[RunemPard]

Hello,

My name is Don and I am a highly enthusiastic young bridge player. I have been playing cards since before I was a teenager and roughly over a year ago I started playing live Bridge. I have learned quite fast and keep improving my play/bidding. One thing I enjoy doing, is putting together ideas for Bridge systems. The system I am showing now is based on Precision. All I have worked on currently is the 1C meaning/replies. I also have a list of reply bid theories, however, before I get serious about that, I would like to see how my base reply bids are. One of the main ideas is to combine as many strong bids into one strong bid to allow for more descriptive bids to take their place. I also prefer to exclude 5cM holdings from NT hands, so I tried to give these their own bidding replies. I am strongly debating having the 20-21 point range being seperate at the 3 level. I may work on a way to combine them into the 18-19 range for an 18-21 5cM. I am also debating including them with a 2C response (22+ HCP, 20-21 (UB), or 20-21 w/ 5cM. Any strong bids that do not fit these categories would fall under another opening bid (I am thinking 1D). These would mostly be 15-19 HCP unbalanced minor hands.

Pros(IMO):

• All strong bids are combined leaving more room for others.
  
• Points are accurately relayed to partner in a decent range.
  
• Allows for an 18-19 NT bid.
  
• Allows for a 20-21 5cM.
  
• 1H/1S opening bids are max 14 HCP...This makes 6-8 HCP responses unneeded unless superb distribution is held.

Cons(IMO):

• Vulnerable to preempts?
  
• Points are shown more than distribution...(Should I include a bid for strong distributional hands?)
  
• Can be difficult to determine if we should play major or NT...(Only major and points shown with a jump to the 2 or 3 level)

1C = 15+ HCP (15-21 w/ 5cM+ | 15+ NT | 22+) -> 1D = waiting (any strength)
-1H = 15-17 HCP (5+H)
-1S = 15-17 HCP (5+S)
-1N = 15-17 HCP (B)(NO 5cM)
-2C = 22-24 HCP (UB)| 22-24 HCP w/ a 5cM | OR | 25+ HCP
-2D = 18-19(20-21?) HCP (5+H)
-2H = 18-19(20-21?) HCP (5+S)
-2S = 18-19 HCP (B)(NO 5cM)
-2N = 20-21 HCP (B)(NO 5cM)
-3C = UNDECIDED
-3D = UNDECIDED
-3H = UNDECIDED
-3S = UNDECIDED
-3N = 22-24 HCP (B)(NO 5cM)


Some of my biggest personal concerns are the bids after 2NT...I am thinking them over a lot myself and hope to come up with a better solution. I understand that the bids being so high basically removes any room to cue/discuss the hand to full extent.

I look forward to reading thoughts and suggestions about this. Would also like to hear some ideas for good bids to have for distribution later on in the system.

Thanks!

Edits:
1. Changed the 3N bid from 25-27 HCP to 22-24 (B).
2. Adjusted the 2C bid to be 22-24 (UB), 22-24 (w/5cM), or 25+ HCP.
3. Decided to remove my 3 level bids for now and concentrate on the core before continuing.

[RunemPard]

Added a poll...appreciated

[RunemPard]

Three votes saying no potential so far, and not a single comment...may I ask what is so disgusting about the bid?

[Cthulhu D]

The problem with your proposed system is that you are extremely vunerable to preemption, and preempting a strong 1C is the best time to preempt in the game. Signalling if you are weak, strong or intermediate at your first turn is critically important because after 1C-1D you are RIPE for pre-emption. You have no idea if you have a fit, what the strength of the hands are.

As a result will get pre-empted constantly and it will be brutually effective, so I strongly recommend that you show shape or strength at your first oppotunity. The nightmare scenario when I played a strong club was a big pre-empt coming down directly over 1C when responders hand was marginal. Here you have the same problem, but are also giving fourth seat a chance at the same thing!

There are a couple of existing structures you can plagurise, with Minimeckwell IMHO being the way to go). I like AWM's structure that has 1D be extremely weak or game forcing, while semi positive hands make a bid showing a suit. Mini meckwell is another option because it establishes a game force at its first turn.

