[ucrman]

A relatively popular system in my area is one with a strong club showing 16 to 20+, but the 1C opening denies a 5-card major. The opening 1NT is 10-12. The major openings are like Standard. The 1D opening is Precision and could be bid on a singleton diamond with a range of 11-15. The 2C opening is like a precision 2C. The strong bid is 2D. Did anyone ever hear of this system?

[mikestar13]

Never head of it, and using it destroys the best sequence in Precision: 1♠-4♠ and likewise in heats. This could be a preempt with five trumps, or a flattish 13 or with support but where responder knows there is no slam opposite a limited opener. Opener doesn't need to know (he's passing either way) and the opponents must guess. Even though alerted and explained properly, it will induce many error defending it.

[ucrman]

The persons that started this bidding system apparently liked their Standard major suit opening bid structure. Instead of opening 1C with 16+ points with a 5-card major and subjecting them to preemption, they can now open 1H or 1S. Also, it does limit the 1C opener's rebids in a good way. Do you like your bidding structure after a 1H or 1S opening?

[Kungsgeten]

I absolutely think wide-ranging 1M openings in a strong club (or strong diamond) system makes sense. The 1M openings in a 5 card major system are pretty good, so I can see the reasoning.

It is very easy (and reasonable) to compare a new/novel system with already existing ones. I think strong club with wide range 1M should be compared to "standard" methods, rather than strong club ones. In other words, what do we gain/lose compared to standard? What is it that makes this system better than standard?

In your example we have a 10-12 NT. This is a lot easier to play in a strong club setting than in standard. However the 1M openings seems to suffer from this? What's the range of 1M when holding 5332? 13-19? I think it makes more sense to open 1C with strong balanced hands, even if holding a five card major. Then 1M is 13-15 if balanced. Even though I think that range might be problematic (might be solved by playing forcing NT) it actually makes 1M better defined than standard, since we've removed the strong NT (18-19 in standard) hands.

You say that 2C is like Precision, but if 1D is 1+ then 2C probably only promise five (can be 5 clubs and 4M)? That's an opening bid with bad reputation. I'm playing this style myself and I know we're potentially having a bad board every time I open it. I'd say that a standard 1C opening will be better on most boards.

You play the nebulous 1D. I don't have much experience with it, but to me it seems like a standard 1D opening is better on average?

Then you have the strong 1C. You'll probably be worse of on 16-17 balanced hands compared to standard, and probably better of on the 18+ balanced hands. On unbalanced minor hands I'm not sure. Strong minor hands can be a bit cumbersome in a natural system, which is why many high level players have a lot of artificiality here. I'd say that at the very least a strong club is easier to play

The 2D opening in your system will probably be a loss, since you lose other alternatives (weak etc). The bid itself is probably fine, especially if only including major suited hands.


If I were to play something like this, I'd probably swap some stuff to have more advantages compared to standard. Something like this maybe (very similar to AWM's Recursive Diamond):

1C = 13-15 (semi)bal or 12-15 4441 or 10-15 5m431 or 5m440 (so might be 0 clubs). Perhaps some kind of transfer responses, or maybe 1D as INV+ relay.
1D = Strong. 16+ NT (including 5M332), 16+ primary minor, 15+ 5-5 minors, GF if unbal 5+ major.
1M = Standard, 13-15 if 5332.
1NT = 10-12.
2m = 6+ minor, 10-15.
2M = Weak.
2NT = 11-14, 5-5 minors.

I think it makes sense to have 1D be the strong bid, especially since you've removed a lot of hands from it when excluding five card majors. The downside is that its less space for positive responses, ofcourse. I think having 1C be the nebulous bid is an improvement, which the response structure should benefit from. It is also quite limited in shape, so opener will not have an "extreme" hand. Having more "extreme" minor suited hands open at the two level can be both positive and negative. Generally though I think its good, since you'll have better tempo in the auction, compared to standard. I think 6-4 hands is a downside, compared to standard. 2NT is quite high when having 5-5 minors (AWM puts them in 1C instead), but the preemptive effect is good. Including the GF 5M hands in 1D shouldn't be that much worse than standard (and will be a win when the opponents are silent).

[spotlight7]

The Comedy Club is fairly close to your requirements.

1C* and a major rebid is either

15-17 or 22+(rebid with a jump)


1M is 11-14 or 18-21

1D is standard(I believe)

[chasetb]

That sounds like an early version of Schenken's Big Club Standard, but then grafted with Precision and then tweaked. It's likely a unique system, but I'm not a fan of it for a lot of reasons.
1.) Your 1♣ is too narrow, both in HCP and the range of hands that qualify.
2.) The 2♦ bid would be fine if you upped the 1♣ range, but constructive bidding isn't good as it stands.
3.) While you gain in the opponents not interfering over 1♣ when you have a 5-card Major, you lose what is Precision's biggest gain - having 1M be limited like it is!
4.) I don't like the 1NT being 10-12, because you lose out on immediately showing the balanced 15s (and really good 14s). The 1♦ bid is overloaded.
5.) If 2♣ is like the old version of Precision, it's not good.

Having said all of that, the system could easily be playable by just one change. Change the range of 1♣ to be [16 HCP - almost GF], allowing 5M hands if [20 HCP - almost GF], and making 2♦ as forcing to 3NT or the 4-level. I would also recommend your 2♣ to promise 6.