An interesting defense against a strong 1c

[luis]

An interesting defense against a strong club:

 

Playing a string club system myself I know that the best way to press is to reach the maximum total-tricks safe level we have before the 1c opener rebids. So we deviced this defense:

 

Double: 3+ cards in all suits but spades

1d: 3+ cards in all suits but clubs

1h: 3+ cards in all suits but diammonds

1s: 3+ cards in all suits but hearts

 

Pd then bid using the "LAW" IE: 3 level with a 6 card suit, 2 level with 5.

 

1N: Any two suiter with 5-5, 6-4 or similar (never 5431)

 

2x: 6+ one-suited hands

3x: Preempts

 

When NV I play that pass is a hand with good values interested in maybe a game contract. So the other bids are obstructive. When V the defense is just sound, we pass with bad hands. (No more 800 in 1sx please!)

[Rado]

Hi Luis,

 

You scheme looks interesting.

At first glance some questions:

- what to do with 5422 ?

- 1NT showing any 5-5 or any 6-4 is of doubtful use.

 

Otherwise the main idea to put maximum pressure on strong Cl bidder is fine:-)

 

Regards, Rado

[csdenmark]

Normally I prefere Truscott conv. over all unknown suits(<4cd)

 

http://groups.msn.com/bridgeFILES/truscott.msnw

 

While creating files for Hamman-Soloway Club I discovered Crash conv. used by that system. Looks great too.

 

 

CRASH convention

A method of bidding defensively against an artificial forcing 1C opening bid developed by Kit Woolsey and Steve Robinson. The word CRASH is acronym for Color-RAnk-SHape.

 

After an opening of 1C forcing bid a DBL or an overcall of 1D or 1NT shows various types of two-suited hands.

 

1C-DBL=Red or black

1C-1D=MAJORs or minors

1C-1NT=H+C or S+D

 

Mostly 5-4, either suit longest.

 

1C-1HS/2CD=1-suiter

 

--------------------------------------------------------

Sad to say - anything but the so-called natural overcall partner is normally not capable to understand. Therefore I pass until a suit stated for cue.

 

Yours Claus - csdenmark ;)

[luis]

Rado: With a 5422 hand you can bid it as

a) If the 5 card suit is very good bid it as a one-suited hand.

;) If the 4 card suit is very good bid it as 5-5

c) If you have a doubleton honor bid it as 5431

 

Claus:

The advantage of my treatment over crash and other methods is that you don't need a two-suiter or one-suiter to put the 1c opener under pressure hands with 4333 or 4432 can bid and then is pd who preempts according to the LAW. This has the following advatgaes over Truscott, Crash and others:

 

1) You interrupt the normal positive responses of responder early. You can bid with ANY hand if vulnerability is ok. 4333 or 4432 hands are just fine to bid with this method.

2) Pd can preempt to a safe level using the LAW and you should reach your safest level before the 1c opener can bid again.

Auctions like

 

1c - (1s) - dbl - 4d

Are common in our system. Without knowing you have 3 cards in his suit your pd would normally bid 2d or 3d with 6 cards.

[csdenmark]

Dear Luis

 

You dont need to convince me. - I like everything not based on simple 5cd overcalls because: http://groups.msn.com/bridgeFILES/naturalo...lovercalls.msnw.

 

I am a proponent of standard systems and frequent use of conventions all according to origin. If somebody is dissatified with a certain system/feauture I prefere to choose another system. It has to be publicly known and invented by others - I have no intensions trying to re-invent anything.

 

That said - I see you don't disclose your holdings until your have a fit and a 7 card fit you will always be able to establish. OK with that - but take care.

 

Most well-defined systems don't need an overcall to work properly - but receiving your overcall - your opponents will mostly be very lucky - especially those playing Precision(Belladonna/Garozzo), Blue Team(Garozzo/Forquet), Meckwell(Rodwell/Meckstroth) and Hamman-Soloway. Maybe others too, but those I don't know.

 

Yours Claus - csdenmark :)

[hrothgar]

Hi Luis

 

I had the chance to look over the defense that you suggested.

I VERY much like the basic idea that you developed. I like the way that this system makes use of bids in known anchor suits. Structures that allow responder to pass the overcall put much more pressure on the opponents.

 

However, I think that it may be possible to improve on the specific implementation. In particular, I think there are two fundamental structural changes that would improve the structure enormously.

 

First: I am HIGHLY skeptical of competitive structures that make frequent use of X and 1D with preemptive hands. These bids increase the bidding space available to the opponents. While partner may be able to bounce the bidding, I'm still uncomfortable every making this bid.

