[jillybean]

Hi, we are adjusting our defense against strong 1♣ players.

We want to play our 1nt defense over their 1♣ = 2♣ majors, everything else a transfer.
Over their 10-12 NT we just bid as if they have opened 1x.

Good, Ok, Bad, Ugly? We need something quick, simple but effective

And, we won our KO so does this mean we have a blue ribbon now?

[hrothgar]

jillybean, on 2011-November-30, 08:37, said:

Hi, we are adjusting our defense against strong 1♣ players.

We want to play our 1nt defense over their 1♣ = 2♣ majors, everything else a transfer.
Over their 10-12 NT we just bid as if they have opened 1x.

Good, Ok, Bad, Ugly? We need something quick, simple but effective

And, we won our KO so does this mean we have a blue ribbon now?

Transfer = worst of all possible worlds.
You don't want nuanced auctions, you want to put the opponents under pressure.

If you want something simple and reasonably effective over their strong club

X = Both majors
1D = Diamonds
1H = Hearts
1S = Spades
1N = Both minors
2C = Clubs
2D = Diamonds
2H = Both majors (shapelier than double)
2S = Spades
2N = Major + a minor
3C+ = natural and weak

Over a mini NT,
X = penalty
2C = majors
2D = hearts
2H = spades
2S = Clubs
2NT = Dimaonds
3C = Clubs and a major, lots of offense
3D = Dimaonds and a major, lots of offense
3H = majors, lots of offense

is a good way to go

[bigbenvic]

In 1 partnership we used to use X to show Majors, 1nt to show minors (less pre-emptive than 2nt) all jump bids as natural and pre-emptive and all overcalls (1♦ > 2♣) as natural and constructive, good suit opening hand+
over 1c P 1d ?
2d became natural and constructive and nothing else changed

Another partner and I used ASPRO over 1nt and ASPRO style over 1♣.
Double of 1♣ shows ♥ & another suit (5+4+), 1♦ shows ♠ and a minor(5+4+), 1♥ > 2♦ Nat constructive and 2♥ and upwards as pre-emptive with 2nt being the minors. We originally had 1nt as less pre-emptive minors but changed it to be something I didn't like (3 suiter with exactly 4♠)
over 1c P 1d ? X showed ♠& another 1nt showed ♥& a minor nothing else changed.

[aguahombre]

jillybean, on 2011-November-30, 08:37, said:

Over their 10-12 NT we just bid as if they have opened 1x.

Which x? actually, this question relates more to calls than bids.

One simple way of handling NT openings which are that weak is to put them at risk, rather than us via:

---Pass with balanced hands beneath our strong NT range.
---Double with our NT range (or more). Systems on for us --you choose for you. We like our NT response structure and don't see why a mini or comic NT by them should make us change it.
---2y=a normal overcall one would make over 1x, not weaker.
---Weak two-suiters? Kind of like not preempting over a preempt.
---Strong two-suiters? You can use 3-level bids for those (to taste) if you like.

A balancing double of (1N) p p ? "borrows" a king from partner, as do 2x bids.

There are a lot of (probably better) more complicated methods out there, but we like (are)simple. We also like to not use artificial calls at a low level in this situation which could give them more tools.

[wyman]

JB, over a strong club, I usually keep it simple:

X = majors
1N = minors
but these don't have to be particularly shapely

everything else natural (except 2N/4N, more shapely with minors -- maybe I should have a 'more shapely with majors' but whatever), jump bids preemptive and natural

Simple overcalls may be on 4 cards and may just be lead directing
Jump overcalls may be on 5 cards.

With a good hand, pass and come in on the next round.

Same idea after (1C) P (1D).

There is something to be said for 2-suited overcalls, but I don't have much experience playing them here. What I do know is that many intermediate players who play a strong club don't end up making good decisions after interference, so I like to get in there with a wide range (that includes a fair amount of dreck). Against good opps, I get in there with lead-directors and aggressive jump overcalls to help partner and to jam the bidding, but be careful, as these players are better able to penalize you when it's right.

[mikeh]

Over 1♣, my view is that you want to maximize preemption and ambiguity. Suction is good, imo. it is a bit more complex than maybe what you are looking for, but worth the trouble if you are going to playa lot of boards against the big club.

Otherwise, 1N minors and x majors has the advantage of simplicity, altho it won't exactly trouble the opps very much.

As for the 10-12 1N, as someone who played that range for many years, I would suggest in direct seat:

x = 15 or more, any hand. May be shaded with a good suit and entries

2♣ majors
2♦/♥ transfers
2♠ both minors
2N good hand, good suit, long minor (not 15 hcp tho)
3 bids: natural, semi-preemptive


If we double, then don't use system on. It is, to my thinking, silly. The idea is that you want to defend, not pull to 2 of a suit. Advancer PASSES with 5+ hcp and tries for the plus.

