Defending against 2 or 3way 1C openings

[eagle_one]

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.

[Ant590]

In short, I'm quite a fan of natural interference after a multi-way club.

 

I think your plan to have 1NT show the minors is less useful than 1NT natural and 2NT minors. This is because you'll not often buy the contract at the two-level, and the thought of passing initially with a strong NT hand gives me the shivers.

 

I've often toyed with the idea that over a multi-way club playing natural at the 1-level and using the meaning of 2♣->2♠ as your defence to a weak NT.

[Trinidad]

My suggestion (and there will be people disagreeing, particularly those that play these 1♣ openings): Play your strong NT defense at the two level.

 

The reason:

You want to interfere with their bidding, since for responder, it isn't clear what hand type opener has (weak 1NT or strong 1♣). If you play your strong 1NT defense at the two level, you are interfering and you don't need to learn a new defense.

 

It doesn't make sense to play your weak 1NT defense. The reason why you have a weak 1NT defense is that you can double 1NT for penalty. But in this case, you will be doubling 1♣. The opponents will be able to get out in 1♣X or run to 1 of a suit. You don't want to double that for penalties. Therefore, use the double of 1♣ for something else useful.

 

In addition, you can use the 1NT overcall to show whatever a double would show in your strong 1NT defense. Other bids at the 1 level are natural and constructive (similar to an overcall of a standard 1♣ opening). Finally, double shows a 1NT opening or a really strong hand. Responder bids as if you opened 1NT (Stayman and transfers at the two level, etc.), but bids at the 1 level if he is really weak.

 

I often play DONT vs strong 1NT openings, so my defense is:

 

2♠: single suiter with ♠

2♥: ♥ + ♠

2♦: ♦ + M

2♣: ♣ + other

1NT: 1suited minor (this works better than "any single suiter" as in DONT)

1♦♥♠: normal overcall

Dbl: 15-17 1NT opening or something really strong

 

Rik

[gwnn]

Please defend against b like a natural club! It is like 95% identical to a sayc 1♣!

 

But be sure to use (against both a and b ) 2♥ as ♥ or ♠, you're allowed to since it's an artificial opening. It is basically impossible to defend against.

[effervesce]

Balicki-Zmudzinski played

 

Pass: no suitable bid or strong (16+ HCP) hand

Double: 5+ hearts, 8-15 HCP

1♦: 5+ spades or 4-4 majors without shortage, 8-15 HCP

1♥: two suits, same shape (other), 8-15 HCP

1♠: two suits, same colour, 8-15 HCP

1NT: two suits, same rank, 8-15 HCP

2X: natural, 8-15 HCP

 

Over the two-suited bids, the step was relay, and other bids pass/correct.

[mycroft]

The interesting thing here is:

- against a natural 1C, there are almost always systemic restrictions on what you can do in defence.

- against an artificial 1C (even if most of the time it's "natural"), almost always most of those systemic restrictions go away.

 

So, sure, defend against it like you defend a normal 1C - *if* you think that your defence to 1C is optimal, given the restrictions on *artificial* bids. If you think you can do better with more artificiality (or more randomness, even), take advantage of it. If you have an issue with that (either as a PC player or defender), talk to Brink-Drijver (that's a Shanghai joke, for those that weren't around for that kafuffle).

[eagle_one]

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

[P_Marlowe]

My suggestion (and there will be people disagreeing, particularly those that play these 1♣ openings): Play your strong NT defense at the two level.

 

The reason:

You want to interfere with their bidding, since for responder, it isn't clear what hand type opener has (weak 1NT or strong 1♣). If you play your strong 1NT defense at the two level, you are interfering and you don't need to learn a new defense.

 

It doesn't make sense to play your weak 1NT defense. The reason why you have a weak 1NT defense is that you can double 1NT for penalty. But in this case, you will be doubling 1♣. The opponents will be able to get out in 1♣X or run to 1 of a suit. You don't want to double that for penalties. Therefore, use the double of 1♣ for something else useful.

 

In addition, you can use the 1NT overcall to show whatever a double would show in your strong 1NT defense. Other bids at the 1 level are natural and constructive (similar to an overcall of a standard 1♣ opening). Finally, double shows a 1NT opening or a really strong hand. Responder bids as if you opened 1NT (Stayman and transfers at the two level, etc.), but bids at the 1 level if he is really weak.

 

I often play DONT vs strong 1NT openings, so my defense is:

 

2♠: single suiter with ♠

2♥: ♥ + ♠

2♦: ♦ + M

2♣: ♣ + other

1NT: 1suited minor (this works better than "any single suiter" as in DONT)

1♦♥♠: normal overcall

Dbl: 15-17 1NT opening or something really strong

 

Rik

I agree with your suggestion, a slight remark is, that you assume,

that a weak NT defence has always to include a penalty X, which

is not always the case, but other wise I agree, also that one use a

1NT overcall to show the hand, which would have Xed 1NT.

 

An important thing to add is, that interference against multi way 1C

openings should show constr. values, a 2S jump overcall should not

be weak, it should be intermediate.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe