The simple 1
responses are geared to make it really hard to miss a 4-4 (or even a viable 4-3) Major fit when we're not strong enough to play beyond the 2-level (which is quite a lot of the time, let's face it).
If I may be forgiven a small amount of advertising, if you want to be sure of finding your major fits and greatly reduce the chances of playing in some silly
![Diamonds !D](http://ocp.pigpen.org.uk/smf/Smileys/default/icon_diamonds.gif)
contracts, then
in 3rd and 4th seats I really do recommend that you give the 1
![Diamonds !D](http://ocp.pigpen.org.uk/smf/Smileys/default/icon_diamonds.gif)
/1NT scheme from my old system a try. It's in the 'alternative treatments' forum. You should
ONLY use this when responder is a passed hand, and cannot have a GF response. Oliver doesn't like the scheme because it means you give up on the pre-emptive 1NT opener (all 11-15 balanced hands are opened 1
![Diamonds !D](http://ocp.pigpen.org.uk/smf/Smileys/default/icon_diamonds.gif)
, 1NT is reserved for hands with genuine
![Diamonds !D](http://ocp.pigpen.org.uk/smf/Smileys/default/icon_diamonds.gif)
) and I absolutely accept that he has a point, but having played the scheme for something in excess of 30 years, I'm firmly convinced that it's a net positive. I did have a scheme for using those NF must-show-a-4CM-even-with-0-HCP responses with an unpassed responder, but I absolutely accept OCP's superiority (yes, both the simple and the complex systems) when responder is unlimited.
One of the major criticisms of the Complex 1
is that it can make it much harder to find a 4-4 Major fit at a low level. Jason and I accepted that (albeit with some reluctance) because of it's perceived advantages in some other areas, but in reality there isn't much to choose between the Simple 1
and the Complex 1
.
I think I'm correct in saying that, apart from Oliver, I'm probably the one in this group with the greatest experience with the Complex 1
![Diamonds !D](http://ocp.pigpen.org.uk/smf/Smileys/default/icon_diamonds.gif)
, and Oliver is, of course, absolutely correct about the problems. All that I want to add, having now had some experience with the Simple 1
![Diamonds !D](http://ocp.pigpen.org.uk/smf/Smileys/default/icon_diamonds.gif)
, is that my opinion is that in playing the Complex 1
![Diamonds !D](http://ocp.pigpen.org.uk/smf/Smileys/default/icon_diamonds.gif)
, you sacrifice something on the weaker part scores in exchange for significant improvements on invitational and GF hands (the Complex 1
![Diamonds !D](http://ocp.pigpen.org.uk/smf/Smileys/default/icon_diamonds.gif)
is also a
much greater load on the memory!). Personally, I think that's a worthwhile exchange.