[foobar]

 snillrik13, on 2014-September-19, 13:37, said:

This might well boil down to using 5C4M (or weak6C4M)ONLY and not 6-carder in clubs when we open 2C......To me it seems the ultimate solution

As others on the thread have noted, the main issue is that the opening doesn't *guarantee* the sixth club, which makes it difficult to safely fish for the major fit. In addition, it makes it difficult for responder to raise opener with 2-card support (at the right vulnerability).

In context of your system, you likely get a lot of mileage for the trade-off, but my guess is that most classic strong clubbers on the forum will lean towards a 6+ 2♣ opening.

[Trick13]

We progressed from 2♣ = 11-15 5♣+4M or 6+♣ --> 11-15 6+♣ no 4M --> 9-13 6+♣ no 4M --> 6-8 4♠ + 4 or 5 in a red suit. Each time it seemed to be an improvement.

This is in the context of 1NT = 11-13 can be off shape all the junk goes in here, 2♦ = multi.
Our 1♦ = 0+♦, either 14-16 NT or 11-15 5+m.

We open 1♦ frequently and look forward to it. Paradoxically it seems much less nebulous that the 2+♦ variations.

[Trick13]

But to answer your question. I think the worst part of the standard 2♣ is when you have 5♣+4M and partner is too weak to invite. The best part is when you have 6♣ and partner can make a weak raise to 3♣. I think you have it the wrong way around.

[the hog]

 whereagles, on 2014-September-17, 04:00, said:

I've played 5♣-4M for a long time and can attest it can *really* put you into some trouble once in a while. Having a long experience helps here, but even then you're bound to get a few zeros on its account.

HOWEVER...

the "2♣ = 6 cards" alternative requires dumping 5♣-4M into 1♦, overloading what is an already problematic opening. I've also played that for a long time and it's not much better.

There's no way out of this except changing the system radically (as in go strong pass or something). You just have to pick the style you prefer and discuss stuff with partner. If I had to choose between the two, I'd say the "5♣-4M" is better in an experienced partnership.

There are a couple of outs.
You can play 4 card Majors.
You could have your 2H/S openings showing 4 in the M and 5+ in Cs with 11-15. This was quite common amongst some expert English Pairs many years ago.

[whereagles]

 the hog, on 2014-September-20, 00:41, said:

1. You can play 4 card Majors.
2. You could have your 2H/S openings showing 4 in the M and 5+ in Cs with 11-15.

1. I tried that, but without canape. It doesn't get much better. I have to try canape one day.

2. Also tried, and even got as far as making it 4M-5m (any m). This so-called "velociraptor" is surprisingly effective. The downside is you weak 2s must use the multi 2♦ and I somewhat dislike that convention lol.

[rbforster]

It's not as bad as you think to just pass all these club hands in a precision context, especially if partner opens pretty light in 3rd or 4th.

[yunling]

If 2♣ promise 6 then responder can immediately find out if it is a misfit, or make a preemptive raise, while if 5♣4M hands are possible, you can be left in a hard guess.

But almost all precision players in China are playing 2♣ as 6+ or 5♣4M, while most of them (especially the top players) are combining it with a nebulous diamond. I asked them why to play this way and they think my question is very odd and just say "oh don't you want to bid clubs holding 5 of them?"

Maybe there are secrets that they don't want to tell me

[whereagles]

I don't think so...

[benlessard]

What I suggest is to play

2D = GF or inv long M
2M inv with 4 or 5M
2NT = INV (could be inv long D)
3C = Inv
rest is GF with good suits.

You may use 2D-??-3C as INV with clubs so 2C-3C is preempt.

so after 2C-2D-??

2H = I refuse a H inv
----2S inv with S
----2NT GF
----3C GF (or inv)

2S = I accept a H inv but refuse a S inv
all is GF

2NT min but accept both M.

rest is GF

So basically you get a 2D relay except you have 2 way to inv and stop in 2M. The drawback is that opener is showing a short suit rather than where hes got 4, but if responder is GF it shouldnt change anything most of the time. The oterh cost is after 2C-2D-2H the relay is 2NT not 2S.

[the hog]

 benlessard, on 2014-September-21, 22:40, said:

What I suggest is to play

2D = GF or inv long M
2M inv with 4 or 5M
2NT = INV (could be inv long D)
3C = Inv
rest is GF with good suits.

You may use 2D-??-3C as INV with clubs so 2C-3C is preempt.

so after 2C-2D-??

2H = I refuse a H inv
----2S inv with S
----2NT GF
----3C GF (or inv)

2S = I accept a H inv but refuse a S inv
all is GF

2NT min but accept both M.

rest is GF

So basically you get a 2D relay except you have 2 way to inv and stop in 2M. The drawback is that opener is showing a short suit rather than where hes got 4, but if responder is GF it shouldnt change anything most of the time. The oterh cost is after 2C-2D-2H the relay is 2NT not 2S.

