Annoying Opponents

[CSGibson]

They do at least tell you their basic system before the round begins?

 

Very few, if any, will do so.

[ArtK78]

I don't know where the players in this thread are playing, but in the games that I play, the convention cards are usually well filled out, they give the basic system and much more. If they don't, there may be penalties assessed.

 

I mentioned once before that my pair was assessed a penalty in the first round of our District NAOP qualifying for not having two fully completed convention cards available. My partner did not have a convention card. While I thought that the penalty was silly (especially as the opponents were not complaining about the fact that we didn't have two convention cards available), it does show that some TDs take this requirement seriously.

[CSGibson]

I don't know where the players in this thread are playing, but in the games that I play, the convention cards are usually well filled out, they give the basic system and much more. If they don't, there may be penalties assessed.

 

When she was asking about telling basic systems, I thought Stefanie was referring to the European practice of announcing polish club, precision, etc before a round, not asking if the convention cards had that basic information.

[gnasher]

I thought Stefanie was referring to the European practice of announcing polish club, precision, etc before a round

That's not particularly common in many places, in my experience.

[jeffford76]

I don't mean to be a pest, but I am planning to play in the ACBL in the near future. Do pairs who always ask usually put it on their convention cards?

 

Although legal, it's very unusual to play a different defense to a short club instead of treating it as natural. I've never seen "we always ask" written on a card, but it certainly would be ok to put it there if you're worried about a ruling.

[PhilKing]

Although legal, it's very unusual to play a different defense to a short club instead of treating it as natural. I've never seen "we always ask" written on a card, but it certainly would be ok to put it there if you're worried about a ruling.

 

In England, you can play a destructive artificial defence versus a 2-card club, but not if it promises 3. I play such a defence, so check the card at the start of the round.

[FM75]

Ok, so my wife and I play a complicated precision system and are pretty decent at it, even where there is interference. At Club games, people occasionally throw bids in an effort to 'mess things' up. Last night, after wife opened 1C, the next bidder overcalled 2D with 10 points and 5 Diamonds, 9 high......SO I double to show 5-7 HCP and wife leaves it in and we go for a top (Match points).

 

If bidding goes 1C, and Opponents bid at the one level, say 1H, and I want to penalize, I will pass and partner Doubles if she thinks I am doing a trap pass.

 

But it is a nuisance when opponents just throw a bid in for no other purpose but to disrupt...

 

I wouldn't mind a discussion on what and how other precision players deal with 'psych'bids, or even worse than psych bids. Occasionally, we do get messed up by them

Maybe you should consider some other alternatives:

1C - 1x

pass = 0-4 - Having partner guess, seems wrong IMO

X = 5-7(8)

any other bid is positive response

 

1C - X

as above, except XX replaces X

 

1C - 2x

pass - then partner can take action based on his hand and any RHO call

X - balanced, pick a range that you like with your system

etc.

 

 

 

[Vampyr]

In England, you can play a destructive artificial defence versus a 2-card club, but not if it promises 3. I play such a defence, so check the card at the start of the round.

 

Yes. Unfortunately the ACBL card does not have a place where players can indicate whether they play a 2-card club suit that is "natural" or one that is not.

[ArtK78]

Yes. Unfortunately the ACBL card does not have a place where players can indicate whether they play a 2-card club suit that is "natural" or one that is not.

Of course it does. If 1♣ is not strong forcing and artificial, and the length promised is 2+, then it is natural.

[awm]

Of course it does. If 1♣ is not strong forcing and artificial, and the length promised is 2+, then it is natural.

 

This is not actually true. Only the 1♣ opening that is 3+♣ or 4432 in that order has been categorized as natural. A 1♣ opening that includes other balanced shapes with doubleton club (i.e. 4342 or even 3352) is not considered natural. The reason as I understand it is to protect beginners (and life-beginners) who play 1♦ showing four... not to protect the advanced-plus crowd playing the increasingly popular method where 1♦ is 4+♦ unbalanced and 1♣ includes all weak notrumps.

 

There isn't a place on the convention card to distinguish between these methods; some players will mark it anyway and others won't. In general it's best to ask when opponents announce "could be short" if it makes any difference to you -- this is rather annoying in that it removes some of the benefit of announcements over alerts (if you have to ask anyway, might as well alert).

[blackshoe]

Although legal, it's very unusual to play a different defense to a short club instead of treating it as natural. I've never seen "we always ask" written on a card, but it certainly would be ok to put it there if you're worried about a ruling.

Um, per a recent change in the GCC, a 'short club' is natural (by definition) if it shows precisely 4=4=3=2 distribution. Since it's natural, defenses allowed under item 7 in the "competitive" section of the GCC are not permitted against this short club. If the 'short club' could include other distributions, then it is not natural, and any defense is allowed (which is what item 7 says).

[Shugart23]

Maybe you should consider some other alternatives:

1C - 1x

pass = 0-4 - Having partner guess, seems wrong IMO

X = 5-7(8)

any other bid is positive response

 

1C - X

as above, except XX replaces X

 

1C - 2x

pass - then partner can take action based on his hand and any RHO call

X - balanced, pick a range that you like with your system

etc.

