improved Caroline Club alpha version
#1
Posted 2011-November-26, 03:24
So I've always wanted to try Caroline Club (which itself claims to be an improved version of Ekeblad club) but there were quite a few no-nos in it that I could never play. It just seemed convoluted to me. Well sure you could say canape approaches are inherently convoluted. Anyway, I really like the idea to have a strong club system where all openings show a suit and promise an unbalanced hand. So without further ado this is where I am currently in devising this hypothetical system.
1♣=15+ any
1♦=10-14, 4+ ♦ unbalanced, either one-suited (6+), or minors, or a 4441 hand with 4 diamonds or 4450 or 4+♦5+♠ (wow, that's a lot of hands)
1♥=10-14, 4+ ♥ unbalanced, either one-suited (6+), or 4♥5+other, or 4414.
1♠=10-14, 4+ ♠ (usually) unbalanced, either one-suited (6+) or 4♠5+other, or optionally 12-14 5♠332.
1N=12-14 balanced
2♣=10-14, 4+ ♣, either one-suited (6+) or 4♣5+ spades
2♦=10-14, 5+♥4+♦
2♥=10-14, 5+♥4+♣
2♠=weak two
2N=10-14, 5+♥5+♠ (I know, weird)
My main contribution is kaplan inversion over 1♦ and 1♥, sorting out spade length cheaply. I don't know if this has been done before, sorry!
1♦-?
1♥=4+ forcing 1 round (responses are rather easy over this one. 1NT could show 3 card support for example)
1♠=denies any 4-card major, over this: 1N=4-5 spades (2♣ asks), 2♣=minors (possibly 1444), 2♦=diamonds
1NT=4+ spades, over this 2♣=minors, 2♦=diamonds, 2♥=good raise (possibly with 5), 2♠=bad raise (possibly with 3)
2♣=GF shape relay (I have this sorted out but I don't want to make this post too long, it's based on symmetric relays)
2♦=single raise, I guess denying 3 spades, maybe not
2♥/♠=limit bids
2NT=forcing raise of ♦
1♥-?
1♠=0-3 spades, over this 1N=4-5 spades(2♣ asks), 2m=canape, 2M=single suited
1N=4+ spades, over this standard stuff. 5-card support should try to bid something more than 2♠ if at all suitable
2♣=GF relay (again, this is sorted out)
2♦=not sure
2♥=single raise
2♠=limit bid
2NT=forcing raise
1♠-?
1N=you know standard 2/1 response, over this 12-14 balanced can pass, canapes can show themselves
2♣=GF relay
2♦=I guess 5+ hearts inv+?
2♥=no clue
2♠=single raise
2NT=forcing raise
1N-?
whatever
2♣-?
2♦=non-value showing asking bid, over this 2♥=canape, 2♠..3♣=one suiter in various shapes (I guess 3♣=minimum, 2♠=maximum w/ singleton, 2NT=maximum without)
2♥/♠=limit bids
2N=dunno (I guess it could be forcing 3♣ and then you either pass or show a 5-5. opener should break the transfer if he has spades)
3♣=mixed raise
over 2♦ and 2♥ I am not sure what 2N should be used for? I am not a big fan of playing 2NT but in this case it might be worth it to play it as invitational. I know Ekeblad plays it as a GF relay though.
Two more little remarks: you don't have to play 1♠ as possibly 5332 but it just so happens to have a perfect spot in both the 1NT system (you pass) and the 2♣ relays. There was one free spot and I decided to put that in. And I know 5♠5♥ is ugly to open all the way up at 2NT but I'm not sure how you can ever show that if you open 1♠!
Yea so what's up people, what do you think? You can say you hate it as long as you admit it's better than Caroline Club?
BTW a nice name could be Petra Club (I'm a Wozniacki fan but also realistic).
George Carlin
#2
Posted 2011-November-26, 03:31
Easiest is over 1♠-?
1♠-2♣
2♦=diamonds or 5332 (2♠ rebid shows 5332)
2♥=hearts
2♠=spades
2NT+=two-suiter with clubs
1♥-2♣
2♦=diamonds or 4414/4405 (2♠ rebid shows the three suiter)
2♥=spades
2♠=hearts
2NT+=clubs
1♦-2♣ (sorry, this is a little convoluted!)
