[mohitz]

OK, so you sit down to play in a ten board team match. Your opponents arrive shortly as you say hello. They hand you a piece of paper with their agreements listed.

You see

1C = 12-13 hcp, any shape
1D = 14-15 hcp, any shape
1H = 16-17 hcp, any shape
1S = 18-19 hcp, any shape
1N = 20-21 hcp, any shape
2C = 22-23 hcp, any shape
2D = 24-25 hcp, any shape

and so on.

Responses by responder are also point showing. The first step shows something like 0-5 hcp, the next step shows 6-8 hcp and so on.

You turn the page to look at their defensive agreements. If let's say we open 1H, their bids have the same meaning as when they would have opened. So, they will pass with anything less than 18 hcps. With 18-19 hcps, they bid 1S.

You stare at them in the hope that they will start laughing and admit they were kidding. They are NOT.

You have a few minutes to come up with a defense. How would you defend?

[Jlall]

Over 1C and 1D I would play X=majors or 18+, and bid normally.

1S I'd play X= spades, 1N= majors, 2N=minors

Over 1N I'd play X=majors, others = nat (2N minors)

Over 2C+ I'd play X=lead directing, 2N=majors, others=nat

Over 1H I'm not sure, I guess I'd play X=majors, 1N=minors.

[jukmoi]

mohitz, on Apr 6 2010, 01:55 AM, said:

OK, so you sit down to play in a ten board team match. Your opponents arrive shortly as you say hello. They hand you a piece of paper with their agreements listed.

You see

1C = 12-13 hcp, any shape
1D = 14-15 hcp, any shape
1H = 16-17 hcp, any shape
1S = 18-19 hcp, any shape
1N = 20-21 hcp, any shape
2C = 22-23 hcp, any shape
2D = 24-25 hcp, any shape

and so on.

Responses by responder are also point showing. The first step shows something like 0-5 hcp, the next step shows 6-8 hcp and so on.

You turn the page to look at their defensive agreements. If let's say we open 1H, their bids have the same meaning as when they would have opened. So, they will pass with anything less than 18 hcps. With 18-19 hcps, they bid 1S.

You stare at them in the hope that they will start laughing and admit they were kidding. They are NOT.

You have a few minutes to come up with a defense. How would you defend?

Just lighten up a bit WJOs, opening bid and overcalling standards. Anyway I would have a good feeling about how the match is going to end.

[CamHenry]

There's two situations here. One is where you're calling before them; the other is where they make an opening bid.

If your side deals, make an opening bid on the slightest provocation. They appear not to be able to make a penalty double; 4-card weak 2s may be your friend if NV.

If they deal and open, make a 4-card overcall unless they KNOW when doubles are penalties.

If they deal and pass, keep the weak openings sound-ish in second, but do shade them a little. Shade one-level openings as well, particularly 1M.

If you're in third seat, open normally with a good hand but psych as high as you dare with dross.

This seems to be a system that cries out to have you take up a level of bidding. They don't seem to be able to make penalty doubles very often; that's likely to mean you just have to bid once to kill their auction. I suspect they'll have trouble playing in good partscores; just hope the cards are reasonably flat and partscore boards are the order of the day.

[kenberg]

There is often some need to inquire a little deeper when people bring in these weird systems. You say over 1H they will pass if they lack the 18 points for 1S. But you haven't, I think, said what 1H-(X) is. It is also important to know if, when you open 1C they will always bid 1D whenever they hold 14 or 15 points. Saying that 1D would only show points, not shape, is slightly different from saying that they will always actually bid the 1D with 14 or 15. Fortunately I have had only infrequent experience with such things, but whatever experience I have had leads me to recommend caution in taking their words at face value.

I probably would not change my own offensive structure all that much except I think I would toss out negative doubles: 1C-(1H): Partner may have been planning on responding 1H, he may even have six and lho have none, and I think he needs the X to show this. This depends on 1H really being any shape, and that in turn at least partly depends on what a double of 1D would have been.

If they open, I would scrap Michaels. it's a good trade. We give up the ability to show 5-5, they give up the ability to show anything at all about their shape. And we need (1D)-2D to show a diamond overcall. Doubles of 1m should be take-out, emphasis on the majors. We may have to scramble a bit when we don't have a major fit but we can cope. If they open 1H or more then it will often be their hand and some pre-emptive action seems right. Although I am not a great fan of DONT over the standard NT, I can see using 2 level overcalls of 1M in this way here. Your side is on its way to a fit or partial fit, all they know is they have quite a few points somewhere.


I think the main thing is to not change everything around so much that you have no idea what your own bids mean. And ask for a bit more detail from them. They will tell you they play exactly what is on the sheet. Then hold them to it. True, people are allowed to use their judgment. They are not allowed to withhold information about what their agreements actually are. Maybe my own experiences have been atypical, but I have come not to trust these things.

