[awm]

I believe that my example hands are very much on the weaker side of 2♠ bids. Doesn't this call go up to 11 or maybe even 12 hcp? Or do you start all invites with 2♦ as well as (almost) all game forces? You can add a (wasted?) queen to basically any of them, I suspect.

After 2♣-2♠, opener will often bid 2NT as a waiting bid and responder can describe his hand. Two-suited GF has another path (direct jump for me) so 2♣-2♠-2N/3♣-3red is NF and invitational. 2♣-2♠-3♣ is always minimum (with good clubs) and responder can pass that on a lot of hand types.

If your 2M bids are very much weaker than an invite (say at most around 9 hcp) such that you are highly unlikely to make game barring a big fit, you will do pretty well with the non-forcing treatment when it comes up. The problem is that now 2♦ has to handle way too many hand types and you will be guessing on the (potentially more valuable) invitational hands a lot. My impression is that most who play 2M as NF use it as at least a light invite (so like 8-12) which seems virtually unplayable to me.

[bluecalm]

Quote

We don't have the 4-4 major problem because we do not open 2♣ with a side 4-cd major.

Y, my comments were specifically about 2C allowing for 5C-4M. I don't have opinion about 2C promising 6 or other variations but I see that in those cases finding 2M partial is not that important.

Quote

Non-descript minimum, I suppose you pass?

Hell, no. Pass is terrible. It's not even minimum for 3S. Maybe there are some junk hands with 3 card support which pass 2M but this is certainly not one of them.
Some Polish players play that 3S is almost obligatory with support here and 3♦ is good raise.

Quote

Max with doubleton support

This is a problem hand. Fortunately I think passing is not that bad. Sometimes we miss game, more often we are in optimal 5-2 major partial not achievable by other means.

Quote

You also have to bid with singleton or void

Yes, most people (and me) do that here. 2N without 6clubs and 3C with 6 clubs.
However there are some good players here who often pass with say stiff honor. It's a judgement call. I think passing is generally bad.

Quote

Or what if partner happens to hold ♠Axxxx ♥xxx ♦KQJxx? Now you missed a pretty good 5♦ game. Or what if partner has ♠AQxxxxx ♥xxx ♦Kx ♣x? Even when opener has the "perfect hand to pass" with doubleton support and a min, you can land in the wrong partial or miss a game.

Those are all real problem hands for 2C opening.

Quote

Losing the ability to play 2M when opener has exactly doubleton and a min seems like a small loss

I basically agree with everything you said with the exception of the above. My intuition (and many players here share it) is that loss is in fact very important. I am not too convinced I am right about it but I would need some evidence to reconsider as playing 2M as forcing goes against common wisdom here and this common wisdom is quite a strong argument as most Polish players (including good ones) play this opening and there were variosu tries to make it suck less and none of them seem successful.

[semeai]

awm, on 2012-September-28, 10:35, said:

Playing 2M forcing is great for coping with hands having "two places to play" (like a 5M and secondary club fit, or a 5/5 invite)

The 5M and secondary club fit hands can bid 2♦ if the auction 2♣-2♦;2M shows 3. If partner doesn't show 3 of your major you can then bid 3♣ if you're just invitational.

[You can still have 2M by opener show 3 even if you allow 4M-5C hands in your 2C bid. See e.g. the Fantunes structure I linked above.]

[bluecalm]

Quote

The 5M and secondary club fit hands can bid 2♦ if the auction 2♣-2♦;2M shows 3.

This is very interesting imo. I like this idea and intuitively I feel it may work better than standard approach.

[Zelandakh]

bluecalm, on 2012-September-28, 02:32, said:

How do you guys find 4-4/4-3 major partials playing those transfers ?
I mean, hands like 3-4-5-1/4-4-4-1 etc come up all the time and this is important (at matchpoints especially) to be able to run from 2C.

With 4 cards in the major and invitational or better strength you transfer. Partner shows you immediately whether they have 3 or 4 card support so finding the fit is trivial. If you have both majors then you start with 2♦ and show spades if no heart fit has emerged. This is the reason for the odd-looking "2NT = 5♠4♥ invite" response; otherwise you could potentially lose a major fit here. Obviously you cannot run with a weak hand and a 4 card suit - I do not think that is normal for non-forcing 2M response either though.

bluecalm, on 2012-September-28, 02:32, said:

You won't be able to play in 2M then with 5 cards. Seems like big loss. I am again talking from matchpoint perspective. What we often done here is to play 2M as non forcing but partner don't pass with 0-1 in that suit nor with support (usually), making 2M bids non-forcing but wide ranging. 2C is awful opening when it comes to partials and it seems the methods you propose cripple it even more (I am talking matchpoints wise).

