it. You still have the issue of NV 11s.

[rbforster]

the_clown, on 2011-December-09, 23:14, said:

Ok, I play a strong club and there are a few things that I like in my system, that I cannot do with yours.

The ability to open light...

When partner opens 1♥ I can bid with 4♥ 0 count and 5card support and with 13 count and 4333.

I don't think this is a fair criticism. I like to open light, but when you do, your range gets pretty wide for 1 level openers, say (9)10-15(16), to the point where bouncing to game on decent hands can still miss lucky slams. I don't know the right thing to do (i.e. is exploring for a rare slam worse because it guides the defense the rest of the time and costs overtricks?), but it's much less clearly a loss. You can have one or the other, each of which are advantages, but I don't think you should count both together as drawbacks.

That said, I think something that's not obvious from the Ben's bidding system is how well it will hold up in competitive situations. Having a big split-range in values for your openers means that almost all of your competitive decisions will be very easy. That's certainly not something that can be said for any other standard system, precision or otherwise.

[benlessard]

A quick way to look at my system is a try to maximize the space wasted by limited opening (9-15). When 1S--2S, 1S--limit raise or 1S-1Nt after these common start there is huge amount of bids that have no use or very little frequency. The easiest way to maximize this space ive found is to put some strong hand into opener so that game & slam are possible and that some sequence are brought back to life.

What is the drawback to open 1M rather than 1C with a 6M hand & 18-20 pts ?
partner cannot pass with 6-9 pts and no fit ? people rarely pass anyway.
partner cannot pass with 5-7 and a fit ? once again passing is rare anyway.

The real drawback imo are you cannot psych and reply 1nt with 0-4 pts.
You cannot do fast arrival without 4/5 trumps support.

The advantage of opening more naturally and freeing some space in 1C are just way way more important.

For the rest, 4414,3523,2533,5233,5332 can easily be relayed at the cost of complexifying the relays. The 4414 can be put as H+C & If you are facing a GF responder the chart is here http://bridge.downag...=1HP1SP1NP2DP2H the big 4414 is also not a problem. Some of the balanced hand can be squeeze here, http://bridge.downag...bod=1HP1SP1NP2D (2S as exact 2524 is an overkill as we can keyc ask about Q of trumps and 2 kings and stop at 4H)
But for me its simply not worth it unless in a 3+ years partnership our system is complicated enough as it is.

I still think opening 1NT with 5M is a weakness but there is a lot to be said for always having unbalanced openings. There is nothing worse in competitive bidding than when partner COULD have a balanced hand with no extras. 1M-(X)- our preempt can be more agressive. 1D--(1S)--?? we can raise with 3 cards etc. We also can play DSIP/penaltish double at low level (semi penalty i called them) 1S-(2C)-you can X with a wide range of hands here and nail them very often, with 11/14 (5431) partner will bid 2D/2H/2S or pass with 3C and a stiff with a {5422} its bid the 4 card or pass with 4 clubs with 6=2=2=3 its 2S or pass) In defense we can find out opener stiff very rapidly , its an inference much more useful for defense than for declarer. Unbalanced opening & split range mean its easier to play negative free bids(we dont right now). 1S--(2C)-- you can bid 2red with a good suit but with a wide pts (5-11) (if partner has 18-22 everything will go fine, if hes minimum with fit he can still raise since hes got a stiff somewhere (opps will not let you play in 2M with a 9 card fit very often anyway) with no fit hes got an easy pass since 14 vs 11 with misfit wont be a great game (the annoying hand here is a 13-14 pts 6M322 where its not fun to raise and see partner with 5-8 pts or to pass and see your doubleton allowing ruffs and you make 4. In general we can make 2 card raise with much more safety than regular system. IMO it take a lot of playing time to understand all the inference that can be drawn in the bidding from unbalanced hands.

The fact I use 2D as nat preempt is a choice not a necessity, its surely possible to play 2D precision if you think opening 2C with 4315 or 1H/1NT with 4414 is bad/awful, maybe my choice is wrong, but for me its a tradeoff not a weakness the same way that I consider not having 2D preemptive available a tradeoff rather than a systemic weakness. I have a complex relay system with unusual opening and still have 2D/2H/2S/2Nt available for preempts rather than filling holes so i can gladly accept some drawback elsewhere, there is some great system with little flaws but they have no preempts at the 2 level so if you believe 2 level preempts are effective its pointless to compared them together.

as For 1H--4H auction the vast majority of time its 11-14 vs 8-15, When opener got a strong hand 6 is often there or 5 is completly safe anyway. Total crap 0-5 pts vs 11-14 1H-4H vs 1H/4D wont stop them from bidding very often IMO. 4D allow them to cuebid 4H or double 4D but imo its not a big deal. Also note that its really in 1st seat that its an issue, once both opps had the opportunity to bid going fast rather than going slow is almost pointless at Imps.

If you want to practice we are looking for opps mostly wednesday night at 10pm EST. If you want to practice some bidding hand send me a PM it will be my pleasure. (the system appear automatically on bbo server so you dont need to learn or remember anything) I know there is a lot of thing in my system that make unclear sense and are probably inferior. But i also know there are some real gems in it