[tysen2k]

I have never played any version of MOSCITO but I have several system descriptions over the years and can see how it has changed.

The point of this is that I am building a system and toying around with 1M openings that show 4+ in that major and 0-3 in the other major (however, mine will always be unbalanced hands). This is how MOSCITO used to be but it has since changed to using transfer openings that don't deny length in the other major.

Was there something wrong with the 0-3 in other major concept? Why was it dropped? Or was it dropped simply because the lower-level transfer openings could handle more hand types?

Since I want to make a system that is GCC-legal, I am not interested in transfer openings. But has anyone played the older version of MOSCITO that had the 0-3 in the other major rule? How did it work out?

Thanks.

[hrothgar]

Hi Tysen...

Here's my understanding regarding the evolution of the system. (PLease note: Paul Marston is often happy to discuss bidding and he's a MUCH better source for things MOSCITO)

Playing" Old style" MOSCITO,

1♥ = 4+ Hearts, 0-3 Spades
1♠ = 4+ Spades, 0-3 Hearts
1N = 4+ /4+ in the majors

There was a lot to be said for the system. In particular, the negative inferences available from the 1♥ and 1♠ openings are very nice. With this said and done, there were also a couple major draw backs. Specifically, the lack of a natural NT opening bid introduced problems in both constructive and competitive sequences. Equally significant, the 1♦ opening (no 4 card major) could be balanced or unbalanced and had no know anchor suit. Not a very desirable part of the bidding arsenal...

I have occasionally toyed with the idea of experimenting with a more modern variant of the original structure. If I were to do so, it would be based on the following

1♦ = No 4 card major
1♥ = 4+ Spades, 0-3 Hearts (denies 13-14 balanced)
1♠ = 4+ Hearts, 0-3 Spades (denies 11-12 balanced)
1N = 11+ - 14 Balanced
2♣ = Unbalanced with 4+ Hearts and 4+ Spades

You can create a nice symmetric structure at the cost of being ofrced up one step after the 2♣ opening (damn 3 suiters). You also can't play 1NT after a 1♠ opening.

[tysen2k]

I'm thinking about something along these lines for the 3rd/4th seat openings of my "Shape System." So that menas that partner is almost always 0-16 balanced:

1♣ = 13+ balanced
1♦ = either no 4cM or 44+ in both majors, but always unbalanced
1M = 4+ major, 0-3 other major, always unbalanced
1N = 10-12 balanced

The 1♦ bid is a little freaky, but not too tough to resolve since it's always unbalanced. My simulations also indicate that it would be a bitch for the opponents to overcall. Plus if they do come in, it gives partner a better guess as to which hand type.

What do you think?

[hrothgar]

Jlall, on Sep 22 2005, 09:52 PM, said:

tysen2k, on Sep 22 2005, 01:49 PM, said:

1♦ = either no 4cM or 44+ in both majors, but always unbalanced

This is really GCC legal?

What do the Ayatollah's Correct Bidding Lessons have to do with bidding theory?

[luis]

To add some references
In our NBO opening in transfer is considered satanic and illegal, they can burn you alive for doing it so we use a version of Moscito called "german moscito" that modified openings to make them more legal under normal circunstances.

1♣ 15+
1♦ 10-14 no 4 card major
1♥ 10-14 4+ hearts 3- spades
1♠ 10-14 4+ spades 3- hearts
1NT balanced 11-14
2♣ 10-14 both majors at least 5/4

[hrothgar]

luis, on Sep 22 2005, 09:56 PM, said:

To add some references
In our NBO opening in transfer is considered satanic and illegal, they can burn you alive for doing it so we use a version of Moscito called "german moscito" that modified openings to make them more legal under normal circunstances.

1♣ 15+
1♦ 10-14 no 4 card major
1♥ 10-14 4+ hearts 3- spades
1♠ 10-14 4+ spades 3- hearts
1NT balanced 11-14
2♣ 10-14 both majors at least 5/4

What do you do with three suiters with no 5 card major?

[luis]

hrothgar, on Sep 22 2005, 07:01 PM, said:

luis, on Sep 22 2005, 09:56 PM, said:

To add some references
In our NBO opening in transfer is considered satanic and illegal, they can burn you alive for doing it so we use a version of Moscito called "german moscito" that modified openings to make them more legal under normal circunstances.

1♣ 15+
1♦ 10-14 no 4 card major
1♥ 10-14 4+ hearts 3- spades
1♠ 10-14 4+ spades 3- hearts
1NT balanced 11-14
2♣ 10-14 both majors at least 5/4

What do you do with three suiters with no 5 card major?

we use
2♦ as 10-14 3 suiter always with clubs.
2♥ weak 2 in hearts OR 10-14 3 suiter short in clubs (always has 4 hearts)

Since both show one 4 card suit they are legal openings in most scenarios.

[tysen2k]

Jlall, on Sep 22 2005, 10:52 AM, said:

tysen2k, on Sep 22 2005, 01:49 PM, said:

1♦ = either no 4cM or 44+ in both majors, but always unbalanced

This is really GCC legal?

Yes, 1♦ can be absolutely anything as long as it is 10+ HCP.

[Kaapo]

tysen2k, on Sep 22 2005, 01:49 PM, said:

1♣ = 13+ balanced
1♦ = either no 4cM or 44+ in both majors, but always unbalanced
1M = 4+ major, 0-3 other major, always unbalanced
1N = 10-12 balanced

Danish junior Martin Schaltz plays something like this with Søren Christiansen. It's a system calld Smart (derived from their first names). An English convention card is here: Smart English. Unfortunately the PDF seems to be missing the suit symbols. There's also a newer but probably more or less the same description in Danish: Smart Danish. Dunno which is easier to read.

(Some help: krav = forcing, UK = forcing to game, kunstig = conventional, svag = weak, med = with, UT = NT, som åbn = like opening, ej = no, og = and, kort (adj) = short, kort (noun) = card, farve = colour = suit,...)

[trefl44]

Awaiting Paul Marston's complete version of Moscito I found strange things appearing when visiting his website http://www.australia...dge/moscito.pdf.

Have you too?

[han]

No, I don't see anything strange appearing, all I see is an excellent read that promises that the final book will be very interesting.