[mikestar13]

[quote name='mycroft' timestamp='1333650539' post='627888']
I've said frequently that my keys to a successful defence of a strong club is to get to 2 or 3 of a fit by the time it gets around to opener's second bid - and then get out. <snip>.

Best summary I've seen (among many good ones). Against good opponents, this is much more effective than the more complicated stuff. Truscott gives them 2 cuebids to play with, Crash gives them none but leaves partner far less likely to be able to give that extremely useful jump raise to 3 with a good fit. (Never mind the chance of convention forgets when playing something weird.) Here in North America where 2/1 is the norm, my favorite method is to look at my hand and decide the right level to preempt against a natural 1♣, and then consider bidding one more.

I have found the double=5-8 the most useful counter for the very reason mycroft cites: +300 looks damn good if game wouldn't be bid and awesome when game would be bid but goes down, both more likely occurrences than when responder has 9+. Also a factor is that making a 5-8 double on a directionless 10 count is much safer than making a 9+ double on a directionless 7 count. (Especially important against Crash and the like, but not trivial vs. natural overcalls.)

[JLOGIC]

I think all of the fancy defenses are misguided. Almost every good pair I have played against (and I've played strong club in all of my regular partnerships) have played X=majors NT=minors.

Personally, I think minors is a pretty stupid hand type to show. I like X=majors and 1NT=more majors, like 5-5. Joe likes X=majors, NT=minors 2D=5-5+ majors, but I would much rather have a natural 2D than a 1N for the minors bid. Minors is the hand type where we're least likely to declare, and it doesn't hurt their bidding much when you bid 1N showing 2 known suits, they now have 2 cuebids plus they can double and do something later, etc. Even when I am 5-5 in M+m, I rarely desire to show my other suit, it will just help them too much if they declare knowing 10 of my cards, and if my minor is unknown it will be hard for partner to preempt immediately and effective, and it is not that likely we need to bid 5m and won't be able to do so otherwise.

Just because they play strong club doesn't mean you're about to get a zero/lose 13 imps, you don't have to go psycho. Suction in particular which I played a lot of when I was younger was very ineffective ime and bad.

[akhare]

+1 for natural methods are best chorus.

Pard and I play a natural defence vs. 1C (being strong club players ourselves) (with X = majors and 1N = minors on occasion).

We have faced Suction (and the better psycho variant), CRASH etc. but they aren't very effective because fourth hand can seldom advance to the 3+ level before opener gets to rebid.

[dake50]

Amsbury used jump overcalls here 20y ago:
2S: WJO. If X, sit.
or 3-suiter w/o spades. If X, SOS red.
or touching 5-5. If X, bid lower.
2H,2D,2C similar.
Add ParadoX responses - this fit or partner
corrects to an implied fit, and it becomes formidable.

[awm]

I think it's misguided to be too focused on points in these auctions. Competitive bidding is much more about finding your fit (and degree of fit) than anything else. Points are good sometimes for judging "what you can make" but the goal in competition isn't always a making contract. You can win a great number of imps or mps by pushing opponents up a level (where their contract fails) or forcing them to guess which game or slam to bid instead of a having a scientific auction, or sacrificing against some making contract.

It's true that sometimes you can make a game after the opponents open 1♣ strong, just as you can sometimes make a game after they open 1NT strong. It's rare, but it does happen. However, overwhelmingly often when you can make a game it's because you have a big fit somewhere and some shape. This means if you bid based on shape and fit, you would bid these games anyway even if you had never communicated the number of hcp you held. It is true that you would also bid some games that don't make this way (because you never figured out how many high cards you have, and you might not have enough) but in those cases it's inevitable that the opponents could make a game of their own...

As far as defenses go, I am a big fan of psycho-suction at NV. It has a lot of the advantages of natural bids (lots of NF calls) but also lets you show all sorts of two-suiters (in a way that doesn't give opponents an easy cue). Opponents who don't have a lot of experience against this sort of defense will also frequently stumble against it because of the high frequency of artificial-but-very-non-forcing calls.

[Phil]

Whatever you decide to play, one level bids need to be lead directing. You are getting an advantage with RHO opening 1♣ instead of 1N, or 2N, or something else.

I also play CRASH (x, 1N and 2♣) and I like it a lot, as long as partner knows how to stir the pot with the advances. There's still confusion and preemption in my view, even against good pairs, and those that think they can sit down and say "Meckwell Lite"? "Sure", and cope with everything.

Bids of 2♦ and higher are that suit or the next higher. Its something I've played for a few years now and it seems to create problems, even though you lose a little bounce like you do with multi.

[nige1]

dake50, on 2012-April-05, 18:48, said:

Amsbury used jump overcalls here 20y ago:
2S: WJO. If X, sit.
or 3-suiter w/o spades. If X, SOS red.
or touching 5-5. If X, bid lower.
2H,2D,2C similar.
Add ParadoX responses - this fit or partner
corrects to an implied fit, and it becomes formidable.

Amsbury seems OK except for the 3-suiter option (3-suiters are usually good defensively).