Mini Meckwell:

Responder - Opener - Responder - Opener
1D					0-7 any shape
	1M				4+ F1, may be canape
		1S			4+, 0-7
		1NT			0-5 any shape
			2m		NF
			3m		F1
			2NT		Game forcing with longer minor
		2C			6-7, denies 3 card support
			2D		Waiting
			X		Game force
		2D			5-7 3 card support
		2M			0-4 4+M
		3X			3X 5-7 splinter
		4X			GF splinter (should have substantial shape)
		2NT			GF 4+ M (must have shape)
		3M			3M 5-7 4+M
	1NT				17-19 systems on
	2C				5+C, denies 4M
	2D				5+D, denies 4M
	2H				force 2S, GF hands: 2N=24+, 3X = GF natural
		2S			
			2NT		24+ bal
			3X		GF Natural
	2S				5+5+ minors
	2N				22-23, systems on, balanced
	3C				Inv 6+C
	3D				Inv 6+D
	3M				unused
	3N				To Play

The gap in the NT ladder is because 2NT = 20-21.

[glen]

I haven't voted yet, but a question and comments:
- How does an unbalanced hand with clubs 11-21 get opened? In Precision 10-15 (some systems 11-16) opens 2♣, the rest 1♣.
- I think your 1♣-1♦-1M rebids can have a wider range, such as 15-20.
- That would allow a lower bid than 2♠ for the 18-19 balanced, such as 2♦

[RunemPard]

@ Cthulhu D - Yes, I have always recognized and agreed to myself that this is vulnerable to a preempt...By moving the 2D/2H bids together with a 1H/S reply I give myself more room...

Does this seem better...?

1C - Same as topic...slightly altered with major ranges.
-1D = positive
-1H = negative - P/C
--1N (reply) = Stronger than 19 HCP further interest.

After a 1D reply, I simply bid normal if the bid goes without disruption.

After a 1H reply...well...that certainly depends on the hand...

[RunemPard]

 RunemPard, on 2012-February-15, 17:35, said:

@ Cthulhu D - Yes, I have always recognized and agreed to myself that this is vulnerable to a preempt...By moving the 2D/2H bids together with a 1H/S reply I give myself more room...

Does this seem better...?

1C - Same as topic...slightly altered with major ranges.
-1D = positive
-1H = negative - P/C
--2C (reply) = Stronger than 19 HCP further interest.

After a 1D reply, I simply bid normal if the bid goes without disruption.

After a 1H reply...well...that certainly depends on the hand...

[RunemPard]

@glen - I have not put a whole lot of thought into other bids as I usually overwhelm my system when I think of everything all at once...but using this 1D would most likely be no 5cM...preference to diamonds. I would have to think about all possible hand layouts a lot and determine what I need to fill in and where.

I have openings at 1NT (may prefer weak NT there)...this removes a lot of normal weak balanced minor hands from 1D...
2C is free to use...best suited for 5+C I would say.
2D I would like to use some kind of a variant of multi for weak majors + some unfit stronger bids that need a home...
I could even use 2H/2S as 10-14 HCP 5cM to open up 1H/S...but I have never played with or experienced these much. Would give me room at the 1 level for unfit hands however...
2NT is free to use as well...



Let me think about how my other bids will fit together and get back to you...The thing that I like the most about putting them into one place is the possibilities for other strategic opening bids.

[Cthulhu D]

 RunemPard, on 2012-February-15, 17:35, said:

@ Cthulhu D - Yes, I have always recognized and agreed to myself that this is vulnerable to a preempt...By moving the 2D/2H bids together with a 1H/S reply I give myself more room...

No, because you're not solving the 4th seat pre-emption problem because 1C - (Pass) - 1D - (Some Big Preempt) the partnership still doesn't have any more infomation that it did after the one club opening was preempted directly.

Given that you've doubled the amount of bidding the partnership has done, you're excessively vunlerable to fourth seat preemption. If you want to preserve the waiting 1D structure, you're going to be much better off with something like AWM's 1D structure:

Credit here: http://cs.ucla.edu/~awm/bridge/rd.pdf

Converting to 1C:

1D any 0-4 points or any GF (9+)
1H 5-8 hcp balanced or semi-balanced
1S 5-8 5+S, 5-8 points, not balanced
1NT 5-8 points, three-suited hand with no 5-card major
2C 6+C, 5-8 points, not balanced
2D 6+D, 5-8 points, not balanced
2H 5+H, 5-8 points, not balanced
2S Undefined: Maybe 5/5 majors? Can wrongside things.
2NT both minors, 5-8 points

AWM has some three level stuff to, consult the PDF.

Now you're much better positioned after 1C and your response. after a fourth seat pre-empt opener can safely pass, and if responder comes back in he 'reveals' the game force.

It also has the additional advantage that Opener knows not to compete with minimum or slightly above minimum hands after 1C-1D as responder will come back in with a game force and otherwise he has a bust.

[RunemPard]

I like the one you put up there...thinking over a lot and I appreciate the input.

[mgoetze]

 RunemPard, on 2012-February-15, 17:35, said:

Does this seem better...?

