How vulnarable is this ?

[Flame]

Normal polish with opener weak bal and responder weak

1♣ - 1♦

1M* - p

 

1M - could be 3 cards.

 

This somethimes helped avoiding big number

 

Awm suggested 1c the bidding will go

1♣ - 1♠ *

1NT**- P

 

1♠ - 0-5 or 12+ hcp no 4M

1nt - 11-13 or 17-19 bal

P - 0-5

Do you think the second method is very risky ? we might be very weak and get doubled.

 

How much does the secondary range helps avoiding the double ?

[awm]

I personally have always been unconvinced by the tactic of opening 1♣ and then, after 1♦, making the same 1♥ rebid with a 2-3-4-4 12-count and a 3-5-4-1 19-count. But perhaps this is just my lack of experience with polish club.

[Free]

I personally have always been unconvinced by the tactic of opening 1♣ and then, after 1♦, making the same 1♥ rebid with a 2-3-4-4 12-count and a 3-5-4-1 19-count. But perhaps this is just my lack of experience with polish club.

I think the 2nd hand needs a 2♥ rebid :)

 

Anyway, it's not thàt dangerous, since opps usually won't pass all the way around when you're both weak.

[Gerben42]

The trick is that responder is already limited. He won't have a 4-card major unless he has 0 - 6 HCP.

 

I think the 2nd hand needs a 2♥ rebid

 

No, 1♥ will do if you don't mind playing that opposite a very weak responder who will pass it. And with only 5♥ and only 19 HCP, no problem there.

 

The second method is too dangerous, I think, and the first one does not cause many problems in the first place even though it looks that way :lol:

[Flame]

Let me explain something, i have no doubt that the first method is safer then the second, the question is how much safer, how risky the second way is, how true is free saying they wont pass and then double (they can double 1S first too). If its not too risky it might be worth it because the other responses might pay off.

[Robert]

Hello everyone

 

Klingers 'Power' system plays 1C-1D-2M and showing 19-21HCP with 5+

 

It is not perfect, but it takes the pressure off a rebid that might be weak with 3 Hs.

 

I think that you will often be 'saved' by the other pair if opener is weak and you are 0-5. Modern tactics use a lot of featherweight overcalls, weak jump overcalls and assorted shape showing bidding.

 

At MPs a rare pair might gamble out a balancing double on 'suspicion.' The odds favor the weak version vs holding the stronger hand.

 

The Poles seem to do very well playing these methods. I suspect that they would not play them if they often went for a telephone number.

 

Regards,

Robert

[cf_John0]

I dídn't think the "red" system of Polish Club is safe,so I've had a post about Polish Diamond system at this column.

[Gerben42]

As you know, a Polish 1♦ response may be based on

 

a) 0 - 6 HCP (up to 8 balanced if playing 2005 not 2000)

b) 7 - 11 unbalanced without a 4-card major

c) some GF balanced hands

 

The problem with your method is that either you cannot play Stayman and Transfer and such for a) or not have room to show (b).

[david_c]

1♠ - 0-5 or 12+ hcp no 4M

1nt - 11-13 or 17-19 bal

P - 0-5

Do you think the second method is very risky ? we might be very weak and get doubled.

It is a bit risky, but you're unlikely to suffer a large penalty very often. For one thing, it will only happen if opponents are canny enough to pass with good hands on the first round. And if you do happen to get doubled in 1NT, the fact that responder has denied a major makes it relatively easy to scramble for a fit at the 2-level.

 

I don't think it's safe for opponents to double after 1♣:1♠,1NT:pass with a random balanced opening hand. At this stage, I would expect that the 17-19 option is almost as likely as the 11-13 option, perhaps more likely, despite the a priori probabilities. So, yes, the strong option does protect you from penalties.

 

So I agree that it's more risky than the traditional Polish method, but if this is the worst thing about your system I don't think it's really a problem.

 

Personally I wouldn't want to give up the 1♦ negative in Polish because it means that the 1M responses promise enough for game opposite the "strong club" variant. Whereas playing transfers, all your 1-level responses could be very weak, and it becomes more difficult for opener to sort out strong unbalanced hands. (Note that in awm's system these strong unbalanced hands don't exist, so transfers become more attractive.) As ever, it all depends on the rest of the system.

[inquiry]

I don't play polish club, but oddly enough, I do play....

 

1♣ - 1♦ - 1M may be three card suit, and is non-forcing. This treatment is based upon a couple of issues. The first, is the 1♦ will not be broke (and if so, lots of diamonds), second, my 1NT rebid after specifically 1♣-1♦ promises 17-19 bal (too good for 1NT opener). This has worked out ok for me, this treatment seesm similar to the polish club auction, except my 1♦ bidding partner a) probably has diamonds, :P definitely has some points, c) will not have four cards in a major unless he has a very decent hand (we play Walsh).

 

The most common auction when I hold three in the major are...

 

1C-1D-1M-1NT

1C-1D-1M-2C* (to play, xzy off since 1D followed by major is good hand)

1C-1D-1M-2D** (suggest contract, since xyx off after 1C-1D)

1C-1D-1M-2M* (* = four card support, GOOD HAND)

1C-1D-1M-1NT*** (*** weak balanced hand, since 1C-1NT is constructive)

1C-1D-1M-2N* (* game force, since 1C-2NT is sound game try)

[david_c]

I don't play polish club, but oddly enough, I do play....

 

1♣ - 1♦ - 1M may be three card suit, and is non-forcing.

Looking at your system, I think some of the similarities with Polish Club are quite striking. Like, the way that 1♦ and 1M opening bids are not completely unlimited. Or the fact that you are opening "strong 2NT" hands at the 1-level. Apart from the 1♦ opening on 4=4=3=2 shape, it looks to me more like a Polish system than a 2/1 variant. :P

[inquiry]

I don't play polish club, but oddly enough, I do play....

 

1♣ - 1♦ - 1M may be three card suit, and is non-forcing.

Looking at your system, I think some of the similarities with Polish Club are quite striking. Like, the way that 1♦ and 1M opening bids are not completely unlimited. Or the fact that you are opening "strong 2NT" hands at the 1-level. Apart from the 1♦ opening on 4=4=3=2 shape, it looks to me more like a Polish system than a 2/1 variant. :P

You are correct. My one bids (even 1♣) are limited, but can include a normal 2/1 2NT opening (I open 20-21 hcp balanced with one of a suit). Really, the only truly strong hand that can be opened 1-of-a-suit are balanced or semi-balanced hands. Having said that, since my 1♣ is not at all forcing, it really can't be considered a variant of polish club where 1♣ can be anything. And my 2♣ opening bid is "strong" and forcing. But "strong" is a relative, as my 2♣ opening can be much weaker than normal 2/1 GF. So I am not sure what to call the system. On the surface it looks a lot like 2/1 GF (14-16 1NT, strong 2♣, but with multi 2♦ and roman 2♥/2♠ opening bids).