You can transfer with a weak hand and a 5 card major if you are prepared to play in 3M should partner have 3 or 4 card support. However, the transfers do make it possible to, for example, play in a 6-1 major suit fit at the 2 level. In other words, I think transfers are better at handling part-score hands than 2M natural at the cost of being easier for the opponents to compete over. For me, this is the biggest disadvantage of the method.

In any case, my experience has been that transfer responses are simply much easier to deal with than more traditional schemes. So much so that I would prefer to rearrange the hands between the minor suit openings rather than be forced to play them. Obviously that is a very personal viewpoint though.

[johnu]

After a 2♦relay,

2♣ - 2♦
2♥ ________________ 4 hearts or 6+ clubs with a maximum
2♠ ________________ 4 spades
2NT _______________ 6+ clubs with a minimum and 2 outside stoppers
3♣________________ 6+ clubs with a minimum and 1 outside stopper

Continuations:

2♣ - 2♦
2♥ - 2♠ _____________ Relay
2NT ________________ 6+ clubs with a maximum and 2 outside stoppers
3♣ _________________ 6+ clubs with a maximum and 1 outside stopper
3♦ _________________ 4 hearts, fragment in diamonds
3♥ _________________ 4 hearts

3♦ by responder is another relay

[rhm]

bluecalm, on 2012-September-28, 11:35, said:

as most Polish players (including good ones) play this opening and there were various tries to make it suck less and none of them seem successful.

Could it be that this is so because 2♣ just showing 5 cards sucks and the US are right and the Polish wrong here?
In most variants of Polish Club 1♦ shows almost as many diamonds as 2♣ shows clubs.
Given the different space consumption between a 1♦ and a 2♣ opening this just does not look right to me.
Play 1♦ as 5 cards or unbalanced. If unbalanced it will be at least 4 cards unless specifically 4-1 in the majors, in which case it could be 3 cards (fairly rare exception).

Now 2♣ can guarantee 6 cards.

Rainer Herrmann

[Zelandakh]

What are you opening on (34)15 Rainer?

[rhm]

Zelandakh, on 2012-October-04, 06:24, said:

What are you opening on (34)15 Rainer?

1♣

I am talking about Polish Club, not Precision. One (important) difference between Polish Club and strong club system is that 1♦ is not nebulous, quite well defined and tends to show diamonds.

Rainer Herrmann

[bluecalm]

Quote

Could it be that this is so because 2♣ just showing 5 cards sucks

Surely so.

Quote

and the US are right and the Polish wrong here?

In what sense ? That 2C should promise 6 ? It would be completely different system then, you can't do that in pc.

Quote

Given the different space consumption between a 1♦ and a 2♣ opening this just does not look right to me.

I don't think space consumption argument is valid at all.

Quote

If unbalanced it will be at least 4 cards unless specifically 4-1 in the majors, in which case it could be 3 cards (fairly rare exception).

What about (3-4)-1-5 or (4-2)-2-5 ? People open 2C with those shapes too.
It's sometimes nice to do it with xx AQxx xx AKTxx or something.
Also what about constructive bidding in sequences:

1D - 2C
?

In pc you have simple natural bidding with 2D promising 5 and 2H/2S being reverses. You need some artificial scheme with 1D being 3+.
I mean, maybe precision is better than pc but those are completely different systems and that change would ruin it imo. People play pc because it's simple, natural and easy to use and having natural and descriptive 1D opening is part of it.

[Zelandakh]

rhm, on 2012-October-04, 06:32, said:

1♣

I am talking about Polish Club, not Precision. One (important) difference between Polish Club and strong club system is that 1♦ is not nebulous, quite well defined and tends to show diamonds.

Being PC is the reason why I asked. My own system was described (by gwnn) as "PC with a weak NT" so I am well aware of what shapes are included. (34)15 is part of the 2♣ opening and not addressed in your previous post. What you are describing sounds similar to the way AUC handles these hands. That is possible of course but if doing this it would seem to make more sense to simply play the entire AUC system and forget you thought it was PC at all.