My favourite is:

1N = ♠ + Minor.
2N = ♥ + Another.
3N OR _X = Minors.
Other bids = Nat

[Statto]

the hog, on 2012-April-05, 03:51, said:

Who cares? The system is crap. Simple is by far the most effective, and I know this from years of playing a big club system. Ask big clubbers what they love to play against and it is silly stuff like Truscott or Crash etc.

That's interesting, as Truscott was recommended to me very recently (well, about a year ago) by someone who has just achieved national selection. Maybe it depends on the defences against the defences. What is your defence against Truscott?

[Statto]

32519, on 2012-April-05, 00:55, said:

The likelihood is therefore greater that the 1♣ opener has 16-19 HCP balanced

FYP . We play 1♣...1NT as 16-19 balanced, and when partner opens 1♣ and I bid 1♦, it seems to be almost inevitable that partner's next bid will be 1NT, I would guess 4 times in 5.

[olien]

If you want a mix of natural and artificiality over an opponents strong club, you might consider a defence that I've heard called 'psycho-suction' where a suit bid shows either the suit you're bidding or the next two suits and notrump bids show non-touching suits. That being said, I am also a fan of bidding naturally and having partner be able to freely raise my suit knowing that its a real suit. Meckwell play X for the majors and notrump for the minors over a strong club and they are clearly not afraid of complexity, so if its good enough for them, its good enough for me.

[paulg]

John Armstrong, who was in Britain's best strong club pair, always said that any one-level overcall that did not show spades was a waste of time

[32519]

The disadvantage of a 1♣ opening is that you haven’t shown a suit yet. Good opponents can exploit that. Good opponents with the right ammunition will bid aggressively and intelligently to try to foul up your communications.

The best strategy when the opponents enter the auction after a 1♣ opening is to ignore the interference as much as possible. Any bidding the opponents do in an attempt to interfere can come back to haunt them when the strong clubber becomes declarer. The information conveyed by the opponents often helps declarer solve otherwise difficult problems.

It is for this very reason that I like to place some sort of minimum requirement before interfering over 1♣. If my interference is made on a ridiculously low HCP range, the probability increases that the partner of the 1 clubber has values to continue with a meaningful auction. Depending on the form of the interference, the 1 clubbers partner can X, XX or bid to show 5-8 HCP or 8+ depending on your agreements/bidding style.

Three defensive systems mentioned in this thread are listed below in no order of preference:

1. Mathe
Very simple: X = 4-4 in the majors, 1NT = 4-4 in the minors. Higher level of NT shows more distributional hands.
2. CRASH (Colour / Rank / Shape)
Different variations exist. One version: X = 2-suits of the same colour, 1D = 2-suits of the same rank, 1NT = 2-suits of the same shape. Bids of 1H, 1S, 2C and 2D show single suited hands.
3. Truscott
Different variations exist. One version: Jump overcall = natural. A simple overcall = suit bid plus the next higher ranking suit. Direct double = the two non-touching suit combinations i.e. ♣ + ♥. 1NT shows the other two non-touching suits i.e. ♦ + ♠. After 1♣-Pass-1♦-X now shows ♦ + ♠. 1NT now shows ♣ + ♥.

Pass can be strong or weak. When strong, you are guaranteed a second bite at the apple as the 1♣ bidders partner is forced to respond.

Simplicity is favoured as being the most effective.

JLogic said:

JLOGIC, on 2012-April-05, 18:07, said:

I think all of the fancy defenses are misguided. Almost every good pair I have played against (and I've played strong club in all of my regular partnerships) have played X=majors NT=minors. Personally, I think minors is a pretty stupid hand type to show. I like X=majors and 1NT=more majors, like 5-5. Joe likes X=majors, NT=minors 2D=5-5+ majors, but I would much rather have a natural 2D than a 1NT for the minors bid. Minors is the hand type where we're least likely to declare, and it doesn't hurt their bidding much when you bid 1NT showing 2 known suits, they now have 2 cuebids plus they can double and do something later, etc. Even when I am 5-5 in M+m, I rarely desire to show my other suit, it will just help them too much if they declare knowing 10 of my cards, and if my minor is unknown it will be hard for partner to preempt immediately and effective, and it is not that likely we need to bid 5m and won't be able to do so otherwise.
Just because they play strong club doesn't mean you're about to get a zero/lose 13 imps, you don't have to go psycho.
Suction in particular which I played a lot of when I was younger was very ineffective imo and bad.

This thread has a lot of support for natural overcalls. In particular I like very much what Mycroft said:

mycroft, on 2012-April-05, 12:28, said:

I've said frequently that my keys to a successful defence of a strong club is to get to 2 or 3 of a fit by the time it gets around to opener's second bid - and then get out. In order to get to that fit, I dislike any call that doesn't show a real suit.

I also very much like what sfi said:

sfi, on 2012-April-05, 09:43, said:

Having played a variety of strong club systems over the years, I don't much care what your defence is - it's not going to mess us up a great deal at the one and two level. What does cause strong club systems problems are natural jumps to the three level, so stretch to do that on hands that are at all suitable. Be aware that the strong club pair also knows that this is a weakness in their system and may shrug and accept whatever penalty you offer. So if you try it too much, you might regret it from time to time. On balance, you will come out ahead unless you start doing it on really unsuitable hands.