If advancer runs, it is because he has a terrible hand....so don't use methods designed for constructive bidding....bid naturally. If you run to 2♣ and then redouble, should you be doubled, then that is SOS...so with 4333 1 count, bid 2♣ and redouble if need be.

The only exception is when advancer has values and a highly distributional hand (I am not talking about a 5 card suit or 4441)...now advancer may see game as better than defending: 2N is a 2 suiter and doubler bids cheapest playable suit (assuming partner has 5-5 or better) up the line, and with single suits, advancer jumps.

it is imperative that you have an agreement as to how high the direct double forces should the opps run, as they usually do. My usual agreement is that after the direct double, the next double by our side is takeout (tho it is often converted), and that after we make a takeout double, that is passed, all further doubles are penalty.

And they can't play 2minor undoubled, but they can play 2M or higher undoubled.

[ggwhiz]

I play very similar to hrothgar with a couple of differences.

Over a big club, the same but a 1 level overcall DENIES an opening bid and tends to be lead directing. We take liberties with chunky 4-card suits with an eye to the vulnerability and with good hands wait for an expected 1♦ response before deciding to come in or sit in the weeds when it's their hand.

Over the mini-notrump, basically the same but with 4-suit transfers (2♠=♣ and 3♣ =♦) which gaurantees you a second kick at the can. That's the idea anyway.

My all time favorite was ♠Ax, ♥Axxxxxx, AKQx, ♣ void

After 1nt, I bid 2♦ transfer and it went pass - pass. The opener had ♣ AKQxxx and a stray K and bid 3♣. I chickened out and bid 6♦ but 7 was cold opposite 7 of them to the Jack and a ♥ void. 4♥ went down 1 at the other table.

I don't think systems on over a double showing a strong nt is silly at all.

1. Pard is well placed if needing to run
2. We can choose to bid to our red games vs. white
3. We can handle any of their runouts with negative doubles and lebensohl with the smaller hand having a good shot at deciding on offence or penalty.

2 and especially 3 have really come in handy. When 1nt is about to get clobbered, they run 99% of the time and partner needs to know more about my hand than it's good.

[hrothgar]

ggwhiz, on 2011-November-30, 11:27, said:

I play very similar to hrothgar with a couple of differences.

Just for the record, I am recommending this as a basic set of agreements that can be safely added to a system with minimal discussion.
I favor something MUCH more complicated...

[nigel_k]

I would definitely play all suit bids natural.

You really want to avoid giving them extra space and an extra turn to call, which artificial methods will do. Double for majors is ok as partner will quite often be able to bid two or three of a major immediately. Otherwise I would not bother showing two suited hands as it can help them quite a lot in the play.

Even 1NT for minors is doubtful - if you don't have a good enough hand to bid 2NT then you won't often have a profitable sacrifice and so you'll just paint a picture of the hand for declarer. Against bad players it is different because any interference is liable to send them into uncharted territory. So I would suggest playing 1NT as any major/minor two suiter (may be 4/5 or even 4/4) but just don't use it against anyone good.

[Mbodell]

jillybean, on 2011-November-30, 08:37, said:

And, we won our KO so does this mean we have a blue ribbon now?

Congrats. Depends on the MP limits of the KO. You either get a red ribbon or blue ribbon. I think, from memory, if your award was all gold it is blue, otherwise red.

[Trinidad]

nigel_k, on 2011-November-30, 13:05, said:

I would definitely play all suit bids natural.

You really want to avoid giving them extra space and an extra turn to call, which artificial methods will do.

I very much almost agree.
So, against a strong club we play every suit "Natural or natural and conventional":
1 level: natural
2 level: natural + a higher ranking suit (as in DONT)

Since none of these bids are forcing, we don't give them extra space.

We rarely overcall 1♦ or double 1♣, since they don't take any bidding room. We do have 1 completely artificial bid: 1NT: 6(5)+ clubs or 6(5)+ diamonds (advances are equivalent to the responses to a Multi 2♦ opening).

Rik

[the hog]

Kathryn, transfers are the worst of all worlds because they give the opponents so many extra options. Other defences such as suction ect are not effective except against weak opponents. I would strongly agree with Nigel and play natural bids with x for the Majors and 1NT as he suggests a M/m 2 suiter.

[mikeh]

the hog, on 2011-November-30, 18:17, said:

Other defences such as suction ect are not effective except against weak opponents.

Really?

[the hog]

mikeh, on 2011-November-30, 19:25, said:

Really?

In my experience, really!

[Siegmund]

One more vote for "transfers are worst of all worlds" over a strong club (and not so hot over 1NT either imo.)