1C - Same as topic...slightly altered with major ranges.
-1D = positive
-1H = negative - P/C
--1N (reply) = Stronger than 19 HCP further interest.

Sounds like just 10 or 20 more iterations before you reinvent the basic Moscito response structure.

[RunemPard]

I must say I greatly appreciate your post Cthulhu...and I have changed my priorities for now to how to cope with noise from opponents...

For now I have come up with defence towards a 1S simple overbid...

1C - 15+
-1D - 0-4 | OR | GF 9+
-1H - 5-8 forcing (w/5cM)
--natural 1S OVERBID BY OPP
---PASS=15+ HCP (5+S)
---X=Hearts but no S stopper
---1N=Balanced hand w/ stops in S
---2C=18+ HCP
---2D=2-3 hearts requesting 2H bid if 5H held...no further interest unless NT is on. If 2H is bid and 2N/3H reply invite to game.
---2H=forcing w/ 3+ hearts
---2S=Game force (interested in NT)


or something along those lines...will work on seeing hands and problems that may occur and plausible bids from opps.

[RunemPard]

I think I may of come to a solution that may actually be quite useful...going a bit different direction than originally planned.

By removing 15-19 5cM bids from the bid...this leaves...

15-17 NT
18-19 NT
20-21 NT
22+++ NT
6cM 15+ (more reliable?)
any 20+ unbalanced hand

This gives a chance to move the bid to 1D leaving standard 1C no 5cM in tact, while allowing for a weak 12-14 1NT...By allowing this many hand distributions are removed from 1C opening bid.

1C now has a much higher chance of holding a 5 card minor. The chance of getting preempted to an unknown minor is now greater, but I feel this is a much better option than having your unknown strong hand preempted...

I am just thinking...but I think this would work a lot better...combining all 15+ NT bids, 6cM+, and 20+ HCP hands into one.

1H/1S would become 12-14 with 6+ or 12-19 HCP with 5.

1H-2C
2H (12-14 HCP 6H+)

1H-1NT
2C (most likely 15+ HCP with 5/4+)

[RunemPard]

1C - NO 5cM (12-19 HCP)(usually 5cm unless 4441)
1D - 15+ HCP (NT, 6cM+, or 20+ (UB)
1H - 12-19 HCP 5c | OR | 12-14 6c+
1S - 12-19 HCP 5c | OR | 12-14 6c+
1N - 12-14 HCP (B)
2C - OPEN FOR USE
2D - Multi variant
2H - OPEN FOR USE (If 10-14 5cM used, 1H/S become 15+ 5c)(If 5/4 major+side used...all 12-14 HCP 1H/S openings have no side suit)
2S - OPEN FOR USE (If 10-14 5cM used, 1H/S become 15+ 5c)(If 5/4 major+side used...all 12-14 HCP 1H/S openings have no side suit)
2N - OPEN FOR USE


I believe a preempt over a 1D opening (usually NT holding I believe) would often give you more information than the opponents are gaining...

[Zelandakh]

Your 1♦ response should probably be your choice from these:-

Negative: any <GF hand
Positive: any GF hand
Mixed: any double negative or GF hand
Transfer: showing hearts

After 1♣ - 1♦ you should move the 18-21 balanced with 5M hands down into the 1M bid giving you

1M = 15-21, if >17 then balanced
1N = 15-17
2♣ = 8 tricks in any suit (strong 2) or 22-23(24) balanced or 28+ balanced
2♦ = 18-19 balanced without a 5cM
2M = natural GF
2N = 20-21 balanced without a 5cM
3m = natural GF
3M = choice of GF with self-supporting suit or direct KCB
3N = (24)25-27 balanced

You could also reverse the 2♣ and 2♦ bids of course, or you could keep 2♣ as you have it and move the strong 2 hands up to 2M and 3m. It would probably also be a good idea to compare how other 15+ club systems handle everything. A common treatment is for 1♣ - 1♦; 1♥ to show 18+ and other simple rebids to be 15-17. Then 1♠ from Responder as a negative and 2♣ as Opener's third bid is like a normal 2♣ opening. Other possibilities exist too of course and one of them (Moscito) has already been mentioned.

The system is ok but you are underutilising the cheapest bids. This is a common mistake when starting out on system design so do not worry overly about it. As you improve things the system will start to resemble more closely something already existing. I suspect that is one of the main reason for the cynicism, not so much that what you are working towards is unplayable so much that it is simpler just to play something that is already out there. Well, that and the number of genuinely poor systems that get posted anyway!

