[david_c]

In WJ05 we usually open 1♦ on minimum balanced hands with four diamonds. But many other Polish systems seem to prefer 1♣ (sometimes even with 5♦-3-3-2). Does anyone have an opinion on which is better?

It seems to me that if 1♦ promises an unbalanced hand, then this inference is very useful - much more useful than the fact that 1♣ tends to deny four diamonds in WJ05. But on the other hand, I suspect that when you do pick up a balanced hand with four diamonds, you will get better results if you are allowed to open this 1♦.

[Chamaco]

Agree.

Playing precision with variable NT (10-12 NT and 14-16 NT), we decided to move to a constant 1NT range (12+/15), so that 1D would be always REAL asnd promise an unbalanced hand.

This was a major improvement: the knowledge that 1D is unbalanced and has a real suit improves both constructive bidding (responder knows opener has shortness and a good ODR), as well as competitive bidding (more frequent partscore competition to 3D, pard can freely raise preemptively).

In my opinion these issues apply to Polish club too.
The only difference is that in Precision I'd open a 5332 with 5D as 1NT(unless great suit, concentrated values), whereas in polish club I would not want to open a minimum 5332 with 1D, because the 1C opener is already too much overloaded with hand-types.

[pbleighton]

Chamaco:

I play Precision with 14-16/10-12 also. I assume you now bid 2C with 5C4M routinely. How does this work out for you?

Peter

[Chamaco]

pbleighton, on Oct 2 2005, 04:27 PM, said:

Chamaco:

I play Precision with 14-16/10-12 also.  I assume you now bid 2C with 5C4M routinely.  How does this work out for you?

Peter

I like to do that only if clubs are good.
If clubs are not good and a (14)35, I prefer to distort the hand:

a. with a good 4 card major I'll open the major; pard shall bid assuming I have 5+M

b. with a good 3 cards in diamond I'll open 1D; pard shall bid assuming diamns are 4+

c. with no decent suit and full opening values I'll open 1NT with a singleton


Of course there are things that can backfire but I'll avoid opening 2C with a bad suit; also, bidding 3/4 card suits with concentration of honors is more likely to be lead-directing if opps buy the contract.

[DelfinoD]

david_c, on Oct 2 2005, 07:17 AM, said:

In WJ05 we usually open 1♦ on minimum balanced hands with four diamonds. But many other Polish systems seem to prefer 1♣ (sometimes even with 5♦-3-3-2). Does anyone have an opinion on which is better?

Not many other. I think only in WJ2000 you open 1♦ with 5+♦. Well I think that opening with 4+♦ is better, but if you open with 4+♦ why would you like to use WJ at all?

[Gerben42]

Quote

but if you open with 4+♦ why would you like to use WJ at all? 

Because it is a much better system than "standard"? The limitedness of the opening bid is a BIG plus in the system, as well as the ability to get a more controlled auction with strong hands.

I personally like opening 1♦ with at least a decent 4-card suit. So open any normal hand with, say, 4342 or so, with 1♦, but not something like

---

It's a frequency thing. The more cards you require for 1♦ the less it comes up but the better you can judge in competitive auctions, but the more often you bid a real suit the more often you are better placed. Where you think the optimum is is up to you.

This is true for both standard auction and Polish Club (even in standard I think you should open 1♣ on 4♠4♥3♦2♣). I played the style where 1♦ shows at least 4 cards but open 1♣ on 4 bad ♦ like the example hand above and really liked the inferences it had.

[hrothgar]

DelfinoD, on Oct 3 2005, 04:59 PM, said:

Not many other. I think only in WJ2000 you open 1♦ with 5+♦. Well I think that opening with 4+♦ is better, but if you open with 4+♦ why would you like to use WJ at all?

VERY old Polish club styles featured a 1♦ opening promising 5+ Diamonds. I'm pretty sure that this is a hold over from Vienna. Most of the "modern" version of Polish club have featured a 1♦ showing 4+ Diamonds.

Case in point: Matula's version of Polish CLub opens 1♦ with balanced hands containing a 4 card Diamond suit. WJ95 also featured a 4+ card 1♦ opening. WJ2000 is really something of an outlier...

[Flame]

The polish 1C is loaded compared to the standard 1C, while the polish 1D is just the opposite, so it make sense to take things off the 1C to the 1D and not vise versa. And also this isnt exactly a polih question, you can ask the same about the italians and others who open 1C on 2 and 1D on 4, the could also change it and open 1C on bal 4D,2C, the fact that they dont mke you think its better not to.

