[Jinksy]

I gather some people play 1C openings that could contain 2C as completely forcing - is there a set of system notes online explaining how you deal with such a system, or can anyone here describe their treatment? It seems like you'd have a tough time untangling the various strengths, especially if you wanted to minimise the information given to the defence on the way to a <=game contract.

[FrancesHinden]

I'm not sure exactly what you mean.

There are various systems around where 1C is either clubs, or balanced, or various strong hands but these might have 0 clubs in them and are completely forcing (Polish club the best known, but Carrott club and some other systems around also do it slightly differently).
There are also some methods where 1C is clubs, 11-14 or 18-19 balanced and played as completely forcing with a 1D negative. In my opinion, they generally aren't very good.

We play a short club with transfer responses, and one effect of this is that we only pass 1C on about 0-4 balanced (any hand with an ace or a long suit would respond). There have been various write-ups in BBO of this type of system (there a quite a lot of different continuations) but the main hallmarks of the method are:

- completing the transfer shows a weak NT (or sometimes also some other minimum hand types)
- rebidding 1NT is strong balanced
- rebidding 2NT is artificial, and you can stay out of game with a strong hand with 4-card support
- other rebids are natural, on the assumption that partner has 'normal' responding values, but you are very careful about forcing to game (and a reverse might be passed on a bad day)

The big advantage is that you get to do lots of bidding when you have a fit and no high cards, which is always good. You stay low when opener is balanced and there is a misfit.
The bad hands are when opener has a strong distributional hand with a misfit (e.g. 1C - 1H (spades) - 3C - pass) when you might have been better to pass out 1C and/or defend.

[Jinksy]

 FrancesHinden, on 2012-April-23, 12:46, said:

I'm not sure exactly what you mean.

There are various systems around where 1C is either clubs, or balanced, or various strong hands but these might have 0 clubs in them and are completely forcing (Polish club the best known, but Carrott club and some other systems around also do it slightly differently).
There are also some methods where 1C is clubs, 11-14 or 18-19 balanced and played as completely forcing with a 1D negative. In my opinion, they generally aren't very good.

I mean a standardish basic system, presumably with 5cMs, where 1C is artificial only in the sense that it might be as short as 2. Some context - I'm fiddling with a Fantunes-derived system where it *has* to be forcing (and is slightly more conventional in that it's natural or any 15+ balanced with no 5cM), but to make up for that the initial 1C shows a hand about a K stronger than normal. We're currently playing a negative 1D system over it, but I'm frustrated that it often wrongsides NT contracts and makes it hard for either player to limit their hand after bypassing 1D.

Quote

- rebidding 2NT is artificial, and you can stay out of game with a strong hand with 4-card support

Not sure what you mean by this. Do you mean you can play in 3N when it's right even with a 4-4 major fit?

Quote

- other rebids are natural, on the assumption that partner has 'normal' responding values, but you are very careful about forcing to game (and a reverse might be passed on a bad day)

We can't really afford this possibility, given that opener is initially unlimited.

[Jinksy]

I've just been fiddling around with ideas as they come to me, and going by the principle that I want to bias the auction towards the cheapest sequences, it occurred to me that you could have 2-way responses, which are something like either a weak xfer, or a hand strong enough that it doesn't mind too much if the opponents get involved before it shows the other type. So 1C P 1D would be something like '0-N points with 4+ Hs or any balanced GF'.

Have any structures like that been documented online already? (or tested and found wanting)

[Zelandakh]

Gerben's website had a modified Fantunes structure posted. It would probably be a good base for you. Off the top of my head (in about 2 mins so highly untested) I came up with this; no idea of it is any good though.

