[Antoine Fourrière]

How about the following system:

1♣ weak notrump or 18+ notrump or 15+ with clubs
1♦ unbalanced with at least four diamonds
1♥ five cards
1♠ five cards
1NT strong notrump
2♣ weak-two bid in a major or weak two-suiter with at least a major
2♦ either a Precision 2♦ or an unbalanced game force
2♥ 11-14 with five clubs, four hearts and less than three spades
2♠ 11-14 with five clubs, four spades and less than three hearts
2NT 9-11 with six good clubs
3♣ 12-14 with six clubs

That 2♣ opening (which I described in a previous thread) allows the opener to open 2♦ to suggest a minimum 4441 or 5431 with short diamonds, and thus to better define the 1♣ opening, as in Strefa. (Packing together the minimum hands with short diamonds and the unbalanced game forces is unheard of, since Precision has no trouble opening the game forces with a strong club and natural bidding has no trouble opening the minimum hands with short diamonds with a natural club, but it still doesn't amount to a lot of hand types.)


Oops! Sorry, wrong forum.

[mikestar]

Interesting structure. I'd invert 2N and 3♣. In either case you may be wrongsiding the NT, but the stronger the hand, the less likely it is. Your 2♥/2♠ bids do well if you catch partner with 3+ cards in the major, but will get you to 3♣ on a fair number of 5-2 fits. May well be worth it for the clarification of the rest of the system.

[the hog]

1 level openings are pretty much PC.
Apart from better definition of the 1C opening, I'd be interested in knowing what you hope to gain. I have played similar 2M openings and have not enjoyed playing in a misfit when we have the majority of the points.

Also I believe you have too many bids for your long C openings; what you gain on your swings, you lose on the roundabouts. Your 2M openings cause a loss of weak 2 bids, or 2 suited 2 openings. I would find this an unaceptable payoff. I also believe that the 2D opening can be put to a much better use, (eg Wilkosz, Tutti Frutti, Multi), than the dubious Precision 2D bid.

I much prefer the present Strefa structure, which fwiw, I think is an outstanding system, far better than 2/1.

[Antoine Fourrière]

mikestar,

No, I think it is better to open 2N with a good preempt in clubs and 3♣ with six bad clubs in a 6331 (can open 1♣ with a 6322) and minimum opening values, since it is with the latter type that I'm afraid of giving them a penalty double.

Ron,

I find it logical to open more often with 2♣ or even 2♦ than with 2♥ or 2♠. (As a rule of thumb, I would say that it is right to open 2♣ more often than 2♥ or 2♠ but less often than 2♦ or 2♥.) WJ meets that standard, contrary to Strefa's Acol 2♣ or Sontag-Weichsel's six-card 2♣. But since opening 2♣ with either six clubs or five clubs and a four-card major is nevertheless shaky, it seems better to exchange these hands with the weak two-bids in a major and the weak two-suiters with at least a major, to give these somewhat doubtful hands a better probability of having the opponents doing the wrong thing. (Even good opponents still have a lot of opportunities of getting it wrong when you open with a kind of multi rather than with a natural preempt, although it won't be on the same deals.)

If it is right to open more often with 1♥ than with 1♠, then maybe it would be better to open 1♣ the minimum 5332s with spades, but not the minimum 5332s with hearts. I really don't like all these situations where opener might have rebid a three-card minor after 1♠ 1N.