[dcohio]

Has anyone ever seen anything like this?

Openings are:

1♣ 16+ forcing, artificial
....1♦ 8+ game force any shape
....1NT 6-7 any shape
....1♥/♠,2♣/♦ 0-5HCP 5+card

1♦ 13-15 no 5cM, 0+♦s

1♥ 13-15 5+♥s

1♠ 13-15 5+♠s

1NT 10-12
1♣/1NT rebid = 16-17
1♦/1NT rebid = 13-15
1♣/2NT rebid = 18-19
1♣/3NT rebid = 22-23
2NT 20-21

2♣,♦,♥,♠ 10-12 5+cards with an outside void or singleton

3 level bids preemptive 6-10 HCP 6+ cards

NAMYATS 4♣/♦
4M preemptive

Edited: fixed the 1M openings

[rbforster]

Some people play a strong club with a GF 1♦ response, although the rest of the structure seems less familiar. I suppose the very weak 1M openings aren't legal many places (although you could swap the 1M and 2M openings).

I don't see a bid for 5+M with 13-15.

[dcohio]

I think I have the 1M bids wrong... they must be the 13-15 bids. I left my page of notes at home and am trying to remember what we talked about. =)

I do know the system was designed for GCC legal...

[rbforster]

dcohio, on Feb 16 2010, 02:27 PM, said:

I think I have the 1M bids wrong... they must be the 13-15 bids. I left my page of notes at home and am trying to remember what we talked about. =)

I do know the system was designed for GCC legal...

Ah, that makes things much more familiar. A 0+ diamond and EHAA-style weak twos seem like a nice combination of sound-but-ambiguous 1m openers and preemptive 1N/2X openers. I expect if you want a more comprehensive and thought-out scheme for 1♣-1♦ GF, you might check awm's system or the later versions of Moscito's strong club. I think most of those use a double negative response (typically 1♠), and use the other responses (up through 2M) as various semipositives.

[spotlight7]

Hi:

There is no bid for 0-5 without a 5+ suit.

Regards,
Robert

[straube]

I don't like it. This structure is way too preemptive. Weak responders give too much direction to the auction.

[SteelWheel]

Dan O'Neill hosts a writeup on his website of something similar to this, called "Revision Club". In briefest summary, a 1♦ response is a waiting bid, similar to the 2♦ waiting response to 2♣ in standard systems, and can be any game force hand, balanced or otherwise, or a balanced 0-7. All immediate suit responses are natural and deny a game force opposite a 16 count. Sort of a "Reverse Precision" concept. Interesting idea... Writeup available here:

http://www.bridgewithdan.com/systems/revis...club_4th_ed.zip

[akhare]

Actually, I came up with something very similar a while back . You may want to consider playing 12+ - 15 for the 1 level openings and say 8-11 for the 2 level (depending on vulnerability of course). It might be best to retain 2♥/2♠ as loose preempts (especially the latter) and use only 2♣/2♦ for the 8-11 type hands.

The 1♣ - 1♦ GF idea is good, but I would recommend using one of the several semi-positive structures discussed in several threads on this forum. The 1♣ - 1N bid doesn't convey anything useful and that purpose is better served by a lower level bid (say 1♣ - 1♥). It would be useful to further specialize the 6-7 (5-7) responses into hands with one or both majors etc.

[straube]

akhare's right. After 1C-1N, opener has an impossible guess. Pass could be right, bidding could be right, and the auction is too high to relay for responder's pattern.

spotlight7's right. No bid for 0-7 with no 5-card suit.

The NT rebids after opening 1C...is that only after a 1D response? If so, those rebids chew up a great deal of bidding room. If it's meant after 1C-1M, 1N...why do you want to play 1N with 16-17 when you can pass responder's 5-card major when he's shown 0-5 hcp?

How does opener force after say 1C-2D? He might have Axx AKQxx x Kxxx and want to bid 2H nf or he might have AKxx AKxxx A KQx and want to bid 2H forcing.

1C-1D GF is used successfully. It saves a lot of room. You need to save a lot of room when responder has bad hands. Like 1C-1H as 5-7 and 1C-1S as 0-4.

Or you could just play 1C-1D as your 0-7.

Most of these solutions give both hands extra chances to bid.