[helene_t]

Flame, on Oct 4 2005, 11:19 AM, said:

The polish 1C is loaded compared to the standard 1C, while the polish 1D is just the opposite, so it make sense to take things off the 1C to the 1D and not vise versa.

But in Standard, the follow-up after 1♣ is inefficient. If you play Walsh, the 1♦ response is less frequent than the more space-consuming major suit responses. And if you don't play Walsh, allthough the quantity of information exchanged is higher than by Walsh-players, it is less helpful information.

PC makes more efficent (though maybe not optimal) use of bidding space after 1♣ openings (as opposed to Standard I mean, not as opposed to 1♦), and therefore 1♣ should be more frequent in PC than in Standard.

[MickyB]

Yes - start playing transfer walsh responses to 1♣ and you'll quickly find yourself wanting to open 1♣ on all balanced hands.

I'm not sure how to work out which method is superior. How are the arguments different between standard and Polish? The only one I've come up with so far is that you can open 1♣ on only 2 in Polish Club without worrying you might play there.

[helene_t]

MickyB, on Oct 4 2005, 11:45 AM, said:

Yes - start playing transfer walsh responses to 1♣ and you'll quickly find yourself wanting to open 1♣ on all balanced hands.

I'm not sure how to work out which method is superior. How are the arguments different between standard and Polish? The only one I've come up with so far is that you can open 1♣ on only 2 in Polish Club without worrying you might play there.

I agree that Transfer Walsh is a fine convetion. It is difficult (impossible?) to play after a forcing 1♣ opening which may be a reason not to play PC.

But I disagree with your second comment. Actually, I think it's a weakness of Polish Club. I would rather play a non-forcing 1♣, that puts opps under more pressure.

The advantages are primarily ... well Gerben said it.

[DelfinoD]

Gerben42, on Oct 3 2005, 06:31 PM, said:

Quote

but if you open with 4+♦ why would you like to use WJ at all? 

Because it is a much better system than "standard"? The limitedness of the opening bid is a BIG plus in the system, as well as the ability to get a more controlled auction with strong hands.

This is true for both standard auction and Polish Club (even in standard I think you should open 1♣ on 4♠4♥3♦2♣). I played the style where 1♦ shows at least 4 cards but open 1♣ on 4 bad ♦ like the example hand above and really liked the inferences it had.

I don't really think it's much better. Do you know how was WJ designed? By a popular vote. People were voting on which conventions they like and that's how they made polish club. It's a pack of raqndomly selected convetnions. Tha'ts why it very artificial, and even advanced players have doubts what should they bid and what does it mean (there are so many versions of it).

I think that the time of polish club has passed, many young people in Poland use now more natural version of polish club, where you open 12-21pc and 1♦=4+♦ (1♣ with 4♠4♥3♦2♣ so called nasz system). And many of them learn SAYC at the beginning instead of WJ.

This is a typical problem. What do you bid in Polish club?

1♦ - 1♥
2♣ - ?

♠KWxx ♥KDxx ♦Dx ♣xxx

P. can have 5♣4♦ or 5♦4♣ and 2nt is of course game forcing... That's why I preffer SAYC.

There are so many asking bids in WJ, and I don't think that asking bidding is good after natural opening. And if you want to use relays, then you shoud use Strong Pass openings. it's much more effective

[mila85]

DelfinoD, on Oct 5 2005, 06:35 AM, said:

I don't really think it's much better. Do you know how was WJ designed? By a popular vote. People were voting on which conventions they like and that's how they made polish club. It's a pack of raqndomly selected convetnions. Tha'ts why it very artificial, and even advanced players have doubts what should they bid and what does it mean (there are so many versions of it).

Polish club is a very natural system eventhough it uses a lot of conventions.

Examples:
1♣-1♥
2nt..............shows 18+balanced without 3heards
Because of a convention (odwrotka - 2♦ shows strong club and 3c support) you can now bid naturaly (3♣ shows clubs).

1♦-1♠
1nt-2♣..........asks
2♥-2nt..........2♥=3spades and max, 2nt asks
?
Almost everybody uses here some convention - NMF or 2♣ as puppet to 2♦.
Spade fit is known but after 2nt the bidding is natural. We can find 4-4 minor fit or play 3nt with fit but bad distribution.

1♣-1M
2♣-2♦ ................. 2♣ shows 15+, 2♦ is GF
Because of this convention you can bid naturaly. You are in GF situation so you aren't afraid of parner pass.

