[Kungsgeten]

Currently partner and I play 1♦ as 11-16, 4+ diamonds and unbalanced. 2♣ is 11-16 5+ clubs (6+ or 5 and a major). I like the diamond opening but dislike the 2♣ opening, and I've been thinking about the structure below. Do you think it would be an improvement?

1♦ = Unbalanced 11-16. No 5+ major, no 6+ minor (unless 6-5 minors or better).
2♣ = 6+ clubs, 11-16.
2♦ = 6+ diamonds, 11-16.

The responses to the diamond opening would perhaps look something like this:

1♥♠ = Natural, F1
1NT = INV+, forcing
2♣♦ = Non-forcing (perhaps 2♣ should be pass/correct instead)
3♣ = Pass/correct
Others = Not sure

1♦-1♥;
1♠ = Natural
1NT = Both minors, equal length or longer diamonds
2♣ = Both minors, longer clubs
2♦ = Heart support and diamonds (maybe better as heart support and max?)
2♥ = Heart support and clubs (maybe better as heart support and min?)

1♦-1♠;
1NT = Both minors
2♣♦ = The minor and hearts
2♥ = Spades and clubs (or spades and max)
2♠ = Spades and diamonds (or spades and min)

1♦-1NT;
2♣♦ = Min, better minor
2♥ = Max, better clubs
2♠ = Max, better diamonds

[gwnn]

You can check out Andrei Sharko's Symmetric Relay 1D structure. 1D-1H; 2m shows 5+m, 4H and 2H shows 4441 with 4 hearts but an unknown singleton. 1D-1S; 2m shows the same hand as above (with hearts!) and 2H/2S show usually 5m4S (with the corresponding minor) or rarely 4441. The 1NT rebid contains both 54 and 45 minors.

[Kungsgeten]

gwnn, on 2015-April-14, 06:26, said:

You can check out Andrei Sharko's Symmetric Relay 1D structure.

Thanks!

They play 1NT as GF, which seems like a good idea. The main issue seems to be with a weak(ish) balanced hand and no 4 card major, where you either pass, fake a 1M response or bid 2/1 in a five card minor.

My main concern, however, is if this is better than 1♦ natural and 2♣ 5+ or not.

[gwnn]

We were just bidding 2/3♣ pass/correct with those hands (although a max hand could raise). And 1♥ with 2344 is also possible although we never did it.

[Trick13]

Kungsgeten, on 2015-April-14, 06:01, said:

1♦ = Unbalanced 11-16. No 5+ major, no 6+ minor (unless 6-5 minors or better).
2♣ = 6+ clubs, 11-16.
2♦ = 6+ diamonds, 11-16.

Why not include the 6+m hands in 1♦? That will free up your 2♣ and 2♦ openings for something else.
You haven't mentioned a NT range, but if you use 11-13 include all your 5m332's and 4441's in there.
With those changes your minor suit will be robust and you will have fewer problems in competition.

We include a 14-16 NT in the 1♦, with these responses:

Pass = rare, as a 1♠ response will normally rate to improve the contract
1♥ = 4+♠
1♠ = artificial inquiry 0+HCP

After those bids the responses are fairly natural:
1♠ (over 1♥) = exactly 3♠ and 5+m
1NT = 14-16 bal or semi-bal
2m = 5+m min
2M = 4M + 5+m max (except 2♠ over 1♥ is a min)
2NT = both minors max
3m = 6+m max
3♠ (over 1♥) = 4♠ + 5+m max

If we a miss a 2♥ contract with 4-4 fit that's regrettable but we are still ahead on average; we have some additional machinery to avoid missing 3-5 and 4-5 ♥ fits.

1NT to 2♥ are two-way transfers, either showing a weak hand in the implied suit or inv+ in the bid suit, e.g.

2♣ = weak with ♦ (responder will pass)

or invitational (12-13) with ♣ (responder will rebid 2NT)

or GF with ♣ (responder will rebid in a suit)

(1NT is weak in ♣ or good with ♠)

2♠ = artificial GF, likely a balanced hand with slam interest.

