[whereagles]

Hi all. I was thinking of tweaking 2/1 with the following twist:

1♣ = natural or any 20+ hand. Forcing for 1 round.

1♣ 1♦ = natural or 0-4 any shape.

Then you'd have

1♣ 1♦
2♦ = strong hand, 1 round forcing. Resp bids 2♥ with a bust and opener bids in transfer (2♠ = clubs, 3♣ = diams, etc). Resp fills transfer if *really* bust.

1♣ 1x
2♦ = game-forcing (opener has 20+, resp 5+). Follow up natural. Other rebids by opener are natural.

1♣ 1♦
2NT = 18-20. If 18-29 then clubs is best minor.

1♣ 1♦
2♦ 2♥
2NT = 21-23 system on.

The main motivation for using this scheme is that it allows opening a weak 2♣!!! The 2NT opener will be for a 55 minors weak or the 4 diam 5 clubs reverse, which cannot be bid naturally.

Plusses:
- Allows for a weak 2♣ opener.
- More precision with strong hands if responder bid 1♣ 1x.
- 2NT opener for the minors.

Minuses:
- Preempts mess you up more than usual, due to the overload placed in the 1♣ opener. Nethertheless, since the percentage of strong hands is really really low, 1♣ can safely be taken as natural.

So what do you think?

[hrothgar]

I think that you would be well served by reading "The Polish Club" by Matula...

[MickyB]

Probably no help whatsoever, but a couple of England Juniors played 1♣ as natural or any 20+ and 1♦ as natural or balanced. 1♣ then 1NT rebid showed the 20+ type.

[david_c]

whereagles, on Jan 13 2005, 02:13 PM, said:

The 2NT opener will be for a 55 minors weak or the 4 diam 5 clubs reverse, which cannot be bid naturally.

Why not open 1D with this hand?

[david_c]

whereagles, on Jan 13 2005, 02:13 PM, said:

Minuses:
- Preempts mess you up more than usual, due to the overload placed in the 1♣ opener. Nethertheless, since the percentage of strong hands is really really low, 1♣ can safely be taken as natural.

I'd say it's only half true that 1♣ can be safely taken as natural. The fact that 1♣ includes 20+ hands doesn't make life any harder for responder at his first turn. The problem comes later when opener makes a strong rebid - it's difficult to distinguish the 20+ hands from shapely hands with clubs.

[the hog]

david_c, on Jan 14 2005, 11:03 AM, said:

whereagles, on Jan 13 2005, 02:13 PM, said:

Minuses:
- Preempts mess you up more than usual, due to the overload placed in the 1♣ opener. Nethertheless, since the percentage of strong hands is really really low, 1♣ can safely be taken as natural.

I'd say it's only half true that 1♣ can be safely taken as natural. The fact that 1♣ includes 20+ hands doesn't make life any harder for responder at his first turn. The problem comes later when opener makes a strong rebid - it's difficult to distinguish the 20+ hands from shapely hands with clubs.

This is not correct. Polish Club has been in existence for over 30 years and has bid this way with no difficulties. What Whereagles is proposing is nothing more than Polish Club - see Hrothgar's post above.

[MickyB]

The_Hog, on Jan 14 2005, 04:53 AM, said:

david_c, on Jan 14 2005, 11:03 AM, said:

whereagles, on Jan 13 2005, 02:13 PM, said:

Minuses:
- Preempts mess you up more than usual, due to the overload placed in the 1♣ opener. Nethertheless, since the percentage of strong hands is really really low, 1♣ can safely be taken as natural.

I'd say it's only half true that 1♣ can be safely taken as natural. The fact that 1♣ includes 20+ hands doesn't make life any harder for responder at his first turn. The problem comes later when opener makes a strong rebid - it's difficult to distinguish the 20+ hands from shapely hands with clubs.

This is not correct. Polish Club has been in existence for over 30 years and has bid this way with no difficulties. What Whereagles is proposing is nothing more than Polish Club - see Hrothgar's post above.

1♣-(1♥)-P-(4♥)
Isn't 4♠ now 20+ with no implication of a club holding, so with a wildly distributional 15 you need to bid something else?

