[Jinksy]

I have a couple of recurring complaints playing Fantunes when sitting third in:

1) with such as
KJxx
KQTx
xx
xxx

I'd like to be able to open 1H for lead (without P driving me on to game/doubling aggressively if the opps get involved).

2) with such as
QJxx
KQ
Jxxx
KJxx

I'd like to be able to open, but don't want to bid a weak NT and have P raise me to 2, or get doubled (esp vul) by a powerful hand on my left.

3) with such as
KQxxx
Qxx
Axxx
x

I'd like to be able to open at the one level and find our best fit when the part score is ours.


So I spent a while trying to modify the system for third and fourth seat openings. With what I've come up with, you'd still do better out of such hands playing a normal system (esp on hand type 3, which I haven't really satisfied myself about), but I've at least been able to give a few options:

1♣ is still full strength (in fact stronger, since the 1N range has changed. If balanced, it's now 17+)
1♦♥♠ can now all be arbitrarily weak, so long as you have enough tolerance to pass any natural call P might make.
1N is now 14-16 bal.
2-bids are unchanged (ie very wide ranging in 3rd)

P of course assumes in competition that you have a weak hand.
In constructive auctions, these bids are still F1.
If P responds at the one level (inc 1N), raises your suit or bids 2♣ over 1♦ or 2♥ over 1♠, any call other than pass promises a full strength Fantunes 1-bid, and system is still on.

***

After a 1M opening, we have two Druryesque bids:
2♣ shows 10-11 points with 2 cards in your suit*
2♦ shows 9-11 points with 3 or more cards in your suit

* The key here is that with a singleton and this point range, P would normally have opened a Fantunes 2-bid. With a misfitting 4441 and 10-11, he has to content himself with a semi-forcing 1N response.

***

After 1M 2♣, opener's 2 of a new suit is to play (inc after a reverse!), and responder should almost always pass. With 4♣ and a min balanced, opener will pass. This guarantees a 4-3 or better fit unless responder is exactly 5422 with doubletons in both opener's suits.

After 1M 2♦, bidding can be fairly natural, obv with 2M as a hard sign-off, though you might have 2N as a forcing enquiry since opener is still unlimited and responder has a narrow range of hands.

***

Anything else is fairly flexible. For eg, after 1♠ 2♥ / should opener's 2♠ rebid be GF? I actually ended up thinking it should be NF inv (opener would have opened 2♠ with a weak hand, is guaranteed 2-card support, and can force with various higher bids if he so chooses).


So on the hands above

1) can open 1H, planning to pass 1♠ or 1N, pull 2♣ to 2♠(!), or 2♦ to 2♥.

2) can choose:

a 1♠ opening (planning to pass 1♠ or 1N, or pull 2♣ to 2♦)
a 1♦ opening, planning to pass any response

Possibly your answer would depend on the form of scoring.

3) doesn't really have its problems solved - with this shape it could open 1♠ planning to pull 2♣ to 2♦, but that might land you in a 4-3 rather than a 5-2, and possibly worse, you'd have to pass p's 1N. I would probably still just open it 2♠.

[Free]

If you want a system that gets you to the best contract each and every time, just don't play Fantunes. Fantunes is a typical imp system: they focus on games and slams at the possible cost of part scores. It puts pressure on opps with quick-in-quick-out auctions while at the same time hiding possible vital information. The drawback is that they can end up in a poor part score while a much better one is available. You just can't have it all.

The 3rd hand is a perfect example: Fantunes open 2♠ which randomizes results. We expect to win when opps defend poorly because they lack information others have after a 1♠ opening (+ responses and rebids), when they overcall when it's not the time, or when they overbid their hands. On the other hand we might have a much better part score available in ♥ or ♦ and we might look silly in 2♠. Starting with 1♠ ruins this entire idea and gives opps an easy 1NT or 2-level overcall.

