[32519]

How do you design your very own HUM system?

The basic idea is –
1♣ = 5-card spade suit, 12+ HCP, or 22+ HCP any distribution (equal a 2♣ opener in natural systems)
1♦ = 5-card club suit, 12+ HCP, or 20-21 HCP balanced (equal to a 2NT opener in natural systems)
1♥ = 5-card diamond suit, 12+ HCP, or 18-19 HCP balanced (equal to a Mexican 2♦ opener)
1♠ = 5-card heart suit, 12+ HCP, or 15-17 HCP balanced (equal to a 1NT opener in natural systems)
1NT = 12-14 HCP, balanced, denies a 5-card suit

The proposed first round responses are –
1. Cheapest available bid, including double and redouble, shows 8-12 HCP, may or may not have a 3-card fit (12 + 8 = 20, our side has at least half the HCP)

a. Opener’s second bid –

i. Bid the suit shown with 12+ HCP

ii. Bid the cheapest NT with the big balanced hand

2. A bid of 1-under the suit shown asks opener to bid the suit shown, less than 8 HCP, may or may not have a 3-card fit
3. Any bid above the suit shown is natural and pre-emptive, denying a fit with opener
4. A bid of the suit shown is game forcing and asking opener to bid out his shape

Before bothering about the 2-level bids and higher, can this work?

[Kungsgeten]

A bit off topic, but this structure is almost legal in Sweden, at any event. It has 8 dots (7 is allowed at the lowest level), two each for 1C, 1D, 1H and 1S. If you removed the strong option(s) from one of the bids (so its only a transfer) and put it elsewhere, it would be legal (if you played that opening 2X and 3X showed at least 4+ cards in that suit and if 2NT was a balanced hand).

[hrothgar]

32519, on 2014-May-05, 09:33, said:

How do you design your very own HUM system?

Start by listing a set of design principles.
Decide what you are trying to do and what you are willing to trade off to achieve this.

Once you have this figured out, you can start worrying about designing a system.

[newroad]

Hi 32519.

I endorse Hrothgar's comments in a broad sense. In a more narrow sense, your proposed matching of both suits with opening bids and BAL ranges seems odd.

On the BAL ranges, you probably want the lower to be the more common, and in any case, 1♠ shouldn't contain the lower ranges (you can't force responder to guess which type you have before bypassing 1NT). Also, you need to consider 4441's.

1♣: 5+♥ or 15-17 BAL or 4441
1♦: 5+♠ or 18-19 BAL or 4441
1♥: 5+♣ or 20-23 BAL or 4441
1♠: 5+♦ or 24+ BAL or 4441
1NT: 12-14 BAL

is perhaps playable (though you still need to figure out what to do with the 12-14 4441's). I would change the suit combos (and your response structure) and try instead

1♣: 5+♦ or 15-17 BAL or 4441
1♦: 5+♥ or 18-19 BAL or 4441
1♥: 5+♠ or 20-23 BAL or 4441
1♠: 5+♣ or 24+ BAL or 4441
1NT: 12-14 BAL

If you're interested in opening 5+ card suits dual range, you should perhaps consider the section on Hole Transfers (look for Brian Senior's book called The Transfer Principle of circa 20-25 years ago). I built and played quite successfully a system for a number of years based on two or so pages from that book, which in essence when engineered became

Pass: 0-6 any or 7-12 BAL or 4441 or 17+ BAL or 4441
1♣: 13-16 UNBAL
1♦: 5+♥, 7-12 or 17+
1♥: 5+♠, 7-12 or 17+
1♠: 5+♣, 7-12 or 17+
1NT: 13-16 BAL (no 5M)
2♣: 5+♦, 7-12 single suited or 17+
2♦: 5+♦/4any, 7-12
2♥: 5+/5+ without spades, 7-12
2♠: 5+/5+ with spades, 7-12
2NT+: various two way pre-empts

Regards, Newroad

[Kungsgeten]

I toyed with a transfer opening system which opened two under the bid suit. It was mostly done as a joke (the most important part was that the pass should show 0--8 and that openings at the one level should show 13--37). 08 is the dialing code for Stockholm and 1337 is Internet slang

1C = Hearts, 13+
1D = Spades, 13+
1H = Balanced, 13+
1S = Clubs, 13+
1N = Diamonds, 13+
2X = Natural, 9--12 (including 2NT)

On a more serious note I would like to try a weak/strong pass where the weak option is balanced. Something like the Swedish club, but a Swedish pass Perhaps something like:

Pass = 9--11 balanced or 15+ unbalanced or 18+ balanced
1C = 12--14 bal or 9--14 unbal with 4M and 4+m
1D = Fert 0--8
1M = 5+ suit, 9--14
1NT = 15--17
2m = 5+ suit unbal, no major, 9--14
2M = Weak

Could also put all 15--17NT into the pass and use 1NT as 12--14, use 1H as the Fert and use 1C, 1D and 1S as transfers.

