Against strong club

[MrAce]

[hv=pc=n&s=s7hj63dq95ckqj765&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1c]133|200[/hv]

 

IMP, knock-out

 

1♣ is 16+ artificial, opponents are world class. So is your pd.

 

What is your choice of call ? Basically would you pass or bid clubs at some level or do something genius ?

 

Agreements are

 

DBL = majors

NT =Minors

Rest natural

[ArtK78]

I would absolutely bid 2♣ natural on these cards.

 

Given the stregth of the suit, it is unlikely that the opps can punish me. And it will take away a full level of their auction.

 

Besides, I want a club lead if LHO winds up as declarer.

 

Anytime I can take the opponents out of their comfort zone there is a greater chance that the opps will have problems. Taking away the one level can do that.

[dake50]

I'm really tempted to 1S.

I have a rescue good club suit.

Little chance this is our hand, maybe blow smoke works.

Partner won't go too high, he knows we're just obstructing.

[hrothgar]

I'd bid clubs at the two level. Probably even the three level.

 

I want a club lead.

I have a solid enough suit that it will be difficult for the opponents to double for penalty or convert.

 

Playing my preferred methods, I'd need to bid 2NT showing clubs or (diamonds and a major).

Single suited hands with clubs are one of the few hand patterns that I can't show naturally.

[hrothgar]

I'd bid clubs at the two level. Even the three level.

 

I want a club lead.

I have a solid enough suit that it will be difficult for the opponents to double for penalty or convert.

 

Playing my preferred methods, I'd need to bid 2NT showing clubs or (diamonds and a major).

Single suited hands with clubs are one of the few hand patterns that I can't show naturally.

[Jinksy]

3C for me. I virtually have a 3C opening bid, and after a precision 1C, I have a better than normal risk/reward ratio for preempting.

[steve2005]

2♣ vul

would do 3 NV

most precision players can double 3♣ with values and opener may able to convert to penalties for a profit

[gszes]

2c in all forms of scoring---against strong club most calls are for the purposes of

 

sacrifice or lead direction anyway and 2c might just scare the opps out of an

 

easily made 3n fearing we might have an entry to go with our long clubs.

 

 

 

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=s7hj63dq95ckqj765&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1c]133|200|

IMP, knock-out

1♣ is 16+ artificial, opponents are world class. So is your pd.

What is your choice of call ? Basically would you pass or bid clubs at some level or do something genius ?

Agreements are

DBL = majors

NT =Minors

Rest natural[/hv]

2♣ = 10, Pass = 9, 3♣ = 5.

The danger is that opponents might settle uncomfortably for 1100 in lieu of their partscore.

[sfi]

Defending against a 3C overcall is far more difficult than against a 2C overcall. I don't need too many good results to make up for the occasional -14 IMPs even if they can sort themselves well enough to double (which I don't see as a great danger), so this looks like a clear 3C to me.

 

Much as I'm in favour of messing around against strong club openers, I don't get 1S. Good opponents can manage to bid the suit naturally most of the time, if we've just talked them out of their suit we may well give up the game bonus in undoubled undertricks anyway, and partner with 5 card support and a stiff club may well bounce to the 4 level. Oops.

[the_clown]

2♣ for me, second choice is 3♣. Doing something genius is not my style, especially not when vul against not.

[gnasher]

3♣. Did somebody really mention pass?

[cherdano]

3♣. Did somebody really mention pass?

Well, I'd day it's better than 1S.

[MrAce]

3♣. Did somebody really mention pass?

 

Yup. It surprised me too. I stole this hand from B.W. The problem asked in B.W was not focused on pass over 1♣ but it was mentioned.

 

Steve Weinstein passed with this. And then in B.W the dialogue between Steve and Gavin Wolpert - Fred Stewart was

 

G.W : What would Kranyak say about your pass over 1♣ ?

 

S.W :He would say Pass?? I would raise my eyebrow at him. Later that day he would come back and say "oh pass is right since bidding squeals so much bout your hand when you are so unlikely to be playing it. There is a good chance you will be on lead and if its a slam going auction you will have a good chance to double clubs at some point." After that I would just smile at him.

Fred Stewart : I must have passed before looking at my hand,

S.W: Yeh yeh yeh http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif

Obviously our panel here disagrees with him. So do i. I personally would have bid 3♣ myself.. Just wondered if pass was even an option for some of us. But i have mad respect to Steve and his bridge and his opinions.He has some valid points to think about, i am not sure if they justify the pass though. Below is the link for full article. You decide yourself.

http://bridgewinners...g-problem-2995/

[mfa1010]

2♣ for me. 3♣ at all other vulns.

[mycroft]

A lot of people play a similar style of defence against strong club interference to me, and my issue with 3♣ is that it is much more likely to go "who knows what we can make, pass" after 1♣-3♣-X (random semi-positive)-p, and this is a hand I want them to guess wrong (I sure do expect that defending 3♣x isn't the wrong guess). Sure, if they bid, I'm much better off than if I'd taken the low road; but I'm betting the system is against me here.

