1S present at the table

[Vampyr]

A post in another thread reminded me that I have been looking for a fun and destructive defense to a strong ♣. Something like Pass promises a constructive hand, 1♠ present at the table, or perhaps some combination of those or something more exotic. I don't play against strong ♣s enough to make it worthwhile to work out an entertaining defense, so I was hoping that people who have played this sort of thing could offer their suggestions.

[gwnn]

2H=hearts or spades (when NV).

[Vampyr]

2H=hearts or spades (when NV).

 

That I already play against a "natural" 1♣ that could be only two cards. It seems to me that it would work very well against a strong club. Now I just have to find out the best way to handle hands that don't have a long major!

[gwnn]

We actually played this style as opening 2-bids:

 

2C=5-7, 5+ diamonds or strong

2D=5-7, 5+ hearts or 8-10 6 diamonds

2H=5-7, 5+ spades or 8-10 6 hearts

2S=8-10 6 spades

 

You can come up with something similar against strong club (for example just substitute 2C to have club hands instead of strong hands). I think it's fun to play and it's almost impossible to defend against.

 

On the 1-level it's not bad to just play natural overcalls.

 

1S="any 13 cards" as disclosure is not OK in my opinion (and I know you didn't say you want to play that but be careful to have a better definition), you can of course play it as "any balanced hand" or "any hand with a singleton but no 6-card suit" or something like this but try to make a clear definition IMO. a thread on this: http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/20578-idiotic-defense-against-strong-club/

[Vampyr]

Thanks

 

On the 1-level it's not bad to just play natural overcalls.

 

Presumably only with constructive hands?

1S="any 13 cards" as disclosure is not OK in my opinion (and I know you didn't say you want to play that but be careful to have a better definition), you can of course play it as "any balanced hand" or "any hand with a singleton but no 6-card suit" or something like this but try to make a clear definition IMO.

 

I can't define the bid until I've decided what my other bids mean!

[hrothgar]

Here's my preferred defense

 

The primary goals are

 

1. Bid naturally (for the most part). If you bid Spades, you shouldn't get upset if partner passes you in spades

2. Avoid ambiguous bids (for example, majors or minors)

 

The meta goal is to make sure that the responses are non-forcing and put as much pressure as possible on the strong club pair.

 

I find it quite effective

 

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

[billw55]

A point of curiosity in ACBL. If I play an unusual defense to a particular system or convention, do I need to provide a written defense to my defense? When does this chain end?

[dake50]

DISALLOWED - ACBL 2008

1. Conventions and/or agreements whose primary purpose is to destroy the

opponents’ methods.

3. Psychic controls (Includes ANY partnership agreement which, if used in

conjunction with a psychic call, makes allowance for that psych.)

***

How can 1S as 'present at the table' NOT be "primary to destroy opponents methods"?

***

Then how can responses NOT make "allowance for that psych"?

***

Is this a sanctioning-body(I'm in ACBL)-too-restrictive posting?

[Vampyr]

DISALLOWED - ACBL 2008

1. Conventions and/or agreements whose primary purpose is to destroy the

opponents’ methods.

3. Psychic controls (Includes ANY partnership agreement which, if used in

conjunction with a psychic call, makes allowance for that psych.)

***

How can 1S as 'present at the table' NOT be "primary to destroy opponents methods"?

***

Then how can responses NOT make "allowance for that psych"?

***

Is this a sanctioning-body(I'm in ACBL)-too-restrictive posting?

 

Sorry, should have specified non-ACBL.

[gwnn]

Presumably only with constructive hands?

Not really. It could either be a flat hand that doesn't want to preempt or a stronger hand with a 5 card suit. If I had to describe it in numbers, I'd say:

7+ hcp with good 4 cards or 5-7 hcp with bad 5 cards or constructive.

I can't define the bid until I've decided what my other bids mean!

Good point. :)

[Phil]

A point of curiosity in ACBL. If I play an unusual defense to a particular system or convention, do I need to provide a written defense to my defense? When does this chain end?

 

No, strong club defenses are GCC.

 

When I've played strange methods, I will pre-alert in a long match however.

[aguahombre]

2. Avoid ambiguous bids (for example, majors or minors)

With conditions for their use (5+5+), combined with natural major suit overcalls, these ambiguous bids (such as X &1D) which take up no significant space from the responder can be quite disruptive anyway.

 

Any time responder does not have a "strain" related bid to make, the ADVANCER is the one who can screw things up for the Clubbers with p/c bids at various levels with 2 places to play and using the theory that overcaller's two suits are the ones where advancer has the fewer total cards.

 

(1C) 1D* (P or X) ?

 

1♦ is (say) two suiter of shape (S/D or H/C) or rank (M's/m's)...doesn't matter which.

4th chair with e.g. 5431 distribution can have fun at the appropriate level bidding the longer of his two "short total" suits. If the 4 and the 1 are matching she is delighted to bid at the 3-level and even more delighted if partner removes and we have two fits (one being of ten cards).

 

I really hate 1S "present".

[nigel_k]

Can someone in the ACBL confirm that you can't have a strong club defence where the primary purpose is to destroy the

opponents’ methods?

[kenrexford]

If you want fun, I'll give you the defense that caused a 7-board KO match to only end up with four hands played, a complete blow-out, and general hilarity.

 

 

1. One-level calls (double for clubs) show one of two hand types. You either have the suit mentioned and a one-suiter OR you have a three-suiter with the other three suits. Hence,m for example, (1♣)-1♠ shows something like 6-3-2-2 or 1-4-4-4 shape.

 

1A. Advancer after these one-level calls responds in a paradox manner. The bext way to explain is with examples. Assume the 1♠ overcall. If Advancer does not like spades particularly (if partner has the one-suiter option) and is not particularly interested in aggressive action opposite the other-three-suits option, he picks the suit that he prefers of the other-three-suits option; hence, 2♣ shows club preference if Ivercaller has the 1-4-4-4 type. If Advancer does not love spades but does love one of the other three suits, he raises spades; hence, (1♣)-1♠-(P)-2♠ shows no interest in higher things in spades if partner has a one-suiter with spades, but interest in higher things in one of the other three suits if partner has the other three suits. It goes up from there.

 

2. Two-bids show two-suiters of some variety,

 

3. 1NT shows a four-suited hand (4-3-3-3).

 

4. Pass shows values and is akin to a "stolen bid pass."

[mycroft]

I play Mathe.

I played the version of Truscott that bid the two-suiters at the 2 level and the lead-requesting 1-suiters at the 1 level. Still my favourite.

One of the ones I'm concerned about, as a Strong Club player, is straight-up Wonder Bids - 1-level is "that suit or takeout of that suit". I'm guessing that two-way (negative or penalty) doubles would reasonably nicely counteract that, but we don't play that.

 

People that play either-or bids, especially Suction, are fun to play against. The Wonder bids above are less fun, because you only need that suit and another to punch-raise (rather than "one of each of these two sets, or this suit and one of two others"), and passing or raising the bid suit to 2 with pretty much any number of that suit - 2-6, anyway - is reasonably effective.

 

That mini-multi 1♥ call would be annoying, I think. Don't know how it would work in practise, both for and against; but it would be annoying.

 

I'm looking at some of the "short club" defences, because there are some pairs here that deserve them (the ACBL saves the majors-5, diamonds-4 LOLs from my wrath, and I don't exactly *mind* that. These aren't they).

[mycroft]

Nigel_k:

 

DISALLOWED, 1, on all ACBL CCs: Conventions and/or agreements whose primary purpose is to destroy the opponents' methods.

 

Apart from that, COMPETITIVE, 7 on the GCC (and therefore anything higher):

 

DEFENSE TO:

a) conventional calls...