[cherdanno]

I hope this happened Thursday last week.

[jjbrr]

Uh. Just bid normally and roll your eyes at them every time they do something competely ridiculous would be my suggested defense.

How are you not going to completely stomp a pair who plays something like this?

Serious answer: Bid a lot. Double of artificial bids shows that suit.

[gwnn]

awesome system would love to try to play it after a few beers.

[jdonn]

I would play over:
1♣: Double 12+ to 15 balanced or 18+, 2♦ majors.
1♦: Double 13 to 15 balanced or 18+, 2♥ NF majors, 3♦ F majors.
1NT: Whatever notrump defense you play (assuming penalty doubles aren't involved!) for simplicity.
Over all others I would play double is the suit they opened, all notrump bids are minors (probably any 2 suits or major/minor is better but just for one round....) and the rest natural.

Another reasonable option is over 1♥ to play double is hearts, 1♠ is natural, and 1NT+ is as though they opened 1NT with our 1NT overcall being equivalent to whatever double of 1NT would be. But I think that's inferior since I'd rather just overcall right away for more preemption.

Something like suction could work over their strong bids but I wouldn't bother, they are already at such a disadvantage that I don't want to randomize that much for our side.

This round should be easy.

[Phil]

I don't see any reason to ever make a point showing double over 1♣ / 1♦. Presumably opener's next call is natural, and I can do something then, unless responder warns me off with a positive response. Surely we aren't headhunting at the one level trying to exploit some systemic weakness?

I would use double as a lead director over 1♣ and 1♦ and play the rest natural.

Justin's continuations over 1♠ (and 1♥) and higher make sense. I think we are in a defensive mode at that point.

Even some kind of Woolsey could make sense over 1♥/1♠/1N and would be fun to play.

Like the others, I find the inbreds that play these kind of systems generally cannot follow suit, so I wouldn't worry a lot about it. There's a few home-brewed systems around here and I don't fret about it.

[kenrexford]

The defense is obvious. Sort of like Unusual-vs-Unusual. I'd use step overcalls.

Fr example, if they open 1♦, I'd pass with 0-5, double with 6-8, 1♥ with 9-10, 1♠ with 11-12, etc. Similar with Advancer.

[WellSpyder]

Were you brought up on Minibridge, Ken? Sounds like by the time you have had a full round of bidding you ought to be able to work out if someone has miscounted their points....

[aguahombre]

I would play Ken's U/U, but inverted ---starting with pass=16+. (and narrower increments)

However, since all overcalls above 2H would show 0-2 HCP, they can show specific two-suiters.

[jdonn]

Ken's defense is the "your system is so awful that I feel bad for you so I'll level the playing field by using the same system myself" defense.

[billw55]

I'd say open light, and four card majors, that should go a loooong way to avoiding interference.

As for when they open, maybe just natural over 1m, Cappelletti over 1M, and x for strong hands.

[ggwhiz]

Overcall and open 1 spade to show zero - 20 any shape.

OK, maybe 0-10

[gwnn]

Insufficient information. What do the bids from 3NT onwards mean? Even though it is not universally known that the maximum possible HCP in 1 hand is 37, almost everyone knows of the first approximation of 40.

[1eyedjack]

gwnn, on Apr 6 2010, 07:08 PM, said:

Insufficient information. What do the bids from 3NT onwards mean? Even though it is not universally known that the maximum possible HCP in 1 hand is 37, almost everyone knows of the first approximation of 40.

My guess is that they zoom into distribution, 3-3-3-4, then 3-3-4-3, then 3-4-3-3, and finally 4-3-3-3, upon which responder should be able to place the final contract.

[helene_t]

I have some experience with such systems as I have been teaching the Looier system to beginners and have been playing quite a bid at the Looier club, and also there is a pair at the Amsterdam club who play a system even more unplayable than Looier though not quite as bad as the OP system, but it's close. Both systems have lots of bids that show a narrow point ranger but say nothing against shape.

Mind you, some of those players are very good card players and show reasonable judgment in the auction, to the extent that their ridiculous system give them some clues they can use. Against such opponents it is a good idea to preempt very aggressively. There is no need to psyche or use artificial preempts. They have no defense against simple natural preempts so just play that.

Against 1♣ and 1♦ you can put all you constructive hands into pass, dbl or the lowest two steps. They will almost never be able to preempt you, so if the board belongs to you, you will get a second shot. All two-level overcalls should be weakish.

Of course they could also be total baloocas in which case you obviously want to bid disciplined.

[1eyedjack]

I generally find that when the opponents are playing inferior methods then it is in my interests to allow them free reign (encourage them, even) to employ those methods with the maximum frequency. Open a preempt, for example, and you level the playing field that was already stacked in your favour.

The major difference in this case is their announced defence to normal opening bids is worse than their uncontested methods.

I might even play 3 card major openings, if I have time enough to discuss them.