Similar is hand 2: a weak NT puts pressure on opps. If partner invites and you go down, so be it... Otherwise you'll end up in a reasonable spot and your opps might get into trouble defending against our weak NT.

Hand 1 is the only hand that doesn't really have an alternative available in Fantunes. It's a hand where quick-in-quick-out is too risky for 2-level and they decided to discard the possibility of opening these, even in 3rd hand. If you open these at 1-level you'll damage your constructive bidding, it's a tradeoff you might find acceptable.

Another remark: the system is quite aggressive on it's own, it's not a good idea to be too aggressive in all seats imo.

[dake50]

Another remark: the system is quite aggressive on it's own, it's not a good idea to be too aggressive in all seats imo. -- Free

*** Exactly. What aggressive shapes would partner in first seat have bid? What fits are remaining/possible for 3rd seat?
*** I need that both Majors opener as 1st seat 10 won't have both Majors. So I do 1H on 1); and 1S on 3).
*** 2) is a systemic pain in the backside. Never hold that hand!

[Kungsgeten]

If you want another system vs a passed partner, just play a different system vs a passed partner? You could play 5542, strong NT and use 2C as strong and other twos as weak (or whatever).

[Cyberyeti]

You could play decent 11-14 1N in first seat so that partner never raises to 2 as a passed hand.

As Kungsgeten says, you can play a different system 3/4, I've played acol 1/2 and a strong club 3/4 before.

[Jinksy]

Re Kungsgeten:

Playing a different system in third is illegal in most UK events (where I live), otherwise that would be a sensible alternative. I used to think regular Fantunes was distinctly inferior to standard systems in third seat - after several gains from opening a wide-ranging 2C I'm not so sure now, although I still suspect it of matching up poorly fourth in.

Re Free:

Quote

Similar is hand 2: a weak NT puts pressure on opps. If partner invites and you go down, so be it... Otherwise you'll end up in a reasonable spot and your opps might get into trouble defending against our weak NT.

I agree to some extent about hand 3 (would like to have the option, but won't miss it too much, hence not allowing for it). I don't agree about hand 2 - a weak NT puts pressure on opps in first and, to a lesser degree second, but in third it's much easier for them to scramble to a fit and somewhat easier for them to penalise you.

In 4th (which this system is also meant for), it seems to lose pretty much all of its value. In the long run any hand on which you think 1N might keep them out of their part score or make on the lead is just as well passed, at least inasmuch as my judgement can discern such hands.

Quote

Hand 1 is the only hand that doesn't really have an alternative available in Fantunes. It's a hand where quick-in-quick-out is too risky for 2-level and they decided to discard the possibility of opening these, even in 3rd hand. If you open these at 1-level you'll damage your constructive bidding, it's a tradeoff you might find acceptable.

I think it does very little harm to game bidding - ie when opener would have a Fantunes 1-bid anyway. If P responds at the one level, system is unchanged; if he responds 2♦ and you have game interest you can find out how many cards he has in support below 3M (where we'd play opposite a normal hand); and you gain some precision by the negative inferences from having not opened a 14-16 NT. You might lose a tiny bit of precision for slam-hunting, but you still can get extremely high definition on P's hand type after a forcing enquiry of some kind - and a slam-seeking hand opposite a passed hand is very rare anyway.

That only leaves the hands you'd otherwise have passed, so it seems like free money in constructive auctions. I think the main loss comes from P not being able to rely on you for a full opener when 4th hand bids, but I bid perhaps a few dozen sequences like this while testing the sequence out and it might have cost one or two part scores (and gained significantly more in return), otherwise I don't think it had any major adverse swings.

[Kungsgeten]

Quote

Playing a different system in third is illegal in most UK events

Ooh, that's a shame. Though I wonder what makes a system different from another. I mean, light openings in third seat must be legal in UK (since you want to play it) and I guess different responses by a passed hand is legal too (since you play Drury). Is it legal to play a different NT-range in third seat in the UK? I know weak NT is pretty popular in the UK and that some people play strong/weak depending on vulnerability (is it okay to play a different system depending on vulnerability?), so I guess it would be okay to change the NT-range vs a passed partner too?