As an exercise for you to understand the way bidding systems work I think you can get something out of your project. You are still very new and there is some benefit to thinking about how to arrange different hand types. I did alot of this kind of thing when I started out too, essentially reverse-engineering a version of reverse-Benji Acol from a combination of Culbertson and 5 card major strong NT Acol together with some additional ideas. Whether it made me a better player is questionable; if you are interested more in systems than anything else (as I am) then your card play development will naturally suffer. I would suggest that this is the part of your game you should work on as heavily as you can since my guess is that the bidding will come to you naturally over time when your mind is already attuned to that side of the game.

[Free]

I voted for no potential because your approach is just wrong imo. You're trying to build a 1♣ opening without knowing what to do with the other hands. First figure out how to open each hand, then try to find a good response structure over each opening. Don't try to make 1 good opening and build your system around that 1 opening. It's better to have 7 good opening bids and responses than having 1 perfect opening and 6 lousy ones to complete the system. A bidding system is a set of agreements based on a combination of design goals. Moreover, when your design goals are poor, any system based on these goals will be poor as well.

[straube]

 Free, on 2012-February-16, 13:24, said:

I voted for no potential because your approach is just wrong imo. You're trying to build a 1♣ opening without knowing what to do with the other hands. First figure out how to open each hand, then try to find a good response structure over each opening. Don't try to make 1 good opening and build your system around that 1 opening. It's better to have 7 good opening bids and responses than having 1 perfect opening and 6 lousy ones to complete the system. A bidding system is a set of agreements based on a combination of design goals. Moreover, when your design goals are poor, any system based on these goals will be poor as well.

That's why I voted no as well. I realize you want us only to focus on the opening of 1C, but how would I respond if you had asked whether 1C showing 10 points with 2434 distribution had potential? Obviously, the bid would work well every few thousand hands.

Imo, you should present all of your openings as well as your design goals when asking for feedback.

[RunemPard]

I re-worked it quite a lot and put together a rough view of openings...

1C: 15+ HCP | (B) NT | rebiddable MAJOR | (UB) 20+ | 15-19 HCP 5/5
-1D: WAITING
--1H: 15-19 HCP | rebiddable H
--1S: 15-19 HCP | rebiddable S
--1N: 15-17 HCP | (B) NT
--2C: 20+ (UB) | OR | 22-24 (B) | OR | 20+ HCP strong major
--2D: 18-19 HCP | (B) NT | (2H=negative - 2S=positive)
--2H: 15-19 HCP | 5H+minor (2N=asking)
--2S: 15-19 HCP | 5S+minor (2N=asking)
--2N: 15-19 HCP | minors
--3C:
--3D:
--3H:
--3S:
--3N: 25-27 HCP | (B) NT

1D: 12-19 HCP | NO 5cM | 5+ minor common | (4M/5m) 4351/4252/4054 OR 4441 | if NO 4cM = 5+minor
1H: 12-19 HCP | 12-14 6cM+ | 12-19 5cM | 15+ may have 5+4c side suit
1S: 12-19 HCP | 12-14 6cM+ | 12-19 5cM | 15+ may have 5+4c side suit
1N: 12-14 HCP | (B) NT
2C: 12-19 HCP | normally NO 4cM | 5+C
2D: Multi
2H: 10-14 HCP | 5H+4 side
2S: 10-14 HCP | 5S+4 side
2N: minors (preemptive)
3C: 6+C (preemptive)
3D: 6+D (preemptive)
3H: 7+H (preemptive) | 6+ H only
3S: 7+H (preemptive) | 6+ S only
3N: Gambling (AKQxxxx) minor



Still vulnerable to preempts at the 1C level. Majority of hands will be NT hands or re-biddable major hands. A preempt from opponent may give us a fair bit of information if we should attempt game or not in NT. Will require good bidding after a preempt to determine if game is possible. Plan to make use of PASS/DBL to counter these as best as possible.

Plans for multi are to show weak majors, strong 4441, strong minors, or stronger distributional hands.

[Flameous]

You can't have 4 any as side suit in 2M opening, you are just too high. 5M4C is likely the best approach, giving you cheap artificial Gazzilli type rebid in 1M-1NT sequences.

2♣ is too wide range for such a high opening. 15+ should go to 1♣.

[mgoetze]

 Flameous, on 2012-February-16, 18:13, said:

You can't have 4 any as side suit in 2M opening, you are just too high. 5M4C is likely the best approach, giving you cheap artificial Gazzilli type rebid in 1M-1NT sequences.

Oh, sure you can. Just like you can have dozens of strong hand types in Multi. But in the Multi case, you will be screwed when the bidding goes 2♦-(2♠)-p-(3♠), and in this 2M opening case, you will be screwed... well, almost all the time. But you can certainly do it if you think it's fun.