[david_c]

MickyB, on Oct 23 2005, 01:02 PM, said:

Having thought about this a bit more - I think that opening 1♦ and rebidding 1NT to show precisely a 5332 is inefficient, playing either a multi-club or natural 1 level openings. If you are going to open 1♣ on all weak NTs I think you need to use an artificial 1NT rebid. This is what I do in one partnership (which uses a 1♣ opener as natural or balanced):

1♦:1♥, 1N = both minors, clubs at least as long as diamonds
1♦:1♥, 2♣ = both minors, diamonds longer than clubs
1♦:1♠, 1N = both minors, either way around
1♦:1♠, 2♣ = 5♦4♥

Yes, if 1♦ promises an unbalanced hand then this scheme is great. I much prefer your method to the one in Millennium Club.

[Gerben42]

Quote

In WJ05 we usually open 1♦ on minimum balanced hands with four diamonds. But many other Polish systems seem to prefer 1♣ (sometimes even with 5♦-3-3-2). Does anyone have an opinion on which is better?

The reason to play Polish ♣ is to have an advantage mostly when you do NOT open 1♣ (as with most ♣ systems). Of course after 1♣ and 4♠ overcall you are badly placed. But you get a lot in return.

I prefer the 1-bid structure of WJ2005, so 1♦ shows one of:

11 - 17, unbalanced with 4+♦
12 - 14, balanced with 4/5♦

The inference "unbalanced" in WJ2000 is nice but IMHO not nice enough. You want to open 1♦ as often as possible and you still have two big advantages over the "field". Also including these hands into 1♦ makes 1♣ simpler (1♣ - 1♦ - 1M)