Defence Against Strong Club Systems

[JLOGIC]

It's just a brown sticker convention. That makes it legal to play in the KO phase of the Bermuda Bowl, or in 4th league in Germany...

 

Hmm really? I thought you couldn't even play it in the KO phase of the bermuda bowl heh, not sure why I thought that. Even if you can, that makes it barred almost always in WBF events.

[benlessard]

Agree with Justin, what I hate most is when they play natural over my strong club. I think that from 1H to 2S (remove 1Nt) natural is probably the best method.

 

X, 1D & 1Nt for 2 suiters should be enough.

[gnasher]

It's just a brown sticker convention. That makes it legal to play in the KO phase of the Bermuda Bowl, or in 4th league in Germany...

Or either division of the English Premier League.

[Phil]

Thanks JLall.

 

I've felt the CRASH bids were there just to take up space between the one level overcalls that are necessary and the 2♦(and higher) multi bids which I like for precisely the reasons you state.

 

I suppose I can make a very easy switch to 1N = minors and 2♣ = majors. I'm not terribly concerned with using the double as anything, since it gives the opponents an extra bid.

[32519]

Basically, you are simply gambling a ton that you ***** them in the auction, because they will often know your shape. And what is the best way to ***** them? It's either to preempt to a high level with your first bid, OR TO MAKE A BID THAT ENABLES PARTNER TO PREEMPT TO A HIGH LEVEL. If opener has to make his first bid at a high level, that's great. But wait, playing these "either/or" bids not only means that the pass or correct bids give a way a ton of info about the shape, it also severely hampers your partners ability to preempt to a high level which is one of the main ways of achieving your dream of ***** them in the auction! I see you play crash, so over 2 suits of the same rank for instance, for your partner to preempt aggressively he needs a good fit in both a minor and a major, otherwise he has to be more cautious. If you could have just shown the majors, your partner would be free to jump immediately. Also, think about this stupid style of bidding super aggressively to begin with. What happens? Oh, partner can't really preempt THAT aggressively, even with 2 fits in possible suits, you might be 4-4 or have a 4 card suit overcall or something stupid. Better be cautious. Oh you had a real 5/5 this time? Too bad, unlucky! The get in every time style is very poor in that respect, it just runs counter to your goal of getting in their auctions a lot. If responder makes a GF bid and the next guy cant jump to at least the 3 level, their auction isn't hurt too much. They have forcing passes, cuebids, they are in a GF and can bid suits. Oh, yeah, they can double you too.

 

Your GOAL when you overcall over a strong club should be:

 

--Always to possibly play it. You are bidding to try and play the hand. This means a making partial or game, or obviously finding a good save.

 

If you DON'T play it your goal should be to:

 

-- Distruct their auction effectively, while not giving them too much info in the play if you fail at that goal (as you almost always will unless you find a big fit.

 

The most likely way to disrupt their auction effectively is to preempt them early. The best ways to do this are:

 

1) Overcall with a preempt obv, this hurts their auction immediately. Even something like 2S. Well, to overcall soemthing at the 2 level, you're much mroe likely to have a 1 suiter. One suiters have more safety for less. And no, artificial 2 bids are not good. For instance multi 2D overcall would be hopeless, you take away you biggest advantage by allowing LHO to double, to show some cards and then make another bid, he can make 2 bids at the 2 level often. You must overcall in a suit that you might have even if its a 2 suited bid (spades and a minor could work, psycho suction is much superior to suction because youre bidding your possible suit, etc).

 

2) Overcall at the 1 level, enabling partner to at least raise, but hopefully to make a big jump immediately if you hit a big fit. Even if you have a spade and club 2 suiter, overcalling spades is not that bad, if you're going to make a big splash it's probably in spades and if you have a save or a make somewhere you're unlikely to win in clubs, spades is far more important (goign to my theory that majors is the only important 2 suiter over 1C). Yes, obviously some bid that showed both suits exactly would be better. But I would submit that if I have 5 spades and 5 clubs and my option is to DOUBLE as a crash bid, or bid 1S, 1S is far better. 1S at least enables partner to jump raise if he has a good fit whereas crash means he has to have a good fit in 2 suits. It also is far more preemptive than X or 1D, it's funny that crashers want to disrupt and 2 of their 3 bids are X and 1D, those are much easier for strong clubbers to deal with.

