Zar and strong club system

[Syl20]

For those playing strong club system (16+Hcp for basis) and evaluating distributional hands with Zar point count, how many Zars do you think you need to open 1C ? :)

 

I would say between 34 and 36 ? <_<

[Free]

Imo it's not quite useful to open a strong ♣ on distributional hands. So Zar isn't a propper evaluation method for such opening imo. The more distributional you are, the more intervention you'll get.

For limited openings and competitive bidding it might be a lot more useful than for an unlimited strong opening.

[Gerben42]

An Ace and Jack more than a minimum opening bid, so 33, sounds about right.

 

Otherwise, agree with Free.

[Chamaco]

Agree.

Strong Club is supposed to guarantee some defensive power.

 

AKxxxx-AJxxxx-x-void

 

Should not be a strong club opener, but would be evaluated so, using zar.

[cherdano]

An Ace and Jack more than a minimum opening bid, so 33, sounds about right.

Do you really want to open

♠- ♥AKxxxx ♦Axxxx ♣xx

with 1♣?

Otherwise, agree with Free.

Ok, I think you don't, and we agree. :)

 

Arend

[david_c]

Also agree with Free.

 

However, switching from HCP to a 6-4-2-1 evaluation might work. It's when you start adding lots of points for distribution that you might become unstuck.

[Gerben42]

Do you really want to open

♠- ♥AKxxxx ♦Axxxx ♣xx

with 1♣?

 

As with all evaluation systems, common sense should prevail.

I wouldn't open this hand on the 1-level either if you remove either Ace even though Zar would say so.

[Chamaco]

Do you really want to open

♠- ♥AKxxxx ♦Axxxx ♣xx

with 1♣?

 

As with all evaluation systems, common sense should prevail.

I wouldn't open this hand on the 1-level either if you remove either Ace even though Zar would say so.

LOL Gerben, I totally agree with you, but that means that neither me nor you are using ZAR points: the peculiarity of ZAR is that it totally ignore the defensive power required by traditional openings. :-)

If we are introducing common sense we are turning the metrics into Gerben or Chamaco points LOL (the latter wd be a nightmare ehehe).

 

It is interesting to note, BTW, that ZAR points tend to estimate the strength range of hands in offence with results very similar to the Losing Trick Count (not an original comment, I know: it was already made earlier by Misho :) ).

[tysen2k]

I'll stick my hand up for the minority. I think distributional values should be counted in a strong 1♣. My simulations as well as my personal experience indicate that using a definition like 1♣ = 18+ (HCP+321 for distribution) is better than 1♣ = 16+ HCP. I haven't had much of a problem with it at all. Most of the time you have the same defensive values as a regular 1♣ and the times you don't, well you just compete more.

 

The advantage is not that the distributional hands really belong in the strong club, but rather that they don't belong in the limited 1-bids. Partner can often sell you short when you open 1♥. However, I tend to use a pretty low lower limit on my 1-bids, so I want to limit my top range as much as possible. If your 1-bids are sound then maybe you don't need to cut off the top as much.

 

My 2 cents.

 

Tysen

[inquiry]

Agree.

Strong Club is supposed to guarantee some defensive power.

 

AKxxxx-AJxxxx-x-void

 

Should not be a strong club opener, but would be evaluated so, using zar.

Might I suggest MisIry even playing Strong club? :-)

 

Zar's bidding system is not the way to go with using ZAR points. I am quite happy adding ZAR evaluation (more or less) into my bidding judgement without messing up my bidding. You know, I like bidding naturally (bid what you got)... you might not realize that if you saw all the gadgets I also like.

 

Had a hand last night for example.. bidding...

 

2C - 2D

2H - 3D

4C -

 

1) Ok, 2D = semi + or better,

2) Natural, five plus

3) 3D = natural, GF with at least 2 tricks

4) 4C - ?

 

Since I play misiry, this 4C is not a long second suit, since I didn't raise diamonds, I dont really have diamond support, since I went past 3NT, I must have great suit of my own and it is NOT CLUBS. So partner was able to cue-bid spades and agree hearts at the same time.

 

MisIry would also help your strong club auctions by the same inferences (well... if you had some way to remove three suited hands from teh mix as well).