[awm]

I suspect it is better to play somewhat different continuations here. In particular:

1. It is not uncommon for 1NT to be your best spot, especially at MP. You can easily have 4441 opposite 3334 for example. In fact if opener's LHO passes and responder has a not-very-strong hand with no 4+M, it's fairly likely to find opener with 44 or (43) in the majors, increasing the odds you want to play in 1NT.
2. You really want to be able to locate heart fits after 1♦-1♠. It seems like you could play 1NT as showing short spades in a somewhat three-suited pattern (including 1345 but more critically 1444 and 14(35)) and a 2♣ rebid as 5/5 minors.
3. There aren't really that many shapes here; you should be able to get full resolution with a 2♣ game force relay.

[straube]

How are you treating the 5m422s? If you treat them as balanced (open a 12-15 NT?) then maybe...

1D-1H
.....1S-4 spades
.....1N-3-1-(54)
.....2C-5m5m
.....2D-good raise (includes 1-3-(54))
.....2H-bad raise (includes 1-3-(54))

1D-1S
.....1N-3-suited short spades
.....2C-5m/5m
.....2D-3-cd raise
..........2H-asking
.....2H-good 4-cd raise
.....2S-bad 4-cd raise

[Kungsgeten]

Trick13, on 2015-April-14, 20:31, said:

Why not include the 6+m hands in 1♦? That will free up your 2♣ and 2♦ openings for something else.
You haven't mentioned a NT range, but if you use 11-13 include all your 5m332's and 4441's in there.
With those changes your minor suit will be robust and you will have fewer problems in competition.

The NT range is not really important for this topic, but we play 14-16 NT and our 1♣ is 11-13 NT or 17+ any. The reason for not including 6+m in 1♦ would be that it in my mind seems like a bad idea. It seems hard to handle in competition so I do not understand you opinion that 6+m in 1♦ would lead to fewer problems in competition.

I like your idea of transfers over your 1♦, but I'm not quite sure of the 1M responses...


Straube: I was planning to treat 5m422 as unbalanced (or perhaps have the option of treating it as balanced or unbalanced). Your idea seems pretty nice though!

[straube]

Tally for 100 hands

1C...30
1D...11
1H...8
1S...19
1N...17
2C...7
2D...5
2N...3

2N is 20-21. So I always seem to be dealt more spade hands than heart hands. Making an eyeball adjustment...

1C...30
1D...11
1H...12
1S...15
1N...17
2C...4
2D...4
2N...3

might more closely resemble your opening frequencies. I think 1D is underutilized. Say it goes

1D-1H, 2C showing either 3-1-4-5 or 2-2-4-5. Two hand patterns at the point of 2C vs a 2C opening that has like 30 (i've not counted) hand patterns. I think this is pretty good
evidence that the opening structure is flawed.

[straube]

Here's the number of patterns each opening would contain for the unbalanced diamond structure (eliminating freaks such as 6-6 or 8+ suit)

1C-238
1D-34
1H-59
1S-63
1N-34
2C-27
2D-27

So the 1C dwarfs 1D in number of patterns and also has to handle two ranges.

Contrast this to IMPrecision openings

1C-238
1D-62
1H-59
1S-63
1N-34
2C-27
2D-27

so while this doesn't reduce the number of patterns handled by 1C it gets rid of the other range and essentially halves the information opener needs to convey.

A lot of folks object to the nebulous nature of 1D, but even with the balanced hands it contains a fairly modest number of hand patterns.

Convinced anyone yet to give up little club?

[awm]

Hmm I don't believe your numbers; the 1C is particularly suspicious.

In any case, I think you obsess to much on the frequencies. The majority of 1S openings (in a 5+ major system) belong in a spade contract, whereas these 1D openings often require more negotiation as all five strains are fairly likely. So regardless of frequency, you want more space when you are less sure of strain (or level).

This is part of why it doesn't bother me that IMPrecision 1D is more frequent than 1C (which your numbers also didn't show, suspiciously enough).

