hrothgar Posted April 10, 2012 Report Share Posted April 10, 2012 There might be something lost in translation. In this construct, 'lead directing' means I have length in the suit as well, and its a suit I want led against 3N. Its the same as the double of a Jacoby Transfer for instance. I need some length in the suit to protect against some silly doubled result, just like I would against any overcall. I don't know if Hrothgar sees things the same as me or not when he discusses 'lead directors'. It is not the same 'lead director' I might make of a high level cue bid with say, KJx(x) of a suit. After a strong club opening, I would overcall 1H with ♠ T75432♥ KQ2♦ 98♣ 84 But 2♠ with ♠ KQ5432♥ T72♦ 98♣ 84 (Its entirely possible that I am overly enamored by canape overcall styles) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegmund Posted April 11, 2012 Report Share Posted April 11, 2012 I've been a fan of CRASH (X, 1D, and 1NT) with the other overcalls agressive and natural (on the 11-count with 5 diamonds Justin mentioned, I would have bid 2D)... after the discussion in this thread, I am thinking that taking the minors out of 1D and having a bid for majors only instead may be better. I wonder why I never thought of doing that before; over 1NT, I have played CHASM ("color-shape-majors") instead of CRASH to be GCC-legal for years. I did have one regular partner who insisted on Truscott, and it did work better against weak opps than strong ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akwoo Posted April 12, 2012 Report Share Posted April 12, 2012 I don't play this with any partners, but why not leave the 1-level bids as natural, and use Woolsey over a Strong Club? 1NT shows any 5+ card minor / 4 (or bad 5) card Major 2-suiter, 2♣ is for the Majors, 2♦ is a pre-empt in a Major, and 2♥ and 2♠ show 5+ of that suit and a 4+ card minor. 2NT can show either the minors or a REALLY strong 2-suiter that basically laughs at the 1♣ opener's hand. I do play Precision (but only in GCC events), and for simplicity's sake partner and I use a Modified Woolsey (that is GCC legal) over a Strong NT as well as over Precision. My opinion is that, unless you play against strong club regularly, you should use your strong NT defense against strong club, with 1-level bids natural and as solid as normal 1-level overcalls. The lower memory load for something that comes up rarely compensates for whatever slight disadvantage your system has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
32519 Posted April 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2012 My opinion is that, unless you play against strong club regularly, you should use your strong NT defense against strong club, with 1-level bids natural and as solid as normal 1-level overcalls. The lower memory load for something that comes up rarely compensates for whatever slight disadvantage your system has. I can see some merit in this suggestion. What do others think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted April 12, 2012 Report Share Posted April 12, 2012 I can see some merit in this suggestion. What do others think?I think you should read Justin's posts again. Btw, I don't think it's hard to remember the meaning of Dbl and 1NT, but it is easy to forget you're playing the same defense as over a 1NT opening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted April 12, 2012 Report Share Posted April 12, 2012 Interestingly, Jerry Helms seems to agree with Atwoo. In his book Helms to Hello, in which he describes Hello as a defense to 1NT, he advocates dbl for the majors, 1NT for the minors (Mathé), suits at the one level natural, and bids above 1NT to be Hello - 2♣ transfers to ♦, 2♦ transfers to hearts, 2♥ is both majors (more playing strength that dbl), 2♠ is natural, 2NT transfer to ♣, 3♣ both minors. He does not, iirc, include the major-minor two suiters in 2♣, or the 3♦ bid to show both majors (forcing) in the defense to 1♣, though they are part of Hello over 1NT. I suppose this has more memory problems than just "play your 1NT defense at the two level", but my partnerships seem either to have few memory problems with new conventions, or to have enough problems that we are reluctant to add anything new at all. :huh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Most defenses to 1nt don't have a way to bid clubs at the two level. This makes sense because a 2c bid doesn't take any space (no preemption) and you probably want to use the cheapest calls to show something where you can compete more effectively (like majors) or something more frequent (like a multi-meaning bid) or something more lucrative (like majors or a power double). None of the above applies over strong club, where its really nice to be able to bid clubs at the two level. I suspect Mathe is a much better defense to 1c than most 1nt defenses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Oops, duplicate post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted April 18, 2012 Report Share Posted April 18, 2012 Most defenses to 1nt don't have a way to bid clubs at the two level.You can get around this problem by using 1NT as multi for the minors, that is clubs or diamonds. So, for example, "Multi-Land over 1♣" would become X = clubs1♦♥♠ = natural1NT = clubs or diamonds2♣ = majors2♦ = hearts or spades2♥ = hearts + minor2♠ = spades + minor2NT = minors Perhaps not ideal but nonetheless quite reasonable. Whether this is less to remember than simply playing something like Mathe over 1♣ is doubtful though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.