Defence to a strong club

[Wackojack]

I play this defence to a strong club with a few partners at my local club. I dont know where it came from or if it has a name. Opinion's please?

 

dble = ♥ +♠

1♦ = ♥

1♥= ♠

1♠= ♣

1NT = ♣+♦

2♣ = blacks

2♦ = reds

All other bids natural single suit

 

Would this defence be appropriate against other artificial club systems such as Polish?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

Two comments:

 

#01 People, who play a strong club system will love to

defend against transfer overcalls.

 

#02 A defence, which works against a strong club, will

also work reasonable against a polish club, ... as long

as the power promised by the several bids is different.

Intervention against strong club can be destructive,

against polish, it should be constructive.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[ArtK78]

There is no reason to have a defense against a Polish Club. A Polish Club is not too much different than a Standard American club when it comes right down to it. But you never hear anyone say "We play such-and-such against your Standard American Club."

 

1♣ in Standard American is:

 

1) A balanced hand with 12-14 HCP

2) A balanced hand with 18-19 HCP

3) A two suited hand with primary clubs, 12-21 HCP.

4) 4414 with short diamonds, 12-21 HCP.

5) A three-suited hand with 5 clubs, 12-21 HCP.

 

If you heard this explanation of a Standard American 1♣, would you devise some defense against it?

 

I have never found any reason to do anything unusual against a Polish Club. I would guess that 9 times out of 10, a Polish 1♣ opening is made on the same hand that Standard American players would open 1♣.

[P_Marlowe]

There is no reason to have a defense against a Polish Club.  A Polish Club is not too much different than a Standard American club when it comes right down to it.  But you never hear anyone say "We play such-and-such against your Standard American Club."

 

1♣ in Standard American is:

 

1)  A balanced hand with 12-14 HCP

2)  A balanced hand with 18-19 HCP

3)  A two suited hand with primary clubs, 12-21 HCP.

4)  4414 with short diamonds, 12-21 HCP.

5)  A three-suited hand with 5 clubs, 12-21 HCP.

 

If you heard this explanation of a Standard American 1♣, would you devise some defense against it?

 

I have never found any reason to do anything unusual against a Polish Club.  I would guess that 9 times out of 10, a Polish 1♣ opening is made on the same hand that Standard American players would open 1♣.

True, but ...

 

Quite often people, who play a polish club, will also play a precison 2c opener, hence hands with 6 clubs or 5 clubs + a 4 card major wont go via 1C, but via 2C.

Hands with 5-4 in the minors will also quite often get opened with 1D.

 

Tranlating this to your list: 3) and 5) are not opened 1C, but get opened 1D, 2C,

those hands will get opened 1C, if playing SAYC.

 

Further 4441 hands make up only 3%, hence one can ignore 4), at least for

frequency reasons.

 

What is left? Balanced hands with 12-14 or hands with +18.

 

From this follows, that it is reasonable to treat the 1C as a weak NT opening, if

oyu ignore the +18 hands also due to frequency issues, this is certainly not as

clear as ignoring the 4441 hands, but the frequency favors the weak NT heavily.

 

Not everyone will agree, but hopefully I have made a case for designing a defence

against a polish club.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[helene_t]

I'd rather play either natural overcalls, or overcalls with no anchor suit (e.g. psycho-suction). More difficult to defend.

[hrothgar]

I play this defence to a strong club with a few partners at my local club. I dont know where it came from or if it has a name. Opinion's please?

 

dble = ♥ +♠

1♦ = ♥

1♥= ♠

1♠= ♣

1NT = ♣+♦

2♣ = blacks

2♦ = reds

All other bids natural single suit

 

Would this defence be appropriate against other artificial club systems such as Polish?

Speaking as a strong club player, I LOVE this defense....

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE use this against me

[dicklont]

Speaking as a strong club player, I LOVE this defense....

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE use this against me

Which defense do you hate Hrothgar?