[straube]

I haven't given frequencies for IMPrecision openings. I gave them for the OP's proposed openings. I then gave the hand patterns contained for those openings and then for IMPrecision.

The IMPrecision 1D opening would be more frequent than the 1C opening because the point range is more common and the hand patterns tend toward being common balanced patterns.

[straube]

Adam was right and I had the tallies wrong.

for unbalanced 1D

1C-288
1D-38
1H-75
1S-79
1N-34
2C-34
2D-34

For IMPrecision

1C-288
1D-60
1H-75
1S-79
1N-34
2C-34
2D-34

I could still be off but I've checked the 288 figure that I should be getting against separate tallies for each opening and they match.

[Trick13]

Kungsgeten, on 2015-April-15, 01:32, said:

The NT range is not really important for this topic ...

I think not including the weak 5m332 and 4441s in 1♦ is really helpful, but I see you have done that.

Kungsgeten, on 2015-April-15, 01:32, said:

The reason for not including 6+m in 1♦ would be that it in my mind seems like a bad idea. It seems hard to handle in competition so I do not understand you opinion that 6+m in 1♦ would lead to fewer problems in competition.

It means your side can compete with more confidence because your suit or hand should stand up at the 3-level.
You may prefer to open 2♦ and perhaps avoid the interference, but we prefer to use 2♦ for something else.

Quote

Straube: I was planning to treat 5m422 as unbalanced (or perhaps have the option of treating it as balanced or unbalanced). Your idea seems pretty nice though!

We often open 1♦ unsure if we are going to treat our hand as balanced or not, or if unbal whether min or max, because it may depend on what partner and opponents do.

[yunling]

I suspect if 1D will perform well in competitive auction since it doesn't promise a suit and responder connot raise.

[Trick13]

yunling, on 2015-April-17, 02:13, said:

I suspect if 1D will perform well in competitive auction since it doesn't promise a suit and responder connot raise.

We do lose preemptive minor suit raises.

[Kungsgeten]

New thoughts:

1D = Unbalanced, 11-16, no 5+ major. If 6+ minor then 4 card major or 6-5 minors.
2m = 11-16. 6+ minor, no 4 card major.

1D---
1H = Natural or GF relay
1S = Natural, F1
1N = "Bid your longer/better minor". May be A) Support for both minors B) Weak with (5)6+ diamonds or C) INV+ with clubs.
2C = Non-forcing, less than INV, (5)6+ suit
2D = Natural INV+ (if INV then 6+ diamonds)
2HS = Weak
2N = INV, opener can take out to 3m
3C = Pass/correct
3D = Quasi-GF, both minors. Primary searching for 3NT.
...3HS = Singleton
...3NT = No major singleton
3HS = Weak
3N = To play
4C = Pass/correct
4D = Pick a major
4M = To play

1D--1H;
1S = 4 spades and 5+ minor or black three-suiter
1N = At least 5-4 minors, minimum if 5-5
2C = Hearts and 5+ clubs or red three-suiter
2D = Hearts and diamonds, minimum
2H = Hearts and diamonds, maximum
2S = 5-5 minors, max, not 3 hearts
2N = 0-3-5-5, max
3C = 0-3-4-6, max
3D = 0-3-6-4, max


Straube: I may be wrong, but this 1♦ opening should have about the same frequency as our 1S opening. In order to use the bidding space in the most optimal way, 1D should probably be more frequent than 1M, but I think thats not the case of most modern natural systems anyway (where 1D is natural unbalanced). To me 1D being unbalanced (even when nebulous) should make the contested bidding easier.

[straube]

I hope you don't mind the feedback, but I think this is going the wrong direction. When you have distributional hands you ought to want to tell partner about them as quickly as possible. In an uncontested auction after a 1H relay you're probably ok, but have you mapped out 1D-1S rebids?