[Free]

Many years ago I played the following:

Pass = 4+ spades

1S = 0-3 spades

Rest = whatever you want, can have any numner of spades

 

This way you can overcall 1S a lot. Biggest problem is when you're V and don't have 4+ spades ofcourse ;)

[dake50]

I don't like 1S as a nothing-to-show bid.

How about 2D as the I'm present bid.

Seems to only lose when they have a D-stack

AND we have no 2M scramble.

Essentially, useful shapely shows at 1-level,

garbage is 2D.

[Quantumcat]

I don't think always bidding over a strong club is a good idea, unless your opponents aren't very good. Experienced players who play precision always know when to play or defend, and you won't get away with making a bid going for too large a number because the opponents make the wrong decision.

[Free]

"always" is a big word in bridge. Don't overestimate your opponent too much.

[dake50]

I don't think always bidding over a strong club is a good idea, unless your opponents aren't very good. Experienced players who play precision always know when to play or defend, and you won't get away with making a bid going for too large a number because the opponents make the wrong decision. -- Quantumcat

 

*** That's been my experience also.

Opponents seem to quit playing sane bridge way often when we open 1C.

Won't even require excellent judgment to take 500/800 or more

against our borderline/failing game.

[glen]

That's been my experience ... take 500/800 or more ...

The full name of the convention is "1S present for the opponents at the table"

[SteveMoe]

Have played an approach that works well:

Over 1♣:

Double = Meckwell - single minor or both Majors (55+)

1♦ = 45 minors

1♥/♠ exclusion 3-suit takeout

1N = 55+ minors

2♣ = ♣ and Major

2♦ = ♦ and Major

2♥/♠ = natural

[Zelandakh]

Meckwell is an interesting description of that double - last time I saw their CC they were playing Mathe; but I guess you mean their 1NT defence. There may be even more 1♣ defences out there than 1NT defences! Here's another:

 

X = both majors, at least 5-5

1♦ = multi: one major

1M = major plus longer minor

1NT = multi: one minor or both majors, 4-4 or 5-4

2♣ = both minors, 4-4 or 5-4

2♦ = multi: 5M(332)

2♥ = hearts and 4+ minor

2♠ = spades and 4+ minor

2NT = both minors, at least 5-5

 

Of course simple works too. Aside from Mathe (X = majors, 1NT = minors) another popular one out there is Modified Crash:

 

X = good overcall in hearts

1♦ = good overcall in spades

1♥ = spades and clubs, or hearts and diamonds

1♠ = spades and hearts, or clubs and diamonds

1NT = spades and diamonds, or clubs and hearts

 

Another major family is Suction:

 

X = diamonds or majors

1♦ = hearts or blacks

1♥ = spades or minors

1♠ = spades and diamonds, or clubs and hearts

1NT = clubs or reds

 

Finally, popular on here are multi bids that show the suit bid, such as 2♥ = either major and 2♣ = clubs or diamonds. These are difficult to defend but also sometimes blow up badly. You can also combine ideas from the different families, for example by playing Modified Crash at the one level and Suction at the two level. And many many more ideas too.

 

For what it is worth, I do not think 1♠ as "anything else" is a great idea. Quite aside from the disclosure issues it is just not particularly effective most of the time. You wins against strong artificial openings tend to come when you can get to 2M or higher quickly. This kind of 1♠ overcall is simply too nebulous to be raised effectively and therefore robs you of a more useful meaning for the call. It is not something I would recommend.

[mikestar13]

Something else interesting is found in John Montgomery's Revision Club notes. Respecting John's copyright, I will only quote the basics for direct bids with no followups.

 

After (1♣)

 

X = 4 spades exactly and 5+ in a minor.

1♦ = both majors, not as good as 5-5.

1NT = two suited including spades, 5-5 or better.

2NT = two suited hearts and minor, 5-5 or better.

3NT = two suited in minors, usually better than 5-5.

 

All other bids natural.

 

The complete PDFs for the system are at BridgeWithDan.com