 

Second: Single suited preemptive hands are very uncommon. I would storngly prefer to be able to jack up the bidding more frequently with common hand types.

 

Potentially, the structure could be improved as following

 

(1C) - X = Values, balanced hand patterns

(1C) - 1D = Value, unbalanced hand patterns

(1C) - 1H = 3+ cards in every suit but Spades

(1C) - 1S = 3+ cards in every suit but Hearts

(1C) - 1NT = Exteme 2 suited hands (5+/5+)

(1C) - 2C = 3+ cards in every suit but Diamonds

(1C) - 2D = 3+ cards in every suit but Clubs

(1C) - 2H = Single suited with Hearts

(1C) - 2S = Sinlge suited with Spades

(1C) - 2NT = Constructive 2 suited hand pattern

(1C) - 3C = Single suited with clubs

(1C) - 3D = Single suited with Diamonds

[Cave_Draco]

The best defence to a Strong C is... don't allow them to bid it!

 

Then they have to "compete", I favour 1C as 7-10 or a major two-suiter, ;D.

[luis]

I like your structure hrothgar. Is better than the one I suggested so I'll change the structure to the new one. :-)

Good to know you liked the idea.

[hrothgar]

The best defence to a Strong C is... don't allow them to bid it!

 

Then they have to "compete", I favour 1C as 7-10 or a major two-suiter, ;D.

 

Couple comments:

 

First and foremost, the strong club opening is generally considered the Achilles heel of the system. Long, long ago when Iwa keeping more detailed statistics I actually performed an analysis of expected scores for different opening bids. There was a statistically significant inverse correlation between strong club openings and expected results [The more strong clubs that we are dealt during a set, the worse we did]. I'd argue that blocking us from opening 1C is a rather perverse goal.

 

If in fact, your goal is to prevent us from applying any of our opening structure, then your argument makes a bit more sense. However, in this case I am curious why you only apply this "defense" to strong club systems. If this defense is optimal, then it should be worth employing regardless of what system the opponents are using.

 

Please note, I agree completely with designing systems that place the maximum pressure on the opponents. With that said and done, I don't think that this 1C opening is particularly useful. Opening 1C increases the bidding space available to the opponents, the bid is not well defined enough to allow responder to bounce the auction, and cramps the rest of your opening structure.

[dwunn1]

Hi, I play "Scheken" modified, I used double is the majors and 1 no is the minors. 10+hcpt. You have Brozel, Capp, DONT, over 1 no, 15-17 or 16-18, but the big club is 17+. If your going to compete then get into the mix. Don

[Free]

The problem with defending against strong 1C is that you have to use constructive AND destructive methods. That's why I usually use my own system, I call DOSC (Disturbing Opponents Strong Club):

 

pass = nothing to say (only used when V !!!)

Dbl = C = shortest OR longest suit

1D = D = shortest OR longest suit

1H = H = shortest OR longest suit

1S = S = shortest OR longest suit

(so far the really destructive methods)

1NT = any 2-suiter (54+)

2X = 1-suiter which you would normally bid at 2-level

2NT = any constructive 2-suiter 55+

3X = pre-emptive

 

If you show a suit (or not), there's no suit equal in length. with 4333 you bid the 4-card, 4432 the doubleton, 5431 you can choose, but I recommend the stiff (unless you can bid at 2-level through 1NT), with 5422 same thing, but here you bid your 5-card,....

 

The 2X openings can be changed or swithed with the 1NT.

[inquiry]

Hi Luis,

 

Your method seems reasonable. I started toying with canape overcalls after reading a post by Ron and then got interested in Rumble, after reading ETM victory. Below is the outline of the RUMBLE Structure, taken directly from the ETM victory document, and here is a link to full description of rumble.

 

http://www.bridgematters.com/rumble.htm

 

• Pass: Not short in either minor, at least 2-2 in the minors vulnerable, at least 3-3 in the minors not vul.
  
• Double: 4+Cs & shortness in Ds, at most a doubleton not vul, at most a singleton vul. No other singleton/void.
  
• 1D: 4+Ds & shortness in Cs, at most a doubleton not vul, at most a singleton vul. No other singleton/void.
  
• 1H: Both majors, at least 5-3/3-5/4-4 not vul, at least 5-4/4-5/5-5 vul.
  
• 1S: 3+Ss & 5+ minor.
  
• 1NT: 3+Hs & 5+ minor.
  
