[EarlPurple]

I'm interested in popularising the system I regularly play with a partner here, and also invoking some discussion on it.

Although it fits into the category of a non-natural system I feel it is a very simple system to play, and that actually relative beginners would be happy to play it and do reasonably well with it.

The general system is as follows:

1♣ opening promises a 4-card major, normal "opening bid" values (rule of 20 or even 21), a hand that doesn't qualify for an opening of 1NT or a stronger bid
A response of 1♥ or 1♠ promises a 5-card suit. This is one of the advantages - that the responder can show their 5 card major right away.
A response of 1♦ promise at least one 4-card major, asks partner to name, and the values for a response.
A response of 2♣ is artificial and this response is commonly used in the system to show game-invite values. In this case no 4-card major or you'd bid 1♦
A response of 2♦ is artificial, game force (but not necessarily interested in slam) and no 4-card major.

That leaves 1NT which is a general weak "to play" response, bids of 2 of a major (pre-emptive) and 3 of a minor (pre-emptive) and 2NT (both minors, pre-emptive).

1♦ opening denies a 4-card major. It could be bid though with 3-3-0-7 distribution.
The response pattern is the same. Of course here the 2NT response guarantees you'll find partner with at least one minor. 1NT could be bid with a 4-card major, there is no need to show it.

1♥ and 1♠ are 5-card major bids. 2]clubs] and 2♦ responses show game invite/forcing values and don't deny support.

The 1-level bids are all relatively limited. See the 2♣ opening. Although you can vary the system, of course.

1NT opening is usually 16-18 balanced

2♣ opening shows either:

• 18-22 unbalanced
  
• 19-20 balanced (will rebid 2NT)
  
• Weak 2 opening in diamonds

Responder will respond 2♦ unless he holds a hand that does not want partner to pass with a weak 2 in that suit. The system is not properly defined after that point other than the obvious opener bidding 2NT on the balanced hand and passing on the unbalanced one. Most of the time it comes up it is actually one of these two, the unbalanced 18-22 seems surprisingly rare.

2♦ opening is either:

• Game force
  
• weak 2 in either major.

Followed by 2NT is usually 23-24 with opening 2NT used for 21-22 balanced. Not determined what opener should do with a better balanced hand. I don't like 3NT as a response, as it cuts out Stayman and Transfers by responder's hand below game.

3-level opening bids are just pre-empts like in most systems.

[rhm]

How you develop minor suit hands remains unclear.
For example you open 1♦ get a major suit response and you bid 2♣.
What does this show?
How do you develop two suiters in the minors, equal in length and unequal in length and how do you distinguish them from minor one suiters?
How is responder supposed to know what to do?

Now assume you have a club fit but over your 1♦ opponents preempt in a major.
Good luck.

Sometimes we need to play in a minor suit in a partial, game or slam. Uncovering a fit in a minor quickly can be important

Rainer Herrmann

[straube]

Are 1C and 1D forcing or may responder pass? Does 1m-1N promise standard values?

Some of this reminds me of Montreal Relay. Have you looked at that? Kenrexford has written a lot about it and he might be a good resource for you.

I would think Club Major has difficulty with good hands. Like 1C-2m seems pretty awkward. You haven't shown any (positive) suit information by this time and opener (especially) can have a wide range of hand patterns. Like couldn't opener have 4027 or 4450 or 4333? You haven't left much room for him to unwind. Perhaps you could have 1C-1D promise either a 4-cd major or any GF hand and have 1C-2m be invitational with that minor.

Kind of the same thing for 1M-2m. I use 1M-2C as a GF relay (asking) bid and feel like I'm running out of room quickly. I would hate to play 1M-2D as my GF relay. Whether you relay or not, 2D doesn't leave much room for opener to tell you about his hand. A quick fix might be forcing NT and forcing 2/1s that actually show suits.

Your strong auctions start at 1N and higher, so same comment about shortchanging the good hands. 16-18 range is a little high and infrequent. Seems like 14-16 is becoming more and more popular. So I'm trying to think...what would 1D-1S, 1N show? Some 12-15 balanced or short spade hand? Does 1D-1S, 2C show minors or just clubs?

What does 1C-1D, 1N or higher rebids show? If opener is always rebidding 1M and his higher rebids are unused or vacant then that's a waste of bidding room.

I play a nebulous diamond (can be 0 diamonds as can yours) and our 1H response is usually 4 but can be fewer with a good hand. This frequently gives opener a lot of room to describe his hand. If 1D-1H had to promise 5 hearts, then that's nice when we have a heart fit, but when responder doesn't have 5 hearts he can't keep the bidding low and consequently opener has less bidding room.

[glen]

EarlPurple, on 2014-July-16, 05:15, said:

Although it fits into the category of a non-natural system I feel it is a very simple system to play, and that actually relative beginners would be happy to play it and do reasonably well with it.

This is accurate except about the relative beginners. It is true they get a simple system, but they have 2♦ Multi, 1m artificial openings, and 2m artificial responses. Only a certain subset of beginners would be happy with that.