[hrothgar]

DelfinoD, on Oct 5 2005, 02:35 PM, said:

 

>I don't really think it's much better. Do you know how was WJ designed?
>By a popular vote. People were voting on which conventions they like
>and that's how they made polish club.

Funny that... BWS is designed in much the same way. I'll note that in both cases you have some very good system designers working to create comprehensive systems out of popular treatments. With this said and done, I think that Polish Club as documented by Matula is MUCH better than either WJ2000 or WJ2005

>This is a typical problem. What do you bid in Polish club?
>
>1♦ - 1♥
>2♣ - ?
>
>♠KWxx ♥KDxx ♦Dx ♣xxx
>
>P. can have 5♣4♦ or 5♦4♣ and 2nt is of course game forcing...
>That's why I preffer SAYC.

Whats the problem? You pass in a known 4-3 fit.
On average it will play as well as if not better than the 5-2

Believe me, I'd much rather face this "problem" than deal with the many issue of SAYC. (No forcing minor suit raise, no agreement about vanilla sequences like 1M - 2m - 2N yada, yada, yada)

[Gerben42]

Quote

1♦ - 1♥
2♣ - ?

♠KWxx ♥KDxx ♦Dx ♣xxx

P. can have 5♣4♦ or 5♦4♣ and 2nt is of course game forcing... That's why I preffer SAYC.

This is no true, 2NT is invitational. Jassem experimented with 2NT forcing here, though, but found out that it didn't work.

Polish Club (Matula style) is not based on popular votes. It's a great system. I see WJ2005 as an improved version of that, although it still has some things I don't like (yuck, strong jump shifts )

One popular vote point is Wilkosz, which is banned in international play and wasn't removed from the system because it is better than the 2-suiters.

That's why my profile says "WJ2005 but prefer Wilkosz". Maybe I should write a book on "Polish Club, young player style".

[DelfinoD]

Gerben42, on Oct 6 2005, 03:28 AM, said:

This is no true, 2NT is invitational. Jassem experimented with 2NT forcing here, though, but found out that it didn't work.

Ok it's forcing in WJ2000 (I have the book) and invitational in WJ2005

And what do you think your partner thinks it is?

[DelfinoD]

Quote

Polish club is a very natural system eventhough it uses a lot of conventions.

Examples:
1♣-1♥
2nt..............shows 18+balanced without 3heards
Because of a convention (odwrotka - 2♦ shows strong club and 3c support) you can now bid naturaly (3♣ shows clubs).

Ok but is 3♣ 5♥4♣ or can it be 4♥4♣? noone knows...
What about 5♣4♦? You have to open 1♦ and after opps overcall you usually get 0% in matchpoints because you're playing a wrong suit.

Quote

1♣-1M
2♣-2♦ ................. 2♣ shows 15+, 2♦ is GF
Because of this convention you can bid naturaly. You are in GF situation so you aren't afraid of parner pass.

But that's not really natural. I can give you a better system than that without much thinking. The next bid is always relay, opener uses natural bids:

1♥ (5+♥) - 1♠ (relay)
2♣ (5+♥4+♣) - 2♦ (relay)
2nt (5♥4♣22) - 3♣ (relay)
3♦ (12-14pc) - 3♥ (relay)
3ba (1 ace) - .. and now asking for kings etc.

Thats a big precision... and partner never passes... etc.

But the problem of such a systems is overcall. Imagine a hand in WJ:
- AKWxxxx Axx AKx

1♣ - 4♠ - pass - pass - ?

That's a horrible problem, and it happens very often. When you bid 5♥ your p. gives you:

DWxxx x Wxxx xxx

When you use SAYC it's easy:

1♥ - 4♠ - pass - pass - x - pass...

I played many different systems, and I really prefer two types of them: maximum natural and maximum artificial.
If you really feel unconfortable with strong hands why don't you just use natural SAYC (better minor) openings base with:
- 2o1 game forcing (no more problems with strong hands without fit)
- inverted minors and 2nt GF responce in major (no more problems with strong hands with fit)
- 2♦ Multi (no more problems with 18-20pc nt opening and strong minor opening)

You can even play strong 2♥/♠ and for two suited preemptives use alternative 1nt - natural 15-17 or two suited 6-10 (well you can't play that everywere...).

Now you have absolutely no problems with any strong hands, the system is much more natural and has much less problems than WJ. And what is the most important it's not really affraid of opponets bidding.

[david_c]

Not wanting to go over that last post word by word, suffice to say: I don't agree with any of it

But it still makes a pleasant change to see someone sticking up for SAYC over WJ.

