[catch22]

I've been considering playing a system losely based on that played by nunes and fantoni, but can't decide wether the strengths outweigh the weaknesses. The basic system is to open all unbalanced 9-13 point hands at the two level, 1NT is any balanced 12-14 count (can contain 5 card major), all one level bids are then 14+ and forcing with 2/1 responses. Just checking if anyone here as played this type of system and if so with what results. The key strengths seem to be in the reduction of the number of 2/1 hands that have to go through 1NT, with their system 2/1 can now be 10+ and you can get in the auction quickly with minimum unbalanced hands by opening two of the longest suit. The downsides are the loss of weak twos and the pressure that is placed on the 1NT opening which is required to contain balanced hands with 5 card majors. Would be interested in any views on the strengths and weaknesses of the approach. I'll probably give it a try anyway and will report back on what I find out albeit good or bad.

[DrTodd13]

1N containing 5cM is not where the pressure arises. "Presumed fit" two bids can get pounded on. Against best defense, I have my doubts as to the soundness of Ekrens type bids. Also, the 14+ range for every one opening seems too large.
Limited openings allow competition to be handled effectively. How about 1C being 18+ artificial and 1D-1S being 14-17. Do they play 4cM or 5cM?

[catch22]

I wasn't too concerned about competition, perhaps I should be. The opening bid except in the case of 1C is either 15+ balanced or 14+ unbalanced (5 cards except ID can be 4 when 4441), so responder has a better idea of the minimum holding and can be more agressive and can more readily identify game going hands.

Having thought about this further I'm revising my view on the strengths and weaknesses. Having said 1S-1NT is a strength of the system above standard, I need to revise that statement. You can more readily identify the game going/slam going hands but the cost is having a 1NT response of 0-9, which must put a lot of pressure on the opener. There was a hand from the Bemuda Bowl were the Italians got too high for this very reason.

[Free]

Hi, welcome to the forum!

I don't like the fact that ALL level-1 openings are forcing for 1 round, and all 2-level openers are 9-13 unbal. Might work for them, but seems a lot of evaluation of a hand, working out systems not to get too high,...

[MickyB]

The big downside of this system is the 2 bids. You will frequently preempt yourself out of a partscore or game, and occasionally go for a number against nothing. Unless the response structure can cope with it, 1 bids shouldn't be 100% forcing, much more likely partner has some extras and will overbid than him holding game in hand. My suggestion would be:

1♣ 15+♣s, bal, or any GF
1♦ 12+ 4+suit (4441 or 4D5C)
2♣ Precision style (6♣ or 5♣4major, 11-14)
2♦ Multi
2♥/2♠ Lucas, 5M4other.

The 1♣ opener is similar to Millennium Club, there is a summary on Daniel Neill's page:

http://www.geocities.../sys/index.html

You can mess around with different minimum opening strengths, moving the ranges for the multi/lucas 2s up and down.

[hrothgar]

Here is my own potentially biased view:

I very much like assumed fit methods such as Ekrens and Frellings Two bids, however, I believe that the theoretical merits of the structures depend on the strength of the opening.

Assumed fit methods work by jamming the bidding. This is a two edged sword. You stop the opponents from exploring for game, however, you significantly cramp your own constructive auctions. The tradeoff works very well when your hand is sufficiently weak that responder typically has no interest in slam. This allows player's to optimize the response structure to accurate investigate likely games while still providing lots of opportunities to escape at the part score level.

Opening 9-13 HCP hands at the two level strikes me as a major mistake. This range is too common and offers too much playing strength for assumed fit methods.

Your milage may vary...

[paulg]

There are two good pairs at my club who open unbalanced 9-13 point hands at the two level.

Almost without exception, every bidding problem they pose starts with one of these bids and involves their partner having to make a difficult decision.

I agree with the others who suggest that this is a tough range to handle at the two level.

Paul

[hrothgar]

cardsharp, on Jun 2 2004, 06:57 PM, said:

There are two good pairs at my club who open unbalanced 9-13 point hands at the two level.

Almost without exception, every bidding problem they pose starts with one of these bids and involves their partner having to make a difficult decision.