The main thing that makes Fantunes different from "standard" 5542 is the 2C opening.

Vs unpassed partner:

1C = 14+, natural or balanced. Transfer responses.
1D = 14+, unbalanced
1M = 11+, unbalanced (14+ if not holding the other major)
1NT = 12-14 (semi)bal
2X = Natural 10-13
2NT = Strong

Vs passed partner:

1C = 10 to short of game force natural or 12-14 balanced or 18-20 balanced. Transfer responses.
1D = 9 to short of game force, unbalanced
1M = 9 to short of game force
1NT = 15-17 (semi)bal
2C = Strong, forcing
2DHS = Natural, 4-10
2NT = Strong

If the 2C opening is the problem I guess you could play strong twos in third/fourth. Then the only difference between the 1st/2nd hand and 3rd/4th openings is the strength shown by the opening bids, which I guess is legal since it is such a common thing.

Here's another variant, but it changes the diamond openings quite a bit:

1st/2nd:

1C = Fantunes
1D = 11 to short of game force. Unbalanced.
1M = Fantunes
1NT = Fantunes
2C = Fantunes
2D = Multi. Weak with a major or game forcing with diamonds
2M = Fantunes

3rd/4th:

1CDHS = As my previous example
1NT = 15-17
2C = Weak
2D = "Multi". Any GF hand
2M = Weak

[Jinksy]

Kungsgeten, on 2014-August-20, 01:05, said:

Ooh, that's a shame. Though I wonder what makes a system different from another. I mean, light openings in third seat must be legal in UK (since you want to play it) and I guess different responses by a passed hand is legal too (since you play Drury). Is it legal to play a different NT-range in third seat in the UK? I know weak NT is pretty popular in the UK and that some people play strong/weak depending on vulnerability (is it okay to play a different system depending on vulnerability?), so I guess it would be okay to change the NT-range vs a passed partner too?

My reference for this is an email correspondence with one of the primary EBU laws people (I can't remember who now, though could prob find it out if of interest), where I asked much these questions. From memory, the answer to each of them is:

'what makes a system different from another' - judgement rather than science. It typically needs to be systemically different, rather than have a couple of tweaks. In his view, Fantunes counted as different to standard primarily because of the forcing 1-bids.

'light openings in third seat must be legal in UK (since you want to play it) and I guess different responses by a passed hand is legal too (since you play Drury)' - yeah, both legal (well, we have different levels, but both level 4 legal IIRC, which means in practice most of the time you can play it)

'Is it legal to play a different NT-range in third seat in the UK?' - yep

Given that, I think both your examples would be illegal

The exception was playing 7+ board rounds (and I'm guessing level 5, where almost anything non-highly-unusual goes), where system switching would be allowed.

[benlessard]

Its mostly just a guess but I don't see how Fantunes wont be at at a disadvantages in 3rd seat.

The 10-13 opening have a preemptive effect but at the cost of constructiveness. Once RHO is a passed hand the preemptiveness is reduced but not the cost.

The 14+ is mostly good for slams, once partner is a passed hand this advantages go down.

In standard because partner is passed you can safely open light and used drury, you dont really get those advantages in Fantunes.I dont know what are the passed hand inference in Fantunes but I doubt they compensate those of standard.

We play a strong club at 15+ and when im in 2nd seat and it goes (P)-P-(P)-?? Im thinking "I guess partner is going to open a strong club" but more often than not its not the case. In the end the frequency of 15+ is not that much higher than in 1st/2nd seat vs 3rd and 4th so imo there is still going to have too much 10-13 hands in 3rd seat for Fantunes.