[whereagles]

Well, I simply try to stay away from nebulous bids although sometimes it's unavoidable.

I also try to let the whole 2-level free for weak twos all around. The weak 2♣ and 2♦ bids may be easy to defend in theory, but they demand a lot of good judgement from opps.

[32519]

newroad, on 2014-May-05, 11:07, said:

On the BAL ranges, you probably want the lower to be the more common, and in any case, 1♠ shouldn't contain the lower ranges (you can't force responder to guess which type you have before bypassing 1NT).

This makes sense, so I think I’ll switch the strong balanced options as follows –

1♣ = 5-card spade suit, 12+ HCP, or 15-17 balanced (equal a 1NT opener in natural systems)
1♦ = 5-card club suit, 12+ HCP, or 18-19 HCP balanced (equal to a Mexican 2♦ opener)
1♥ = 5-card diamond suit, 12+ HCP, or 20-21 HCP balanced (equal to a 2NT opener in natural systems)
1♠ = 5-card heart suit, 12+ HCP, or 22+ HCP any distribution (equal to 2♣ opener in natural systems)
1NT = 12-14 HCP, balanced, denies a 5-card suit

The proposed first round responses are –
1. Cheapest available bid, including double and redouble, shows 8-12 HCP, may or may not have a 3-card fit

a. Opener’s second bid –

i. Bid the suit shown with 12+ HCP

ii. Bid the cheapest NT with the big balanced hand, or your real suit with 22+ HCP

2. A bid of 1-under the suit shown asks opener to bid the suit shown, less than 8 HCP, may or may not have a 3-card fit
3. Any bid above the suit shown is natural and pre-emptive, denying a fit with opener
4. A bid op the suit shown is game forcing and asking opener to bid out his shape

[newroad]

Hi again 32519.

A few obvious points

• 1♠ 2♥ seems very high for an FG relay, and
  
• 4441's are still not catered for
  
• In general, you want the unknown hand (responder) to be declarer when opener is MIN. The current structure will not achieve this

I suppose you have compensating advantages though, e.g. 1♣ 1♥ 1♠ means the stronger hand would declare their own suit and it gives responder another chance if WK with shape. Feels instinctively wrong to me though - if WK with shape I'd rather start describing on the first round rather than the second.

Regards, Newroad

[straube]

Your openings don't show much of anything.

1C-promises 2 or more spades and an opening hand
1D-promises 2 or more clubs and an opening hand
1H-promises 2 or more diamonds and an opening hand
1S-promises 2 or more hearts and an opening hand

Your 1N opening is fine.

Have you ever played Twenty Questions or Animal, Vegetable, Mineral? You need to think like that when designing a bidding system. Think about taxonomy, grouping, or classification. If your bid takes up space, it ought to be more descriptive than a bid that takes up less space. For example....

1C-16+
1D-2+ diamonds
1H-4+ hearts
1S-5+ spades
1N-bal
2C-6+ clubs

The club divides between good hands and ok hands, but the other openings are more and more descriptive as they take up available space.

You want partner to be able to react positively to your openings...like being able to raise your suit if you have one. Partner can't very well raise any of your openings because he doesn't know what you have. He can't preempt opposite any of your openings because he could be preempting a good hand.

Think about this another way. Your 1C opening promises spades or a 15-17 balanced. OK. So pretend instead that your 1C bid promises spades (no balanced hand). What then would your 1D, 1H, 1S, etc replies show? Then consider if your 1C bid showed 15-17 balanced, what would you use your 1D, 1H, 1S, etc replies for now?

Do they match? If so, you have a shot of this being a workable system, but they probably don't match. In fact, you're probably best off replying 1D to your 1C opening (spades or 15-17) almost all of the time until you learn what opener really has....and that's a waste of bidding room.

[32519]

straube, on 2014-May-07, 02:24, said:

Your openings don't show much of anything.

1C-promises 2 or more spades and an opening hand
1D-promises 2 or more clubs and an opening hand
1H-promises 2 or more diamonds and an opening hand
1S-promises 2 or more hearts and an opening hand

Think about this another way. Your 1C opening promises spades or a 15-17 balanced. OK. So pretend instead that your 1C bid promises spades (no balanced hand). What then would your 1D, 1H, 1S, etc replies show? Then consider if your 1C bid showed 15-17 balanced, what would you use your 1D, 1H, 1S, etc replies for now?