Ben, you have not read the post. The op is asking about 5 vs 6 card C suits. If you play that 2C shows 6 cards then 2NT as invit is sub optimal If pd has a 6 card suit it is unlikely you will make exactly 9 tricks. This scheme has been used by a number of Poles and works well
2C 2N forces 3C
Now Pass = rubbish, 3D = GF with 5+D, 3H = invit with 5/5 Ms, 3S = gf+ with 5/5 Ms, 3NT = 16-17 bal
2C 3C = invit with support, now show stoppers if max

Of course, this assumes C = 6 cards.

[whereagles]

If I recall correctly, Rigal's book has a slight tweak on that 2NT relay. But then again, he uses 5+ clubs openings.

[benlessard]

I forgot to tell but i was suggesting a scheme for when 5C+4M is possible, IMO you first have to look at what your system responses is going to look like before choosing if it good for you or not.

AS for 6C or 5C if you already have bal hands in 1D (4423) opening keep 2C with 6 and open 1D/1H (i slightly prefer 1H) with 4414 and 4405. If you dont have bal hand in 1D than its a no brainer to make 1D=4 and 2C=5 like polish club.

[rhm]

 hrothgar, on 2014-September-18, 12:58, said:

There's a reason some of us prefer canape based 4 card majors in conjunction with strong club...

This is more honored in theory than in practice.
Giving up that 1♥ or 1♠ shows five card solves the problems discussed here.
But given the popularity of 5 card majors at all levels of Bridge should tell you that the cost doing so is prohibitive.
I played Blue Club thirty years ago.

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

 benlessard, on 2014-September-22, 11:06, said:

If you dont have bal hand in 1D than its a no brainer to make 1D=4 and 2C=5 like polish club.

In Polish Club it is much easier to play that 2♣=6 than in Precision, yet you are right that most Polish Club players play 2♣=5.

This is something I never understood and I do not think it is a no brainer.

5♣=2♦=4M=2M or 5♣=1♦=4M=3M or 5♣=0♦=4M=4M can and should be opened 1♣

The roof won't fall in if you open 5♣=3♦=4M=1M with 1♦ (I had never a problem with this rare type of hands when opened 1♦)

That's what I play. It even works if you like to play that 1♦ should always show an unbalanced hand.

Rainer Herrmann

[NickRW]

 rhm, on 2014-September-25, 04:11, said:

But given the popularity of 5 card majors at all levels of Bridge should tell you that the cost doing so is prohibitive.
I played Blue Club thirty years ago.

Rainer Herrmann

Well, I tend to prefer 5cM systems myself, or certainly at least 5 card spades, to 4cM ones. However, I don't think the popularity of one over the other really proves anything. In most of the world they teach 5cM systems in the first place. In the UK they generally teach 4cM, and, surprise surprise, 4cM systems are popular here. In other words, I think it (popularity) more has to do with inertia, than the true merits of one versus the other.

[benlessard]

Quote

5♣=2♦=4M=2M or 5♣=1♦=4M=3M or 5♣=0♦=4M=4M can and should be opened 1♣

Yes I agree with rhm, playing a PC I would try to open 1C with clubs hands with 4M but I don't have enough exp playing reg PC to work out the details.

My point is that going from 5-3 (minimum for clubs & D) to 6-1 is a terrible deal. If you already have a lot of bal hands with only 2D than the damage is alread done so at this point its a different story.

I also hate 2D prec so that doesnt help.

I personnaly think the reg precision scheme

13-15 NT
1D could be 3 unbalanced
2C could be 5c4M

is pretty good all you have to do is lower the range in 3rd seat to 12-14 and 15+.

[ping2827]

The answer to this depending on the rest of your system. I played a modified Precision with the following opening.
1. All strong hands open 1♣.
2. 1♥, 1♠ and 2♣ are standard Precision open.
3. The rest of the limited hands are divided into balanced/semi-balanced and unbalanced hands. Unbalanced hand open 1♦. Balanced/semi-balanced open 1NT.
4. 2♦ is weak two in ♥ or ♠. 2♥, 2♠ and 2NT are all weak two suiter (5-5). 2NT is both minor. 2♠ is ♠ and a minor. 2♥ is ♥ and any other suit.
In this system, I find it is very useful to keep 5C4M in 2♣ open because it could make 1♦ open more precise. If you work out possible distributions, you'll find 1♦ open will have either 4+♦ or singleton/void in ♦. The later case must have 4-4 in the majors. Otherwise it would have 5♣ with 4M and should open 2♣. The 1♦ open would have a singleton/void. This is very useful in later bidding and playing. The only exception is 7222 hand with 7♦. In that case opener just keep rebidding ♦. This arrangement moved Precision 2♦ hands into 1♦ and free up 2♦ for multi weak two.