 

Also it's worth noting that even 1S is a pretty effective preempt even if your partner can just raise to 2S.

 

All of these things argue for natural bids, not either/or bids and not 2 suited bids, and that is just on top of the main point that we do not want to tell them so much about shape every single time when we are unlikely to declare the hand! They also argue for not bidding super aggro and just bidding normally at the 1 level, because WHEN you bid, you want your partner to be able to bid very aggressively. You can argue whether you should be preempting aggressively, this is more random and has a lot more upside but you will just get doubled a lot. IMO this is the same thing, people just preempt too much. Yes maybe novice strong clubbers don't know what to do over 1C 3S X(GF no bid) p ? with xxx AJx AKJx Axx but any good player is just going to pass and let you play it, so good luck to you if you have a retarded hand. Yes, 3S is a very effective preempt, but if you are bidding it too often they can counter it by just defending 3S X when they have game going points and no super long suit. And that is a common battle these days. But that is a totally different argument about best style for preempting over a strong club, it's way different than best methods and style on 1 level bids imo.

 

Also Remember that even overcalling a preempt like 2S with 6 spades gives them far less info about the shape than 2 suited bids.

 

This post is going on and on, but I would say that you should devise your system/methods for playing against people who are competent. Even if they are incompetent, they might have no idea what they're doing in their uncontested auctions anyways that you are risking a lot to gain not a ton. I admit there is a class of players who knows their auctions very well if you don't bid, but has very poor judgement in competitive auctions. For instance, I used to play against some relay guys and I would always bid, because they were hopeless at bridge but they knew their relays 100 %. But that is just exploiting their particular weaknesses, it should not be your general strategy. When people play vs meckwell, they often freak out and think they're getting fixed or something if they let them have an uncontested 1C auction. That couldn't be farther from the truth, yes they are in a +EV spot vs natural, but sometimes natural works better, usually it doesn't matter at all it's just a normal whatever contract. Let's say 90 % of the time it doesn't matter what system you play in an uncontested auction, you're just going to get to the same spot. In those auctions, do I want to risk going for a number for no reason, or even worse, do I want to tell meckwell a ton about the shape and let them pick me clean in the play? And for what gain, because I'm going to screw meckwell really hard by overcalling 1D CRASH and then my partner can bust out 3D, pass or correct? What percentage of the time do you think that stops natures course of them playing a routine game or something? It is just a really bad strategy and this conventional wisdom comes out of some fear of strong clubbers having a strong club auction like you will always get burned, combined with how inept bad strong clubbers are at dealing with competition, combined with people not considering the implications of the play after these auctions, only the bidding.

 

Justin

 

The amount of time you spend in these forums as a top international player is hugely appreciated. Anything you possibly gain must be tiny compared to the knowledge you are sharing with others. Last year you were “Poster of the Year” winner and it is easy to see why. Inevitably you cut through all the fancy crap and get down to addressing the nuts and bolts of why one approach is better than another (just as you have done here). Based on the things you have said in this thread I intend resorting back to what was suggested on page 1 (post 6), with some minor adjustments.

 

Thanks a million.

[Trinidad]

Or either division of the English Premier League.

... or my local bridge club.

 

Rik

[gnasher]

Your GOAL when you overcall over a strong club should be:

 

--Always to possibly play it. You are bidding to try and play the hand. This means a making partial or game, or obviously finding a good save.

 

If you DON'T play it your goal should be to:

 

-- Distruct their auction effectively, while not giving them too much info in the play if you fail at that goal (as you almost always will unless you find a big fit.

I think that when one preempts the second goal is the main one - you want them to get too high or too low, or play in the wrong strain. If they let you play the hand in a partscore it generally means they're happy for you to do so; if you save that means you're playing for the smaller minus rather than playing for a plus; and if your side is in the game zone you might be better of not preempting.

 

Do you diasagree with that, or are you saying that strong club auctions are different from other auctions, or with your first goal were you thinking mainly of one-level overcalls?

 

This post is going on and on

It's OK, really, we don't mind.

 

 

One other question: how much harder (it at all) is it for the opening side if it goes

1

♣

(2[sP)

rather than

1

♣

(1[sP) something (2

♠

)

I've seen people say that the key with preempting over a strong club is to get the bidding to a high level by the time it gets back to opener, but intuitively it seems to me that it's more important to take away responder's space, as responder's hand is less well-defined than opener's.

