[Jinksy]

For the (few) others still playing a Fantunes-y system, this is something I've developed in response to a) the problem of side majors in 2-bids/super-wide-ranging 1-bids, and b) the problem of any kind of constructive auction after the 2♠ opening.

Our 1M-bids are always up to strength (or at least, never systemically downgraded to 11+). They include 21-22 point balanced hands (as does our 1♣ opening)
Our 2M-bids can have a 4cM side suit. Opposite them, with a marginal invite that needs 4 of the other major to justify being in game, we normally pass. This doesn't seem to be nearly as bad as some people think - usually when we might have found a marginal major game, we're mostly compensated in expectation by being 2 levels lower.
Our 2N opening* shows 5+ spades and 5+ (hearts or clubs), and the same playing strength as an opening 2-bid.

* At least in first and second seat - in third and fourth we still play it, but it loses some value (probably most in that it's much less likely that holding this hand, the bidding will have been passed to you than earlier in the auction).

We used to play 2N as hearts and a minor, but I gradually found that a) at the strength we play it, it was often a constructive bid rather than a preempt - that is, the opps rarely profited from having a 2♠ overcall when we opened 2♥ on these hands, and b) having hearts as an anchor suit didn't quite give enough room to bid all reasonably common hand types constructively, and c) it was the 2♠ opening that suffered (by far) the most from lack of space anyway.

Obviously you can play whatever continuations you like, but these are ours, playtested as well as I could with a BBO bidding practice room, my best attempt to analyse counterfactual auctions, and a lot of patience for that kind of thing:

3♣: pass or bid 3♦. Partner can now pass with a long diamond suit, or correct to 3M (or occasionally bid on, if your heart suit inspires him)
3♦: asks about hearts, either because P has a long suit of his own, or because he has game/slam aspirations that might be conditional on you having hearts (and if the former, prefers 3♠ to 3♣)
3♥: just asks for the second suit. Since 3♦ is a heart ask, the assumption is if P's aspirations are limited to game, he's interested in game iff opener has clubs.
3♠: to play
3NT: a slam try in whichever is opener's second suit.
4m: a natural slam try
4M: to play

***

After 2N 3♦
__ 3♥ shows heart tolerance, ie 2-3 hearts*
__ 3♠ denies heart tolerance, ie 0-1 hearts
__ 3NT shows a heart side suit

* I'm interested in using 4♣ as a pseudo-superaccept showing exactly 5305 shape, but we're not doing this atm.

After 2N 3♥
__ 3♠ shows hearts
__ 3N shows clubs

If opener has a real freak - ie 6-5 with reasonably substantial suits, he can optionally invent an 'impossible' response to any of responder's calls - given that 4♠ is basically never sane, you can figure these out on the fly.

***

Generally, responder's (forcing) calls always give the options of slam in two denomination: spades and hearts after 3♦, clubs and spades after 3♥, and clubs and hearts after 3N. After the first two, responder's next bid will (if not a signoff) set the trump suit for cueing. After the latter, opener bids 4♣ to set that, or starts cueing for hearts.

In terms of bidding efficiency, I make it very close in probability to a 21-22 2N opening (the standard Fantunes use), though the likelihood of you actually getting to open it conditional on holding it drops quite fast the later you are to open it.

The main advantages of opening 2N are i) competitive auctions when they do come up, ii) finding thin games that the rest of the room might miss after (eg) 1♠ 1N / 2♥ P, and iii) rightsiding/getting to game with minimal information leak after 2N 4♠.
The main disadvantages are predictable - i) you sometimes end up too high on part score hands, and ii) you can occasionally not have the room for slam bidding that you'd have got from opening lower (though obviously opener having defined his hand so closely helps)

But the main advantage IMO is taking these hands out of the 1M/2M openings. Obviously opening 2M with them is disastrous, but opening 1M with 11+ hands causes all kinds of headaches that opening 2N with these hands helps you avoid (assuming you're willing to pay the extra price of opening 2M with 5-4 in the majors). You lose the natural 2N opening, but I'm not convinced it's worse to open those at the 1 level anyway, since you can do so forcingly.

[Phil]

Going back, I don't understand why you don't like the shaded 11-13 1M with the other major. It hasn't been a problem from responders standpoint as long as you have effective controls. Our relay 321 steps start a little lower when opener has both majors. 2M-1 is a wide ranging 3 card range and opener generally rebids 2M with the submin/ 7 loser hands.

Dunno, giving up a 2N opener to fill in a system hole that may not exist isn't worth it IMO.

[Jinksy]

I didn't realise you played it Phil. Want a Fantunes vs Fantunes game on BBO sometime?

As for weaker 1M, I don't know your system so can't comment on it directly, but IMO playing 1M openings as 11-37 has three typical problems. In increasing severity:

1) Invitational non-fit auctions: after eg 1M 1N / 2♥*, at one of you is going to have an awkward range. If responder doesn't bid 2N on most 8-9 counts, or if opener doesn't bid 2N after simple preference on most 16-17 counts, you're going to miss a few games. If either of them does bid on such hands, you'll (respectively) frequently** find yourself in 20-21-point 2N contracts/occasionally find yourself in 16-19-count 2N contracts, doubled if the opps have been paying attention.

