[NaeosPsy]

Any comments or tips on this system?
1♣ - 15+HCP or 8-9HCP, balanced
1♦ - 10-14 HCP, 5+♥
1♥ - 10-14 HCP, 5+ ♠
1♠ - 10-14 HCP, 2+ ♦
1NT - 12-14 HCP, balanced
2C - 10-14 HCP, 5+ ♣
2D - 10-14 HCP, any three-suited hand with short ♦
2H - 5-9 HCP, 5+ ♥
2S - 5-9 HCP, 5+ ♠
2NT - 5-9 HCP, 5-5 minors
2H and 2S pre-empts are done sanely, shitty hands with 10 HCP can be opened with 1C.

[wclass___]

It is all fun until someone gets hurt.

It might be fun to play 1♦/1♥/1♠ this way, but natural is clearly better. Same with including 8-9 in 1♣.

As other bids are defined i think your 1♠=4♦441 or 5+

[Free]

Welcome to the forums.

Just a couple of thoughts:
- So you pass with 10-11 balanced?
- I think 1♠ is unplayable.
- It's impossible to analyze the 1♣ opening without any response scheme. A system is the combination of a lot more than just an opening scheme...

[steve2005]

i suspect you open 1♠ with 11-12 balanced, would fit.
can't see how this would be playable. i agree with Free
1♦ with 2+♦'s is hard enough to play but starting your major suit search at 2 level would be hard amongst other things

[NaeosPsy]

steve2005, on 2012-February-24, 14:54, said:

i suspect you open 1♠ with 11-12 balanced, would fit.
can't see how this would be playable. i agree with Free
1♦ with 2+♦'s is hard enough to play but starting your major suit search at 2 level would be hard amongst other things

Yeah, i worried about that too.
That opening is mainly for pre-empting the opponents. All responder's suit's in level 2 are pretty weak, 1NT shows 11+, after that, i can show if I have 5+diamonds or a hand without 5+suit.

[NaeosPsy]

Responses to 1♣:
1♦ – 0-9 HCP; any
1♥♠– 10-15 HCP; 5+
1NT – 10-15 HCP; balanced
2♣♦ – 10-15 HCP; 5+, unbalanced
2♥♠ – 6-9HCP; 6+
2NT – 16+HCP; any

Responses to 1♣ - 1 ♦
1♥ – 8-9 HCP; balanced
1♠ – 15-19 HCP; any
1NT – 15-17HCP, balanced
2♣♦♥♠ - 20+HCP, 5+, asks for support

Responses to 1♣ - positive answer.
NT – 8-9 HCP; 15-17; 20-21; etc.
Raise – 8-9 HCP, fit. (with jump – 15+ HCP)
Any other suit – 15+ HCP; 5+ , asks for support.

Responses to 1♣ - 1NT
2♣ – Stayman ; a)15+HCP, b)8-9 HCP, both majors 4-4
2♦ ♥ ♠, 3♣ –15+HCP; 5+
2NT – 15+ HCP; balanced

[straube]

NaeosPsy, on 2012-February-24, 12:05, said:

Any comments or tips on this system?
1♣ - 15+HCP or 8-9HCP, balanced
1♦ - 10-14 HCP, 5+♥
1♥ - 10-14 HCP, 5+ ♠
1♠ - 10-14 HCP, 2+ ♦
1NT - 12-14 HCP, balanced
2C - 10-14 HCP, 5+ ♣
2D - 10-14 HCP, any three-suited hand with short ♦
2H - 5-9 HCP, 5+ ♥
2S - 5-9 HCP, 5+ ♠
2NT - 5-9 HCP, 5-5 minors
2H and 2S pre-empts are done sanely, shitty hands with 10 HCP can be opened with 1C.

1C is overloaded. We play 1C is 16+ and it's loaded enough. Not going to add bal 8-9 to the mix. Btw, it's horrible to have to reply 2N to 1C with 16+

1D and 1H are underloaded. Contrast to Moscito which 1D=4+ hearts and 1H=4+ spades

1S is overloaded.

What's the rational for your system? What are you trying to accomplish?

[NaeosPsy]

straube, on 2012-February-24, 16:21, said:

1C is overloaded. We play 1C is 16+ and it's loaded enough. Not going to add bal 8-9 to the mix. Btw, it's horrible to have to reply 2N to 1C with 16+

1D and 1H are underloaded. Contrast to Moscito which 1D=4+ hearts and 1H=4+ spades

1S is overloaded.

What's the rational for your system? What are you trying to accomplish?

1C opening is to stop opponents from blocking it, becouse they can block themselves, if we have the weak opening. 2NT is GF for 8-9, and Slam Try for 15+

[relknes]

NaeosPsy, on 2012-February-24, 16:28, said:

1C opening is to stop opponents from blocking it, becouse they can block themselves, if we have the weak opening. 2NT is GF for 8-9, and Slam Try for 15+

a sweedish club (11-13 balanced or 17+ any) has the same idea, in principle, as your 1♣ without being so overloaded. You might want to look into a sweedish club with a 2 way diamond response (where 1♦ is either a hand so weak it can't force to game even oposite 17+ or else so strong that it can force to game even oposite 11-13). This avoids using up quite so much space when you are exploring slam. To reach 2 NT without having agreed on a suit is trouble if you find yourself in a misfit. Shape is as important (probably more important, actually) as the point total.

[benlessard]

If you have transfers opening you should make them forcing and have some strong hands in those.

AKQxxx
AKxx
Ax
x

I much rather open it 1H (showing S) than to open a strong 1C. You might wrongside but if you relay the declarer hand will be totally unknown.

PS bal 8-9 into 1C is a joke.

[relknes]

benlessard, on 2012-February-24, 21:04, said:

PS bal 8-9 into 1C is a joke.

To be fair, it isn't totally unheard of. The "Tangerine Club" uses the same 1♣ opener. Not saying it's good, just that it is not quite as crazy as we have made it seem.

[straube]

relknes, on 2012-February-25, 00:13, said:

To be fair, it isn't totally unheard of. The "Tangerine Club" uses the same 1♣ opener. Not saying it's good, just that it is not quite as crazy as we have made it seem.

Here's the link confirming that the 1C bid is the same. The responses seem the same as well.

http://www.bridgeguy...gerineclub.html

I think the club structure is very bad. I'm not a fan of Polish Club either, but this seems like it would create even more uncertainty. Responder basically has to bid as if opener has only 8-9 balanced and that's very unfortunate when opener actually has the big hand.

[Cthulhu D]

You'd be much better off imho with:

Switching to a 4 card major majors first approach
changing the balanced inclusion in 1C to 10-11

You could also remove 4441 hands into 1C and 1NT, but I doubt this is a winner

Now 2C and 1S promise either 54 in the minors or a six card suit and your major suits openings promise an unbalanced hand, and are so likely to be 5 you can still aggressively raise on 3.

This resolves the sticky major suit search issue, and lets you aggressively raise diamonds when it's right.

If you then change the 1C - 1D response to 14+ or 0-7 you are under much less pressure the balanced inclusion can pass the semi positive responses with no fear of missing game.

Opening balanced 10 counts doesn't seem to be winning bridge either so you could change to 11-15 openings and 1C 11-13 bal and 1NT 14-16.

A lot of that makes it Swedish club lite, but it us still very pushy. NV vs V when you need the pre-empt protection least you could swap the balanced 1C inclusions and 1NT

[benlessard]

This is the Tangerine Crusher.

AKxx
AQTx
Qxx
xx

a normal 15 pts you are nV/V


(1C)--P--(1D)-P
(1H)--??

You can double freely for penalty knowing partner has at least 6 pts. Do that twice in less than 5 boards and you see the opps throwing their system it in the garbage.

[Free]

If you play 4 card Majors in transfer, you pretty much have MOSCITO with a 2-way 1♣ opening. Then 1♠ becomes playable btw, but it has to show an unbalanced hand with either both minors, or 6+♦ (so always 4+♦). Also you can now play 2♣ as 6+♣, much better. But still, the 2-way 1♣ opening will be very hard!

[relknes]

benlessard, on 2012-February-25, 06:04, said:

This is the Tangerine Crusher.

AKxx
AQTx
Qxx
xx

a normal 15 pts you are nV/V


(1C)--P--(1D)-P
(1H)--??

You can double freely for penalty knowing partner has at least 6 pts. Do that twice in less than 5 boards and you see the opps throwing their system it in the garbage.

The first pass seems odd with this hand. I could see bidding (1C)--1N, or (1C)--X, or even (1C)--1H depending on partnership agreement and style. I can't see pass being a winning bid long term, though it happens to work out well sometimes. If they end up playing a 2C partscore and it turns out you had game cold (which really dosn't take that much from partner) you will regret not jumping in when you had the chance.

[glen]

relknes, on 2012-February-25, 09:31, said:

The first pass seems odd with this hand. I could see bidding (1C)--1N, or (1C)--X, or even (1C)--1H depending on partnership agreement and style. I can't see pass being a winning bid long term, though it happens to work out well sometimes. If they end up playing a 2C partscore and it turns out you had game cold (which really dosn't take that much from partner) you will regret not jumping in when you had the chance.

If 1♣ was just 15+, you would not take action with a balanced hand, and if 1♣ includes 8-9 balanced there are even more reasons to trap pass with values. For a discussion on this see the Chip Martel section that begins "The defense was really geared to the Swedish Club, where a 1♣ opening is 10-12 balanced or 16+ ...":

martel.pdf

[relknes]

glen, on 2012-February-25, 10:20, said:

If 1♣ was just 15+, you would not take action with a balanced hand, and if 1♣ includes 8-9 balanced there are even more reasons to trap pass with values. For a discussion on this see the Chip Martel section that begins "The defense was really geared to the Swedish Club, where a 1♣ opening is 10-12 balanced or 16+ ...":

martel.pdf

Thanks, that does put it in a bit more perspective. I was working under the assumption of a natural overcalls system, not pass, double, and 1♦ being strong and everything else being destructive as Martel says about his system.

[gwnn]

all this swedish talk made me curious. where can I find a decent write-up on Swedish Club?

[straube]

Has the OP given up on the 8-9 balanced range? I see some support (not mine) on this thread for a higher range, but not for 8-9 balanced. I don't see a reason for these 8-9 hands to bid, especially vulnerable. They aren't strong enough to support fit-finding, greatly muddy the water when combined with strong hands, and can easily show values if third/fourth hand opens.