[ASkolnick]

I play something similar against a Polish Club and I am glad Hrothgar loves this defense against it. I think most strong club players are used to having "unusual" interference over it, so there is much more discussion to do with "what if people interfere". But the difference between a strong club and a Polish Club is that responder knows where he stands after the interference. By using transfers, you are giving two extra bids to the responder.

 

 

While maybe not technically advantageous, I find many Polish club players, at least the ones I play with, have more problems when the bidding is slightly off kiltered due to the lack of discussion.

 

As for constructive versus destructive versus polish club, that is why the 1 level is constructive and 1N and up are "destructive" a la suction. So we play transfers on the one level, suction 1N and up and I have found this very effective against Polish club players.

[Wackojack]

Could strong club posters explain why they find this defence easy and which defences they they would find most difficult? This is why I asked the question. I would like to know the most effective defence against a strong club.

 

Edit addition: Just read Askolnik's post who seems to be advocating constructive transfers against Polish but not against Strong. To my simple mind a transfer gives one extra bid to the opps and not two. Presumably against the Polish club the constructive extra bidding space for the defence is felt to be worth the extra room given away. Whereas against the strong club destroy destroy is paramount. Is this the argument?

 

The way it appears to me is that overcalls at the 2 level are more destructive than those at the one level so it makes sense to show 2 suiters at a suitable low level. Is the argument that overcalls at a low level are best to be ambiguous so as to have most destructive effect? Thus the recommendation of suction type bids.

[helene_t]

Transfer overcalls are easier to defend than natural overcalls because:

- An advancer with some 5-7 points (just nut enough to make a GF freebid if that is what you play) is under less presure to make a stretchy wjs (if that is what you play) or an off-shape double. He can also pass, hope the transfer gets completed, and then bid.

- A bid in overcallers suit can also be used as something like a raptor overcall, typically with semipositive values. Again, this takes away some of the ambiguity of the negative double.

 

The most annoying defense against strong club are those overcalls that may or may not have length in the bid suit, like for example 2♥ showing either hearts or spades. You would like to have a double showing length in the bid suit as well as a double showing shortness in that suit. You don't have a cuebid. And you don't know which suit you need to stop in order to bid notrumps.

[P_Marlowe]

Could strong club posters explain why they find this defence easy and which defences they they would find most difficult?  This is why I asked the question.  I would like to know the most effective defence against a strong club.

The most effective defence? No idea.

 

But an idea, which works reasonable well, is to use the

defence you employ against a strong NT.

Assume they have opened 1NT and proceed from there.

 

The advantage: You dont have an additional memory load,

the defence has incooperated one important feature, which

your defence and several other lack, it kills space.

 

A modification (*) may be, too use an 1 NT overcall as the

replacement for the not possible X of 1NT, of course this is

also a transfer overcall to some extend, but assuming X

has multiple meanings, and if partner can suggest to play

1NTx, it should work ok.

 

(*) One should be wary to use X as an bid against a strong 1C

opening, since most player will have discussed this intervention,

and because the guys get an additional option.

Similar a 1D overcall is problematic, because they still have

all options available.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: We play Lionel against NT, so from the above it followes:

 

Two suiters are 4-4, depending on vulnerability.

 

X = 3 suiter (never comes up, which is a good and bad thing)

1NT = spades + ?

2C = clubs + hearts

2D = diamonds + hearts

2H = nat., 6 cards

2S = nat., 6 cards

 

Some one on the forum did suggest the above (hrothgar?), but

suggested to play X as both majors, which makes a lot of sense,

but we did not incooperate this suggestion yet.

 

The advantage of the above is, that all bids are more or less to

play, the transfer nature of 1NT is not too bad, because partner

will most of the time bid 2S, which kills the complete two level,

and 2S as a cue takes also the complete 2 level away, but it is a

small weakness.

[hrothgar]

Speaking as a strong club player, I LOVE this defense....

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE use this against me

Which defense do you hate Hrothgar?

I posted my preferred defense versus strong club openings a couple years back. It should be relatively easy to find, though it probably takes a bit of time.