[JLOGIC]

 

One other question: how much harder (it at all) is it for the opening side if it goes

1

♣

(2[sP)

rather than

1

♣

(1[sP) something (2

♠

)

I've seen people say that the key with preempting over a strong club is to get the bidding to a high level by the time it gets back to opener, but intuitively it seems to me that it's more important to take away responder's space, as responder's hand is less well-defined than opener's.

 

The first is better, but not that much so. Let's use my methods over each bid which are pretty simple standard to analyze it. Over 1C 2S, I play any bid is GF. Over 1C 1S, Double is 6-7 (maybe a good 5), and pass is 0-5, and a bid is GF.

 

Over 1C 2S p p X I play lebensohl. Over 1C 1S X 2S, I play bidding is GF, X is takeout (over that 2N is not leb). Opener can pass and expect a reopening X if he has some spade length, then make a NF bid.

 

So, if responder has 6-7, he gets to show it immediately which is useful, maybe he can stop in a partial after 1C 1S X 2S p p something, whereas 1C 2S p p bid he'd have to bid a game with 6-7 almost always. If it goes 1C 2S p p X, it is largely the same with use of lebensohl, a little bit worse. If responder is going to make a GF, then 1C 2S is better, especially if responder is going to bid hearts. For example, notice how much better 1C 1S 2H 2S p p or 1C 1S 2H 2S bid is than 1C 2S 3H p is. But still, opener can bid 3N or raise or cue with no stopper or a slam try. You have gained by bidding 2S, maybe opener has 2 hearts and a spade stopper and has to guess between 3N or 4H, and maybe he will guess wrong, and maybe it will matter. But that's still a parlay, usually the normal spot will be reached, and an abnormal spot may be inferior but will often work out just as well. If responder is going to bid a minor, it's not a huge difference between 1C 2S 3C and 1C 1S 2C 2S. It's different but theres still a lot of room (facilitated by a 3S cue also being available).

 

So yes, 2S is better, but you now run the risk of getting doubled in it if you bid it too often. Is that worth the trade off? You won't get doubled that often, but even thuogh you are gaining sometimes by bidding 2S immediately, it does not usually matter.

 

And this goes back to my point, there is another thing to consider, how often can responder raise to 3S? Bidding 3S when you have some safety is the nuts, it creates problems. If you are bidding 2S wildly, repsonder cannot raise to 3S as often. In standard bidding methods, most hands that bid 1C 1S something 2S would raise a 2S overcall to 3. If you bid 2S too much, this means you might have to bid 3S on classical 2S bids, and that is quite risky since you are really offering yourself up at the 3 level. The 3 level for strong clubbers is like the 5 level in normal auctions, that is the point you start getting doubled successfully on high cards without trump stacks, especially if you are bidding it too often. If you are overcalling 2 so often to the point that you have to bid 3 on normal 2 bids, you will have high risk and high reward. Or if you just bid 2 a lot, you will suffer from partner not being able to make the critical raise sometimes, 2S is not where the money is at in disrupting their auction, it has some gain but the 3 level is really good, even if responder has taken a bid.

 

And, if you are bidding 2 wildly, I don't think it's going to be that infrequent that you get doubled and get a poor result compared to how often you mess up their auction AND profit from it. It is less hard to trap pass when your partner opens a strong club compared to normal since you know your partner has a good hand.

 

As an extension to your question, lets consider how difficult it is if responder is going to bid 3S whether you overcall a standard 1S bid, or a hyper aggressive style 2S bid.

 

Over 1C 1S X 3S or 1C 1S p 3S vs 1C 2S p 3S, this is the best case for the 2S bid, since responder got to show his 6-7 or 0-5, and in the 2nd auction, he is 0-7 either way. However, it's not a huge difference, no suits have been bid and it's a tough auction either way. Generally opener will still play his partner for about 5 and bid (similar to the standard rule of handling normal preempts). If responder was going to make a GF bid, it is irrelevant whether 1S or 2S was bid. Either way, there are a lot of problems, finding 5-3 heart fits, finding out about stoppers, etc etc. 3S is the nuts. The one thing they have going for you is that if you are out of line the opps can double you pretty easily (again, not an exact science, they will go wrong a fair amount to). It might be different if pairs played bidding shows a semi positive and X is an art GF over a 1 level bid, and the reverse over 2S, I have no idea.