I agree with the others who suggest that this is a tough range to handle at the two level.

Paul

Note: From what I can tell, opening unbalanced hands with 8 - 12 HCP at the two level is reasonable sound. My primary worry is assumed fit styles such as Ekrens.

[MickyB]

hrothgar, on Jun 2 2004, 11:55 AM, said:

Note: From what I can tell, opening unbalanced hands with 8 - 12 HCP at the two level is reasonable sound. My primary worry is assumed fit styles such as Ekrens.

Why do you think opening all unbal 8-12s at the 2 level is sounder than assumed fit styles? Seems you still get all the problems - with a singleton in partner's suit, you will usually be playing a 5-1 if you pass, but if you bid you could be playing a 6-1 at the 3 level. Often whether you should be in game or not depends on whether partner's 2nd suit fits your hand well - but to find that out, you may have to go past the par contract for the hand. Take the Precision 2♣ (5♣4major or 6♣) - even though you have more space over 2♣ than any other 2 bid, and opener denies 5♣4♦ or a 5-5, it is still considered the weak point of any system that it appears in.

[hrothgar]

MickyB, on Jun 2 2004, 09:46 PM, said:

Why do you think opening all unbal 8-12s at the 2 level is sounder than assumed fit styles? Seems you still get all the problems - with a singleton in partner's suit, you will usually be playing a 5-1 if you pass, but if you bid you could be playing a 6-1 at the 3 level.

The strong opener's hand, the more likely we are to want to be able to explore game and the more constructive our us of bidding space needs to be.

Compare and contrast the following 2 bids

2H = 5+ Hearts and 5+ cards in another suit

2H = 4+ Hearts and (4+ Spades or 5+ Clubs)

Suppose I get dealt a 5=2=3=3 hand with game invitational values.
I think that I am better positioned to make the right choice opposite a 2H bid that promises 5+/5+ shape than I am opposite the second hand type.

[MickyB]

hrothgar, on Jun 2 2004, 02:01 PM, said:

Compare and contrast the following 2 bids

2H = 5+ Hearts and 5+ cards in another suit

2H = 4+ Hearts and (4+ Spades or 5+ Clubs)

Suppose I get dealt a 5=2=3=3 hand with game invitational values.
I think that I am better positioned to make the right choice opposite a 2H bid that promises 5+/5+ shape than I am opposite the second hand type.

Yes, but the original poster was suggesting a 2♥ opener being any unbal hand with 5 hearts...could be 4-5-2-2 or 0-5-5-4. I assumed from your comment that you felt this style was sounder than assumed fit preempts, but looking back you were just talking about unbalanced hands in general!

[Trpltrbl]

With a pair like that I don't think, it matters what system they play.
It's their judgement and cardevaluation what makes them good, they might even win playing SAYC

Mike

[Flame]

The main problem with this system is imo that the 1 level biddings are unlimited, this mean forcing and this sounds to me like something close to not playable, how can you response to 1s without a pass with 0-5 ? this will get you too high too many times, what i would change is to limit the 1 level bids to non GF and add all the GF bids into 1c which should be the only forcing opening.
good luck.
OK i checked and they do play those 1 level opening as forcing and if they do then saying its close to not playable is far from right, but i still dont like it.

This post has been edited by Flame: 2004-June-04, 02:57

[catch22]

As I see it the real problem hand is a balanced 16-17 count with a 5 card major. The wide ranging 1NT (0-9) means that opener probably as to move to what potentially could be a very uncomfortable contract at the 2 level, although they play 2C as either natural or 18+ unbalanced, so there is some additional definition there. Like all bridge systems there are strength and weaknesses, it may be down to the statistical frequency of the hands were they have an advantage as opposed to the frequency of the hands were they are weak. 17 opposite 0 is awful for the system, but how often does that occur. It looks an interesting system and it obviously works for them, though as Mike pointed out, maybe any old system would work as they are that good.

Many thanks to all who have replied, I've found it most useful and I know a lot more now than I did when I posed the questions. Don't touch it with a barge pole does seem to be the underlying message of a number of posts, but I'll probably give it a try, so it'll be easy pickings at my table