[ahydra]

2C for me. I'd be bidding 3C too if it wasn't for the vul.

 

ahydra

[Jinksy]

 

S.W :There is a good chance you will be on lead

 

What, after I bid 3C their methods allow them to find the right spot *and* reliably rightside? That's some powerful system they've got.

 

Also his discussion of Xing makes it sound as though he thinks we're mainly doing this for lead. I expect my P to virtually ignore my bid on this type of auction where lead's concerned (albeit less so at these colours) - I want to damage their bidding, with anything else a minor bonus.

[awm]

2♣ is really clear for me. I don't think this really gives the opponents that much information about the hand, besides that I have a club suit (which they are likely to know after I make my opening lead of a top club in any case). However, it does take away the whole one-level from the opponents when negotiating the right contact, and it will help partner out substantially in the case that he is on lead.

 

Bidding 3♣ seems like too much. It offers the opponents a number when they have game, might even offer them a number when they don't have game, and also might push them into a light making game (given my lack of defense).

[GreenMan]

What, after I bid 3C their methods allow them to find the right spot *and* reliably rightside? That's some powerful system they've got.

 

And why not? OP specified world-class opps. I would expect players at that level to play transfer responses over interference. And even if they're not, a responder with values and no clear bid over the OC will likely double and let opener take charge.

 

I'd say "could well be on lead" is, if anything, an understatement.

[cherdano]

3♣. Did somebody really mention pass?

 

I think pass is much much better than this thread is giving it credit.

 

Let's start with 3♣. I ran a simple simulation, only constraint is East has at least 16hcp. The average par score was -576, the average score in 3♣X was -520. That's awfully close: while my opponents don't defend perfectly against 3♣X, they are much worse at bidding to par (doubly dummy par!), even when undisturbed. If the opponents are just mildly good at guess when to pass 3♣X, of when to pass 3♣ undoubled, they will gain. A lot of IMPS. For example, under the highly sophisticated constraint "Neither East nor West has shortness", our average score in 3♣X becomes -553, while the average par score becomes -393. And obviously, our average still contains many 3CX making (not that rare), in which case opponents will often just pass out 3♣, or get to double 4♣X or ♣X.

 

You would have to gain a lot from pushing them to wrong contracts, or causing partner to make the right lead, in order to make up for this. I don't see it.

 

While they be able to double 3♣? The will often be endplayed into it: LHO makes a double showing some range of values with not much shape, RHO is balanced and can't do anything but pass. Do these numbers look realistic? Obviously, we will often be -800, and we don't need much from partner to stop them from making slam. Give LHO a hand where they make slam, swap it into partner's seat, and I don't see them making game, nor getting there.

 

(To add some context to the stats: they make some game 77% of the time. They make 4S 62% of the time. I can add more statistics counter if anyone thinks they would help. The above numbers are based on 500 hands.)

 

Now what about bidding 2♣? That doesn't cause them much trouble. In fact, on some hands it will make their auction more accurate: RHO will get to make a takeout double with 4432, and they play 2M in a 4-4 fit rather than 1N. They will find their spade fit when they have one most of the time. It will sometimes cause them to misguess hearts, but more often will help them to guess the spade suit, or to strip squeeze me into leading away from the heart queen. We aren't worried about stealing them a level to obstruct their slam bidding, since they are unlikely to have (a biddable) one. We are unlikely to buy the contract (neither constructively nor as a save).

 

On the other hand, bidding 2♣ doesn't cause much harm either. Plus, it may get partner off to the right lead.

Isn't all that more or less a wash?

[rmnka447]

I think you have to bid some number of ♣s. Strong 1 ♣ systems open a much wider set of hands 1 ♣ than do strong and artificial 2 ♣ bidders. So anytime you can quickly get the bidding to 2 ♣ or above, you're forcing them to use the same bidding space strong 2 ♣ bidders use to sort out where they belong for a lot more hands. It exerts a lot of pressure on them and has to make it more difficult for them to find the optimum spot.

 

NV vs. VUL, as here, I'm bidding 3 ♣. At other vulnerabilities, I'll just bid 2 ♣.

[cherdano]

P.S.: Of course I wouldn't pass. 2♣ for me.

[wanoff]

Not totally happy about the vul. but don't want to waste an opportunity to wheel out 2♠ showing spades or clubs.

Opponents may not know what they're doing and/or it may stop a relay sequence.

[dake50]

2C is really clear for me. I don't think this really gives

the opponents that much information about the hand, -- awm

North or South "I'm borderline for a slam try but I have no

wasted Club honors, I'll try."

Gets opponents to the "we told you so" slam. Do you really

think taking the 1-level away hampers them? Much?

I have DQ so unlikely partner's D-lead blows our defense;

even HJ saves a blown trick in hearts.

So, no need to insist on a club lead.

Little gain. Just bidding because it's my turn against

their high-powered 1C opener.