[MickyB]

david_c, on Jan 14 2005, 12:52 AM, said:

whereagles, on Jan 13 2005, 02:13 PM, said:

The 2NT opener will be for a 55 minors weak or the 4 diam 5 clubs reverse, which cannot be bid naturally.

Why not open 1D with this hand?

Because the alternative is it showing 5-5 minors weak! Anything to escape that...

[the hog]

"1♣-(1♥)-P-(4♥)
Isn't 4♠ now 20+ with no implication of a club holding, so with a wildly distributional 15 you need to bid something else? "

Eh? I don't understand this comment at all. Yes 4S in the above given auction would show 19+ with long S and clearly a very good hand. With a wildly distributional 15 count you obviously would not have opened 1C.

[Gerben47]

What you describe is not exactly Polish Club, which uses 2♣ as a Precision opening bid. However German open team players Gotard - Piekarek (from Polish origin) include all ♣ hands in 1♣ and play 2♣ as weak opening bid.

[MickyB]

The_Hog, on Jan 14 2005, 09:18 AM, said:

"1♣-(1♥)-P-(4♥)
Isn't 4♠ now 20+ with no implication of a club holding, so with a wildly distributional 15 you need to bid something else? "

Eh? I don't understand this comment at all. Yes 4S in the above given auction would show 19+ with long S and clearly a very good hand. With a wildly distributional 15 count you obviously would not have opened 1C.

I can't find any reference to the hand now, and my memory of it is very hazy, but IIRC...In a world championship, a Pole rebid 5♣ on this sequence on a black 2 suiter (6-5 or 7-5); This resulted in 1400, when 4♠ would have gone for 300.

[david_c]

The_Hog, on Jan 13 2005, 11:53 PM, said:

david_c, on Jan 14 2005, 11:03 AM, said:

I'd say it's only half true that 1♣ can be safely taken as natural. The fact that 1♣ includes 20+ hands doesn't make life any harder for responder at his first turn. The problem comes later when opener makes a strong rebid - it's difficult to distinguish the 20+ hands from shapely hands with clubs.

This is not correct. Polish Club has been in existence for over 30 years and has bid this way with no difficulties. What Whereagles is proposing is nothing more than Polish Club - see Hrothgar's post above.

Oh, I didn't mean to imply that there was a hole in the system - I like to play this sort of thing myself. But you have to realise that there are some hands where your "natural" opening bid would be 1♣ but it's dangerous to do that because your normal rebid would be taken as showing a 20+ hand.

[helene_t]

Does this system include a neboulous 1♦? Or does "natural" clubs include ballanced hands with a 4-card clubs?

And how would you rebid with a 6-card clubs and something less than a GF hand? Seems as the ranges for
1♣-1♦
2/3♣
would be rather wide.

[whereagles]

hrothgar: I have the polish club book I realize there are a few similarities between my idea and PC, so I might go and check how PC solves some of the issues.

Helene: 1D is natural, but if you want to use a 9-11 1NT you can dump the 12-14 hand into 1C opener and the 15-17 one into 1D. (Or the other way around.)

As for club one-suiters, I would bid them as follows:

11-15:
Open 1C, rebid 2C

16-18:
Open 1C, rebid 3C

19-21:
1C 1x
2D

1C 1D
2D 2H
2S 3C <-- now pass with 19-21, bid on with 22+.

In any case, I'm happy to know polish club players have sucessefully dealt with interference over 30 years, so I'm convinced the maminsky club can be a winner

[hrothgar]

whereagles, on Jan 14 2005, 07:56 PM, said:

hrothgar: I have the polish club book I realize there are a few similarities between my idea and PC, so I might go and check how PC solves some of the issues.r

Polish Club is a very well designed system, evolving after years of experimentation by some very able theorists. With all due respect, you need to START by studying their work and understanding why the system is laid out the way it did.

From my perspective, the version that you are offering seems badly flawed...

Most notably:

The decision to treat 2♣ as weak and preemptive is going to severely overload you 1♣ opening

Your constructive opening bids feature a very high range. Once you allow a 1♠ opening on an unbalanced 19 count, you might as well play a strong 2♣ opening.

