[helene_t]

Shogi and I play
1♣=12-19 bal (no 5cM) or 4=4=1=4
1NT=6+clubs or 5♣4M, 11-19
Rest=like SA except for Dutch 2-openings and 1♦ is natural and is systematic with 45 minors.

We like this and believe it is sounder than the original Boring Club, in which 2NT is 11-15 with 4♦5♣ (lol) and 2♣ is 19-22 bal so all gf hands sit in the multi 2♦ (except hands with primarily clubs, as their 1NT opening is unlimited).

I wonder if we should make the 1NT opening promise 6. This would mean that (43)15 and 4405 would open 1♣ and (41)35 1♦. In a Precision context I like that but in Boring club the situation is more akin to Polish Club so maybe we should just keep it the way it is? Our 1NT opening is limited at the moment, but we could obviously take some pressure on the 2-openings by making it unlimited as in traditional Boring Club. But I think that an 11-30 1NT opening that doesn't promise six clubs is unplayable. Any thoughts?

Something more radical: We like lighter 1M openings, maybe from 8-9 points with a good suit and a bit of shape. This would require switching to strong 1♦, I think. So the hands with diamonds would have to open at the 2-level. I am not sure if there is any good solution for this. Something I just came up with:

1♣:balanced, or 3-suited short in a minor. Up to about 20 points.
1♦: Strong
1M: Five cards, 9-16 points.
1NT: six clubs or diamonds, up to about 16/17 points
2♣: three-suited short in a major, or both minors. 11-15 points.

This is just at the brainstorm level so far. As I said we kinda lie our existing system, so it is not urgent to fix it, but it would be more fun to be able to open lighter in the major suits.

Any thoughts about this?

[straube]

Hi Helene

So 1N-2C and 2C-2D would just be sign offs? If so, this should be a red flag. They probably should be asking bids. If not asking bids, the second priority would be telling bids. Using them as sign offs is very wasteful of a potential sequence.

I think you should tally a hundred or so hands and see how often these openings come up. 1N as 6+ clubs would probably be pretty rare. You'd be underutilizing 1N and overusing 1C.

If 2C may include 3-suited short a major then you will miss many major suit fits when responder is not strong enough to investigate. I think the trend is away from opening 3-suited hands at the 2-level.

[mgoetze]

It seems like by far the most obvious improvement to your system would be to just switch the 1NT and 2♣ openings (and include the reverse strength 5♣4M hands in 1♣). I completely understand that it is counterintuitive that a move to make your system more GCC legal would be an improvement, of course.

[gwnn]

I agree with mgoetze (regarding putting 15+ with clubs in 1C) but in addition maybe you could also put in the strong hands into 1C to free up 1D and then maybe also have 1NT as 15-17 and not to have those annoying anti-field swings. Hmm this seems familiar...

Sorry I don't mean to be a troll but I just see no upside to it now!

[whereagles]

>>> I wonder if we should make the 1NT opening promise 6.

I will only comment on this, as I am not familiar with the rest of the structure.

Agree that if 1NT-2♣ is a sign-off, then I really don't see why not opening it 2♣ directly. It puts a lot more pressure on opps. I suppose it would be better to use 1NT-2♣ as something like "bid on if you're max" and 1NT-pass as "no hope for game, hope for making 1NT".

But my main critics is that, in my experience (~3 years at top dutch level), the precision 2♣ opening is a huge hassle already with 11-15. If you're extending it to 11-19 or whatever, I would be very close to label it as "unplayable".

[helene_t]

We currently play 1nt-2c as 6-9. Weaker hands either pass or bid 3c. In traditional boring club, 1n is forcing and weak hans bid 2c.

[helene_t]

straube, on 2015-January-01, 18:56, said:

I think you should tally a hundred or so hands and see how often these openings come up. 1N as 6+ clubs would probably be pretty rare. You'd be underutilizing 1N and overusing 1C.

If 2C may include 3-suited short a major then you will miss many major suit fits when responder is not strong enough to investigate. I think the trend is away from opening 3-suited hands at the 2-level.