The system is like the Diamond Major (see this link: http://www.bridgeguy...ening_bids.html) except it had the 1♦ opening showing a major. I think your approach is better. I did a complex system where 1♣ was a four card major or big (http://www.bridgemat...com/mobclub.pdf). In the 2009 world championships a pair played 1♣ as 4♠s, 1♦ denying a 4cM (http://info.ecatsbri...ascal-ahmed.pdf). The Montreal Relay continues to attract converts, including this site: http://www.montrealrelay.com/ and see the interesting discussion of approaches here: http://web.mit.edu/m...r_Suit_Fits.pdf

I've seen adhoc systems where 1♣ shows a 4cM, 1♦ denies a 4cM at bridge clubs, but they had no notes.

You should adjust 1NT to 15-17, as right now your 1NT rebid is too wide, 11-15.

1X-2♣ as an artificial invite is not ACBL GCC (General Convention Chart) legal. For this market you should have 2m as natural, forcing bids with invite or better values.

[kenrexford]

This is somewhat interesting to me. What you end up with, strangely, is a 1♣ opening that can be thought of as functionally equivalent to a canapé structure, where a delayed 1M "opening" (at rebid) shows either a balanced minimum or a major-MINOR canapé hand. And, you undoubtedly end up with several canapé completions in reality. For instance, 1♣-P-1M-P-2minor seems to be the functional equivalent of a canapé sequence where you open a major, partner shows the other major, and then you rebid your longer minor. Thus, 1♣-P-1♠-P-2♦ seems identical to 1♥-P-1♠-P-2♦, meaning hearts and longer diamonds. However, with your approach, you end up solving immediately, in a sense, the 3-4-5-1 hand, by immediately raising the spades instead? This undoubtedly leaves some unknowns, but that might be unwound if it benefits your side.

[gwnn]

I was going to post this thread here but I see that you created it 6 years ago

http://www.bridgebas...d-really-a-hum/

So it will be tough to popularise a system that is illegal in most jurisdictions.

[WGF_Flame]

This is a known system called midmac.

[glen]

WGF_Flame, on 2014-July-16, 12:29, said:

This is a known system called midmac.

You are correct, with some system mods:

http://www.eclipse.c...5046/midmac.htm

One can buy a used copy of A New Approach to Bidding: Complete Hand Valuation (Cv) and the Midmac Bidding System (Paperback), Jon Drabble for 21 cents, plus shipping

[starryone]

I am the partner of EarlPurple on playing this system and usually we do well but get into confusion sometimes about the strength of bids and we missed 2 games contracts today by this confusion.

When opponent bid over 1♣ pass 1♦ they bid 1♠ and if opener has 4 hearts do you bid 2♥ or double for take-out, and which is stronger? I think 2♥ should be stronger because responder can more safely go to 2NT with spades and not hearts and over double can go to just 1NT.

I think for a beginner they can simplify the 2 level and use 2♣ to show all the strong bids and no weak ones 2♥ and 2♠ as regular weak 2. You did not put the meaning of those bids in the system but we play they show 5-5 hands that suit and a lower one. The disadvantage is now you cannot use that for medium-strong hands, and I think it is good that 1-level bids are not too wide a strength.

We had an auction last week that went 2♦ then opponent bid 3♦ and I had 7 spades and bid 3♠ intending to be sign-off if partner has the likely weak 2 in hearts, which partner did and 3♠ went 1 off for average but not sure what to do if I have a hand that wants to compete to 3♠ opposite weak 2 in spades or 4♥ if partner has hearts or something else if partner is strong. Should I double or should that be penalty which is normal when opponent calls over a pre-empt.

Our opening bids are sound so usually we do not open with weak 11 points or even weak 12, so not a big problem of the 1NT rebid being too wide, it is normally 13-15 or a good 12 and we open on 11 only with distribution.

1♣ opening can often be canape

After 1m 2♣, 2NT looks like it should be balanced and minimum, and 2♦ and 3♣ should show a long suit that goes with the major. There are also bids of 2♥ and 2♠ available. 2♥ can be maximum balanced, 2♠ maximum unbalanced then go on. Yeah we still have not shown a suit if we bid this. This is starting to get more artificial too.

I do like having a game-force bid though and if 1NT is sign-off what can you do for an invitational value bid? 2♣ response might not show a suit but does deny 5 card major, and 4 card major over 1♣, and opponents like to come in with majors so it's good we know our strength in values at least to know we should own the hand.

[EarlPurple]

Yeah, in the auction 1♣ pass 1♦ it's good to find the fit but neither of us has shown a suit or strength at this point and if we don't have a fit we need to find somewhere else to play and still determine the level. On this case we found the fit but not the level.

Should we use 2♣ as a 2nd round respnose after double to show game-invite values? Or should it show a lack of fit in the major and looking for clubs to compete? Maybe a poor 4-card spade and 5 or more clubs. And then should it be forcing (I don't think so).