2♦=diamonds or three-suiter (2♠ rebid shows the one-suiter)
2♥=5 spades
2♠+=minors
The only tricky part is that there are still some three-suiters lurking around in some 5-4's but not in others. For example, if I show a ♠-♣ two-suiter, I can be 4045 but not 4405. I just put a simple rule for this: if you show a 5440 you can't have, it's just a maximum 5431.
one-suited relays are always announced by 2♠. Afterwards it's standard symmetric relay stuff. You lose a step but you regain it because you can't be 5332.
two-suited relays always announced by 2♠ (or start at 2NT, anyway) except the minors and ♦+♠, which are special anyway because they can be 5-5.
George Carlin
#3
Posted 2011-November-26, 04:30
*it is probably a good idea to let opener decide to open 1M even on some 6M4m hands (and especially open 1♦ on 6♦4♣), in that case you would simply give up exact relays after you've announced your one-suiter.
*1♠-2♣; 2♦ should be hearts or balanced to rightside hearts but yea where will it ever stop if you want to fish out all these cases?
George Carlin
#4
Posted 2011-November-26, 04:41
gwnn, on 2011-November-26, 03:24, said:
So I've always wanted to try Caroline Club (which itself claims to be an improved version of Ekeblad club) but there were quite a few no-nos in it that I could never play. It just seemed convoluted to me. Well sure you could say canape approaches are inherently convoluted. Anyway, I really like the idea to have a strong club system where all openings show a suit and promise an unbalanced hand. So without further ado this is where I am currently in devising this hypothetical system.
1♣=15+ any
1♦=10-14, 4+ ♦ unbalanced, either one-suited (6+), or minors, or a 4441 hand with 4 diamonds or 4450 or 4+♦5+♠ (wow, that's a lot of hands)
1♥=10-14, 4+ ♥ unbalanced, either one-suited (6+), or 4♥5+other, or 4414.
1♠=10-14, 4+ ♠ (usually) unbalanced, either one-suited (6+) or 4♠5+other, or optionally 12-14 5♠332.
1N=12-14 balanced
2♣=10-14, 4+ ♣, either one-suited (6+) or 4♣5+ spades
2♦=10-14, 5+♥4+♦
2♥=10-14, 5+♥4+♣
2♠=weak two
2N=10-14, 5+♥5+♠ (I know, weird)
I still prefer the ambiguous or 2+ diamond opening and your 1D will cover fewer hands than I would like. Nevertheless, I think you need to sacrifice your weak 2S bid to show something else...probably 5+S/4C as including this hand in your 2C opening is very poor imo. I also would use 2N for something else...probably to show a strong balanced hand; this might help you anyway because your 1C opening has to deal with a wider range of strengths. Notice that Meckwell use 2N as 20-21 or so and their club is stronger than yours by 2 points when balanced. Btw, I wouldn't want to open a 5/5 major suit hand in such a way as to force to the 3-level. The point of having majors is you don't have to bid as high.
#5
Posted 2011-November-26, 08:17
George Carlin
#6
Posted 2011-November-26, 19:35
"Well sure you could say canape approaches are inherently convoluted." No, this is not correct. Your changes inherently change the nature of the system and are not an improvement. Perhaps you should look at Auken and von Arnim's system instead.
#7
Posted 2011-November-27, 04:11
George Carlin
#8
Posted 2011-November-27, 12:48
On a serious note, I´ve seen 1♦-1♥-1♠ is 4441 in the original and I almost stop reading there, reserving the cheapest response to the most common sequence for a 3 suiters must be a mistake.
I have zero experience on canape except when I open 1♦ with 4-5, can´t help you at all on competitive sequences at least.