Thanks, I should probably move away from the idea of 1NT showing 6+ clubs. The problem I see with the orginal BC system is that if 1NT is forcing, you can play a silly 2♣ contract in a 5-1 fit. We play the 1NT opening as NF so responder can pass if short in clubs and very weak, while the 2♣ response shows 6-9 so it is a bit safer for opener to move on with a 16-count and we can still scramble to a better partscore sometimes. But ok, it doesn't seem to happen so often that we play a silly partscore. Usually opps will interfere if neither of us have the strength to move beyond 2♣. It could go 1NT-a.p. while we have a 7-2 fit in clubs but again, usually opps interfere. Unless opener is strong enough for 1NT to have play.

Anyway, it seems to create a lot of problems to move the 5-card clubs hands out of 1NT.

mgoetze, on 2015-January-01, 21:13, said:

It seems like by far the most obvious improvement to your system would be to just switch the 1NT and 2♣ openings (and include the reverse strength 5♣4M hands in 1♣). I completely understand that it is counterintuitive that a move to make your system more GCC legal would be an improvement, of course.

But this raises the issue what to do with the 16+ hands with clubs....

gwnn, on 2015-January-02, 04:38, said:

I agree with mgoetze (regarding putting 15+ with clubs in 1C) but in addition maybe you could also put in the strong hands into 1C to free up 1D and then maybe also have 1NT as 15-17 and not to have those annoying anti-field swings. Hmm this seems familiar...

Sorry I don't mean to be a troll but I just see no upside to it now!

Well the whole point of the system is to bid shape before strength. In many cases it doesn't matter to responder whether opener has 14 or 15 points, while it usually does matter if opener is balanced or not. For example, we play junk jump shifts, 0-5 points and a 5+ card suit. And negative freebids can be safely done on a moth-eaten 5-card suit. And responder can jump to 3NT immediately with a 4M333 as well as any balanced hand without a 4-card major.

[Zelandakh]

I am not keen on the basic structure but it seems to me that making 1NT a multi would be a major improvement. Move the GF hands down into this and the 15-19 club hands out. Now after a 1NT opening, Responder can bid 2♣ without game interest, after which any rebid shows the GF hand, while any other call shows enough strength to excite the GF hand type. If you had the other responses also as transfers then they could also be invoked with a weak hand and a long suit without too much disruption or artificiality. The 15-19 club-based hands can become the new meaning for a 2♣ opening or, probably better, go into 1♣ and 17-19 balanced pulled out into 2♣. Not that I have any experience with this system of course, it just feels like the result would be more efficient.

[jgillispie]

Your latter proposition reminds me a lot of Magic Diamond. There's a comprehensive booklet on it here. I've never played it, but the light 1M seems like a winner.

I'm curious as to what the goals for this system are? The modifications you make are dependent on what you want the system to do. I.e., if you like to hassle the opponents with preempts, then a mini NT makes more sense than a strong NT. I've toyed around with a 1N opening like you have prescribed. It only seems to work if it is a means of refining an existing 2♣ opening that says about the same thing.

Please let me know where you intend to go with this system. I think it will help everybody with their suggestions (which, I can assure you, will me much more meaningful than what I have to tell you).

[helene_t]

jgillispie, on 2015-January-03, 12:48, said:

Please let me know where you intend to go with this system.

The main objective is to make it shape-first. We try to avoid opening bids which could be multiple shapes such as the 1♣ opening in most systems. The 1♣ opening allows responder to make a NFB or WJS on a 5-card suit and the 1NT opening allows partner to compete in clubs.

[helene_t]

Zelandakh, on 2015-January-03, 05:23, said:

[...] it seems to me that making 1NT a multi would be a major improvement. Move the GF hands down into this and the 15-19 club hands out. Now after a 1NT opening, Responder can bid 2♣ without game interest, after which any rebid shows the GF hand, while any other call shows enough strength to excite the GF hand type. If you had the other responses also as transfers then they could also be invoked with a weak hand and a long suit without too much disruption or artificiality. The 15-19 club-based hands can become the new meaning for a 2♣ opening or, probably better, go into 1♣ and 17-19 balanced pulled out into 2♣.

This is an interesting idea. Defining the 2♣ opening as 15-19 natural is obviously simpler but there is probably room for more strongish hands in the 1♣ opening. Maybe I would prefer 2♣ = 15-19 with 6+ clubs and move the 15-19 hands with 5 clubs and 4M into 1♣.

[Zelandakh]

Or you could put everything in 1♣ and use 2♣ for any other problem hands, or even preemptively. I suggested the Mexican-style 2♣ because these are often the most awkward hands to deal with when this type of 1♣ opening gets overcalled.