defense of interference over precision club

[plypoin]

hi

I am junior player. i've play bridge for 4 year since high school.

We (me and my partner) got a problem with interference over 1♣ (we played it as precision club)

1♣ = 16+ any with 15-17 1NT opening.

 

if

1♣ (interference)

our system over any interference is :

double = 5-7 any

next any suit = 8+ with #5+ card

 

and if

1♣ (interference) P (P)

Double = strong 20+

any suit = 16-19 5+

 

the problem are :

how do you defense the contract

Vs interference at level 3 ? (1♣ 3x )

vs two suiter ?

 

any suggestion for better defense ?

[steve2005]

1♣ inter P (P)

don't think you can afford X to be 20+. You need to be able to show takeout hands. Your methods leaves no bid if opener has no 5-card suit and is unsuitable for NT.

With 20+ you can often double and bid again.

[foobar]

hi

I am junior player. i've play bridge for 4 year since high school.

We (me and my partner) got a problem with interference over 1♣ (we played it as precision club)

1♣ = 16+ any with 15-17 1NT opening.

...

any suggestion for better defense ?

 

My recommendation would be use a meta-defence and focus on showing responder's hand instead of trying to untangle the meanings of their bids.

 

Basically, the opponents may be:

 

1) Playing natural overcalls, but psyching

2) Unsure of the methods they are playing (several pairs discuss their methods over strong just in time)

3) Playing various versions of two-way exclusion bids (CRASH, Suction, etc.)

4) Playing something more sophisticated, like psycho-Suction

 

In general, you should try to remain within the system for <= 1♥. Over their Xs, you can choose to either ignore them, or take advantage of the extra space by assigning a new meaning to Pass (say really awful hand). Over >= 1♠, you can use something like the defence suggested by awm for IMPrecision:

 

1) The cheapest NT calls are natural and GF

2) Doubles tend to be takeout oriented

3) 2-level bids are transfers, except that there can never be a transfer to a suit that couldn't be bid naturally at the 2-level over their overcall (for example, over 1♣ - (2♣), 3[♣] is a transfer to ♦s because we could have bid 2♦ naturally). In general, these bids promise at least competitive strength.

4) Pass tends to be weak, or a trap pass (rare)

[straube]

http://web.cs.ucla.edu/~awm/bridge/IMprecision.pdf

 

page 14. You can also do searches for threads where awm has commented on this topic.

[helene_t]

At the 3-level, a voluntary bid by responder should be forcing. Both partner's can double for takeout.