Of course most these issues occur in "natural" phoney-club systems too. I don't think we'd need 2♣ as a natural bid that often. If you have 4 spades you'll probably be able to bid 1NT most of the time (I doubt you'd pass for penalties) and so have 2[clubs as game-invite strength, even if you know we have a heart fit, and 2♥ simply minimum to play. (I can't remember what you actually had, only that you made 11 tracks).

By the way I have looked at MIDMAC and there are major differences. He says 1♥ and 1♠ response can show just 4, I think that it shows 5 is the big plus in the system. He uses 1NT as the artificial strong bid and is the only strong bid in the system. Sounds interesting but I'm not used to it.

As for the other question about last week, I think 2♦ multi 3♦ by opponent, double needs to be take-out asking for partner to compete to 3 of a major. Yeah you lose the option to double for penalty. Their overcall in some ways is a pre-empt of its own as you can't bid 2NT asking anymore so we're all in a bit of a guessing game here. Anyway I open 2[diamonds with hearts and my LHO has diamonds, someone has spades and it may well be my partner and so I take 3♠ as natural, at match-points which it was probably competitive, at IMPs possibly invitational if I'm not minimum but definitely not forcing in either case.

[steve2005]

your pretty well restricting your potential players with a multi 2♣ and 2♦ bids. most people cant play that.

[gwnn]

steve2005, on 2014-July-16, 15:47, said:

your pretty well restricting your potential players with a multi 2♣ and 2♦ bids. most people cant play that.

or the 1♣ opening.

[akwoo]

Try it at board-a-match against a team of crazy juniors who'll make wide ranging jump overcalls at every opportunity. Figure out how to deal with them. Report back. Then I'll actually have an opinion on this system.

[Free]

WGF_Flame, on 2014-July-16, 12:29, said:

This is a known system called midmac.

Or MAF, or some other names.

[EarlPurple]

Perhaps like there are many systems that use 1♣ as a strong bid, and Polish that uses it as a variable bid, there are different systems that use 1♣ to show a 4 card major and 1♦ to deny.

You see the advantages in finding the major fit. It is of course possible to play that this scheme covers all opening bids that don't open NT. So if you play it for 12-14 hands and 18-19 hands (but open 15-17 hands 1NT) you'd have to have a way to show the stronger range, and also work out what to do with unbalanced 15-17 hands assuming 1NT is always at least semi-balanced.

That is the case with any system, and phony club systems also suffer from a problem of intervention when partner wants to compete, in fact I find that a problem after 1NT openings too, particularly when responder knows we have approximately 20 points (so they are evenly balanced) but doesn't know if we have a fit or not (and competing when not can turn out a bad move).

Anyway, if anyone would like to try playing against this system, it is always constructive to see where we do run into a bidding problem. If two others would like to play the system (rather than compete against it) we could arrange a team-game (which I assume could be board-a-match). For a proper analysis though you'd want our side to also be playing wide-ranging jump overcalls so when it comes up, it gets used against both the club-major and the normal system, and we can see which system copes best with it.

In particular if the auction has gone, say, 1♦ (no 4 card major) 2♠ (opponents) I know partner does NOT have 4 hearts. I might have long hearts but if I have 4 I know our fit, if any, isn't there. If I have both minors I know partner definitely has one of them with me, and I can cue-bid their suit if I think 3NT might be the right contract, or do something else to ask partner for a minor. Yeah, they may bid more but there's a limit how high one can pre-empt before you just get hit for a large sum. If my partner bid 1♣ and they bid 2♥ or 2♠ I know partner either has the other major or 4 cards in theirs. Questionable of course whether partner can pass it for penalties if it's theirs, but that would be the case in a normal system. I think finding the minor fit in this auction is harder of course. I don't know partner has a 4-card minor at all. e.g.

♠ 9 6 4 2 - 10 x
♥ A Q x - K x x x
♦ K Q x x - J x x
♣ K x - A x x x

bidding goes 1♣ ( 2♠) I double, partner has 4 poor spades, might bid 3♦, we end in a Moysian fit. Partner could risk pass but might lead to -670 (or -470) and never more than one off assuming a 6-card suit overcall.

In a regular auction the bidding would start 1♦ (2♠) Dbl. Then what? 3♥ with only 3 or 2NT (whatever that means here).? Or rebid diamonds with only 4 of them?. I think I mildly prefer diamonds as trumps to hearts here - spade ruffs in short trumps (and if overruffed probably with long trumps) hearts ready to cash as quick tricks along with ace king of clubs. Even at matchpoints I think I prefer diamonds especially if we're at the 3-level.

With regards to the 2-level bids as I have encountered them, the biggest issue I find is competing on over 2♦ when you don't know what partner's suit is so it's harder to pre-empt further. I've always found that to be an issue with multi compared to regular weak 2s.

Interestingly, multi 2♦ bids became very popular in the UK where traditionally opening 2♠ and 2♥ bids were "Acol 2" bids, showing a good suit and about 8 playing tricks. Novices who didn't want to give them up but wanted to be able to also open when holding a weak 2 wanted to play it and they had to make it general licence so as not to upset these people. It was also considered common enough that players could expect the opponents might use it and have a defence prepared.