 

Yes. if Opponents are kind enough to double, we get pass and redouble as free bids...so pass shows 0-4; 1D shows 5-7 and all other bids remain as if no double occurred. Redouble means we have them on the run

 

If Opponents overcall 1D, pass shows 0-4, double shows 5-7 and all other bids remain the same as if no 1D overcall

 

If Opponents overcall 1H through 2S, pass is 0-4 and double is 5-7, and any suit bid is Game going positive

 

If Opponents overcall 2NT or higher. Double is for business, any other bid is positive

[Shugart23]

Yes. if Opponents are kind enough to double, we get pass and redouble as free bids...so pass shows 0-4; 1D shows 5-7 and all other bids remain as if no double occurred. Redouble means we have them on the run

 

If Opponents overcall 1D, pass shows 0-4, double shows 5-7 and all other bids remain the same as if no 1D overcall

 

If Opponents overcall 1H through 2S, pass is 0-4 and double is 5-7, and any suit bid is Game going positive

 

If Opponents overcall 2NT or higher. Double is for business, any other bid is positive

 

 

Plus we have the trap pass by responder, if opponents overcall the 1C up through 2S

[the_clown]

Yes. if Opponents are kind enough to double, we get pass and redouble as free bids...so pass shows 0-4; 1D shows 5-7 and all other bids remain as if no double occurred. Redouble means we have them on the run

 

If Opponents overcall 1D, pass shows 0-4, double shows 5-7 and all other bids remain the same as if no 1D overcall

 

If Opponents overcall 1H through 2S, pass is 0-4 and double is 5-7, and any suit bid is Game going positive

 

If Opponents overcall 2NT or higher. Double is for business, any other bid is positive

 

 

Playing penalty doubles after overcalls higher than 2N seems pretty bad to me, what are you supposed to do with a classical t/o X and game going hand?

[Shugart23]

Playing penalty doubles after overcalls higher than 2N seems pretty bad to me, what are you supposed to do with a classical t/o X and game going hand?

 

Honestly, when partner opens 16+, and I have 8+, we arent running into opponents jumping in at the 3 level with a lot of frequency. (We have 24+ HCP) I don't play strong 2C openings, but I am pretty careful about jumping in at 3 level when RHO has opened strong 2C

 

 

We won't miss game, because any bid I make over the preempt is game forcing. Preempts do take away our communication, but that is what they are designed to do

[Shugart23]

Maybe you should consider some other alternatives:

1C - 1x

pass = 0-4 - Having partner guess, seems wrong IMO

X = 5-7(8)

any other bid is positive response

 

The problem with this is that you need a way to punish the opponent that overcalls 1C with 5 spades to the Queen and 8 points vulnerable, hence the trap pass.

 

Partner can 'usually' tell by his own holding in opponent's suit

[jeffford76]

Um, per a recent change in the GCC, a 'short club' is natural (by definition) if it shows precisely 4=4=3=2 distribution. Since it's natural, defenses allowed under item 7 in the "competitive" section of the GCC are not permitted against this short club. If the 'short club' could include other distributions, then it is not natural, and any defense is allowed (which is what item 7 says).

 

I'm not sure why you think anyone is confused about this.

 

I meant that it is not common to play an artificial defense against players who play a short club that it is legal to play an artificial defense to.

[Vampyr]

I'm not sure why you think anyone is confused about this.

 

I meant that it is not common to play an artificial defense against players who play a short club that it is legal to play an artificial defense to.

 

It's not unusual in the UK. Of course it is more useful here on grounds of frequency, because no opening of doubletons is considered "natural".

[Vampyr]

This is not actually true. Only the 1♣ opening that is 3+♣ or 4432 in that order has been categorized as natural. A 1♣ opening that includes other balanced shapes with doubleton club (i.e. 4342 or even 3352) is not considered natural. The reason as I understand it is to protect beginners (and life-beginners) who play 1♦ showing four... not to protect the advanced-plus crowd playing the increasingly popular method where 1♦ is 4+♦ unbalanced and 1♣ includes all weak notrumps.

 

There isn't a place on the convention card to distinguish between these methods; some players will mark it anyway and others won't. In general it's best to ask when opponents announce "could be short" if it makes any difference to you -- this is rather annoying in that it removes some of the benefit of announcements over alerts (if you have to ask anyway, might as well alert).

 

Which method is more popular? Maybe a slight expansion of the announcements would make sense; we have this in the UK -- sometimes announcements of openings are announced "Strong, non-forcing" or "weak to intermediate" etc.

 

Very impressed with your first sentence. Had I replied first I would not have been able to to resist something along the lines of "that is complete and utter bollocks" :(

[awm]

Which method is more popular? Maybe a slight expansion of the announcements would make sense; we have this in the UK -- sometimes announcements of openings are announced "Strong, non-forcing" or "weak to intermediate" etc.

 

I've seen four different versions of "short" club:

 

1. Always 3+ except 4432 in that order; 1♦ is 4+

2. Any hand without a 5-card non-club suit; 1♦ is 5+

3. Any balanced hand (or any hand with clubs); 1♦ is 4+ and unbalanced

4. Some nebulous "catch-all" as part of a strong diamond system.

 

Overall the frequency of these in ACBL is 1 > 2 > 3 > 4. However, this changes a bit in a mid-chart event because of the combination of a stronger field and the legality of transfer responses to 1♣. In that case the frequency is 3 > 2 > 1 > 4.

[Vampyr]

I've seen four different versions of "short" club:

 

1. Always 3+ except 4432 in that order; 1♦ is 4+

2. Any hand without a 5-card non-club suit; 1♦ is 5+

3. Any balanced hand (or any hand with clubs); 1♦ is 4+ and unbalanced

4. Some nebulous "catch-all" as part of a strong diamond system.

 

Overall the frequency of these in ACBL is 1 > 2 > 3 > 4. However, this changes a bit in a mid-chart event because of the combination of a stronger field and the legality of transfer responses to 1♣. In that case the frequency is 3 > 2 > 1 > 4.

 

Thanks. Are systems such as Polish Club popular in mid-chart events?

[awm]

Thanks. Are systems such as Polish Club popular in mid-chart events?

 

Very rarely encounter Polish Club. Strong club variants are fairly common though.