[rhm]

bluecalm, on 2012-October-04, 06:36, said:

Surely so.



In what sense ? That 2C should promise 6 ? It would be completely different system then, you can't do that in pc.

Why?.
Jassem mentions it specifically in WJ05 as an option.
I play it with little difficulty

Quote

I don't think space consumption argument is valid at all.

Come on. The whole discussion in this thread centers on that we do not have the space over 2♣ we need to distinguish different responding hands.
Why else all these discussions about 2M forcing or not etc.
Differentiating different responding hands over 1♦ is far less of a problem.

Quote

What about (3-4)-1-5 or (4-2)-2-5 ? People open 2C with those shapes too.
It's sometimes nice to do it with xx AQxx xx AKTxx or something.

You open this 1♣, just like balanced hands with 5 clubs or 4-4-1-4 or 4-4-0-5, which even you do now open 1♣, right?

Quote

Also what about constructive bidding in sequences:

1D - 2C
?

In pc you have simple natural bidding with 2D promising 5 and 2H/2S being reverses. You need some artificial scheme with 1D being 3+.

Agreed, you will have to modify your responses to cater for all possible distributions, but it is not difficult.
Remember that opener, with the additional hands will have very good club support for responder, when partner responds with 2C. You can splinter in your major, when you have the holding with 3 diamonds for example. i wouldbe delighted when my partner responds 2♣ over 1♦.
I have never found the natural responses in this sequence very satisfactory anyway and I do not worry too much about (41)-3-5 because they occur less than one in twenty when I open 1♦.

Quote

I mean, maybe precision is better than pc but those are completely different systems and that change would ruin it imo. People play pc because it's simple, natural and easy to use and having natural and descriptive 1D opening is part of it.

I am not speaking about precision, because in precision you can not open 1♣ with five clubs and short diamonds when 12-14. There is nothing wrong doing this in Polish club. You often open 1♣ with 5 clubs and you do this short in diamonds. If you open 2♣ with 5 clubs and a 4 card major instead of 1♣ you risk losing your major.

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

Zelandakh, on 2012-October-04, 07:08, said:

Being PC is the reason why I asked. My own system was described (by gwnn) as "PC with a weak NT" so I am well aware of what shapes are included. (34)15 is part of the 2♣ opening and not addressed in your previous post. What you are describing sounds similar to the way AUC handles these hands. That is possible of course but if doing this it would seem to make more sense to simply play the entire AUC system and forget you thought it was PC at all.

Everybody in PC opens (44)14 or (44)05 with 1♣.
Explain why you see problems opening (34)15 with 1♣ in PC, when balanced hand with 34 in the majors are opened 1♣ as well.
I have never encountered them.

Rainer Herrmann

[bluecalm]

Quote

Everybody in PC opens (44)14 or (44)05 with 1♣.
Explain why you see problems opening (34)15 with 1♣ in PC, when balanced hand with 34 in the majors are opened 1♣ as well.
I have never encountered them.

Those hands are very rare. Another thing is that they contain 4-4 in majors which makes for example:
1C - 1M
2M still 4 cards as it always is in Polish club.

I feel you take the worst of both worlds (polish 1C promising balanced hand and standard 1C) by introducing some of those hands into 1C but not all. It makes some simple situation awkward, say:
1C - 1D
1M - 2D
or negative free bids with 5 cards. It cripples 1D opening but you still have sucky 2C there for (4-1)-3-5 hands.

I don't like it but some good Polish players do that so it's playabale I am sure.

[mikestar13]

PrecisionL, on 2012-September-27, 17:59, said:

,
I have played 2♦ and 2 ♥ as conditional transfers for over 3 years now (in response to a Precision 2♣ opener).

The 2♣ opener accepts the transfer with xx or better in the suit indicated by the transfer.
Opener with 0-1 cards of the suit shown by the transfer bids 2NT if maximum or 3♣ if minimum.

Responder with invitational hands or better knows what to do after hearing the opener's response to the transfer.

Downside: With both partners minimum and no fit, you might get too high, 3♣. Thus, opener might want to have a good ♣ suit for the 2♣ opener.

It is unclear if this is an ACBL GCC allowable treatment / convention.

RESPONSES AND REBIDS

7. ARTIFICIAL AND CONVENTIONAL CALLS after strong (15+ HCP),
forcing opening bids and after opening bids of two clubs or higher. (For this
classification, by partnership agreement, weak two-bids must be within a
range of 7 HCP and the suit must contain at least five cards – See #7 under
DISALLOWED.)

