[mtvesuvius]

I am considering combining a Polish Club with a precision Club... What do you recommend to determine whether polish or Precision, and why? Does the strength of your opponent's matter? How about the form of scoring? Any comments/thoughts/ideas would be appreciated.

[TylerE]

Consult http://www.ecatsbridge.com/documents/docde...;Systems%2FOpen

Martens-Jassem.

[gwnn]

Two friends of mine, who are very good (by Romanian standards, anyway) play Polish when vulnerable and strong club with a 10-13 NT when non-vulnerable. I suppose this is because of their weak NT range.

[Gerben42]

Don't play 2 systems depending on vuln. unless you are playing in a pro partnership.

Otherwise, I would prefer a modernized WJ05.

[Free]

I'd say precision whenever opps are VUL

[awm]

You probably don't want to try playing two systems like this unless your partnership already has substantial experience playing at least one of the systems.

So I'd suggest, think about the system you've played substantially and decide if there are particular times that you feel like it puts you in an awkward position. Is it worse at some vulnerabilities or positions than others? If so, you might want to try the alternative method in these situations.

Personally, I feel pretty comfortable with a strong club method in all situations, and my experience (admittedly only a hundred boards or so) of playing polish club is not that positive. There is supposedly some advantage that the opponents are less able to interfere because you might have a weak notrump, but against this coping with interference is more annoying (because you might have a weak notrump) and when the opponents make some crazy bid over my precision club that they wouldn't make over a polish club, I actually get a good board pretty often too.

[akhare]

IMO, it's not worth going through the motions of learning two completely different system just out of fear of interference by opps. Also, I don't see how playing Polish Club when vul. solves the problem -- IMO, responder is at a disadvantage in competitive auctions over 1♣ because opener may hold the weak NT hand.

A simpler solution might just be to bump the point range on the 1♣ opening to 17+ when vul and open a 14-16 NT.

[Codo]

Forget the idea below the level of Meckwell.
Jassem himself talked about this and said, that the theoretical benefit is large but not large enough when you are no professional player.

[helene_t]

Come on guys, you sound very old. Playing two or three systems at the same time is a drop in the bucket of complexity a junior like Adam Kaplan plays already

[Tola18]

helene_t, on Mar 3 2009, 06:02 AM, said:

Come on guys, you sound very old. Playing two or three systems at the same time is a drop in the bucket of complexity a junior like Adam Kaplan plays already

Yeah, simply something a little refreshing for our good Adam. He is way too young to refresh himself by some other refreshments otherwise disponible for us oldies!



By the way. Is the weak NT vulnerable troubling you?

I had played quite some a 10-13NT in all zones without any trouble. We had of course a good wriggle system (Nilslands slinkningar; ie Nilslands wrigglies).

But I must confess: having a bad 10 counter in red zone I always chickened out and didnt opened with the 1NT, I passed instead.

Otherwise it worked very well, although we didnt even had very elaborated methods for the contested bidding if they bid suits against our NT.

[cwiggins]

Gerben42, on Mar 2 2009, 09:19 AM, said:

Otherwise, I would prefer a modernized WJ05.

What modernizations are you think of?

[keylime]

I agree - I think WJ05 is a good starting point with this.

[Rossoneri]

Wouldn't hurt to take a look at MickyB and David_C's Polish Club variant as well.

[Gerben42]

Quote

Otherwise, I would prefer a modernized WJ05.

What modernizations are you think of?

The most important ones are:

* Not using strong jump shifts.
* Including 18 - 21 ♦ hands into the Multi 2♦.
* Transfers after 1♣ + Dbl / overcall