The bidding system MALEX (Major's Length Exact) has these opening bids :
1C each hand with 14 P (and some with 13 P)
Rule of 18 up to 13 P :
1D with 4= Hearts & 0-3 Spades - not 3433 , may have a longer minor
1H with 4= Spades & 0-3 Hearts - not 4333 , may have a longer minor
1S with 4+ Hearts & 4+ Spades
With 9 - 13 P :
2C with 5= Hearts & 0-3 Spades
2D with 5= Spades & 0-3 Hearts
2H with 6+ Hearts & 0-3 Spades
2S with 6+ Spades & 0-3 Hearts
With 11 - 13 P :
1N semi-balanced (4432 , 5422 , 5332 , 6322) , no 4card Major (and not 4333)
2N with 5+ Clubs & 4+ Diamonds
3m with 6+ cards
Pass up to 13 P (good 13 are always 14) with 4333
and with 31 Majors & 5= Diamonds & 4= Clubs - no place to open , sorry
The system works fine , at least to us non-top-player
- konstructive advices are welcome
KES - still trying to re-invent the wheel
Page 1 of 1
MALEX again
#2
Posted 2008-June-28, 07:19
14 hcp for strong ♣ is too weak.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#3
Posted 2008-June-28, 07:19
Having tinkered with openings similar to what you have (but from a suspensor forcing pass basis):
The main defect of your system is that you really lose out big on minor hands. Opening 2NT or higher with such hands will be the biggest losers in such a system, and is a very large hole imo.
Yes, you can play it-but I think you'd do better with a standard system than with MALEX.
That said, the idea is sound- have you looked at MOSCITO forcing pass/strong club systems?
The main defect of your system is that you really lose out big on minor hands. Opening 2NT or higher with such hands will be the biggest losers in such a system, and is a very large hole imo.
Yes, you can play it-but I think you'd do better with a standard system than with MALEX.
That said, the idea is sound- have you looked at MOSCITO forcing pass/strong club systems?
Ming
--Always remember you're unique. Just like everyone else.
--Always remember you're unique. Just like everyone else.
#4
Posted 2008-June-29, 04:01
I have played systems that used 1♣ and 1♦ artificial.
One of my experinces was, that these openings worked much better than expected:
2♣ = 5+ clubs, 4+ diamonds
2♦ = 5+diamonds, 4+ clubs
These bid take a lot of strain from the one-level minor-openers. The more exact their point range is, the better they work, but of course then they take less strain of the openings.
At a glance it seems that we start the bidding uncomfterbly high, but responder will often know the right strain immidiately, and will only have to check for strenght.
It is, of course, not a perfect solution, but if you want to free 1♣ and 1♦, I found these to be very usefull.
I recommend playing penalty doubles over opponents interference. (When you have showed nine specific cards, the need for takeout is infrequent.)
One of my experinces was, that these openings worked much better than expected:
2♣ = 5+ clubs, 4+ diamonds
2♦ = 5+diamonds, 4+ clubs
These bid take a lot of strain from the one-level minor-openers. The more exact their point range is, the better they work, but of course then they take less strain of the openings.
At a glance it seems that we start the bidding uncomfterbly high, but responder will often know the right strain immidiately, and will only have to check for strenght.
It is, of course, not a perfect solution, but if you want to free 1♣ and 1♦, I found these to be very usefull.
I recommend playing penalty doubles over opponents interference. (When you have showed nine specific cards, the need for takeout is infrequent.)
_____________________________________
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher
Page 1 of 1

Help
