[luke warm]

do you think there's a *best* way to play against interfence to the 1C bid? to me it doesn't necessarily make sense to continue as if no interference (for example, if control responses, continue.. if relay, continue, etc)... it should be possible to have bids that show shape, strength, willingness to penalize, etc... have any of you thought on this and if so what have you come up with? thanks

[glen]

Answered wrong question - ignore/delete this

[inquiry]

officeglen, on Jan 28 2006, 01:58 PM, said:

Likely hard to figure out "the best". Imo, the most fun is:

http://bridgeguys.co...1ClubAshton.pdf

"Rumble is the most aggressive in-your-face method you can effectively play against strong one club"

Rumble is fine, but i think what jimmy is wanting is how best for the CLUB opening side to continue AFTER interference. That is a horse of a different color.

[Gerben42]

What is a SAF 1C?

[hrothgar]

The answer is far too dependent on the original methods being used...

[luke warm]

ok richard, that's kinda what i was wondering... that seems to imply that the original responses determine how to handle interference, and i was trying to see if that was necessarily so... responses are shape relays

saf is strong artificial forcing

[hrothgar]

luke warm, on Jan 28 2006, 10:59 PM, said:

ok richard, that's kinda what i was wondering... that seems to imply that the original responses determine how to handle interference, and i was trying to see if that was necessarily so... responses are shape relays

Please note:

I am NOT claiming that shape relays are necessarily better than controls or natural bidding or whatever. Rather, I think the additional memory load of switching from controls to relays is likely to be highly problematic.

I also think that the strength of the initial 1♣ opening is likely to be quite important.

From my perspective, the "big" decision likely revolves arround prioritizing semi-positives or strong hands...

[Free]

What I use with Willem is following:
over 1♣-Dbl-?:
Pass = semi positive (1♦ now relays => scheme =)
RDbl = double negative, not triple (1♦ now relays => scheme =)
1♦ = triple negative (no relays)
1♥+ = GF like original scheme

over 1♣-1♦-?:
Pass = semi positive (Dbl now relays => scheme =)
Dbl = double negative (no relays)
1♥+ = GF like original scheme

over 1♣-1♥-?:
Pass = semi positive (Dbl now relays => scheme +1) or GF hoping to penalize
Dbl = double negative (no relays)
1♠+ = GF like original scheme +1

over 1♣-1♠-?:
Pass = semi positive (Dbl now relays => scheme +2) or GF hoping to penalize
Dbl = double negative (no relays)
1NT+ = GF like original scheme +2

after intervention with 1NT or higher:
Dbl = semi positive / GF no 5 card
pass = double negative
suit = GF 5+ card

note 1: we also use shape relays first.
note 2: when opps intervene at 1-level, we gain when semi positive, and lose minimum space when GF. So if you play against us and want to help, bid at 1-level

[Gerben42]

Thanks, thought something South African...

Depends on what you use without intereference.
But include a negative double.