I fail to understand the purpose of your tinkering: When push comes to show, you have all the costs of a poorly defined two-way 1♣ opening and a nebulous 1♦ without effectively limiting the strength of your 1 level openings...

It seems that you are giving up an aweful lot in order to be able to show a "weak two" in clubs...

[whereagles]

I have already studied the polish club. I don't see how my treatment, which is so similar to PC, can be so badly flawed when PC is, in your own words, a very well designed system.

The overload of 1C seems marginal to me. With respect to PC, the only hand I'm dumping into 1C is the 11-15 5 clubs opener, a hand which I actually much rather open at the 1-level.

The purpose of this twinkering is simple, as I said:
- Allow for a weak 2C opener, a very common hand-type, especially if you open it on 5 cards as I do.
- Improve precision if opener is strong and resp has 5+.

[david_c]

hrothgar, on Jan 14 2005, 12:09 PM, said:

I fail to understand the purpose of your tinkering:  When push comes to show, you have all the costs of a poorly defined two-way 1♣ opening and a nebulous 1♦ without effectively limiting the strength of your 1 level openings...

That seems a bit harsh - this 1♣ opener isn't going to behave much differently from a Standard 1♣, even in competition. And if I understand it correctly, the 1♦ opener isn't nebulous.

Meanwhile, if you play a reasonably frequent meaning for 2♣, that could easily score a few successes.

[hrothgar]

>I have already studied the polish club. I don't see how my treatment,
>which is so similar to PC, can be so badly flawed when PC is, in your own
>words, a very well designed system.

I was hoping to avoid this whole discussion, however, since you insist:

1. The maximum strength for your "constructive" opening bdis is much too strong. Polish club is characterized by limited opening bids showing 12-17 HCP hands. Opener's range is tightly defined, allow responder to accurately judge the maximum strength of the two hands.

In contrast, your constructive openings show 12 - 19 HCP. You have added in a range of very strong, comparatively rare hand types. In doing so, you are severely degrading the utility of the limited opening.

>The overload of 1C seems marginal to me. With respect to PC,
>the only hand I'm dumping into 1C is the 11-15 5 clubs opener,
>a hand which I actually much rather open at the 1-level.

2. When playing Polish Club, a 1♣ openiing explictly denies 12-14 HCP with 5+ Clubs. Consequently, any rebid in clubs shows a strong (15+ HCP hand). You are trying to work arround this problem by using a "simple" rebid in clubs to show 11 -14 HCP and jumping to 3♣ with 15+ HCP.

(A) You are going to encounter enormous problems during constructive auctions:

Example: You hold

♠ 7
♥ AK53
♦ Q32
♣ AK542

The auction starts 1♣ - 1♠

What is your rebid?

2♣ showing a weak hand with 6 clubs???
2♦ As some kind of relay?
2♥ showing 5+ Clubs and 4 Hearts?
3♣ suppressing your Heart suit???

If you chose 2♥, please explain how you plan to show "strong" hands with primary Hearts...

If you want to use the 2♦ relay, you might want to consider that the Poles believe that the relay needs to promise at least 3+ cards in Opener's suit to be able to hand intervention...

Example:

You hold

♠ Q542
♥ 6
♦ K3
♣ AK9542

You open 1♣ and partner responds 1♦

Whats your rebid?

A 1♠ response completely supresses your Club suit...
A 2♣ response looses Spades...

(B) These are construvtive auctions, where your system is expected to shine... Through in competitive bidding and life gets really ugly.

[david_c]

whereagles, on Jan 13 2005, 02:13 PM, said:

1♣ 1♦
2NT = 18-20.

Am I right in inferring from this that 1♣:1♦,1NT would be 12-14 balanced? That would be different from Polish Club!

[hrothgar]

david_c, on Jan 14 2005, 11:08 PM, said:

whereagles, on Jan 13 2005, 02:13 PM, said:

1♣ 1♦
2NT = 18-20.

Am I right in inferring from this that 1♣:1♦,1NT would be 12-14 balanced? That would be different from Polish Club!

David_C has raised another point worth noting:

1♣ - 1♦
2NT

1♣ = Maminsky Club
1♦ = I'm broke - You have no transport to my hand
2NT = I have 18-20 balanced, please double me...