[wclass___]

This is a mixture of a lot of systems. The key bid is 1♣ and I was trying to set meanings for others bids as well as possible. 1♠ was the tough one, initianlly i thought about 5♠+ 8-11, then 6♠ 11+ then 4♥5m+12+ and now it something else. Suggestions?

1♣ = F1 12+ 4♠+ not 4♠333
1♦ = F1 12+ 4♥5m+ or 16+ with 4♥4m or 16+ with 5♥332
1♥ = F1 14+ 5♥+ not balanced, not 4♠ (unless 6-4 or very strong I guess)
1♠ = F1 16+ balanced or minor hands
...........1N = would have passed natural 1N opening
........................ Pass = 16-19 bal-semibal
........................2m = 5m+
1N = 13-15
2♣ = 11-15 6♣+ or 5♣4♦+ good ODR else pass/1NT
2♦ = 11-15 6♦ or 5♦4♣+ good ODR else pass/1NT
2♥ = 5♥+ 10-13,unbal, common sense
2♠ = 6♠+ like 7-11
2N = 20/21

P.S. I'm looking for a pd who want to play this.

[dake50]

Strategy is backward. Original 1S thought was nearer.
Get in there esp vs nv. quit low or game on is your
systemic decisions.
Give opponents -110/-140 compared to their 110/140 for 5IMP;
200 compared 420/140 (which?) for 1/6 IMP.
They are almost forced to be game-trying not competing.

[wclass___]

Yes, that was my initial though, but that is by far the worst one. At first it sounds like a very good idea... 8-11 - limited+frequent+preemptive effect, but it just doesn't work.

Often you have a hand like 9 points with 6♠322 with decent suit and just want to bid 2♠. And then there are plenty of hands you expect to score better by passing.
There is a study by Richard Pavlicek "Which light opening bids work" and his analyses clearly suggest that openig light 1♣, 1♦, 1♥ works, but 1♠ doesn't.

There was some interesting study by tysen2k and from his abstract system design one could also realize that with ♠ one should go low.

I went through many deals and 1♠ as 8-11, these hands do just fine by passing (or bidding 2♠ if you have 6). Not to mention that it puts pressure on other opening bids. In other words it preempts both sides and i'm not sure that it has +EV at all compared to pass.

Btw. i'm not realy sure what you mean by backward strategy, but it doesn't sound anything good.

[dake50]

Backward strategy:
Trying to make VUL opponents guess their game/partial
when they only need about 38% to try game.
Their decision should be to try the game with those odds.
Preempts to push VUL into a 38% or better game don't
pressure their decision.
Whereas, opponents *nv*, they need a 46+% to try game.
Now their decision is much more keen.
Get in there against *nv*.
This is converse of prevailing strategy to obstruct
VUL opponents. That's what I mean by backwards strategy.
Not emphasizing *nv* safe against VUL, but emphasizing
the more keen decision when they are *nv*.

[wclass___]

After re-reading tysen2k posts I got intrigued by other his ''Silent spade'' openings. Later on other meanings changed, but Pass=♠ and 1♣=bal stayed the same.

Here is one version of his silent spade:

Quote

Pass is something like 4+ spades (unbalanced only) or 15+ HCP and both minors1C is 0-12 HCP, no singletons/voids, 2-4 spades, 2-5 hearts
1D is clubs
1H is diamonds
1S is hearts
1N is 0-10 HCP, semi balanced, usually has diamonds and only 2-3 in both majors
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And I don't know why it likes "1 over" transfers either.

OK, in most systems 1♠=5♥+ probably would not be feasible. (Maybe strong club+flannery NV)

Now, how crazy It would be to play 1♠ as F1 14+ 5♥+ 0-3♠ not bal? It seems like there are some competitive advantages, you have taken away 1♠ bid which opponents might need more than you do.