[Jinksy]

benlessard, on 2014-August-20, 09:30, said:

Its mostly just a guess but I don't see how Fantunes wont be at at a disadvantages in 3rd seat.

The 10-13 opening have a preemptive effect but at the cost of constructiveness. Once RHO is a passed hand the preemptiveness is reduced but not the cost.

Not sure why you conclude this. For one thing, Fantunes 2-bids in third are wide ranging. They basically just tell P you're not interested in game - so can be 0-13ish and IMO should be near identical to third seat 'weak 2s' (given that the latter also become wider ranging with a higher top end, and frequently a 5 card suit)). The differences are only that we have one more of them, and hand 3 above and similar will also be included in them.

Quote

The 14+ is mostly good for slams, once partner is a passed hand this advantages go down.

I would say if anything you're at a slight disadvantage over regular 2/1 slam hunters since opener has so much wider a possible range (as does a 1N responder, and to a lesser degree a responder who 2/1s).

I find it more useful in competition, where responder can be more optimistic after an overcall, eg bidding games on most 10 counts, whereas an SAYC (or worse yet Acol) opener with a 15ish count might have a tough decision about showing their extra values (although this advantage would go if they used my variant). It has a slight benefit for finding games when you're just shy of a 2♣ opener and P isn't good enough to respond to a normal 1-bid, or similarly when in a natural system you'd have to open a dubious 2N to get your values across. None of these really change opposite a passed hand.

Quote

In standard because partner is passed you can safely open light and used drury, you dont really get those advantages in Fantunes.

Well yeah - that's the gap I'm trying to shrink.

Like I say, I don't really have a view on whether it's at a comparative advantage. I think the preemptive 2♣ is a moderate gain and not being able to open light is a moderate loss, hopefully now a smallish loss.

[benlessard]

If you gave me a hand like

AQxxx
Kxx
Kxxx
x

and told me that ill need to bid it twice, but once in 1st/3rd seat and once in standard/Fantunes ill of course open 2S in fantunes 1st seat and open 1S in 3rd seat standard, I surely wont do the opposite (1S in standard 1st seat and 2S in 3rd seat Fantunes) because the preemptive effect of 2S is reduced in 3rd seat (because only one opp) while the cost is fully there (playing a poor partscore).

[Jinksy]

In first seat that's a Fantunes 2-bid and a SAYC 1-bid.
In third seat it's still a Fantunes 2-bid and a SAYC 1-bid.

Maybe we agree? I can't make sense of what you've written.

As for reduced cost:benefit ratio of preempting in third seat, that seems to fly against all received wisdom. Yes you're only preempting one opp, but he's likely to be the stronger one, and meanwhile you've lost the risk of preempting yourself out of game (or slam).

[benlessard]

In first seat that's a Fantunes 2-bid and a SAYC 1-bid.
In third seat it's still a Fantunes 2-bid and a SAYC 1-bid.

Maybe we agree? YES

But my point is that opening 2S in 1st seat with a standard 1M hand has more upside than in 3rd seat. The downside is the same. If someone forced me to play Fantunes on one deal where I got a 10-13 pts 5(431) I would way prefer to be in first seat than in 3rd seat and it not really close for me. Yes im taking risk by opening 2M but at least I block 2 opponents and my partner know my pts range fairly precisely.Being forced to open 2M in 3rd seat even if partner doesnt have values for game block mostly one opponents, 2nd seat player had the chance to make a weak 2 or to open.


"As for reduced cost:benefit ratio of preempting in third seat, that seems to fly against all received wisdom. Yes you're only preempting one opp, but he's likely to be the stronger one, and meanwhile you've lost the risk of preempting yourself out of game (or slam)."

This is true for a standard weak 2 not for a fairly precise 10-13 opening in 1st seat.

[rhm]

Jinksy, on 2014-August-19, 10:13, said:

Re Kungsgeten:

Playing a different system in third is illegal in most UK events (where I live), otherwise that would be a sensible alternative. I used to think regular Fantunes was distinctly inferior to standard systems in third seat - after several gains from opening a wide-ranging 2C I'm not so sure now, although I still suspect it of matching up poorly fourth in.