• 2C: 4+Cs & 5+ in either Ds or Hs, OR 5+Cs & 4+Ds, OR not vul only, weak two suiter, 5+Ds & 5+Hs.
  
• 2D: 4+Ds & 5+ in either Hs or Ss OR not vul only, weak two suiter, 5+Hs & 5+Ss.
  
• 2H: 5/6Hs, OR, not vul only, weak two suiter, 5+Ss & 5+ in a minor.
  
• 2S. 5/6Ss, OR, not vul only, weak two suiter, 5+Cs & 5+Ds.
  
• 2NT: Weak with 5+Hs & 5+Cs, OR major/minor two suiter with wild distribution.
  
• Higher suit jumps: Preemptive, long suit, not necessarily weak.
  
• 3NT: Both majors or both minors, wild distribution.
  
• 4NT: Both minors.
  

 

Your structure looks a little easier to remember, and I like the safety of being able to PASS with bad hands. :-0

[luis]

Ben,

 

Rumble is interesting. It has two problems that I think you already spotted:

1) I don't like to waste memory remembering our obstructive treatment against their strong club. Better to remember your own constructive conventions. No I wasn't hypnotized by Fred it's what I think :-)

2) I did play a method that forced to bid against pass, in 2 sightings of their strong club we were -800 in 1 spade and -800 in 2 diamonds. As interesting as it is to obstruct their strong club opening you can't be confortable if you don't have pass as an option. Judgement is more important than conventions and when your judgement tells you to pass you should pass. Even state of the match can be important, if you are winning by 20 why would you want to see if they can set you 1100?

 

For example these factors are clear indications to pass a strong club if you are vulnerable:

- when you have two aces

- when you have a lot of values just behing the strong 1c opening

- when you have soft values in the 4 suits (Qxx, Kxx, JTx, etc)

- when you have a defensive hand (example 4 queens)

- when you strongly suspect you will be hung for a number

etc...

[luke warm]

this is just a thought, based on a defense to strong 1nt which i play and love...

 

X = clubs and diamonds OR diamonds only

1D = hearts and spades OR spades only

1H = spades and clubs OR clubs only

1S = 3 suited with spades

1nt = 3 suited without spades

2C = diamonds and hearts OR hearts only

 

since luis' distribution comes up far more often than the above, i think he's on to something

[Free]

Potentially, the structure could be improved as following

 

(1C) - X = Values, balanced hand patterns

(1C) - 1D = Value, unbalanced hand patterns

(1C) - 1H = 3+ cards in every suit but Spades

(1C) - 1S = 3+ cards in every suit but Hearts

(1C) - 1NT = Exteme 2 suited hands (5+/5+)

(1C) - 2C = 3+ cards in every suit but Diamonds

(1C) - 2D = 3+ cards in every suit but Clubs

(1C) - 2H = Single suited with Hearts

(1C) - 2S = Sinlge suited with Spades

(1C) - 2NT = Constructive 2 suited hand pattern

(1C) - 3C = Single suited with clubs

(1C) - 3D = Single suited with Diamonds

Hi hrotgar,

 

I like this system, but imo there's just one thing that can be changed to make it even better:

 

(1C) - X = Values, balanced hand patterns

(1C) - 1D = Value, unbalanced hand patterns

(1C) - 1H = 3+ cards in every suit but Diamonds

(1C) - 1S = 3+ cards in every suit but Hearts

(1C) - 1NT = Exteme 2 suited hands (5+/5+)

(1C) - 2C = 3+ cards in every suit but Spades

(1C) - 2D = 3+ cards in every suit but Clubs

(1C) - 2H = Single suited with Hearts

(1C) - 2S = Sinlge suited with Spades

(1C) - 2NT = Constructive 2 suited hand pattern

(1C) - 3C = Single suited with clubs

(1C) - 3D = Single suited with Diamonds

 

this way, you can also play 1S...

 

Free

[SteelWheel]

This sort of stuff is very interesting. I've generally played suction/cyclone against strong clubs for most of my bridge life. I was also intrigued by the defense suggested by Barry Rigal in his recent Precision book(X=Hearts, 1D=Spades, giving room for partner to relay with certain hands and otherwise just to complete the transfer at whatever level was deemed appropriate. 1H/1S/1NT where some sort of CRASH like bids, although I'd be damned if I could recall which was which at the moment...but it seemed like a reasonable structure and I'm sorry I never got a chance to try it out).