 

If no one has tracked this down by the time I get home from work I'll see what I can find.

[keylime]

The defense given, I would enjoy immensely bidding over. Natural overcalls and aggressive preemption are going to carry you further than a xfer overcall that now gives 3rd seat more bids than they know what to do with.

[kgr]

I play same defense against strong club as against strong NT and that is Multi Landy. (not sure if it makes a lot of sense - If it is a good defense against strong club - , but it is easy to remember)

[jtfanclub]

Could strong club posters explain why they find this defence easy and which defences they they would find most difficult? This is why I asked the question. I would like to know the most effective defence against a strong club.

Anything where I as responder can pass with 5-8 and your suit (and know that I'll get another bid) and X with 5-8 without your suit makes me most happy.

 

The nastiest defense I know of is:

 

X = Penalty oriented (16+)

1 diamond- something special

1♥, 1♠= natural, constructive.

1NT=Spades and diamonds OR Hearts and clubs

2♣= Clubs OR majors

2♦= Diamonds OR black suits

2♥= Hearts OR minors

2♠= Spades OR red suits

 

 

If partner of the bidder has a balanced nothing, he just passes, and nobody knows what the heck is going on. If the bidding goes something like 1♣-2♠-X-P-P, the overcaller corrects to the lower ranking remaining suit with the two suiter, or just plays it if it was the one suiter.

 

If the auction goes 1♣-2♠-P, for example, 3♣ shows a good hand willing to be at the 3 level in partner's best suit (or may in fact be going for game), while 3♦ says "I can't stand spades, pass or correct to your better red suit even if you meant your call to show spades". The P/C is especially vicious, because it's not forcing and you have no clue if they have a fit (they will if overcaller was two suited) or not (probably not if he was one suited).

 

If you feel slightly less insane, you can take the two of a suit bids besides 2♣ down a level. What can I say, insanity is good.

[gwnn]

Speaking as a strong club player, I LOVE this defense....

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE use this against me

Which defense do you hate Hrothgar?

I posted my preferred defense versus strong club openings a couple years back. It should be relatively easy to find, though it probably takes a bit of time.

 

If no one has tracked this down by the time I get home from work I'll see what I can find.

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...ndpost&p=212059

 

?

[hrothgar]

Speaking as a strong club player, I LOVE this defense....

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE use this against me

Which defense do you hate Hrothgar?

I posted my preferred defense versus strong club openings a couple years back. It should be relatively easy to find, though it probably takes a bit of time.

 

If no one has tracked this down by the time I get home from work I'll see what I can find.

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...ndpost&p=212059

 

?

That's the one

 

Thanks for tracking it down

[skjaeran]

It's ages since I played a strong club myself, and I don't think we encountered methods that bothered us particularly more than others. Preempts at the 3-level or higher of course could make life difficult.

 

When it comes to preferred defense when playing against a strong club, I prefer a combination of CRASH and a suction-offspring at the 2-level:

Pass = weak or strong balanced

X = Colour (blacks or reds)

1♦ = RAnk (majors or minors)

1M = natural, constructive

1NT = SHape (pointed or rounded)

2♣ = ♦ or majors

2♦ = ♥ or 4♠ + longer minor

2♥ = 4♥ + longer minor

2♠ = nat preempt

2+NT = minors

3+x = nat preempt

[gwnn]

seriously 1♣-(2♥* hearts or spades)

 

is next to impossible to defend in a civilized way. of course it's much more playable NV than V.

[jdonn]

At least non-vul where it's much safer I definitely like bids over a strong club that

 

- can be passed, and usually or often are

- can show two or more different things

 

So I like psycho suction, but a system incorporating 2♥ as hearts or spades is just fine with me. When vul I pretty much play natural, as the first consideration is more important to me than the second. Double majors notrump minors works just fine.

 

I find things like crash fairly useless and unintimidating. And I think transfer overcalls are an abysmal idea.