Is that really true?
I consider this unenforceable and arbitrary. What constitutes a "different" system anyway?

If Fantunes publish system notes about third seat openings would that change what constitutes the Fantune system?

If you look at Lawrence and others they all modify their system according to tactical differences in third seat.
99.9% of all systems insist that 2/1 is at least a one round force. How many do this after a third seat opening?
Many people play only fit jumps as a passed hand.
Drury is a convention specifically designed to be used after third or fourth hand openings.
Many change their notrump ranges in third seat.

If you revert to "standard" in third seat I do not believe anybody should complain.
If you revert to a very artificial different system in third seat you could run into trouble.

Rainer Herrmann

[Jinksy]

benlessard, on 2014-August-20, 18:53, said:

But my point is that opening 2S in 1st seat with a standard 1M hand has more upside than in 3rd seat. The downside is the same. If someone forced me to play Fantunes on one deal where I got a 10-13 pts 5(431) I would way prefer to be in first seat than in 3rd seat and it not really close for me.

Ok, then I think we agree that it's a downside, except I don't think it's a big a downside as you say. It essentially randomises the results, and I have no evidence or strong sense about whose favour it does so in.

Quote

Yes im taking risk by opening 2M but at least I block 2 opponents and my partner know my pts range fairly precisely.Being forced to open 2M in 3rd seat even if partner doesnt have values for game block mostly one opponents, 2nd seat player had the chance to make a weak 2 or to open.

So did your P. That means (unlike it first), the opps could still have game or even slam on, whereas your side can all but rule out either.

Quote

This is true for a standard weak 2 not for a fairly precise 10-13 opening in 1st seat.

I would say you're about equally as likely to preempt P with a 'fairly precise' 10-13 opening when that hand could be eg 5134, 7222, 5350, 7132 etc (for us it could also include the other major, so could be 5521, though you might not want to focus on that case if you'd prefer to focus on more typical Fantunes variants).

[Jinksy]

rhm, on 2014-August-21, 04:16, said:

Is that really true?
I consider this unenforceable and arbitrary. What constitutes a "different" system anyway?

Like I said, I sought advice directly from the EBU on this. That's what they told me.

[rhm]

Jinksy, on 2014-August-21, 04:23, said:

Like I said, I sought advice directly from the EBU on this. That's what they told me.

So a 1♠ say in Fantunes shows a minimum of 14 HCP in first or second seat.
What will happen if you open 1♠ with 10 HCP in third seat?
Will that be considered in your case a psyche?

I mean irrespective of Fantunes the sound opening brigade (I know a dying breed and never very popular in the UK) always had to lower their opening requirements in third and fourth seat.
But still all sophisticated bridge players have different requirements what to open or preempt with in first second third or fourth seat.
Where is the difference?

I personally think it is a mistake to ask these bureaucrats. Just play Bridge.
However, I do not mind defending my actions in front of a committee where there are bridge players.
It happens very rarely.
It is the same old story. The bureaucrats will eventually allow a new successful system to be played but always only with "handcuffs".
They worry that otherwise there will be anarchy.
Do not take them too seriously.
The roof won't fall in.

Rainer Herrmann

[WellSpyder]

Jinksy, on 2014-August-17, 11:20, said:

P of course assumes in competition that you have a weak hand.

I think this is one thing I would wonder about as an implication of this approach. One of the things I like about playing Fantunes is that responder is often able to compete or double more effectively in competitive auctions as a result of knowing an opening 1-bid is sound. Losing that inference would be a drawback.

[Jinksy]

rhm, on 2014-August-21, 05:10, said:

Where is the difference?

The difference is that the opening bids are forcing. Perhaps I needn't have asked, but having done so now it would be daft to ignore their response.