[Gerben42]

Ben, I can recommend MisIry ESPECIALLY when playing Strong Club!

It is helpful to know that when it goes 1♣ (loads of interference) that partner cannot have a strong 5+5+ 2-suiter, narrows down the possibilities.

[inquiry]

Ben, I can recommend MisIry ESPECIALLY when playing Strong Club!

It is helpful to know that when it goes 1♣ (loads of interference) that partner cannot have a strong 5+5+ 2-suiter, narrows down the possibilities.

Anytime you can remove one group of strong hands from other groups of strong hands, you stregnth the infernces you can draw... I have separated really strong one suiters, from strong two suiters, from strong three suiters. I furhter not so strong hands with good single suits from not so strong hands with good point counts and so-so suits using Riton 2C... it really does help your bidding, ESPECIALLY in competition.

[inquiry]

On the topic of my last post....

 

Last night my partner accepted a game try after opening 1S holding

 

AJxxx

Axxx

xx

Ax

 

The auction.. 1S=1N=2H=3H=4H

 

Here, 2H was limited by the inablility to rebid 2♣ (riton). 3H was then, ok, you got a minimum, I am still interested in game. HE accepted... What this has to do with ZAR is I held this "monster" for the invite...

 

Void

QTxx

QT8xx

KJxx

 

So with my 7 hcp facing less than 15, I invited game... Why? I Zarred it... 1 CP, 7hcp, 14 DP, 5 FIT points = 27 ZARS. The only reason I didn't just blast game is that my minor suit honors might not be that useful facing a major two suiter.... and partner might have 25 ZARS since he holds spades. But here, Hannie was able to easily accept game, because his 2♥ bid was limited by the inablity to use Riton 2♣. Thanks Henri.

[han]

I didn't "easily" accept game, but Henri-"pedal on the metal"-Schweitzer was watching so how could I possibly pass? I'm not sure that it is a good game, and I certainly didn't "easily" make it. I believe it required some luck and help from the defense.

 

About the other auction where I also was Ben's partner, it was indeed helpful to know that Ben did not have 5 clubs.

[inquiry]

I didn't "easily" accept game, but Henri-"pedal on the metal"-Schweitzer was watching so how could I possibly pass? I'm not sure that it is a good game, and I certainly didn't "easily" make it. I believe it required some luck and help from the defense.

Hehehe.. well with 13 hcp, 6 big control points, 12 DP, for a whooping 31 ZARs, I didn't imagine you had any trouble at all accepting the invite... this has to be a maximum 2H bid... I thougth you bid 4♥ in a flash, I would....

 

As for the play.. ♠ split, club queen was on side, they didn't even lead a diamond, the infra-diamond finessee for ♦J9 was working (and ♦ 3-3), and the KJx of hearts were well placed. I don't think you could fall out of it if you tried... well, ok, you could, but it would take some doing. I don't think friendly defense was the only reason you made. :-)

[EricK]

For those playing strong club system (16+Hcp for basis) and evaluating distributional hands with Zar point count, how many Zars do you think you need to open 1C ? :P

 

I would say between 34 and 36 ? B)

I think a more important question is how many points do you need to make a GF response to the strong club.

 

If you play straightforward HCP for deciding the strong 1C opener, you can also use HCP for determining a positive response. This is because on misfits both hands will likely have extra overall strength (HCP + distribution) so that there is less danger of getting too high.

 

If you include distribution in determining your strong opener then you need much stronger hands to make a positive response in case the hands are a misfit (and so the distributional strength which allowed you to open 1♣ is not actually any use to you)

 

Eric

[tysen2k]

If you include distribution in determining your strong opener then you need much stronger hands to make a positive response in case the hands are a misfit (and so the distributional strength which allowed you to open 1♣ is not actually any use to you)

I thought this was true at first, but when I looked into it:

 

Let's say you define a positive response as 8+ HCP.

Opposite an any 16+ HCP opener, you have game 87% of the time

Opposite a 16+ HCP (17+ balanced), you have game 92% of the time

Opposite a 18+ with distribution opener, you have a game 90% of the time

[inquiry]

I think a more important question is how many points do you need to make a GF response to the strong club.