[mila85]

DelfinoD, on Oct 7 2005, 04:45 PM, said:

Quote

Polish club is a very natural system eventhough it uses a lot of conventions.

Examples:
1♣-1♥
2nt..............shows 18+balanced without 3heards
Because of a convention (odwrotka - 2♦ shows strong club and 3c support) you can now bid naturaly (3♣ shows clubs).

Ok but is 3♣ 5♥4♣ or can it be 4♥4♣? noone knows...

In most of the systems 3m is used as artifical checback for 3c major fit. In WJ you can show naturaly 4card minor. Perfect tool in slam bidding - and absolutely natural.

Quote

What about 5♣4♦? You have to open 1♦ and after opps overcall you usually get 0% in matchpoints because you're playing a wrong suit.

I haven't wrote that it's a good systmem (eventhough I think so). I only wanted to say that it's very natural despite it does not look so.

I don't think that it's 0 in MP. When I compare it to SA. 1♣ opening shows 3+♣ 11-20. 1♦ opening in WJ shows 4+♦, 11-17 and unbalanced hand. Who is in better position after interference?

Quote

Quote

1♣-1M
2♣-2♦ ................. 2♣ shows 15+, 2♦ is GF
Because of this convention you can bid naturaly. You are in GF situation so you aren't afraid of parner pass.

But that's not really natural. I can give you a better system than that without much thinking. The next bid is always relay, opener uses natural bids:

1♥ (5+♥) - 1♠ (relay)
2♣ (5+♥4+♣) - 2♦ (relay)
2nt (5♥4♣22) - 3♣ (relay)
3♦ (12-14pc) - 3♥ (relay)
3ba (1 ace) - .. and now asking for kings etc.

Thats a big precision... and partner never passes... etc.

Sorry, relay bidding is not natural.
In the sequence I showed can 2♦ start reley sequence. But it doesn't. It establish GF and the bidding is natural with all its advanteges.

Quote

But the problem of such a systems is overcall. Imagine a hand in WJ:
- AKWxxxx Axx AKx

1♣ - 4♠ - pass - pass - ?

That's a horrible problem, and it happens very often. When you bid 5♥ your p. gives you:

DWxxx x Wxxx xxx

When you use SAYC it's easy:

1♥ - 4♠ - pass - pass - x - pass...

1) NAMYATS is very good in WJ.
2) I would double, not bid 5♥.
3) No system is perfect.

Quote

I played many different systems, and I really prefer two types of them: maximum natural and maximum artificial.
If you really feel unconfortable with strong hands why don't you just use natural SAYC (better minor) openings base with:
- 2o1 game forcing (no more problems with strong hands without fit)
- inverted minors and 2nt GF responce in major (no more problems with strong hands with fit)
- 2♦ Multi (no more problems with 18-20pc nt opening and strong minor opening)

You can even play strong 2♥/♠ and for two suited preemptives use alternative 1nt - natural 15-17 or two suited 6-10 (well you can't play that everywere...).

Now you have absolutely no problems with any strong hands, the system is much more natural and has much less problems than WJ. And what is the most important it's not really affraid of opponets bidding.

Strong club is not played because of strong hands. Its advantage is in other limited openings.
My post wasn't about opening scheme. In polish club you open artifical 1♣ and use some convections in later bidding. But the idea of it is very natural.

[MickyB]

david_c, on Oct 2 2005, 01:17 PM, said:

In WJ05 we usually open 1♦ on minimum balanced hands with four diamonds. But many other Polish systems seem to prefer 1♣ (sometimes even with 5♦-3-3-2). Does anyone have an opinion on which is better?

It seems to me that if 1♦ promises an unbalanced hand, then this inference is very useful - much more useful than the fact that 1♣ tends to deny four diamonds in WJ05. But on the other hand, I suspect that when you do pick up a balanced hand with four diamonds, you will get better results if you are allowed to open this 1♦.

Having thought about this a bit more - I think that opening 1♦ and rebidding 1NT to show precisely a 5332 is inefficient, playing either a multi-club or natural 1 level openings. If you are going to open 1♣ on all weak NTs I think you need to use an artificial 1NT rebid. This is what I do in one partnership (which uses a 1♣ opener as natural or balanced):

1♦:1♥, 1N = both minors, clubs at least as long as diamonds
1♦:1♥, 2♣ = both minors, diamonds longer than clubs
1♦:1♠, 1N = both minors, either way around
1♦:1♠, 2♣ = 5♦4♥

This post has been edited by MickyB: 2005-October-23, 06:22