[Kungsgeten]

Me and partner has been discussing our 2♣ opening (11-16 hcp, 6+♣ or 5♣ and 4cM). In our opinion this is the worst part of our Swedish Club system. We could probably improve the continuations over this opening, but has been thinking about how to handle hands with clubs better. Currently we play:

1♣ = 11-13 NT/4-4-1-4 (no 5 card major) or 17+ any
1♦ = 11-16, 4+♦, unbalanced in 1st and 2nd
1♥/♠ = 11-16, 5+ suit
1NT = 14-16, may have 5 card major, may have 4-4-1-4
2♣ = 11-16, 6+♣ or 5♣ and 4♥/♠, may be 4-4-0-5
2♦ = Weak multi.
2♥ = Flannery. 11-16, 5+♥ and 4♠
2♠ = Weak with 5♠ and 5+♣/♦
2NT = 20-21
3♣/♦ = Sound preempts

I've been thinking if the 2♣ opening could be passed in 1st and 2nd seat, as in Robert Forster's Silent Club system. In order to remove some club hands from this pass, semibalanced hands with clubs could be treated as balanced and we would be using 2♣, 2♠ and 3♣ as different club hands. It would be great if we only passed with hands holding 5+♣ and a four card major, so that all single-suited club hands opens right away. Perhaps something like this:

Pass = 0-10 or 12-15 with 5+♣ and a four card major (not 5422?)
1♣ = 11-13 semibal or 17+ or even 16+ if holding unbalanced values with clubs as longest suit.
1NT = 14-16 semibal
2♣ = 8-11 unbal with 5+♣
2♠ = 6+♣, single-suited, 12-15
2NT = As before
3♣ = Not sure, but perhaps long clubs with max one loser, at least one side quick trick and 4-5.5 losers (as played in the Carrot Club/Morotsklövern)

Now in 3rd/4th we would play:

1♣ = 8-13 NT or 16+
1♦ = 4+ suit, 8-15
1♥/♠ = 5+ suit, 8-15
1NT = 14-16
2♣ = 6+♣ or 5♣ and 4♥/♠, 8-15
2♦/♥/♠ = Weak
2NT = 20-21

Do you think this could be an improvement, or should we just give it up? Does the idea of using 2♠ and 3♣ as openings strength with clubs have merit, or should we just pass with these hands too (or perhaps have more restrictions on the 2♠ opening)?

[phoenix214]

Have never tried, the idea, but is the opening that much worse in your opinion? It should still bring you a marginal +. If you want to separate the hands out of 2C which have 5C-4M, maybe you can try opening them 1M or treat them as 1NT for simplicity sake?

Or a more off-beat idea, maybe try out some Flannery type openers with clubs(although they might need to be separated, which might lead to a problem), for example
2♣ 11-15 5♣-4♥
2♠ 11-15 5♣-4♠
3♣ 11-15 6♣

[jgillispie]

Another possibility is to put the 4M 5♣ hands into 1M opening. I'm not entirely sure what your follow-ups would be. Best to reference some other canape systems to see what is best.

[Zelandakh]

Have you considered switching to 1♦ = one minor and 2♣ (or 2♦) = both minors? Ken can give you lots of stuff on that approach if you want to play around with it.

[Kungsgeten]

Canape is a possible solution, but that would change the entire system.

Playing a nebulous diamond would work too, but our main reason for playing Swedish Club from the start was to avoid the nebulous diamond On the other hand it is probably an improvement if 1D is nebulous but always unbalanced.. Other possible solutions is a three-suited precision opening and opening (41)35 with 1D, but that too seems like a sacrifice.

[awm]

What are your 1♣ continuations? It seems like putting 5 club / 4M hands into 1♣ might be easiest; basically if partner responds in a 4M you treat as 4441 and if partner responds in your short major you treat as balanced?

[Zelandakh]

It breaks the whole essence of SC though. The idea of the system is that the weak NT makes an ideal one bid hand type so any additional hands here have to be two bid types. For that 17+ is already a little dodgy and if you lose this advantage too the whole system loses its efficiency. Much better imo to find a satisfactory solution using the 1♦, 2♣ and 2♦ openings. If not then switch to a PC-like (3-way) arrangement.