[cherdano]

There is no reason to have a defense against a Polish Club.  A Polish Club is not too much different than a Standard American club when it comes right down to it.  But you never hear anyone say "We play such-and-such against your Standard American Club."

 

1♣ in Standard American is:

 

1)  A balanced hand with 12-14 HCP

2)  A balanced hand with 18-19 HCP

3)  A two suited hand with primary clubs, 12-21 HCP.

4)  4414 with short diamonds, 12-21 HCP.

5)  A three-suited hand with 5 clubs, 12-21 HCP.

 

If you heard this explanation of a Standard American 1♣, would you devise some defense against it?

Uhm. One-suited hands with clubs open what in Standard American?

I also seem to remember that most Americans open their longer minor with balanced hands.

 

I think it is worth having a natural club overcall over a Polish 1♣.

[jtfanclub]

I think it is worth having a natural club overcall over a Polish 1♣.

Last time we went through this, just going from memory, a 1♣ opener in SA averaged 3.75 clubs while a 1♣ opener in Polish averaged 3.45.

 

I happen to think that a natural club overcall over a 'natural' 3+ card club suit is also worth having, especially with all that wonderful space available. Use 2♦ or something for Michaels. But I seriously question that having a natural club overcall is necessary for a 3.45 average club length but not a 3.75.

[jdonn]

I think it is worth having a natural club overcall over a Polish 1♣.

Last time we went through this, just going from memory, a 1♣ opener in SA averaged 3.75 clubs while a 1♣ opener in Polish averaged 3.45.

 

I happen to think that a natural club overcall over a 'natural' 3+ card club suit is also worth having, especially with all that wonderful space available. Use 2♦ or something for Michaels. But I seriously question that having a natural club overcall is necessary for a 3.45 average club length but not a 3.75.

He didn't say necessary, he said worthwhile.

 

I find it hard to believe a standard 1♣ opening averages as few as 3.75, but I am just going off instinct. I've been wrong before...

[mycroft]

Two goals with a strong club defence against pairs that actually know their system (please note, there are a lot that don't, and anything that isn't bog-natural works against them; in fact, bog-natural works against them as well):

 

- avoid giving them a second chance - don't play anything that doesn't expect to get passed. Make responder do something to describe her hand.

- play a system that can get to 3 of a fit before opener gets a second chance, should you have a fit. 1C-1H-X-p really isn't a problem; 1C-1H-X-3H is. You should be willing to push a bit, especially NV, to take away the control-ask cue below 3NT.

 

Actually, bog-natural, or Mathe, works well for this. So does things like psycho-suction or wonder bids, where you only need a two-suiter including the bid suit to jump-respond. Because that's the third thing that works:

 

- avoid giving them a cuebid in a suit they know they won't play in. But that doesn't trump "don't give responder a second chance": pass-and-cuebid is just fine for the clubbers.

 

Me? I play Mathe, now, because for the number of strong club pairs I run into that aren't me, it's not worth remembering anything more. Back east where I ran into more, I played Truscott (possibly inverted, never can tell):

 

X, 1suit: natural, willing to have it led

2suit: that suit and the next one up (2S = S+C), DONT-style (very aggressive)

1NT: two non-touching suits (again, very aggressive).

 

if they use my 1-level suit, P/X/XX/raise is available for sacrifices or lead vs. NT decisions; at the 2 level, they have to decide whether the cuebid is (something) or "stopper-ask for NT" (hard to have both); push to the 3 level is easy (except after 1NT), and there's usually a reasonable degree of safety if they decide to defend.

 

I've been seeing in <companion city> a trend to using Cappelletti/strong C, which I think is stupid - X=onesuiter? 1D doesn't show diamonds? Go Right Ahead. Other than that, Strong NT defences do tend to work well.

[blackshoe]

Jerry Helms, in Helms to Hello, recommended Mathé/natural at the one level, and Hello at the two level. But then, in that book he suggested Hello as the basis for defense to just about everything. B)