#9
Posted 2011-November-28, 00:41
1♣ = 16+
1♦ = 4+ ♦, includes single-suited (6+), or at least 5-4 in the minors, or a 4441 hand with 4 diamonds, or 4+ ♦ and 5+ ♠
1♥ = 4+ ♥, includes single-suited (6+), 4+ with longer ♦ (unless 4414), or 5+ ♥ and 4+ ♣
1♠ = 4+ ♠, includes single-suited (6+), 4+ with a longer red suit, or 5+ ♠ and 4+ ♣
1NT = 12-15, usually denies a 5-card Major
2♣ = 10-15, either 6+ ♣ or 5 with a 4-card Major
2♦ = 10-15, 5+ ♥ and 4+ ♦
2♥ = 10-15, 4+ ♥ and 5+ ♠ (deals well with Anti-Flannery and the Majors... I hope). Similar to Truscott's Symmetric Relay.
2♠ = Weak 2
2NT = what you want, 19-20(21) like Meckwell would work
"Learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to make them all yourself."
"One advantage of bad bidding is that you get practice at playing atrocious contracts."
-Alfred Sheinwold
#10
Posted 2011-November-28, 03:39
BTW how do you open 5-5s and 6-5s on canape?
#11
Posted 2011-November-28, 03:59
George Carlin
#12
Posted 2011-November-28, 04:08
#13
Posted 2011-November-28, 08:49
In an attempt to solve that problem, I once experimented with this:
1C = Strong, or 11-13 balanced
1D = Unbalanced without a major, or 14-16 balanced without a major
1M = 6, or Canape with 4, or 14-16 balanced with 4, or 4441-type
1NT = exactly 5 hearts
2C = exactly 5 spades, without 4 hearts
2D = exactly 5 spades, 4+ hearts
but that doesn't meet Gwnn's requirement for a suit bid to show an unbalanced hand.
Another possibility is to put all the 14-16 balanced hands into 1D. Then you'd have:
1C = Strong, or 11-13 balanced
1D = Unbalanced without a major, or 14-16 balanced
1M = 6, or Canape with 4, or 4441-type
1NT = exactly 5 hearts
2C = exactly 5 spades, without 4 hearts
2D = exactly 5 spades, 4+ hearts
#14
Posted 2011-November-28, 09:41
gwnn, on 2011-November-28, 03:59, said:
+1
Trading 15+ for a 12-15NT is a big loss. 15+ is fine anyway.
#15
Posted 2011-November-28, 13:23
kfay, on 2011-November-28, 09:41, said:
Trading 15+ for a 12-15NT is a big loss. 15+ is fine anyway.
+2 -- play this range only if you want to live in the constant dread of "what if..." when holding 10/11 point hands...
#16
Posted 2011-November-29, 04:17
George Carlin
#17
Posted 2011-November-29, 04:47
gwnn, on 2011-November-29, 04:17, said:
After the 1NT opening, there is room to investigate strength and spade contracts at the two-level. Like this, for example:
2♣ = 4+ spades, but not a one-suiter unless FG. Opener bids: 2♦ with 0/1 spades, 2♥ with 2 spades, 2♠ with 3 or a minimum with 4, higher with 4 non-minimum.
2♦ = puppet to 2♥. (Signoff in hearts, signoff in spades, invitation in notrumps, invitation in a minor, or game-forcing raise.)
2♥ = constructive, 3 cards
2♠ = constructive, 6 cards
2NT/3♣ = transfer, signoff or FG
3♦ = invitational raise
3♥ = weak raise
In addition:
- I've given you back your weak two in hearts
- I've got rid of the revolting 2♣ opening and the scary 2NT opening
- I've taken away the major-major Canapes, which will make your competitive sequences rather easier.
#18
Posted 2011-November-29, 08:07
George Carlin
#19
Posted 2011-November-29, 09:32
2C = 4+C5M
2H = 5S4+H [or possibly 4+S5H or just 5S5H]
3C = natural
2N = something else
or possibly
2C = 5S4+round
3C = natural
2N = something else
#20
Posted 2011-November-29, 10:26
gwnn, on 2011-November-29, 08:07, said:
Yes, my main objective was to be able to get to game without giving away unnecessary information. I think that's one of the two main reasons for playing Canape. The other is the preemptive value of opening one of a major.