eagle_one

I a under the impression that "Strong 10" leads promise the 9 and at least 1 higher honour, but NOT JT9(x)(xx) etc. i.e. AT9 QT9 KT9x KT9xx and so on Am I wrong? Do other people have different definitions?

I reckon p is more extreme than 4-5/5-4 but I don't know why they're keeping quiet. More like 65. I'll accept and bid 4 although worried about entries to my own hand.

♠Q unless well behind and looking for the jackpot. ♣ is far too risky giving 2 tricks when they hold A and Q; maybe letting them make 9 before we get our ♠ in the bag.

7♥. Lines as given.

We defended it by bidding naturally and as their system meant 1♦ was a positive with 2+ controls and 1♥ and 1♠ negative(4-7) with 5+, and 1N 4-7 balanced, we decided a 1N overcall would be minors and double would shohw any weak NT with no 5 card suit except possibly ♣. What would have happened with a bust (<4) is unclear. Holding a strong NT with 12-14 on the right and 4-7 1N on the left is an easy penalty double when it comes back round, and with knowledge of there being a major and it coming back it was either safe or not to bid a natural 1N now. Curiously they used a 1♦ opening to show any unbalanced hand with the long suit unspecified although it shouldn't be clubs as 2♣ was 11-16 with ♣ and no other suit. Unsurprisingly they got into some fearful muddles as we interfered over 1♣ and 1♦ as often as possible. Additionally the 2N opening was used as either majors or minors, the only forcing response being 4♣. I am not sure either 1♦ or this 2N is allowed. I thought, unless it was a multi2♦ at least one suit has to be specified in these openings, under WBF rules. Additional question: if playing a strong ♣, should the CC make mention of the possibility of upgrading this hand as apparently "it is only 5 losers", which I agree with, but it isn't 12-14 balanced or 17+ that's for sure: ♠A5 ♥92 ♦98 ♣AKQJ973 I have never come across precision players who do this in over 30 years playing against it in many flavours as they have always had a gadget that allows such a hand to be shown

I am interested in common defences to a 1♣ opener that may be: (a) 12-14 balanced or any 17+ or ( b ) 12-14 balanced or any 17+ or 12+ with ♣ Please not that this system uses 1♦ as a positive response (2+ controls, A=2 K=1) 1♥/♠ are weak and show 5+ 1N is I believe nebulous (non positive) My initial thoughts are: In direct seat: Pass with a strong NT type hand. WJO can be pretty poor in all suits. double to show any 12-14 balanced 1N shows both minors. Sitting over responder after partner has passed and hence denied one of the above hand types, bids are natural, how to show a 2 suiter? via Double? via 1N? Any thoughts gratefully appreciated.

You need some decent agreements in place as the overcallers partner will be preempting to the level of fit. You may find the auction is quickly at the 3 level with opps in a known 9 or 10 card fit, from where it is difficult to judge 3N or x for pen or game in a strain. Slam hands are less tricky funnily enough. Since the suit is not held: you have double and NT available as distinctly different meanings, and also 2♣, if 1♣ rarely natural.

double seems obvious. If p wants to convert then AK AK in the minors should be a bonus.