* Or whatever system you use to show both majors with opener
** Frequently given such an auction, I mean. I realise this isn't that common a sequence

2) Invitational fit auctions: most versions of Fantunes seem to end up at the three level on 5-3 fits uncomfortably often. I spent some time looking at Fantoni-Nunes' actual bidding sequences over 1M (can't find the site now, but there was one with records of hundreds or thousands of hands they'd played, searchable by sequence), and they noticeably overbid on this hand type.

3) Competitive auctions: IMO the biggie - we have frequently had such auctions as 1M (4m) 4M pay dividends in either making or being good competitive score, where 4M is on something like a decent 8-count with 3-card support, and opener couldn't have acted again. Even at lower levels, after eg 1M (2-level bid) P / or 1M (3-level bid) P /, opener often has a difficult decision with eg a 16-17 count. I found these the nightmare hands in Acol, where half the room has opened a strong NT, and you have no sensible way of telling who the contract belongs to. One of my favourite things about Fantunes is getting to play a weak NT without this issue, and in general with being well placed in competitive auctions, but on all the wider range hands you're going to have tougher high-level decisions.

In the first two cases you can presumably mitigate the problem with relays but a) relays with always come with a cost of losing something else, and b) you can still play relays if you open a full-strength 1M and get the same benefits.

[Phil]

Jinksy, on 2016-July-12, 11:34, said:

I didn't realise you played it Phil. Want a Fantunes vs Fantunes game on BBO sometime?

As for weaker 1M, I don't know your system so can't comment on it directly, but IMO playing 1M openings as 11-37 has three typical problems. In increasing severity:

1) Invitational non-fit auctions: after eg 1M 1N / 2♥*, at one of you is going to have an awkward range. If responder doesn't bid 2N on most 8-9 counts, or if opener doesn't bid 2N after simple preference on most 16-17 counts, you're going to miss a few games. If either of them does bid on such hands, you'll (respectively) frequently** find yourself in 20-21-point 2N contracts/occasionally find yourself in 16-19-count 2N contracts, doubled if the opps have been paying attention.

* Or whatever system you use to show both majors with opener
** Frequently given such an auction, I mean. I realise this isn't that common a sequence

2) Invitational fit auctions: most versions of Fantunes seem to end up at the three level on 5-3 fits uncomfortably often. I spent some time looking at Fantoni-Nunes' actual bidding sequences over 1M (can't find the site now, but there was one with records of hundreds or thousands of hands they'd played, searchable by sequence), and they noticeably overbid on this hand type.

3) Competitive auctions: IMO the biggie - we have frequently had such auctions as 1M (4m) 4M pay dividends in either making or being good competitive score, where 4M is on something like a decent 8-count with 3-card support, and opener couldn't have acted again. Even at lower levels, after eg 1M (2-level bid) P / or 1M (3-level bid) P /, opener often has a difficult decision with eg a 16-17 count. I found these the nightmare hands in Acol, where half the room has opened a strong NT, and you have no sensible way of telling who the contract belongs to. One of my favourite things about Fantunes is getting to play a weak NT without this issue, and in general with being well placed in competitive auctions, but on all the wider range hands you're going to have tougher high-level decisions.

In the first two cases you can presumably mitigate the problem with relays but a) relays with always come with a cost of losing something else, and b) you can still play relays if you open a full-strength 1M and get the same benefits.

1. Sure but I might surprise you with how little I know about the methods lol.

2. Gazilli and KI seem to help narrow the ranges.

3. 3,card raises haven't presented a problem. 2M-1 is a wide ranging 3 card raise.

4. Yes we play relays but generally on hands where we expect opener to be dummy.

Haven't been burnt by preemption yet but if they preempt it better be in a minor. The knowledge of opener having a major or a good hand is an improvement over standard.

[straube]

If Fantunes is willing to lose four hearts via opening 2D with 1453, why not lose four hearts via 2S with 5413? Not that I like losing hearts in either case, but sticking minimum hands that are 5M/4M with plus hands loses an advantage that its 1M opening might have.

I think the whole approach of Fantunes is wrong, but this seems an inconsistency which admits of flaw.

[Jinksy]

Phil, on 2016-July-12, 14:11, said:

1. Sure but I might surprise you with how little I know about the methods lol.

I was mainly envisaging me + regular vs you + regular - I started playing before Jacobs released his book, so have a very different system to anyone else who plays it (eg we still play the second 1♣ scheme here).

Re the rest, obv YMMV. I've found the competitive edge from full strength openings to be very helpful (and I agree that 'The knowledge of opener having a major or a good hand is an improvement over standard,' but that doesn't mean it's not substantially better still to know that it must be a good hand - even when they're competing in the other major).

Also I find the 'loss' of a natural 2N is barely a loss at all. On most hands, we probably do better in expectation from starting at a low level. The main cost is using sequences to show those hands that we could have used for other hand types, but they're typically highly distributional 2-suiters (in the versions I've seen) that will be substantially rarer than our 2N hand type (or than a natural 2N opening), and often powerful enough that they can look after themselves.

[Jinksy]

straube, on 2016-July-12, 17:48, said:

If Fantunes is willing to lose four hearts via opening 2D with 1453, why not lose four hearts via 2S with 5413? Not that I like losing hearts in either case, but sticking minimum hands that are 5M/4M with plus hands loses an advantage that its 1M opening might have.

Yeah, I think it's not that big a loss. The 5H5S hands are the main problem, and there's no analogous issue where you open 1m with a 5cM on the side.

[Phil]

From what I can tell so far playing these methods the loss of defining a 1M call as 14+ isn't as critical as keeping side 4 card majors out of 2M.