 

I love the idea of two and three suiters getting shown by one bid, which can be passed. The only misgiving I have about this one is to bd X with values (which I guess boils down to a strong notrump or better) seems wrong. Why let them in on the joke at such a low level. Seems to me like you should want to just sort of wait around in the weeds in auctions like that. If you're gonna get out the hammer, it should be later in the auction, and not with an advisory of potential rough weather ahead beforehand,

 

Or more simply, I always believed that strong balanced should pass over a strong 1C and await developments

[Free]

well, there are several ways to see defense against a strong 1C-opening. One is that you need constructive actions, another says you may not use the Dbl and 1D bid for weak hands because you give opponents more bidding space. Imo, you should try to bid 1S as much as possible. This bid is fairly low, won't kill you, and disturbs pretty much if you don't have anything. I've posted some defense against strong 1C, but I've noticed that indeed, the 1D and Dbl allmost never pay off! That's why I've changed a week ago to another interesting defense imo:

 

Crush:

 

Pass = 4+S

Dbl = C or Strong hand, 1-suiter

1D = 4+D, lead directing

1H = 4+H, lead directing

1S = LESS THAN 4 card S (0-3) and obligated to bid if no other bid aplies

1NT = 44+ in H-S

2C = DONT

2D = DONT

2H = 5H and 4+m

2S = 5S and 4+m

2NT = 55+ C-D

3X and higher pre-emptive

[YaBB]

Hi Luis

Consider Canape style overcall where the first suit may be 3

carder ,if it is changed susequently

sincerely,

BHANSALI

[pozeracz]

Hi

And what do you think about Lambda def (modified)?

 

Pass 0-7 or 16+ any or 8-15 ballanced

 

dbl - hearts

1d- spades

1h- c+h or d+s (2-suiter at least 54)

1s- blacks or reds

1nt- mm or MM

 

 

There is also 2nd ver.

 

PASS - 0-7 or 16+ PC any

Other: 8-15 PC

Dbl- ballanced hand, no 5+ suit

1d - 5332 (any Major 5)

1h - 4441 any sing., or 5+4+ c/h or d/s

1s - 5+4+ black or red

1nt - 5+4+ mm or MM

2cd- 5+suit

 

BRG

[Gerben47]

I like psycho suction.

1C - ?

 

Pass = Nothing to bid or strong enough to wait

Dbl = Clubs or reds

1D = Diamonds or majors

1H = Hearts or blacks

1S = Spades or minors

1NT = Round or Pointy

2C = Clubs or reds

etc.

 

My partner was sceptical at first but then he discussed with his other regular partner (with whom he plays precision) about defending against this and he didn't find a good answer. So now he likes it :)

[junyi_zhu]

yes, suction seems very effective, but it's banned by ACBL.

One big drawback of luis' structure I think is that it discloses too much

information to opponents.

[hrothgar]

yes, suction seems very effective, but it's banned by ACBL.

 

Yes and no

 

Suction is NOT permitted as a defense to NT opening bids at the GCC of Midchart level.

 

In ACBL-Land, players are allow to use whatever methods that they see fit as defenses to strong club openings.

[mycroft]

 

yes, suction seems very effective, but it's banned by ACBL.

 

Yes and no

 

Suction is NOT permitted as a defense to NT opening bids at the GCC of Midchart level.

 

In ACBL-Land, players are allow to use whatever methods that they see fit as defenses to strong club openings.

 

Well, except for "Conventions and/or agreements whose primary purpose is to destroy the opponents' methods." (ACBL GCC) Over strong clubs and the like,

the ACBL tends to be very lenient (I expect non-transfer Suction would be fine - I know wonder bids (bid suit or takeout of bid suit) are). They, however, put this in to deny people totally destructive methods - like 1S automatic overcall ("shows 13 cards") and the like.

 

Time for me to throw in that query again if "could be short" 1Cs are conventional for the purposes of GCC-legal defences ...

 

Note: I may be misreading Richard, but just to be clear: Suction over NT is Midchart legal, but not GCC.

 

Michael.

[the hog]

the ACBL tends to be very lenient

 

With all due respect is this post a joke?

The ACBL is not lenient at all. You have absolutely totally restrictive and very silly system regulations which are killing the game in America. Good heavens, you don't even allow 2 bids which are played by lols in Australia.

[bhugi]

Defence On Strong Club (DOSC), mine is:

 

p :not the other cases

x :at least same strength

1d:d+h

1h:h+s

1s:s+c

1n:both minors

2c:c+h

2d:d+s

2h:heart suit

2s:spade suit

3x:pre-empty