 

If you can preempt to the THREE level immediately, that messes responder up a lot, but like I said they will also just double you since theyre messed up, so it's high risk high/reward. I don't think it's a huge difference whether you preempt to the 2 level immediately or if responder gets to raise to the 2 level, even though it is a difference.

[JLOGIC]

I think that when one preempts the second goal is the main one - you want them to get too high or too low, or play in the wrong strain. If they let you play the hand in a partscore it generally means they're happy for you to do so; if you save that means you're playing for the smaller minus rather than playing for a plus; and if your side is in the game zone you might be better of not preempting.

 

Do you diasagree with that, or are you saying that strong club auctions are different from other auctions, or with your first goal were you thinking mainly of one-level overcalls?

 

 

Since the first bid shows points, the weakness of the system is that they haven't shown suits. Consequently, if you preempt I would hope to get them to the wrong strain rather than the wrong suit moreso than usual (or if it's a slam hand, the wrong strain). You are right, sometimes you will force them too high when they could have stopped by preempting, but I don't think it should be a primary goal. I mean, once 16+ is shown, if responder has 8+ he will force to game. If the bid is low enough, responder can probably show his points too, or later bid lebensohl/some other clarifying type bid. If the preempt is high enough, sometimes you force them too high since they have to guess about points, the same as any preempt.

 

But yes, I was thinking about overcalling a non preempt I think. Your main goal with a non preempt should be to declare, or enable partner to preempt effectively, and I think many of these artificial systems go against that goal. When you preempt, your goal should be to preempt them, whether it happens to be more the wrong strain than the wrong suit than an auction that starts by bidding a suit is irrelevant.

 

Preempts and 1 level overcalls are def different beasts.

[hrothgar]

Since the first bid shows points, the weakness of the system is that they haven't shown suits. Consequently, if you preempt I would hope to get them to the wrong strain rather than the wrong suit moreso than usual (or if it's a slam hand, the wrong strain).

 

If you have a moment, curious what you think of the following:

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/20626-precison-defence/page__p__212059#entry212059

[mycroft]

Ah well, in [hated other city] they've decided that Cappelletti is an optimal defence to strong clubs, because it works so well against strong NTs. So all the one-suiters go with double, and all the two-suiters bid (usually at the one level), either with the majors (with 1♦!) or with an unknown minor.

 

"UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of this IMPORTANT Information is ENCOURAGED, ESPECIALLY to COMPUTER BULLETIN BOARDS."(*) - at least, when you're playing against me!

 

(*) Anybody who gets this reference (without googling) has been online TOO FREAKING LONG, just like me :-)

[Free]

I understand the logic behind natural intervention and bidding 2-suiters specifically (for example "both Majors"). Dbl and 1NT are obvious choices for 2-suiters, but what about 1♦? It's an overcall that doesn't do any damage, it even creates space for opps, and all of this in the hope that partner can preempt.

 

You can't show a ♣ single suiter at 1-level, you might as well sacrifice your natural 1♦ overcall and bid 2♦ with these ♦ single suiters. This frees up 1♦ for a specific 2-suiter and runs less risk to be left in doubled than an aggressive 2♠ overcall for example. But I wonder which 2-suiters are most useful to show. Both Majors is obvious (but how aggressive? 4-4, 4-5, 5-5?). When we have 2 more bids left for other specific 2-suiters, which ones should we show immediately?

- ♠+♣ and ♠+♦

- ♥+♣ and ♥+♦

- both minors and both Majors (more extreme)

At first I thought that ♥+m is useful because you don't have the master suit. On the other hand, if you have ♥+m then opps will usually end in ♠ knowing a lot about defenders' hands. ♠+m seems quite lame, you can easily start with 1♠ and bid your minor afterwards if necessary. Both these approaches could use 1♦ as natural and Dbl/1NT for the ♣+M hand (respecting Justin's "law" of bidding to play).

When we'd use the 3rd approach, it would allow us to intervene with both Majors a lot more, and let partner preempt more accurate. But 1♦ now becomes artificial unless you use it for both minors.

