[whereagles]

or you can play my strong diamond system : dump all 11-15 with no 5 card major into a 1♣ opener and use tranfer replies

[Codo]

brianshark, on Apr 23 2008, 05:13 PM, said:

So it seems that preserving the quality of the 2♣ opening and making the 1♣ include more shapes is the way to go. But how far to go is the question?

I could go with David (and a few others') suggestion to open 1♣ with 11-14 balanced, or semi-balanced such as 4414, most (42)25, and unbalanced such as (43)15 or (322)6 or 3316 with a weak ♣ suit, and still open 2♣ with some 54 hands if the strength is in the right place or the singleton is in the wrong place.

Or I could by rule include all 5♣4M hands and 2♣ becomes 6+. But what to do with 4405. Am I to open this 1♣ as well?

I think 2 ♣ as 6+ is not playable in WJ2005.

Personally, I follo the rule that concentrated values in the main suit s of a 4225 or 4315 are treated as a 2 Club opening and with values in the short suits as a weak NT. Works well for me. Soemtimes I treat a 4135 as a 4 card diamond, so you can get out of the rain quite ofte.

The win/lose ratio of the 2 Club opening is not the best, but it is still okay. Yes we would like to have better scores for this particular opening, but I doubt that we can reach this goal without problems in other areas. (Like implying a nebolous 1 Diamond or sacrifice our 2 ♦ mini multi)

[david_c]

brianshark, on Apr 23 2008, 09:13 AM, said:

But what to do with 4405. Am I to open this 1♣ as well?

Yeah you have to open this 1♣ really, since if you open 2♣ there's just too much danger of missing game in a major. Actually I think one of the WJ books (WJ00?) says this.

Fortunately in the time I've been playing PC I haven't had one of these hands yet.

Quote

But in polish we like our 1♦ as 4+ and 2♦ as weak multi (or wilkosz if you can get away with it). That means there is a certain amount of hands that have to fit into either 1♣ or 2♣ and can't go anywhere else.

I'd actually be perfectly happy to give up 2♦ if it actually solved the problem; but it doesn't. The Precision 2♦ is not particularly useful since the worst hands for a 1♣ opening are those with a singleton major. I thought about 2♦ showing 5♣4♠ but from dealing some example hands it seemed that this would be even worse than opening 1♣.

[the hog]

At the risk of being pedantic..
What is "polish"? A system that brightens up your day? I know what "Polish" is.

If you play the Polish Club variant Strefa, you can open these hands with 1C. Pszowa - Kwiecken played this.

[Hilver]

Mbodell, on Apr 22 2008, 03:36 PM, said:

I agree that opening a 6+ precision 2♣ is a great bid that leads to great results.  Putting the (34)15 and 4405 and 4414 hands in 2♦ works very well (although comes up very rarely if your 2♦ is just 0-1 diamond 3 suiters) as does putting them in 1♦ (although you may need better methods).

For two years now I play a modified version of Revision Club and play 2♣ and 2♦ in the way You described it. In practise it works out well.

[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on Apr 22 2008, 10:45 AM, said:

It's just necessary for 2♣ to show 6+ clubs, it works terribly when it shows 5+ clubs. There isn't much else to it.

I don't agree.

Well, I do agree. 2♣ sucks when it shows 5+ clubs. The problem is, whatever bid you put 4135 into tends to suck, so I put it in 2 clubs because that's our least common opener.

I like 2♦ actually promising both majors, and I like 1♦ promising 4+ diamonds. If I put the evil hand there, it hurts those openings. Where I'd really like to put it is 1NT, but the ACBL frowns on that.

I love my 1♦ bid (4+, not balanced 1st and 2nd seat). When I was tracking it, it was second only to the 12-15NT in terms of great results. I just can't bring myself to throw the 'extra' hand in there. It would be like changing your 1♥ opening to include 4 card majors only for exactly 4-4-3-2 hands with 12-14 hcp.

[han]

The_Hog, on Apr 23 2008, 07:35 PM, said:

At the risk of being pedantic..
What is "polish"? A system that brightens up your day? I know what "Polish" is.

Shoe Polish makes you look good.

[jdonn]

The_Hog, on Apr 23 2008, 07:35 PM, said:

At the risk of being pedantic..
What is "polish"? A system that brightens up your day? I know what "Polish" is.

Saying that comment is made "At the risk of being pedantic" is like setting my house on fire and saying "At the risk of warming your toes...."

[dake50]

As hrothgar, what do you expect from 2C?
A source of tricks if partner can punt 3N? Then it's excellent.
A space taker when they have majors to barrage 2C, 3C+? Again excellent.
A constructive bid to find our best game, slam? Much poorer.

[brianshark]

2♣ is actually great when you have game or slam values. You usually find the right game and slam fairly easily.

It's when it's only a partscore deal that it costs because we may miss a more effective 1NT or 2M.