upgrading and downgrading with strong club

[Fluffy]

I am starting to play a strong club system, with 1♣ showing 16+ any (balanced included).

 

I wonder what is the correct thing to do with a 2 suiter with very good 15 (or 14), or bad 16 balanced or AAAK balanced etc.

 

Also when responding, taking KQJxxx as 8+ response or not?

 

yesterday for example partner had AKJxxxx x Axxx x and I opened 1♣, he showed the 8-12 range, and when I later checked for keycards I though he actually meant zero when he showed 3, since this didn't look as 8-12 at all to me.

 

So, some help from experienced players on this matter would be wellcome.

[hrothgar]

Hi Fluffy

 

Strong distributional two suiters can be a real pain in the butt playing a strong club system.

 

Consider a hand like

 

♠ x

♥ AKxxx

♦ x

♣ AKxxxx

 

 

On the one hand, you don't want to open 1♥ partner is never going to play you for a 4 loser hand.

 

On the other hand, if you open 1♣, you're going to give a more accurate description of your strength; however, its very likely that you're going to face a competitive auction and you're never going to get your shape straightened out.

 

Either way, there is a very real chance that your opening is going to backfire on you. You're best choice of action (probably) depends on just how aggressively your competitors bid over strong club openings. (If you could be sure that you'd never face a competitive auction, opening 1♣ with the hand in question seems like a no brainer)

 

Personally, I face enough competitive auctions that I would probably open 1♥

[gwnn]

Upgrade 1 suiters happily, 2 suiters almost never. It is not foolish to think of downgrading some 16 counts if they are 2 suited. This applies both to opening and responding to 1C (but it depends on your 1C structure I guess, how you will reply).

[hrothgar]

As for your question about the right response with

 

♠ AKJxxxx

♥ x

♦ Axxx

♣ x

 

There is an old saying "It's a bad craftsman who blames his tools". Even so, I question whether it makes sense to use HCPs to quantify the strength of responder's hand.

 

Most of the strong club systems that I am used to use some kind of controls to evaluate hand strength. Either

 

A = 2, K = 1 or

A = 3, K = 2, Q = 1

[Vampyr]

yesterday for example partner had AKJxxxx x Axxx x and I opened 1♣, he showed the 8-12 range, and when I later checked for keycards I though he actually meant zero when he showed 3, since this didn't look as 8-12 at all to me.

Does this matter, though? When partner shows 0 or 3 and you sign off, he is supposed to go on. Did partner not do this?

[Apollo81]

I wonder what is the correct thing to do with a 2 suiter with very good 15 (or 14), or bad 16 balanced or AAAK balanced etc.

 

It's generally incorrect to upgrade distributional two-suiters into 1♣. Since your other openings are limited, you don't need jump-shift auctions such as 1♠-1NT-3♣ to show game-forcing hands. These can instead be used to show these very distributional 14-15 hcp hands, e.g. AKxxxx x x AQJxx. The problem with opening 1♣ is that your two-suiter becomes very hard to show if the auction gets competitive, and even if you can show it, partner may play you for a better hand than you actually hold.

 

I've had good results from upgrading 15-counts into 1♣ that have:

- a very good 6-card or longer suit, e.g. AKJTxx and are one-suited in nature

- a singleton or void somewhere

 

I also think you will generally have good results from downgrading bad 16-counts into your presumed 13-15 1NT range at unfavorable vulnerability. 1NT is both more descriptive and preemptive than 1♣. Also when the opponents interfere over 1♣, I've noticed peoples' standards for what is a game force tend to get a little looser, so it's nice to have a little extra when this happens. Of course, all this presumes you aren't upgrading a lot of good 12-counts into your 1NT, since if you're doing that, you shouldn't also downgrade routinely.

 

Also when responding, taking KQJxxx as 8+ response or not?

 

I don't like upgrading hands like this into a game-forcing response. Imagine opener with a singleton in your suit and a minimum; how well do you think this hand will play in game? I mind less if you had a seventh card in the suit and the suit is a major. In fact, if your 1♣ opener could be an ordinary balanced 16-count, I would make 9 hcp the normal minimum to force game and upgrade only very good 7 counts and good 8 counts. Also, the more distribution you have, the more the hand argues for an immediate shape-showing bid, so I would feel compelled to force game on say, - xxxxx xx AQJxxx.

 

yesterday for example partner had AKJxxxx x Axxx x and I opened 1♣, he showed the 8-12 range, and when I later checked for keycards I though he actually meant zero when he showed 3, since this didn't look as 8-12 at all to me.