1♣ = 14+ nat or 15+ bal
... - 1♦ = 4+ hearts
... - ... - 1♥ = 18+ any
... - ... - 1♠ = 14-17, clubs and spades
... - ... - 1NT = 15-17 bal
... - ... - 2♣ = 14-17, clubs and no major
... - ... - 2♦ = 15-17 bal, 4 hearts
... - ... - 2♥ = 14-17, clubs and hearts
... - 1♥ = 4+ spades
... - ... - 1♠ = 18+ any
... - ... - 1NT = 15-17 bal
... - ... - 2♣ = 14-17, clubs and no major
... - ... - 2♦ = 14-17, clubs and hearts
... - ... - 2♥ = 15-17 bal, 4 spades
... - ... - 2♠ = 14-17, clubs and spades
... - 1♠ = diamonds or <7 balanced or 10+ bal or <7 with clubs, no major
... - ... - 1NT = 15-17 bal
... - ... - 2♣ = 14-17 nat
... - ... - others = 18+
... - 1NT = 7-9 bal
... - 2♣ = 7+, 5+ clubs

[Jinksy]

Gerben's system *is* my current base. The negative D works well in many ways, but has a number of flaws that seem to add up, especially because the 1C opening is by some way the second most (possibly the most) common in the system - 1) 1C 1D seems much rarer than the higher sequences, 2) 1C 1M 2N is a disaster waiting to happen, 3) 1C 1M 2M is ill-defined and hard to untangle, 4) 1C 1~D 3C more or less needs to be GF, which means 1C 1~D 2C is very vague, and 5) you frequently wrongside NT contracts via 1C 1N or 1C 1D 1M 1N.

Of these 5 is the biggest issue so far, 2 is a pain not so much in that we’ve missed slams as it means we often reveal pointless info on the way to a 3N neither of uswould dream of bypassing if you knew the other's playing strength. 3 is a pain though not a disaster, and a couple of relays could probably sort it out, 1 and 4 haven’t seemed to matter much yet.

I’d dismissed the ‘xfer accept as strong hand’ idea from a general aversion to having cheap bids that rarely come up, but your setup does seem like it could make a number of problems go away, so I’ll play with it.

I’ve also thought a bit more about cheap 2-way responses, and wondered whether it would be better to do a straightforward combo of 1D as either negative or H xfer positive, so that higher bids actually guarantee some points. Then we’d be in a much better position to continue from them, and we’d just have to sort out the 1C 1D continuations.

[mgoetze]

The negative 1♦ is of course a big part of the "modified" in "modified F-N".

You might want to check Dan's notes on the original system (which does have transfer responses): http://www.bridgewit...ntoni_Nunes.txt

[Jinksy]

I've spent quite a while looking them. I'm not thrilled by their jumps to 2M, which seem to take a lot of room to not define the hand at all well. It's also often not clear from the notes what the system on complex sequences *is*, since Dan's apparently only been able to write down what they actually had when they made various bids. Given that it has a lot of artificial sequences and a number of others where they seem to end up at the three level with little expectation of points or a fit, I've found it hard to draw much inspiration from.

[phil_20686]

 Jinksy, on 2012-April-24, 09:46, said:

I've spent quite a while looking them. I'm not thrilled by their jumps to 2M, which seem to take a lot of room to not define the hand at all well. It's also often not clear from the notes what the system on complex sequences *is*, since Dan's apparently only been able to write down what they actually had when they made various bids. Given that it has a lot of artificial sequences and a number of others where they seem to end up at the three level with little expectation of points or a fit, I've found it hard to draw much inspiration from.

So i used to play a version of this. Basically it was a 555(4)2(1) opening structure, where all balanced hands with no 5 card suit 11-14, and 18-19 (incl 18-19 bal with 5 diamonds) are opened 1C.

I would play 1d = 0-7, and forcing, then over that you would bid 1M with 11-14 balanced. Up the line, but you might occasionally have to bid a 3 card suit at the one level. If you bid 1c-1d-1n=18-19 bal. 1c-1d-2M= natural reverse. 1c-1N=7-10. 1c-1M = 4 plus cards 8+ points.

This was quite a nice structure. Particularly at MP, as you always get to your 4-4 fit with weak hands opposite, and dont play 1N. You never play in1c with two cards and partner having a weak hand. You dont ever rebid 2N with 18-19 bal and see partner put down a terrible hand. Or worse, a terrible hand with an undiscovered major fit. You can also play some fairly cool stuff at the two level, we played 2D=multi weak in a major, 2H=transfer to 2N, various hands with a strong minor but mainly looking to rightside 3N, you could bid 2S over this if you really didnt want to declare 3N. 1C-2N= both minors (since 2N unnecessary).

