[dcrc2]

 awm, on 2012-June-10, 12:04, said:

It seems that this sequence creates a couple issues.

When opener has a weak notrump and responder has something like 4-6, you can't really get out in 1M. You'll end up playing some pretty bad contracts, and opponents may be able to double since it's pretty clear by the time 1♣-1♦-1M-1NT-Pass comes around what has occurred.

I never found this sequence to be much of a problem. The field can't play in 1M on these hands either. You're ending up in 1NT on two balanced hands with roughly half the deck, which, if anything, is a good place to be.

The range of 1♣-1NT makes a bit of a difference. WJ05 used a 9-11 range, which is perhaps a little odd, but it does mean that 1♣-1♦-1M-1NT is 4-8, making it impossible for opponents to double "on the auction". I used to play 1♣-1NT as invitational which had the same effect. Trying not to tell opponents that they had the majority of the deck was certainly one of the reasons for playing it that way.

[antonylee]

 awm, on 2012-June-10, 12:04, said:

You will have some awkward sequences when opener has the strong hand. In standard you might bid 1M-2M-4M; in precision maybe 1♣-1♦-1M-2M-4M. But in Polish club you will get 1♣-1♦-1M-1NT-2x-3M-4M at minimum (giving more information about opener's shape) and if responder bids 2M instead of 3M that could presumably be preference and you'll get an even longer sequence that makes declarer's hand basically an open book.

It can simply go
1♣-1♦
1M-1N(5-7)
2M(18-20)-3/4M
which is hardly worse than the standard or Precision auctions.

[rhm]

 awm, on 2012-June-10, 12:04, said:

It seems that this sequence creates a couple issues.

When opener has a weak notrump and responder has something like 4-6, you can't really get out in 1M. You'll end up playing some pretty bad contracts, and opponents may be able to double since it's pretty clear by the time 1♣-1♦-1M-1NT-Pass comes around what has occurred.

You will have some awkward sequences when opener has the strong hand. In standard you might bid 1M-2M-4M; in precision maybe 1♣-1♦-1M-2M-4M. But in Polish club you will get 1♣-1♦-1M-1NT-2x-3M-4M at minimum (giving more information about opener's shape) and if responder bids 2M instead of 3M that could presumably be preference and you'll get an even longer sequence that makes declarer's hand basically an open book.

I begin to see how the Martel defense of "pass with good hands, then double them" can work out well.

This is not correct.
While you respond 1♦ almost always with less than 7 HCP in Polish Club, you may respond 1♦ with stronger hands.
The variant of Polish Club I prefer is that an immediate 1NT response to 1♣ shows invitational values opposite 12-14 (slightly stronger than WJ05), about 10(+) - 12 HCP, normally denying a 4 card major.
With the weak variant opener passes or bids 3NT. This allows us to stop in 1NT when others tend to play 2NT or in a bad 3NT.
Accordingly I will respond 1♦ with up to 10 HCP with a balanced hand if I do not have a 4 card major. If I then rebid 1NT over 1♣-1♦-1M I show between 5 and 10(-) HCP.
I do not see how opponents can easily exploit that and I can not remember having ever had a problem. The only information known round the table is that the values for 3NT are not present when opener has the weak variant.
This information is always known any time 1NT gets passed out. Of course telling opponents you want to undertake 1NT with insufficient values in both hands combined is plain stupid.
Matula's reasons for responding 1♥ with almost all hands in the 12-14 HCP range do not sound convincing to me. But even I prefer that a 1♠ rebid by opener usually guarantees 4 cards. With 12-14 balanced and no 4 card major I prefer to rebid 1♥.
When 1♦ is opened on 4 cards, the 1♥ rebid after 1♣-1♦ guarantees either hearts or clubs.
I disagree that responder with 4-6 HCP can only bid 1♠ or 1NT over 1♥. Responder can also bid a 5 card club suit or a 6 card diamond suit, showing about 5-11 HCP. There is little risk here, since opener tends to pass with the weak variant and bids on otherwise.
If opener's 1♥ rebid gets doubled, opener should correct to 2♣ with no hearts and a 5 card club suit (weak variant) and responder should do likewise when holding at least 4 clubs and no major.
Martel's defense of "pass with good hands then double them" may have worked against older versions of Polish Club, but is not likely to work against modern variants, at least not against those variants, where a 1♦ opening promises only 4 cards, narrowing down the possible holdings of the weak variant in Polish club.

Rainer Herrmann

[Tomi2]

 rhm, on 2012-June-12, 06:27, said:

...
Martel's defense of "pass with good hands then double them" may have worked against older versions of Polish Club, but is not likely to work against modern variants, at least not against those variants, where a 1♦ opening promises only 4 cards, narrowing down the possible holdings of the weak variant in Polish club.

Rainer Herrmann

Nearly nobody opens 1dia on 4 cards in Poland, that idea to open minors an an american style is, as fat as I know, only published in Jassems english translation of WJ05, the polish one uses the normal and good approach to open 1 club on the balanced hands even with 4 dias.

A reason, why Martens' idea sometimes fails is some other:
(1♣) - pass - (1♦) - ??? pass
1M - pass - (2M) - ???

now its your turn, you have a strong hand and forgot to bid in your first turn. Say the bidding has already reached 2♠ and you now know they hold 7 to 9 spades with 16 to 26 hcp, lucky you...

or:
1♣ - ?? pass - any weak jump - pass
pass - ??

now you can express that you want to enter the auction because you hold more points than the opener but have much less room to do so.

even after 1♣-1♦-1♥ and now 2nd seat is on, its not clear if the auction will end (undoubled) or if they correct to a better (worse) contract and you get the chance to bid again. Playing double in that seat as "either 1 heart doubled will be the best contract for us or we better take it out" is also not so easy...