[borag]

I'm trying to adapt a Polish Club variant but can't be sure if it is playable. Any comments ?

1♣ = 10-17 hp 5+♦, 4♦(441) / 12-14 hp bal / 18+ hp any
1♦ = 10-17 hp 5+♣, 4414
1♥ = 10-17 hp 5+♥
1♠ = 10-17 hp 5+♠
1N = 15-17 hp bal
2♣ = 5-9 hp M+M
2♦ = 5-9 hp 6M
2♥ = 5-9 hp ♥ + m
2♠ = 5-9 hp ♠ + m
2N = 5-9 hp m+m

[helene_t]

You gain a bit of bidding space after the 1♣ opening when you rebid 2♣ showing diamonds rather than clubs. You lose on the diamond suit, for example
1♦-1NT
2♦*
is presumably a minimum hand with both minors?
There is also less inference when responder responds 1NT or 2♣ to the 1♦ opening since he won't often be able to pass the 1♦ opening.

But overall it sounds like a good trade-off. You will have to put some work into the follow-ups after 1♦ but it could probably work.

[borag]

Hi helene_t,

Thanks for the comments. Actually I also think to limit;
1♣-1♦ = 0-7 any (now)
pass = 12-14 hp bal 4+♦ or 10-14 hp unb 4+♦

Maybe it can help further

[rbforster]

helene_t, on 2014-October-09, 03:44, said:

You gain a bit of bidding space after the 1♣ opening when you rebid 2♣ showing diamonds rather than clubs. You lose on the diamond suit, for example
1♦-1NT
2♦*
is presumably a minimum hand with both minors?
There is also less inference when responder responds 1NT or 2♣ to the 1♦ opening since he won't often be able to pass the 1♦ opening.

1♦ appears to be unbalanced (as 1♣ and 1N cover all 12+ balanced hands), so in particular this means opener has a free 1N rebid after opening 1♦ showing clubs. Whether you want to use that as minors (only reversing into 2♦♥ with extras) or hearts any strength I'm not so sure. It may depend on how well you can open 1♣ and handle both minor hands.

[MickyB]

This is a big improvement on Baltic Club IMO. 1C:1D as a NF negative would work really well, it's not the first time I've seen it suggested, but it is the first time I've seen it combined with a system that needs the negative for other reasons.

1D:1S, 1N should definitely be the minors, you'll miss a lot of diamond fits otherwise. You could play 1D:2H as 5S4H 6-10 to find heart fits.

1D:1S, 2D = reverse in hearts
1D:1S, 2H and 1D:1H, 2D would be free, maybe "min with three trumps or extras with four", with the latter bidding again. 1D:1M, 3M = 6-4 minimum

Opener being unbal with both minors is no problem after 1D:1N, worst case scenario is both sides have two eight-card fits, going to 3m on those hands is fine.

I'd do something different with the two-level openings - perhaps

2C = 18-19 NT [often a tricky hand to show in competition having opened 1C]
2D = sound weak two [you don't want to open 1C with unbal 10-counts when the dominant handtype is 12-14 balanced]
2M = weak

2C as a weak 2D or an 18-19 NT is tempting, but I don't think it's actually sound.

[helene_t]

How does opener rebid after 1M responses? Seems obvious after 1♥ to play
2♣=strong artfifical
2♦=onesuited, minimum

but after 1♠ it might be better to play
2♣=onesuited minimum OR a strong hand
2♦=5+♦4♥, minimum

[borag]

Hi MickyB,

I actually now try to find something simple with 1♣ sequence and for a quick try things might get simple if;
2♣ = weak ♦ / 18-19 hp bal
2♦ = weak M / gf ♦ (single suited or with clubs maybe ?)
2♥ = weak M+M
2♠ = weak ♠+m
2N = weak ♥+m

That will all depend how easy 1♣ will be
For example now it might be
1♣-1M
2♣ = trs
2♦ = gf 5+ ♣
2♥ = gf 5+♥
2N = gf 4+♦-4♠ / gf 5+♠

But still not sure

[rhm]

borag, on 2014-October-09, 03:24, said:

I'm trying to adapt a Polish Club variant but can't be sure if it is playable. Any comments ?

1♣ = 10-17 hp 5+♦, 4♦(441) / 12-14 hp bal / 18+ hp any
1♦ = 10-17 hp 5+♣, 4414
1♥ = 10-17 hp 5+♥
1♠ = 10-17 hp 5+♠
1N = 15-17 hp bal
2♣ = 5-9 hp M+M
2♦ = 5-9 hp 6M
2♥ = 5-9 hp ♥ + m
2♠ = 5-9 hp ♠ + m
2N = 5-9 hp m+m

What do you try to fix in the first place?
As I understand your suggestion you simply switch the minor suit holdings 1♣ can have diamonds instead of clubs and 1♦ shows clubs instead of diamonds.
Where do you gain on balance?

MickyB, on 2014-October-09, 13:27, said:

This is a big improvement on Baltic Club IMO. 1C:1D as a NF negative would work really well, it's not the first time I've seen it suggested, but it is the first time I've seen it combined with a system that needs the negative for other reasons.

What is the big improvement? Would you mind to elaborate for us not so enlightened? That 1♦ is non forcing and you can not use the bid as responder if holding 8+ HCP, for example when you have a balanced hand better played from partner's side without a 4 card major?
I at least do not like to respond 1NT to 1♣ with an unsuitable hand, when opener might have 18+ and I as responder 8-9 HCP.
Playing 1♣-1♦ forcing may look unsound, but is in practice an advantage not a fault, since it allows to put some of responder possible holdings into 1♦, which are neither weak nor easy to describe, giving other responses to 1♣ more precision.
I play Polish club for years and never encountered any problem after 1♣-1♦ forcing, even when opener had the weak variant. The odds change when responder is weak.
I am not aware of many disasters Polish club players encountered at top level tournaments, because of that.
I only know of one encounter where Martel Stansby I think had a good result against a top level pair in the early nineties with a specialised defense, they were unwilling to share.
After that it got very quiet.
People are devising schemes catching Polish club players and are remarkably unsuccessful in practice.
Gerben wrote one at
http://bridgewinners...st-polish-club/ to which I responded at that time in the comment section.