You can also always get out into a long minor with a weak hand, which not all systems allow you to, as after 1c-1d-1M* basically all bids are NF.

I really liked a lot of aspects of this system, but you can do all of the same stuff with transfer walsh, and somehow that seems easier/better. I remember we spend quite a lot of time debating whether transfer walsh was better than this or not and basically cane to the conclusion that they are basically the same. The differences are all swings and roundabouts: gain is after std would go 1c-1M-3M, you dont get caught with partner having a super weak hand, as he can bid 1d first. Loss wrt xfer walsh is that you have a lot of the same wrong siding problems in partscores. You also have slightly fewer sequences available.

[Jinksy]

That's basically the system I'm playing atm, Phil. Wrongsiding feels like a big deal esp when you've got 4ish opposite 16ish, and given that the 1C opening bid is so high frequency it feels like we're losing a lot to it.

What do you think of the idea as 1C / 1D as 'either Hs or negative'? It's obviously going to suffer if LHO decides to get involved now, and I'm not sure how tough it will be to untangle below 1N whether P has Hs. On the upside any continuation to 1C *besides* 1D now becomes massively easier to cope with.

[Jinksy]

By the way, playing your version, how did you cope with nn45 hands with 18-24 points after a 1D response? If P bids a positive 1M you can just reverse normally, but over 1D your 2D bid is presumably GF.

[phil_20686]

 Jinksy, on 2012-April-24, 15:41, said:

By the way, playing your version, how did you cope with nn45 hands with 18-24 points after a 1D response? If P bids a positive 1M you can just reverse normally, but over 1D your 2D bid is presumably GF.

We didnt play it as GF. It takes some getting used to, but similar to 1c-1d-3c these are NF by strong. I mean you cant really have a true GF as you are still limited by 2C. I would expect partner to pass yarbouroughs with no fit.

I can also lie and show 18-19 bal. This is basically close to guaranteed to end the auction if you play the multi over 1c, so partner cannot have weak with a major unless very weak.

[Jinksy]

 phil_20686, on 2012-April-24, 15:46, said:

We didnt play it as GF. It takes some getting used to, but similar to 1c-1d-3c these are NF by strong. I mean you cant really have a true GF as you are still limited by 2C. I would expect partner to pass yarbouroughs with no fit.

Ah, I'm not. I thought you meant you were also playing a Fantunesy system - 2C is just a natural intermediateish opening bid.

Quote

I can also lie and show 18-19 bal. This is basically close to guaranteed to end the auction if you play the multi over 1c, so partner cannot have weak with a major unless very weak.

What's the multi over 1C? 1C P 2D as similar hand-types to a normal multi-2D?

[phil_20686]

 Jinksy, on 2012-April-24, 16:17, said:

What's the multi over 1C? 1C P 2D as similar hand-types to a normal multi-2D?

Just weak two's in teh majors, 4-7 six cards in a major.

[Cthulhu D]

I am screwing around with the same system with a casual partner. It occurred to me that most 9 counts will be enough to force to game (except opposite a min hand with clubs, but yeah most of the time it's balanced hands, so you could try

1C - ??

1D: 9+ GF any

Everything else is limited to 8
1H: 4+ spades
1S: 4+ hearts
1NT: 5+ diamonds

2C: 5+ clubs
2D: Either major 6+

Not sure what the best use for 2H +2S is, probably both majors type hands.

Not sure how hot that is. The flip flop transfers should solve your wrong siding issues.

[Jinksy]

That makes life easier if you bypass 1D, but it seems to put a lot of pressure on the 1C 1D sequences - you have a wider range on both of the bids than you would do after a similar Precision sequence, and still very little information about distribution. I don't think you'll be able to get to 2M reliably, for eg.

Also it means opener can't afford to sign off over a negative with any kind of extras at all, which means you're surely going to end up overbidding on many hands where you have a little more and partner shows up with nothing (on a really bad day a misfitting nothing).

In any case, if we're both fiddling with the same type of (rare!) system at the same time, maybe we should collaborate? I'll PM you.