 

When you respond 0/3 keycards and you have 3, you are usually forced to bid a slam even if partner tries to sign off in 5. The exception is if you have already shown a very strong hand (e.g. you opened a standard 2NT or 2♣). So the main problem is that your partner just made a wrong bridge call that had nothing to do with Precision, although I agree that hand definitely deserves to be upgraded (I'd upgrade even with 6-2-4-1 and the same high cards).

 

I have about 9 years experience playing Precision.

[jjbrr]

It's ok that you thought he had 0 since he bid again after your signoff, right?

 

 

right?

[akhare]

Pretty much echoing what Richard, gwnn and Apollo have said.

 

BTW, please make sure that your pard is on the same page and doesn't do something silly like randomly passing with 6-7(8) HCPs over major suit openings because it might play than in 1M than 1N and "it's impossible to have a game opposite a max 15 (sic)" (and yes, I know players who subscribe to that flawed philosophy).

[WellSpyder]

Upgrade 1 suiters happily, 2 suiters almost never.

You might also want to be aware if you play in England that the regulations around permitted agreements may prevent you from agreeing to upgrade some of the hands that you would otherwise want to - hands either have to have a minimum of 16 HCPs or satisfy the rule of 25, ie the sum of the HCPs and the length of the two longest suits must be at least 25 (there is also the possibility of 8 clearcut tricks, but that is less likely for a marginal strong 1C opener). One suiters (and three suiters) are less likely to satsify this requirement than two suiters.

 

I started a thread in the forum on changing laws and regulations about this (sorry, not sure how to link to it). As a real-life example I held a few months ago, the English regulations would not allow you to agree to open a strong club with Q10x, AKQ10xx,Ax, xx.

[Vampyr]

Strong distributional two suiters can be a real pain in the butt playing a strong club system.

 

Consider a hand like

 

♠ x

♥ AKxxx

♦ x

♣ AKxxxx

Don't strong clubbers jump shift with this sort of hand -- without the HCP for a strong clubs but lots of playing strength in 2 suits? And aren't major/minor 2-suited hands potentially canape?

[nigel_k]

An 11-15 opening and jump shift with a maximum 5-5 is fine, e.g. x AKJxx xx AQJxx, even though it is worth more than 16 HCP. But I think with Hrothgar's example x AKxxx x AKxxxx you will never be able to communicate how powerful your hand is after starting with 1♥ and you have enough to bid again over anything they might do, e.g. if it goes 4♠-P-P you can bid 4NT.

 

Without a 5-5 two suiter as opener, or when responding or rebidding, I would always treat my hand as having HCP values according to its playing strength. If I have a bid to show spades and 8-12 then the typical shape for that would be 5332 so anything worth as much as an average 5332 13 HCP hand would be too good. I wouldn't even do it with AKJxx xx Axxx xx. Likewise I would happily open a 16+ 1♣ with AKJxx xx AKxx xx (unless it had been made illegal by some uninformed bureaucrat who thought an ace was worth the same as two queens). Even if you don't disregard HCP as blatantly as I do, I think the basic principle is correct.

 

Having said that, I like to always show my suit right away when I have a positive. The 8-12 range suggests a method where responder cannot show shape at all on the first round with 13+ and I would prefer not to play that.

[PhantomSac]

I upgrade spade 1 suiters with good controls, and that's pretty much it (also balanced hands that are worth an upgrade). Spade 1 suiters are easy to handle in competition, others are less so. You can still show strong heart one suiters later by jumping, I mean 1H 1N 3H means something.

 

I don't upgrade to respond pretty much, maybe a shapely hand with an A and K.

 

I would say I downgrade out of a strong club more than I upgrade into one.

 

From what I have seen from Greco/Hampson and Meckwell, my strong club "idols" they upgrade quite a bit, true to their styles.

[Fluffy]

It's ok that you thought he had 0 since he bid again after your signoff, right?

 

 

right?

don't remember exactly but I asked about ♠Q before realicing he could just as well have zero. After he answered I had no clue where we belonged, I had upgraded ♠xx ♥AKJxx ♦x ♣AKxxx.

 

We are playing a kind of viking club, and partner said he didn't upgrade since after many relays I could find out the 7411 and AAK, but I stopped relaying earlier sadly.

 

From what we are training, it seems like we tend to upgrade a lot with KQJxxx but downgrade stiff kings and QJ tight and such.

 

We downgrade more 16s than we upgrade 12s wich I think is the correct thing to do.

 

 

On a side note, 13-15 balanced should make game more often opposite 10-11 bal than a 15-17 opposite 8-9 bal, shouldn't it?, is it worth considering?

[PhantomSac]

On a side note, 13-15 balanced should make game more often opposite 10-11 bal than a 15-17 opposite 8-9 bal, shouldn't it?, is it worth considering?