I used to play that my 2D opening denied a 4-cd major because you really can't relay 2D if it also includes 4M, but I like that I can tell partner about the six diamonds right away. Say your bidding goes 1D P 1S (3C). With 6D you'll want to bid 3D much of the time in order to show your basic hand type, but partner won't know min or max information. If instead it goes 2D P 2S (4+S, f) (3C) you can pass with a minimum/bad suit because you've delivered your message. Or 2D P P (3C) same thing.

Anyway, I had unexpected benefits from putting the 4M patterns back into 2D. One is easier 1D-1S auctions. Rebids I'm using are

1N-bal or short spades, min
2C-short spades, max
2D-5/5 minors
2H-good raise
2S-bad raise.

The other benefit is in competition. Diamonds are usually an artificial bid...

1D P 1H (3C)

3D good raise
3H bad raise

[straube]

I'm wondering why you're avoiding lumping the weak NT with your unbalanced.

Your system presently uses a natural unbalanced 1D and a natural limited 2C, right? And you're exploring other options probably because the 1D opening gets good results (when it comes up) but the 2C opening gets you too high and to the wrong place sometimes, especially when it causes you to miss a major suit fit?

So you're swapping things around and making 2m openings promise 6m (which is good) and perhaps even deny a 4-cd major (which may be too good) and you want then to keep 1D as unbalanced other...including 5m422s (which are kind of balanced).

But what's the advantage in keeping 1D as unbalanced vs unbalanced combined with weak NT? You don't have any immediate suit information either way and when it might take one or two rebids to have a proper picture of the hand? Again, what advantage?

But there's a real advantage in moving the weak NT out of your club and into 1D. It separates the strong from weak openings. It lets responder game force with much weaker hands. Perhaps attracts competition (I think this fear is overdone) but assists responder get in the bidding when it does.

Btw Adam has great structures for his 2C and 2D natural openings (Google awm UCLA IMPrecision) as well as his 1D etc openings. By far this best document on system I've read.

[Kungsgeten]

Straube:

We have good results from our 1C opening and we enjoy playing it. Why change what you like? 11--13 NT is very common, and in my opinion we do a lot better when opening this hand with two-way 1C than a nebulous diamond. This experience is from playing "regular" nebulous diamond (11-13 NT, 4+ diamonds or 4414) and "major-minor" nebulous diamond (11-13 NT or unbalanced with 4M and 4+m).

So what's the advantage of not having 1D as possibly balanced, apart from 11--13 NT being treated better when included in 1C? Well I do not like the rebids in your or Adam's 1D structure, where 1NT may be a very weak hand or a very good hand. 1D--1S; 2C as max with short spades seems like an awkward sequence, should responder with 5332 just guess which suit to sign off in, perhaps 2D isn't even a sign off (else, do we have to bid 2NT+ to force)? If having a weak NT in 1D I'd rather play 2m as 6+ suit or 5-4 minors, and perhaps 2NT as 5-5 minors, making the unbalanced rebids in 1D easier.

We do have some suit information: Opener will have two 4+ suits, and almost always a 5+ minor. It is not as good as opening a real suit, but I think it will do okay in most situations. 1D--(2H)--X--(P); 2S shows a whole lot more in this system than if 11--13 NT was included: now opener has 4 spades and a longer minor, or just possibly 3-4-(15) or 3-4-(06) with a weak heart suit.

I've looked at Adam's 2m structures and they look nice if 4 card majors is included in 2m. I'm not against having 4 card majors in 2m, but partner is. We'll probably play something like this:

2C---
2D = INV+ relay
...2H = Some shortness, minimum
...2S = No shortness, so 6322 (now 3D invites and 2NT relays)
...2N = 0--1 spades, max
...3C = Single-suited and 0--1 hearts, max
...3D = 4 diamonds and 0--1 hearts, max
...3H = 3-3-1-6, max
...3S = 7+ clubs and diamond singleton, max
...3N = 7+ clubs and diamond void, max
2M = 5+ suit, F1
2N = Constructive raise
3C = Preemptive raise
3DHS = GF
3N = To play
4C = Preemptive
4D = RKC

Over 2D the same, but one step up (2NT is 5+ hearts).