Above is the relevant part of the GCC. Transfer response to two level or higher openings are perfectly OK. I assume transfers are OK anywhere in the world, since as far as I know, the GCC is the world's most restrictive convention regulation not intended for beginners.

[blackshoe]

Personally, I think the GCC is intended to keep everyone at beginner level.

[mikestar13]

blackshoe, on 2012-October-06, 08:46, said:

Personally, I think the GCC is intended to keep everyone at beginner level.

A big +1 on that .

[glen]

[blackshoe]

Good one, Glen!

[straube]

Our 2C opening promises 6 clubs and denies 4 hearts...so quite a bit more defined than a standard Precision 2C. We wanted the ability to see how opener liked our 5-cd major before giving up on a club partial. Also, we wanted the ability to get out in 2M in a misfit (a la a standard 1C-1S, 2C-2S) auction. So with a little help from Zelandakh and others we came up with...

2D-artificial GF OR hearts
.....2H-0-1 hearts
..........P-9-11 with six hearts
..........2S-artificial GF
...............2N-four diamonds
....................3C-asks
.........................3D-2146
.........................3H-3046
.........................3S-1147
.........................3N-2047
...............3C-single-suited
....................3D-asks
.........................3H-3136
.........................3S-2137 or 3127
.........................3N-3037
...............3D-4126
...............3H-4036
...............3S-4117
...............3N-4027
.....2S-2 hearts
..........2N-artificial GF
...............3C-balanced
....................3D-asks
.........................3H-2236
.........................3S-3226
.........................3N-2227
...............3D-four diamonds
...............3H-1237 or 3217
...............3S-4216
...............3N-4207
.....2N-3 hearts, higher shortness
..........3C-GF relay
...............3D-1336
...............3H-1327
...............3S-0337
.....3C-3 hearts, lower shortness
.....3D-0346
.....3H-2326
.....3S-4306

2H-5+ spades, constructive or GI, or with a prepared game rebid
.....2S-0-1 spades
..........P-six spades, 9-11
.....2N-2 spades, minimum
.....3C-2 spades, maximum
.....3D-3 spades, minimum
.....3H-3 spades, maximum
.....3S-4 spades, minimum
.....etc

2S-GI, club tolerance
2N-constructive, club fit
3C-weak
3D-GI, 6 diamonds, no fit

After 2C-2D, opener's rebids reserve room for responder to break relay in the cases of a misfit. For example...

2C-2D, 2H-2N is nf invitational
2C-2D, 2S-3D is nf invitational showing 5/5 in the reds

If opener has three hearts, that news should be welcome to responder whether he has any GF hand or constructive+ with hearts

2C-2D, 2N-3H shows a constructive hand with hearts
2C-2D, 2N-3D is inviting in hearts. There isn't need to show a GI with both reds when opener has a fit for hearts

When responder has a GI hand with spades, opener shows just how many spades he has and whether he is minimum or maximum.

2C-2H, 2N-3H shows a GI with 5/5 in the majors
2C-2H, 2S-3S shows a GI with a good six+ card suit

A couple of downsides...some of opener's higher responses to a 2D inquiry get us rather high.

2C-2D, 3S where opener has 4306 and 10-15 and now we're forced to game. OTOH, these higher responses are infrequent and responder has at least constructive values. Maybe game makes.

Another downside is that we give up on finding 4/4 major suit fits (spades is the only 4/4 fit we can have) unless opener is strong enough to force game. What happens is that responder shows whether he has constructive or GI values and then opener decides whether to show shortness and perhaps uncover a spade fit if it exists.

2C-2S, 3D-3S, 4S where 2S shows GI values, 3D shows opener is short in diamonds, and 3S is natural showing 4.

I think Precision 2C has even more need of a scheme like ours. You don't have the safety of a six-card club suit which (for us) serves as an anchor suit. I'm thinking...

2D-GF relay OR hearts
2H-constructive+ spades
2S-3+ clubs with constructive or GI values
.....2N-GT
2N-GI misfitting
3C-weak

The difficulty you would have is that your 2C has too many hand types. You would have to collapse some and lose a little accuracy.

2D-
.....2H-0-1 hearts
.....2S-2 hearts
.....2N through 3N to handle 3 or 4 hearts