Not sure I understand what you are fussing about. 1 of any suit shows 5-cards in the applicable suit or a balanced hand in the relevant HCP range. So if you opened a NT hand (whatever the HCP range), responder's second bid can still be Stayman or Jacoby transfers or MSS or whatever you agree upon.

[EricK]

32519, on 2014-May-07, 11:19, said:

Not sure I understand what you are fussing about. 1 of any suit shows 5-cards in the applicable suit or a balanced hand in the relevant HCP range. So if you opened a NT hand (whatever the HCP range), responder's second bid can still be Stayman or Jacoby transfers or MSS or whatever you agree upon.

Probably the most important aspect of system design is how to cope with interference. It is really rather easy to construct a system which gets to the right contract nearly all the time assuming the opponents remain silent. An opening bid which guarantees length in a given suit is far less prone to disruption by the opposition than one which is ambiguous. Partner can rarely support your suit, if you mightn't have that suit! So if you open, say 1♣ showing 5♠, and the next hand calls 2♦, if responder happens to have 3 card ♠ support he can show it. But if your bid shows 5♠ OR a balanced 15-17 hand, then responder is on less certain ground. Now I'm not saying that it is impossible to construct a set of responses which can handle all responder's common hand types after a 2♦overcall (and a 2♥ overcall etc), but this is the kind of problem you should be concerning yourself with when trying to construct a system.

[glen]

To answer the thread question, how do I design my very own HUM system, is that I put everything I like into it, such as:

Pass: 13-16 bal NV, 10-13 bal V (I prefer value showing pass, that it is not forcing)
1♣: 14+ unbal, 17+ bal
1♦: 7-9, artificial, not too shapely
1♥: 0-6 fert (if ACBL allowed ferts, I would have been playing them for three decades)
1♠: 4♠s, (8-9)10-13, unbal with longer second suit, if 8-9 shapely, or (8-9)10-13 5-4/4-5+ in majors
1NT: 14-16 V, 10-12 NV
2♣/2♦/2♥: (8-9)10-13, 5+ suit, not 4+♠s, if 8-9 shapely
2♠: (8-9)10-13, 5+♠s, not 4+♥s, if 8-9 shapely
2NT: 5-7 shapely two suited
In second seat, all openings go up 1 point (1♥ is 0-7)
4-4-4-1s are treated as bal

[32519]

newroad, on 2014-May-07, 01:23, said:

2. 4441's are still not catered for

glen, on 2014-May-07, 19:33, said:

4-4-4-1s are treated as bal

The 4441 hand patterns with 16+ HCP go through my Two Diamond bid. The 4441 hand patterns in the 12-14 HCP range can all be included into the 1NT bid. Which leaves the 4441 hand patterns with exactly 15 HCP unplaced. I favour including them into the 1NT opening as well. Any 4441 hand pattern with exactly 15 HCP will have a low frequency of occurrence, so I won’t have any sleepless nights about including them into the 1NT bid.

[newroad]

Hi 32519,

On various points ...

Anyone interested in constructing their own system would do well to read Bo-Yin Yang's primer on system construction: Primer on Advanced System Construction - warning, this is a PDF. You may not agree with everything, but the considerations raised within are worthy.

Of particular relevance and related to EricK's post, one should read and understand the beginning of Page 8, namely: "If the opponents will usually stay silent, one would want each opening bid to transmit between 1.6 and 2 times the information as the bid one step lower. If we could anticipate LHO is about to take some given action - e.g. 1♠ - regardless of our opening bid, opening hands should be divided roughly equally among the calls under that level". Read some more to understand why.

As to treating 4441's as BAL, and opening or rebidding NT's (and almost as much, rebidding NT's with a singleton on otherwise problematic hands, e.g. 1=3=4=5's after 1♣ 1♠) I am personally very much against this style - it leads to poor competitive and choice of game decisions in my experience. I do know some who do it by design in certain circumstances, as you are proposing, but mainly because their methods allow no other practical choice.

With the changed BAL ranges, I think you've got a problem with the spade showing one (1♣) as if there is competition, you'll have relatively more trouble untangling things. Conversely, with the 1♠ showing hearts, you shouldn't have much of a problem, you just assume hearts and if partner has the very big BAL range, you'll most of the time come out OK, at least constructively (you may miss chances to penalise the oppo).

Regards, Newroad