[PrecisionL]

Gee, now everyone will be bidding like rabbits on speed against our 1 club opening

I guess I will join the crowd, from our system notes:

IX. Strong 1 Club Opening, We Interfere with Bugatti in direct seat:

(1♣): 1♦ > 1♥, 1♥ > 1♠, 1♠ = 1444, 1NT = 5m/55M, 2m = DONT, 2M = Natural, 2NT = 5-5

Strong Club Defense over (1♣) - P – (1♦) ?

Mathe: 1♥ Natural, good suit

1♠ Natural, good suit

1NT Takeout for the minors

X Takeout for the Majors

[shevek]

As a strong clubber, I'm almost ashamed to admit that we do better when they interfere over our 16+ 1♣ than when they pass throughout. Strong club is quite rare in Sydney. People don't often get to trot out their half-baked defense that they don't understand. If they carry round Suction or Twerb, they can't wait to distort to give their toy an airing. Also, we have a feel for these auctions while they don't.
Our last 2300 went something like

1♣ - (no) - 1♦ - (3♣)
no - (4♠) - X - (no)

3♣ showed diamonds or the majors, 4♠ was correctable, but not seen that way.
They has a 12-card diamond fit.

[mgoetze]

shevek, on 2012-April-06, 16:51, said:

People don't often get to trot out their half-baked defense that they don't understand.

Indeed. On the other extreme to what you just posted, I've seen

1♣-(1♦)-no-(1♠)

1♦ was CRASH, majors or minors.
The lady bidding 1♠ had 5-5 in the black suits.

[the hog]

PrecisionL, on 2012-April-06, 08:34, said:

Gee, now everyone will be bidding like rabbits on speed against our 1 club opening

I guess I will join the crowd, from our system notes:

IX. Strong 1 Club Opening, We Interfere with Bugatti in direct seat:

(1♣): 1♦ > 1♥, 1♥ > 1♠, 1♠ = 1444, 1NT = 5m/55M, 2m = DONT, 2M = Natural, 2NT = 5-5

Strong Club Defense over (1♣) - P – (1♦) ?

Mathe: 1♥ Natural, good suit

1♠ Natural, good suit

1NT Takeout for the minors

X Takeout for the Majors

PLEASE, pretty please play this against me when I am playing Moscito. Transfer defences are awful and give the bic clubbers many extra options.

Statto, did your "nationally selected" player ever play a big club system? I bet not.

[Free]

It depends largely on your opponents' response structure. If they show HCP (1♦ = 0-6, 1♥ = 7-8,...), and keep doing this in competition, then it pays off to interfere a lot. I know many pairs that play this way, one of the most funny auctions was p-1♣-2♣*-3♠-p-4♥-p-... (*=DONT) where 3♠ showed something like 15 HCP any distribution. I really had a hard time not to start laughing because we were V and I had only 1HCP!

Against decent players it doesn't pay off to interfere too wildly on flat hands. You'll run into a hammer way too often and many times they land in a good contract and know more about the defenders' hands than other tables.

[PrecisionL]

the hog, on 2012-April-06, 21:17, said:

PLEASE, pretty please play this against me when I am playing Moscito. Transfer defences are awful and give the bic clubbers many extra options.

OK, for $?

[dake50]

Aside, do y'all play the same obstruct/compete
scheme over a nefarious 1D? eg. Precision 1D as catchall.
Seems that has much to gain even with game possible cases to attend.
Second
After (1C) P (1D(neg)) ??
Partner's direct seat pass over 1C changes what shapes he can have left.
Scheme to obstruct/compete using that inference?
Or has partner's no-direct-action decided our side plays tame?

[Phil]

For the last umpteen years, I have heard 'trust me, natural is better', but color me a non-believer. Of course, if you buy me a Starbucks, I'll listen to your sermon

No one has a problem with jacking around a 1N opening with Woolsey, and a lot of players think that the 2♦ multi overcall is what creates the most havoc in strong NT bidding. So over a strong club, where opener can have anywhere from a balanced 16 to a variety of 2♣ openers, this is the most fertile ground for interference, but a 1N opening is very limited is range and shape, so the opportunities for effective interference are limited.

Maybe this isn't true anymore since everyone and their dog play woolsey or multi-landy, and effective counter-measures have been created, but it does create a lot of issues. Multi bidders trade preemption for sowing confusion. Sure, there's inexperienced pairs that play crash and return with -2300 but if you are trying to make an argument 'natural is better', this is a weak point.

I suppose if you wanted to make better definitions about two suiters, this gives responder more opportunity to preempt, which is the biggest drawback to anything like suction or Crash.

In a recent long match, we had an auction that started similarly to: (1♣) - 2♥* - (dbl)# - pass**, which created some problems. Opener had Hxx of hearts, but a pretty good offensive and couldn't leave it in. Responder didn't know if a subsequent 3♥ call was a cue bid or natural.

* - hearts or spades
# - cards
** - pass or correct