My personal simple preference is X,1D, and 1NT as CRASH, all the other bids natural. With my last reg p, we played Truscott (X=CH, 1NT=DS, 1D through 2C two touching suits, 2D upwards natural) and it worked ok too. Emphasis is on taking up space quickly and then getting out. To me that means if you have a normal overcalling hand you bid 2 of it rather than 1, and the only use for the super-cheap bids is something partner is likely to be able to bounce.

Doesn't matter too much exactly which suit combinations you agree to, long as they enable you to take up space effectively.

[Cascade]

Double for majors and 1NT for minors is simple.

Suits are natural and make simple overcalls reasonably aggressively hoping for a fit and a raise especially when the vulnerability is suitable for a sacrifice.

After double of 1C you can play 1D to ask partner for their best major. This is similar to what many play after a 2C = majors overcall over 1NT.

Also play double for the majors after 1C P 1D X.

Raise aggressively to the two and three-level (and higher with more distribution).

[jillybean]

Thanks all. We decided simply to keep the old system of X=M 1N=m but I will keep this for future reference. We did just fine by gettting into their auctions whenever we could and learned quickly not to ask for meanings of bids after we had interfered, they didn't have good any agreements in competitive auctions.

[fromageGB]

Too late to impact your decision, but I echo Trinidad in saying that it is a waste of time - and a gift to the oppponents - to use double or 1♦. Let all your bids start at 1♥, and for something simple I use suction (or inverted psycho-suction). So a bid of 2♣ means either diamonds, or both majors. NT bids shows split suits. Bids mean the same even with a jump, just the higher the level the more pre-emptive you want to be. With a 4-4 2-suiter, I am happy to bid cheaply!

The important thing is to get in the bidding whenever you have any shape other than a 3333, and with an ambiguous bid. Experts will have decided how to handle it, but even they will be disadvantaged by the space you have taken away. Even if your bid makes no difference to the eventual contract, give them a chance to miss something.

The downside of suction is that responder can always pass and bid again, but play the variation that 2♣ means both minors or hearts, and his pass is risky. The bid is more risky for you, too, if you have hearts and end up in 2♣, but of course partner has some as he prefers clubs to diamonds, and if you are doubled you can always bid hearts.

The upside of any ambiguous bid (apart from removing bidding space) is that your suit is not known. Every precision player knows how to handle a known suit (whether bid naturally or transferred) but it is not so easy when they don't know what you have.

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2011-December-01, 08:50, said:

Thanks all. We decided simply to keep the old system of X=M 1N=m but I will keep this for future reference. We did just fine by gettting into their auctions whenever we could and learned quickly not to ask for meanings of bids after we had interfered, they didn't have good any agreements in competitive auctions.

This suggests that you are playing weak players who have adopted big club methods because they think it solves problems they couldn't handle in standard methods.....and they are right.....big club avoids many 'standard' problems, but only by creating new ones....interference over 1♣ being a big one.

As you play better opps, your 'getting into their auctions whenever we could', using basically natural methods, will rapidly become counterproductive.

I know that when I played in a serious, altho not particularly successful partnership, using a big club method, our biggest numbers in sectionals and regionals were against pairs who thought that they should 'get into' our auctions. 1100 or 1400 against 630 wasn't uncommon .


While Hog's experience tells him something different, my view is that ambiguous methods are best....not because of responder's problem over the overcall, but because of opener's problem over the advance.

When partner has overcalled, say, 2♥ showing either both minors with great shape or a weak jump overcall in spades, and responder doubles, showing some positive hand or some 5-8 or whatever they play, and I have shape, some spades, and a minor...I can jump. So with 3=4=1=5, I can, if the vulnerability and my values suggest, jump to 4♠.....this is pass or correct. Now opener, whose hand is virtually unlimited and not at all described, beyond having 16+ hcp, has to make a decision....and his methods have to cater to his opps belonging in spades...and should he be defending or bidding....or to the possiblity that HIS side belongs in spades! So is double takeout or penalty? Is pass forcing and if so, what do various bids mean? How does he show a 2♣ opener rather than a 1N opener? And so on.

Now, when you play against the Meckwells or the Berkowitz-Cohen players, they will handle this issue reasonably well, but my take is that well over 90% of the big clubbers will struggle if your auctions are ambiguous and apply maximal pressure.

[ggwhiz]

mikeh, on 2011-December-01, 12:51, said:

While Hog's experience tells him something different, my view is that ambiguous methods are best....not because of responder's problem over the overcall, but because of opener's problem over the advance.

I soooo agree with this.

Our first mission is to set the defence with light overcalls that may often be 4 cards and lead directing. At favourable we overcall 1♠ with a meager excuse and hope for a raise. Let them figure it out from there.