[nullve]

Found this convention card when looking here for a description of the Blakset 2♠ used by Blakset-Lahrmann in this year's open European Teams Championships.

Enjoy!

Edit, 3 Jan 2023: The link to the CC wasn't working, so I replaced it.

[nullve]

Apparently, their fert-like 2♣ opening

Quote

Opening bid of 2♣ in any seat at NV versus V
Shows: 0-8 allmost any hand
Detailed Description:
0-8 allmost any hand
4333 is rare
3+controls is rare
7+minor is rare
6+major is rare

is also known as Munksgaard's 2♣, after its inventor, Lars Munksgaard.

One board where they used it in the ETC can be found on page 19 here.

[foobar]

nullve, on 2022-October-11, 04:57, said:

Apparently, their fert-like 2♣ opening


is also known as Munksgaard's 2♣, after its inventor, Lars Munksgaard.

One board where they used it in the ETC can be found on page 19 here.

Seems like a 2-level fert for all intents and purposes. On this occasion it worked because South failed to bid the obvious 3♣ to set up the GF, after which they should be able to locate some red suited slam.

[michel444]

fert opening 2♣ sound interesting

[Gilithin]

That is an appalling convention card!. Even after staring at it for several minutes, I still do not know what their initial Pass means. This should be in really big letters on the front of the CC in any Forcing Pass system!

[nullve]

Gilithin, on 2022-October-13, 20:04, said:

That is an appalling convention card!. Even after staring at it for several minutes, I still do not know what their initial Pass means. This should be in really big letters on the front of the CC in any Forcing Pass system!

Vendetta Club is hardly a Forcing Pass system. Even NV vs V, when their 2♣ is fert-like, Pass seems to have an upper limit in 1st/2nd seat of 11 hcp if BAL and 9 hcp if unBAL.

[Gilithin]

nullve, on 2022-October-14, 00:56, said:

Vendetta Club is hardly a Forcing Pass system. Even NV vs V, when their 2♣ is fert-like, Pass seems to have an upper limit in 1st/2nd seat of 11 hcp if BAL and 9 hcp if unBAL.

But this just highlights the point. If 2♣ is 0-8 any then Pass must have a different meaning from this. This needs to be explained if a CC is to be valid, even if the explanation is that no hand may be passed. Is it? I still have no idea...

[nullve]

Gilithin, on 2022-October-14, 09:41, said:

If 2♣ is 0-8 any then Pass must have a different meaning from this. This needs to be explained if a CC is to be valid, even if the explanation is that no hand may be passed. Is it? I still have no idea...

Their Munksgaard's 2♣ is not exactly "0-8, any" but

Quote

Opening bid of 2♣ in any seat at NV versus V
Shows: 0-8 allmost any hand
Detailed Description:
0-8 allmost any hand
4333 is rare
3+controls is rare
7+minor is rare
6+major is rare

.

I infer from their CC that they usually pass in 1st/2nd NV vs V with

a) 0-8 hcp, (4333)
b) 7-8 hcp and 3+ controls if the shape is wrong for 2♦/2N/3♦/4m/4N+
c) 9 unBAL if too weak for 1♦/1M/2M/3♣/3M/3N or if the shape is wrong for 2♦/2N/3♦/4m/4N+
d) 9-11 BAL (too strong for 2♣, too weak for 1N)

.

I agree with you that the meaning of Pass should be on the CC. In fact, I think it should regardless of the system being played, because there is really no such thing as a standard Pass "opening".

[pilun]

Marston - Burgess played a non-vulnerable 2♣ fert - basically 5-8 any - in the 1989 Bermuda Bowl.
Previously they played strong pass. Regulations forced them to switch to strong club, so they moved the fert.

[dokoko]

nullve, on 2022-October-14, 15:02, said:

I agree with you that the meaning of Pass should be on the CC. In fact, I think it should regardless of the system being played, because there is really no such thing as a standard Pass "opening".

In most systems I think there is no need to describe a "pass" opening. IMO there are mainly two exceptions:

(1) There are handtypes where one would usually at least consider opening which you have to pass because there is no suitable opening bid available (e.g. 1♦ opening shows 14+ nat and there is no bid for weaker unbalanced diamond hands).
(2) You use some "nebulous" weak openings (like 2♣ here) and it is not clear which hands are passed and which hands are opened with those. An example would be 2♦ showing 4+♠ and 3+♦ 5-9; the system card should tell whether a 4=2=3=4 hand in range is usually opened 2♦ or not.

Generally I would expect my opponents to pass with hands that have less than opening values and don't qualify for their preempts. If those are described correctly there should be nothing unclear. Pairs should be "strongly encouraged" however to describe their "Pass opening" where helpful.