 

What are your opinions about the following defense:

Dbl = both Majors, 4-4 or 4-5 (or 5-5 with very weak hands)

1♦ = both minors, 4-4 or 4-5 (or 5-5 with very weak hands)

1NT = both Majors, 5-5 or better

2NT = both minors, 5-5 or better

rest = natural

(I haven't thought about continuations)

[EricK]

I understand the logic behind natural intervention and bidding 2-suiters specifically (for example "both Majors"). Dbl and 1NT are obvious choices for 2-suiters, but what about 1♦? It's an overcall that doesn't do any damage, it even creates space for opps, and all of this in the hope that partner can preempt.

It could perhaps be used for a strong(ish) ♠ overcall. So 1♦ is a good ♠ overcall, 1♠ is weak overcall with a 5 card suit, and 2♠ is weak with a 6 card suit.

[the hog]

It could perhaps be used for a strong(ish) ♠ overcall. So 1♦ is a good ♠ overcall, 1♠ is weak overcall with a 5 card suit, and 2♠ is weak with a 6 card suit.

 

If 1D is a good S overcall, you give the partner of the big clubber X and 1S to show other hands.

[mgoetze]

So, when's the money game? I want to watch.

[straube]

How about dbl = 4 spades and 1D = 4 hearts? Or maybe dbl = 3 spades and 1D = 4 spades.

[JLOGIC]

Today, the one time we opened a strong club, my opponent (Mike Kamil) overcalled 1D. He had an unremarkable hand, a 5332 11 count with QJxxx of diamonds. His partner happened to have a stiff spade and 5 diamonds and 6 or 7 points, and saved over our cold 4S in 5D. This was down 300 and we were cold for 620. At the other table, they didn't play strong club, so they opened 1S and had an uncontested auction to 4S and made it. Everything on this hand was completely normal, and we lost 8 imps due to effectively a system swing.

 

Of course, if the opps had played some fancy convention, they could not have been in our auction and would probably not have even noticed that their methods cost them a normal 8 imps. This is what people miss when they say that 1D is a useless overcall, or that 1D gives the opponents more room, etc. 1D is always an unpreemptive bid, but it enables partner to preempt or save or compete to make or push them higher in a competitive auction, etc. It gives away little about the hand relative to 2 suiters. Yes, sometimes playing CRASH or some other convention would have gained, and this is just a 1 hand sample, but it is certainly a loss to have no way to show a 1D overcall (and it would be a huge loss to not be able to show a 2C overcall also).

 

Perhaps I have selective memory but it seems to me that there are many many hands like this, and I don't remember very many hands at all where we got screwed by the opponents being able to make a 2 suited overcall, especially relative to how often it causes them to lose in the play.

 

This is definitely not a cherry picked example, it was the only example tonight. Perhaps I will bump this thread this week when someone bids over strong club or doesn't bid when they might have with some results.

 

It is possible that some of the issue is that it seems to be the weaker players that play artificial methods against strong club, so there is some bias there in my memory since it's more likely that weaker players will have bad judgement causing them to have bad boards with any methods. But, if that is true, it must be telling that weaker player almost always play some artificial methods, and stronger players almost always play X majors NT minors and do not bid hyperaggressively, there has to be a reason for that. Just as there must be a reason that almost all strong clubbers that have spoken say they love to play against artificial methods and hyper aggressive bidders over a strong club. That means something to me.

Edited April 10, 2012 by JLOGIC

[the hog]

How about dbl = 4 spades and 1D = 4 hearts? Or maybe dbl = 3 spades and 1D = 4 spades.

 

Or what about x = a 13 card suit, or perhaps some 9-4 distribution, or, or....................."

You have had the answers you need.

[mike777]

I thought suction can show all of these hands?

 

one suited or two suited.

 

granted I learned suction almost 30 years ago and there is something better now.

[JLOGIC]

Thanks JLall.

 

I've felt the CRASH bids were there just to take up space between the one level overcalls that are necessary and the 2♦(and higher) multi bids which I like for precisely the reasons you state.

 

I suppose I can make a very easy switch to 1N = minors and 2♣ = majors. I'm not terribly concerned with using the double as anything, since it gives the opponents an extra bid.

