[Miron]

Do you have a good defence against precision 1♣?
Please DO NOT answer YES/NO

[hrothgar]

Maybe

[Miron]

[Gerben42]

Quote

Maybe

ROFL!
**********
In my opinion there are two kinds of SUIT bids that "work" against Precision.

A. Natural bids
B. Bids that do not show a known suit, but one of the possibilities is the suit bid.

Example of A: 1♠ shows ♠
Example of B: 2♦ shows either ♦ or ♥+♠

Suit bids that do NOT work are those that show a known suit but are not natural (for example 1♥ promising ♠), and bids that do not show a known suit but exclude the suit bid (for example 2♦ Multi: either ♥ or ♠). These can easily be doubled to show "it's our hand".

NT bids and Double of course have the problem that you're not going to play what you bid. That doesn't mean that 1♣X should be a penalty double of ♣ and 1NT a big balanced hand, far from it, you just need to be aware of this.

SIMPLE DEFENCE:

X = ♥ + ♠
1NT = ♣ + ♦
Rest = natural

Easy

*************
NASTY DEFENCE:

X = ♣
1♦ = ♦
1♥ = ♥
1♠ = ♠

(so far not really nasty, wait for it)

1NT = ♣♥ or ♦♠
2♣ = ♣ or ♦♥
2♦ = ♦ or ♥♠
2♥ = ♥ or ♠♣
2♠ = ♠ or ♣♦
2NT = as 1NT
etc.

Edit: If you plan to play this, be sure to talk about the continuations and what it means when they double.

This post has been edited by Gerben42: 2006-February-02, 07:46

[Miron]

Why the first level is natural?
I have were good experiences with one level bids, a lot of pairs is not exactly agreed on defence.

[hrothgar]

Here are my preferred methods

Pass = Strong or weak

X = Both majors

Typical example hands (minimum/maximum)

♠ KJT2 ♥QT98 ♦73 ♣762
♠ AJ763 ♥ KT52 ♦ 9 ♣ 763

1♣ = Lead directing (typically a canape overcall)

Typical example hands

♠ 92 ♥ 874 ♦ QT853 ♣ KQ3
♠ 54 ♥ T87432 ♦ 63 ♣ AQJ

1♦ = Lead directing (typically a canape overcall)
1♥ = Lead directing (typically a canape overcall)

1♠ = Spades

♠ AJ72 ♥ 52 ♦ QT62 ♣ 763
♠ AQJ73 ♥ 74 ♦ 843 ♣ K5
♠ AJ843 ♥ K742 ♦ 672 ♣ 4

1N = 2 suited with Spades and a minor

♠ AQ52 ♥ 673 ♦ QT632 ♣ 3
♠ AJT62 ♥ 4 ♦ 52 ♣ KJ942

2♣ = Clubs and Hearts

♠ 7632 ♥ QJ73 ♦ 4 ♣ KQ42
♠ 5 ♥ AQJ9 ♦ Q42 ♣ KQ8742

2♦ = Diamonds and Hearts

♠ Q52 ♥ KT52 ♦ QT62 ♣ 62
♠ 42 ♥ KJT82 ♦ AQ932 ♣ 3

2♥ = Hearts

♠ 73 ♥ QJT642 ♦ K72 ♣ 732
♠ K4 ♥ AQT9732 ♦ 73 ♣ 82

2♠ = Spades

2N = Clubs or (Diamonds and a major)

3C = Minors

♠ 4 ♥ 863 ♦ KJ762 ♣ KQ73
♠ 2 ♥ 63 ♦ AT572 ♣ AKT73

3♦ = Diamonds
3♥ = Majors

[Gerben42]

Okay here's why the 1-level is natural.

First, you're not taking a lot of space with your bid so you want partner to be able to beef it upto the 3-level if his hand calls for it.

Second, you may have a hand that just wants to set the lead for partner if it comes to that. Since such bids are too dangerous at other levels you need to make them at the 1-level, and if it's not natural partner will not get it right that often.

Third, 1-level bids are easy to defend. If pairs have no agreement against 1-level interference you were probably going to beat them if you would have passed also

[Free]

There have been like 20 threads about this, my favorite is still DOSC.

[Gerben42]

Notice BTW that Hrothgar's method follow the rule that suit bids cannot be doubled to show points and then wait for a second chance. In his case, a bid in a suit shows that suit, possibly in combination with another suit but that's not important.

In that respect it must be classified as a "good defence". Sorry Free, I don't like the 1-level bids in your DOSC. Also against my regular partner and myself bidding 1♠ won't "destroy" most of our regular system. Pushing up the relay 1 step is not the end of the world, anyway (take away 1♦ 1♥ 1♠, gain Dbl and Pass). Except that's not what we play. Instead we push up the relay TWO steps, pass with "it's our hand" and double for good measure with weak hands (0 - 5).

I'm sure it works for you and you are very happy with it but I would want more opponents to play your defence when I open a strong Club. Maybe this is because I am among the lucky few who put work into interference auctions

[Flame]

http://squeezingthedummy.blogspot.com/2006...trong-club.html

[csdenmark]

Defensive strong artificial openings

[inquiry]

What I like....