For your wild ZAR point hands consider this..\

 

With strong two suiters -- Misiry (what else).

For strong one suiters with high ZAR count and major - namyats

 

That means your other less than 16 hcp ZAR hands are three suiters, and you have good chance for fit... or you have real strong hand.... Either way, 8+ surely works.

[EricK]

If you include distribution in determining your strong opener then you need much stronger hands to make a positive response in case the hands are a misfit (and so the distributional strength which allowed you to open 1♣ is not actually any use to you)

I thought this was true at first, but when I looked into it:

 

Let's say you define a positive response as 8+ HCP.

Opposite an any 16+ HCP opener, you have game 87% of the time

Opposite a 16+ HCP (17+ balanced), you have game 92% of the time

Opposite a 18+ with distribution opener, you have a game 90% of the time

OK. Maybe much stronger was an exaggeration, but your figures seem to show that a little bit stronger (maybe 2HCP or so) is needed. Or am I misinterpreting them?

 

Eric

[Guest Jlall]

Think you are misinterpreting. 16 HCP vs 18HCP+distro is what he means.

[EricK]

The figures are quite confusing because 18+ including distribution will remove the weakest balanced hands from a normal precision 1♣ sample so we might expect this to increase the chance of game, but in fact it decreases it. This is what lead me to my conclusion.

 

I still may be misunderstanding though.

 

Eric

[tysen2k]

The figures are quite confusing because 18+ including distribution will remove the weakest balanced hands from a normal precision 1♣ sample so we might expect this to increase the chance of game, but in fact it decreases it. This is what lead me to my conclusion.

18+ with distribution will remove the 16 HCP balanced hands (making it stronger) but will add some distributional hands that are <16 HCP (making it weaker). So overall, the chances for game are all about the same. It just shows that 8 HCP is still about right for making a positive response. Let me know if you are still confused.

[Chamaco]

Agree.

Strong Club is supposed to guarantee some defensive power.

 

AKxxxx-AJxxxx-x-void

 

Should not be a strong club opener, but would be evaluated so, using zar.

Might I suggest MisIry even playing Strong club? :-)

Sure Ben :)

 

As a matter of fact I think that 4-losers 2-suiters should be opened with something else than a strong club, even when they guarantee, say, some 16-18 hcp.

 

 

I tried to experiment Misiry and propose to my pards but that was not so well accepted.

 

So now we open 4-loser TOUCHING 2 suiters with 2S, and 4-losers NONTOUCHING 2 suiters with 2NT.

 

We lose some preemption:

- no Unusual 2NT opener (but often this does backfire, so we are not desperate about this)

- no natural weak 2 in spades, nor Muiderberg 2's: that's worse, we play 2D Multi and 2H as Precision 3suiter short in diamonds.

 

We gain:

- the opportunity to anticipate opponent's preemption, or to be able to better explain opener's hand if opps stick in.

- in contructive bidding: the big club opener has more rarely a 55+, and when he does, it's a battleship (3-losers or less).

- we protect our big club from preemption: most of the times the hand is either one suiter or (semi)balanced or featureless (5332,5422, 5431, etc). The 64 or 74 hands are still problematic, but at least we have removed some of the problem hads (55+, where after preemption it becomes hard to show the 2nd suit).

[mr1303]

In the EBU, I believe it is currently illegal to have an agreement to open 1C with less than 16 HCP.

 

Which of course is silly, but then these rules and regs sometimes are.

[mycroft]

From the IBLF, this is David Stevenson (on the EBU Laws and Ethics Committee), talking about their decision that "we don't want 1C any 15+ to be level 3, but we want all our 16+ strong clubbers to not be breaking the Laws when they decide to open AKJT874 AKT 54 9 1C - as they all already do":

 

"While decisions by the English Laws & Ethics Committee are not final, and are not even official until the minutes are published, it is no secret that they decided that in future a Strong Club/Strong Diamond opening should show by a agreement a minimum of 16 HCP or Rule of 25, and that the strong part of an Either/Or Club should show the same."

 

So, soon. Those people who want to play MOSCITO with 1C starting at 15 or equivalent are still L3 out of luck, however, and explicitly so (as, among other things, the transfer openings will come in at a reasonable level).

 

Michael.