 

When you have a reasonable hand with the majors, there is a reasonable chance it is your hand or that you can at least compete even though RHO has more points than you. Being able to double with KJxx AQTxxx xx xx is useful, so is being able to get in on a hand like KJxx AKJx xx Qxx, just as it is over a normal 1m opener. This is why I think Joes idea of having a bid that shows 4-4/4-5 and a reasonable hand (double), and a bid that takes up more space that shows 5-5 majors and might be weaker is sound, just like we can bid michaels or make a takeout X over a normal 1m opener. They are different hand types, and both important. Minors seems pretty unimportant, and if you have a lot of minors you still have 2N.

[JLOGIC]

If you have a moment, curious what you think of the following:

 

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/20626-precison-defence/page__p__212059#entry212059

 

Not at all a fan of the "lead directing" overcalls. You can make a lead director, but it will be hard for your partner to compete/save/bid over it. It's not like it is never our hand for a partial/game/save because RHO has 16+. I still think at such an early stage of the auction our goals should be about fighting for those things, and to do that we need to find fits early. Preempting them quickly, same thing, we need to find fits early.

 

Also, why is a lead director so important? Even if theyre going to play it, usually overcaller is going to be on lead, I don't understand the emphasis placed on it.

 

The suggested style of things like the 1S overcall is too aggressive imo, I don't see the reason to overcall 1S on a 4432 7 count, I'd rather pass. It's fine to fight, I am a huge 1 level overcaller, but those kinds of hands are not the time imo and hurts you when you have one of the hands that is but your partner cannot fight since you might have something like a 4432 7 count.

 

I like that your 2 suited bids all show specific suits. However, you might be giving away too much info if you are bidding them very aggressively, and if you are not then standard preempts might be better. I don't know, but it's certainly on the right track if you value 2 suiters imo, not bad at all. I just value 1 suiters much more than 2 suiters.

[straube]

I still think dbl as 4 spades and 1D as 4 hearts is worth exploring. They could be canape bids.

 

Let's say it was our open and our goal was to find a fit as quickly as possible. Would we assign...

 

1C-both majors

1D-5D

1H-5H

1S-5S

1N-both minors

2C-5C

 

or

 

1C-2 suits of same color

1D-2 suits of same rank

1H-5H

1S-5S

1N-2 suits of same shape

2C-5C

 

or

 

1C-4S

1D-4H

1H-5H

1S-5S

1N-minors

2C-5C

[hrothgar]

Not at all a fan of the "lead directing" overcalls. You can make a lead director, but it will be hard for your partner to compete/save/bid over it. It's not like it is never our hand for a partial/game/save because RHO has 16+. I still think at such an early stage of the auction our goals should be about fighting for those things, and to do that we need to find fits early. Preempting them quickly, same thing, we need to find fits early.

 

Also, why is a lead director so important? Even if theyre going to play it, usually overcaller is going to be on lead, I don't understand the emphasis placed on it.

 

The suggested style of things like the 1S overcall is too aggressive imo, I don't see the reason to overcall 1S on a 4432 7 count, I'd rather pass. It's fine to fight, I am a huge 1 level overcaller, but those kinds of hands are not the time imo and hurts you when you have one of the hands that is but your partner cannot fight since you might have something like a 4432 7 count.

 

I like that your 2 suited bids all show specific suits. However, you might be giving away too much info if you are bidding them very aggressively, and if you are not then standard preempts might be better. I don't know, but it's certainly on the right track if you value 2 suiters imo, not bad at all. I just value 1 suiters much more than 2 suiters.

 

Hi Justin

 

thanks for the comments.

 

The primary idea behind the lead directing overcalls at the one level is not so much that bid, but rather trying to discipline other bids.

 

Lets assume that the auction starts

 

(1♣) - 2♠

 

Not only do I know that partner has a six card spade suit, I also know that spades has some kind of lead directing value since partner would have preferred a one level overcall with something like

 

♠ T75432

♥ KQ2

♦ 98

♣ 84

 

I'm torn about the bids. (Maybe its better to treat 1D / 1H as showing five baggers or some such)

 

In any case, thanks for the thoughtful comments and grats once again on the recent wins...

[chasetb]

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.

 

*Getting off topic here and responding to an earlier post, I congratulated JLall on his Platinum Pairs win while in Memphis, outside of a fancy restaurant right after the Vanderbilt final. I was rather hoping that he would stick with a Strong Club with Hamman, but I'm not a part of the partnership, and I certainly can't argue with success. I know 2/1, when worked on, can work very well, just look at Levin-Weinstein or Gitelman-Moss.

[Phil]

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.