[Kungsgeten]

Awm: Putting the club hands there could work, but 1C as it is works pretty good in competition due to being strong or balanced. Loading it with club hands would hurt both constructive and competitive bidding, but perhaps it could be worth it. If playing like that the AUC system is probably better though?

Our continuations over 1C:

1D = 0--7 any or 8--11 NT without major, optional with 5m332
1M = 4+ major, 8+ hcp, may have longer minor if less than GF
1NT = Transfer to clubs, 8+ hcp. May have longer diamonds if GF
2C = Transfer to diamonds. 8+ hcp.
2D = 0--4 with 6 card major or 18+ NT without major and not 5m332
2H = 12--15 NT, no major, optional with 5m332
2S = INV with both minors
2NT = INV, no major
3X = Weak
3NT = 16--17(18) NT, no major and not 5m332

[glen]

I prefer:

Pass = can be 11-13 with 5-6♣s, major suit singleton, and not 6-4+
1♣ = 11-13 NT/4-4-1-4/4-3-1-5/3-4-1-5/3-3-1-6/4-2-2-5/2-4-2-5 (no 5 card major) or 11-13 6♣s no singleton or void, or 17+ any
2♣ = 14-16, 6+♣s or 5♣s and 4♥/♠, may be 4-4-0-5, or 11-13 6+♣s shapely 6-4+ or 7+♣s, or 11-13 4-4-0-5

[yunling]

Just put (41)35 hands into 1♦ and (43)15 hands into 1♣/1NT. It's Rainer's suggestion if I remembered it correct.

[Kungsgeten]

yunling, on 2015-January-10, 20:22, said:

Just put (41)35 hands into 1♦ and (43)15 hands into 1♣/1NT. It's Rainer's suggestion if I remembered it correct.

That's a possible solution. The problem hand then is 4-4-0-5, doesn't feel right to open it 1C/1NT. There's also the fact that responder may fear to raise diamonds (right now we can raise to the two-level with 3-card support and to the 3-level with 4-card support). If deciding on opening 1D with a possible (41)35 then we should probably consider using a Precision-like three-suited opening. If doing this, however, we would probably have to give up Flannery (or give up a weak two in hearts). Not a big deal, but there's a reason why we chose to play it in the first place

The continuations over our 1D opening right now:

1D---
1H = Natural or GF wishing to use relays
1S = Natural, forcing
1NT = 5+ clubs, weak or GF
2C = 3(+) diamonds weak or 4+ diamonds GF
2D = 3+ diamonds, invitational
2M = Weak Jump Shift
2NT = Natural INV
3C = Natural INV
3D = Preemptive
3HS = Splinter
3N = Flat hand, to play
4C = Splinter

If 1D could be three-cards we have some problem hands as responder:

3-3-3-4, pass unless invitational? Or should we pretend to have a four card major? Right now we can bid 2C or 2D.
(23)-3-5, pass here too? A transfer to clubs seems unwise? Or perhaps play that a transfer to clubs and following up with 2D is non-forcing (somewhat solves the problem avobe too)
2-2-3-6 and (13)-4-5, same thing, but would be okay to support diamonds here with four card support

Having another hand pattern in 1D would probably not be a problem for our relays, but may be after we respond 1S. Right now we play:

1D--1S;
1N = 6+ diamonds, may have 3-card support
2C = Both minors
2D = 5+ diamonds, 4 hearts
2H = 3-card raise, less than 6 diamonds
2S = 4-card raise, minimum
2N = 4-card raise, max
3S = 4-card raise, "medium"

If 1D can be 1-4-3-5 we have a bit of a problem with the rebid structure above. 2C would probably need to show 5 clubs, and 1NT would show 5 diamonds and 4 clubs? 2D would be 6+ diamonds or diamonds and hearts? Or perhaps use 1NT as 4 hearts and 5 clubs/diamonds (2C showing both minors and 2D 6+ diamonds).