DBL = ♣'s
1♦ = ♥'s
1♥ = ♠
1♠ = 4♠ and longer minor (raptor) can also have 5♠ and 5 minor, weak
1NT = 4♥ and longer minor (raptor), can have 5♥ too, see 2NT
2♣ = shows ♦, or ♥ and ♠ two suiter
2♦ = shows ♥, or ♠/♣ two suiter
2♥ = shows ♠, or minor two suiter
2♠ = shows ♠, ♦ two suiter
2NT = shows exceptional ♥, ♣ two suiter (use 1NT otherwise)
3 bids = preempt in bid suit.

[Miron]

Summary of hrothgar's method
(I need to see it in few lines to understand it :-)
------------------------------------
pass = strong or weak
x = ♥ & ♠
1♣♦♥ = Lead directing (canape style)
1♠ = ♠
1NT = ♠ & minor
2♣ = ♣ & ♥
2♦ = ♦ & ♥
2♥ = ♥
2♠ = ♠
2NT = ♣ or ♦ & ♥♠
3♣ = ♣ & ♦
3♦ = ♦
3♥ = ♥ & ♠

[Free]

Gerben42, on Feb 2 2006, 03:30 PM, said:

In that respect it must be classified as a "good defence". Sorry Free, I don't like the 1-level bids in your DOSC. Also against my regular partner and myself bidding 1♠ won't "destroy" most of our regular system. Pushing up the relay 1 step is not the end of the world, anyway (take away 1♦ 1♥ 1♠, gain Dbl and Pass). Except that's not what we play. Instead we push up the relay TWO steps, pass with "it's our hand" and double for good measure with weak hands (0 - 5).

I'm sure it works for you and you are very happy with it but I would want more opponents to play your defence when I open a strong Club. Maybe this is because I am among the lucky few who put work into interference auctions

We've been playing this against quite a lot of good opponents, and we've even tested it against our own system (also strong ♣). About 95% of the time we get to a decent spot in the worst case scenario (for example 2X*-2 when opps have game, or even makable contracts). Btw, we also lift our relays +2 steps in this situation, and it can be a real pain in the ass when your relays suddenly pass 3NT! Anyway, if I can get your relays up 2 steps without having problems of my own, what's my problem?

I'm not going to try convincing people of the method, since opinions can't be changed anyway. I just know it works for me and my partners.

[Echognome]

We play the following as it is similar to our 1NT defense, so less pain on the memory. It has been reasonably effective without taking us for a number.

X = ♥+♠
1♦ = any single suit (rarely used)
1♥ = ♥+minor (4 is fine)
1♠ = ♠+minor (4 is fine)
1NT = ♣+♦
2X = wonder bid (that suit or the other three)

We vary our strength/distribution requirements according to vulnerability.

[Double !]

I kind of enjoy playing TRASH where every bid shows either the next highest suit (X = diamonds) or the two suits after that. At least it's relatively easy on the memory, but don't ask me how. I forget.

But, on first glance, Ben's defense looks quite interesting.

DHL

[Al_U_Card]

x=majors
1NT=minors
1D=D and a major (better D)
1H or 1S= that suit and a minor (better major)
2 level is weak single suited.

[han]

I like the following basis for a defensive convention to 1C:

1H =hearts.
1S =spades.
2C =clubs.
2D =diamonds.

I agree with what Justin wrote in his blog, entering the auction for the sake of it is not good. Partner should have some faith in your overcalls because he needs to be able to raise to the 2 or 3 level.

One other point that I haven't seen mentioned. When you have a (not so strong) 2-suiter but one suit is much better than the other, make a 1-suited overcall in your best suit. Not only will this much better in the defense (lead directing as well as not giving away your distribution), the 2-suited overcalls will often help them to find their best contract, and allows them to make cuebids that were otherwise not available.

[luke warm]

i play
x=C and D or D only
2c=D and H or H only
1d=H and S or S only
1h=S and C or C only
1s=D and S
1nt=C and H

any bid at any level means the same ... i also like this over the 1D response to 1C (shifted), over strong 2C, and over 2D waiting after 2C

[Sigi_BC84]

Gerben42, on Feb 2 2006, 02:43 PM, said:

Suit bids that do NOT work are those that show a known suit but are not natural (for example 1♥ promising ♠), and bids that do not show a known suit but exclude the suit bid (for example 2♦ Multi: either ♥ or ♠). These can easily be doubled to show "it's our hand".

I understand that non-forcing artificial bids put more pressure on the precision pair, since responder does not get a guaranteed second opportunity to make a call.

However, your argument cited would also work against popular (and working) anti-NT conventions (e.g. 2♣ = Ms or 2♦ = Multi). If they work against a strong NT, why shouldn't they (quite) equally apply against a strong club (which is quite often a strong NT opener anyway)?

E.g. if the bidding goes (1NT)-2♦*-(X), opener also knows that it's their hand, but we have got them out of their NT and disturbed their methods. Likewise against a strong club (we have disturbed their methods while odds were on that it was their hand anyway).

Curious,
Sigi