Yes and no. The effect is very very minimal and largely overstated to make a point.

[gwnn]

You definitely want to GF with nearly all 11 counts opposite 13-15 I think and also invite with some shapely 9 counts.. but maybe I am just too young

[dake50]

I partition strong hands into 1C or 1D. This steps my NT ladder AND which 2-suiters are in 1C, which in 1D, which left to open 1H or 1S and jump shift.

So, What does the rest of your system handle? Remainder into 1C.

This partition allows Dbl to suggest misfit M if 2-suiter M-m expected. Bid has tolerance+ for expected M. Eg. 1C <2H> X = don't fit Spades; 3m =m-stuff +S-Hx(+)

 

Don't you have a reserved response for S-KQJxxx, m-KQJxxx? Similar near positives? One message, this suit. At least for Majors? a 2M response?

[mycroft]

I hate balanced 16s. In one partnership, we roll "not good 16s" into 1D NV (and play 14-16, respond as if 15-17, V). In a "simple standard" I'm trying to promote in my area, 1NT is 15-17 for a number of very good reasons (not least that we're passing crappy balanced 11s).

 

We get forced into no-play games after 1C-positive - you can't get away from that - but I'm less worried about 1C-1H-1NT-3NT than without this agreement.

 

Having said that, we upgrade any A, K into a positive, and downgrade most 0-control 8s (I tend to downgrade 1-control 8s with stiff K or Kx, unless the long suit makes up for it).

 

Upgrading 15s into 1C tends to follow the descriptions I've seen above. I have a nice auction for strong two-suiter 15 counts, so I use it. Three-suiters with a stiff minor - especially (45)=(31)s, as I always have a sane (if not lovely) rebid - are high on my list to upgrade.

[DJNeill]

You have to upgrade to be realistic. Keeping the goal in mind is important. If you respond with 8 HCP opposite a 16+ 1C opening, that is chosen because that is what is needed for a GF. Many times it won't work, but using 9 HCP is too conservative and 7 HCP too aggressive. Look at your hand, and if you think it will make game opposite 16, bid it like a positive.

 

Remember too in your judgement that 24 HCP with a major fit is more likely to make game than 24 HCP without a major fit, overall. So I upgrade the 5-4 majors more than the 5-4 minors, rather than play catchup later.

 

Thanks,

Dan

[lowerline]

I am starting to play a strong club system, with 1♣ showing 16+ any (balanced included).

 

I wonder what is the correct thing to do with a 2 suiter with very good 15 (or 14), or bad 16 balanced or AAAK balanced etc.

 

Also when responding, taking KQJxxx as 8+ response or not?

 

yesterday for example partner had AKJxxxx x Axxx x and I opened 1♣, he showed the 8-12 range, and when I later checked for keycards I though he actually meant zero when he showed 3, since this didn't look as 8-12 at all to me.

 

So, some help from experienced players on this matter would be wellcome.

I only upgrade single suiters in a major with 15hcp to a 1C opening (if the suit is at least a good 6crd suit).

 

Responses to 1C:

positive response with 9+hcp unless <2 controls

positive response with 8hcp and 3-4 controls (unless when balanced)

 

a maximum positive response is usually 13+hcp and 4+ controls (frequent upgrades with 12hcp, but never with <4 controls)

 

Steven

[NickRW]

On a side note, 13-15 balanced should make game more often opposite 10-11 bal than a 15-17 opposite 8-9 bal, shouldn't it?, is it worth considering?

The effect is there - but really quite slight. It makes a difference worth noting for example with 20-22 opposite 3-4, then you get real communication problems.

[NickRW]

Upgrade 1 suiters happily, 2 suiters almost never.

You might also want to be aware if you play in England that the regulations around permitted agreements may prevent you from agreeing to upgrade some of the hands that you would otherwise want to - hands either have to have a minimum of 16 HCPs or satisfy the rule of 25, ie the sum of the HCPs and the length of the two longest suits must be at least 25 (there is also the possibility of 8 clearcut tricks, but that is less likely for a marginal strong 1C opener). One suiters (and three suiters) are less likely to satsify this requirement than two suiters.

 

I started a thread in the forum on changing laws and regulations about this (sorry, not sure how to link to it). As a real-life example I held a few months ago, the English regulations would not allow you to agree to open a strong club with Q10x, AKQ10xx,Ax, xx.

You could always try a stong 1♦ system - since you're typically a point or two stronger to make that bid, upgrading shouldn't fall foul of the EBU's somewhat arbitrary rule

 

Nick

[keylime]

I look at my control count when deciding about a strong club - if on six I likely upgrade to a 1C.

 

With balanced hands, 14-16 NT, with the 1C-1x-1NT being 17-19.