Rainer Herrmann

[helene_t]

One advantage of Polish Club, compared to a standard nebulous 1♣ opening, is that responder can make a NFB at the 2-level with 7-10 points and any 5-card suit. If 1♣ can be weak with diamonds and also weak with a balanced hand, responder is in an awkward position. Sometimes he will have to pass with an awkward 10-count. Now if the overcall gets raised and opener has one of the strong hands, I think it could get messy.

[glen]

rhm, on 2014-October-10, 02:15, said:

As I understand your suggestion you simply switch the minor suit holdings 1♣ can have diamonds instead of clubs and 1♦ shows clubs instead of diamonds.
Where do you gain on balance?

the scheme doesn't use a Precision type 2♣ opening

I've worked on designs like this before (the minor flip), it is playable

[helene_t]

Here is a somewhat similar discussion, although with a weak 1NT opening:

http://bridgewinners...on-of-a-system/

[Kungsgeten]

To me 1♣ seems a bit overloaded, but it might work anyway. Have you thought about putting 12-14 bal into 1♦ instead?

[Free]

What would you open with both minors? 1♣ or 1♦?

[MickyB]

Kungsgeten, on 2014-October-10, 08:24, said:

To me 1♣ seems a bit overloaded, but it might work anyway. Have you thought about putting 12-14 bal into 1♦ instead?

The 1C isn't as 'overloaded' as it seems. Putting diamonds into it instead of clubs reduces the load compared with Baltic Club, because you have more space below one of your most likely low-level contracts, 2D. Think about it this way - a 1C opening showing 5+spades is underloaded, this doesn't mean that a 1S opening showing 5+spades is underloaded. Also, putting the sequence 1C:1D, P to good use reduces the load on other sequences.

Similarly, while 1D as a 12-14 NT or diamonds works well, 1D as a 12-14 NT or clubs would definitely be overloaded. 1D showing an unbal hand with clubs seems pretty sensible, you've got a descriptive opening bid in terms of contested auctions, and just enough space to make everything work in uncontested auctions.

[MickyB]

Free, on 2014-October-11, 01:38, said:

What would you open with both minors? 1♣ or 1♦?

Looks like he'd open the longer, although I could certainly see opening 1D with 4C5D if it led to nicer sequences after a 1C opening.

[Free]

MickyB, on 2014-October-11, 06:56, said:

Free, on 2014-October-11, 01:38, said:

What would you open with both minors? 1♣ or 1♦?

Looks like he'd open the longer, although I could certainly see opening 1D with 4C5D if it led to nicer sequences after a 1C opening.

What interests me most is what to do with 5-5?

[Jboling]

I think it would be beneficial if 1♣ would deny clubs, as you then use the 2♣ rebid for various purposes with no additional cost, for example:
1♣-1M-2♣ = 10+ with diamonds (as I think Helene already implied).
1♣-1M-2♦ = 18+ Bubrotka or similar artificial.
1♣-1♦ = 0-6
1♣-1♦-2♣ = artificial GF
1♣-1NT = 7-11 no major
1♣-1NT-2♣ = 15+ with 5+♦, responders rebid 2♦ showing 7-8
1♣-1NT-2♦ = 10-14 with 5+♦

A problem with this is that 1♣-1M-2♣-2♦ must be as non-forcing, so no low-level relaying here.

[borag]

Hi thanks for the comments What I have in mind is to keep 1♣/♦ openings as natural as possible.
First I started with 1♣ (responses are very similar to Jboling's structure.

I will prepare a simple brief once I complete the picture.

[rhm]

Jboling, on 2014-October-13, 13:44, said:

I think it would be beneficial if 1♣ would deny clubs, as you then use the 2♣ rebid for various purposes with no additional cost, for example:
1♣-1M-2♣ = 10+ with diamonds (as I think Helene already implied).
1♣-1M-2♦ = 18+ Bubrotka or similar artificial.
1♣-1♦ = 0-6
1♣-1♦-2♣ = artificial GF
1♣-1NT = 7-11 no major
1♣-1NT-2♣ = 15+ with 5+♦, responders rebid 2♦ showing 7-8
1♣-1NT-2♦ = 10-14 with 5+♦

A problem with this is that 1♣-1M-2♣-2♦ must be as non-forcing, so no low-level relaying here.

In Polish club, strong hands with diamonds the longest suit can be hard to bid.
This structure extends the problem to both minors.

Rainer Herrmann

[Kungsgeten]

This rebid scheme to 1♣-1♦ is inspired by the methods I play over our Swedish Club:

1C--1D;
Pass = Weak, usually 4+ diamonds
1H = Forcing. a) Any 18+ unbal not GF b) 12--14 bal, 3+ hearts c) 24+ bal
1S = NF. Natural, may be 12--14 bal and 3+ spades, max 17 hcp
1N = 18--20
2C = NF. Diamonds and hearts (both minors open 1D)
2D = NF. Just diamonds
2M = Nat GF
2N = 21--23
3CD = Nat GF
3M = GF 5+ diamonds and 4 card major

1S (if holding diamonds), 2C and 2D should show about 15--17, otherwise I think it is best to pass 1D.

I guess 1C--1D; 1S--1NT should be forcing against the unbalanced hand (since opener do not promise diamonds by rebidding 1S).