[shugart24]

Do you think a 'modified' Hello defense could work against a strong 1C bid ? Asking for a friend

[mycroft]

My favourite defence to a strong club is the one played in That Other City, which is Cappelletti at the 1 level.

My favourite defence when I am *playing* a strong club, that is. "Double is a suit"? Great, I'll ignore it (and use pass and redouble for free) until they're defending. 1M "this suit and a minor"? Great. I have a cuebid, I can double, and if they look for the minor, we know it's a misfit ourselves. 1♦ as both majors is good - double for the majors is basically as good, so there it is - but we have a defence to 1♦ overcalls no matter what they mean. And if we end up playing in our major fit, at least we know it breaks badly before the second round of trump.

Hello is a Cappelletti variant, which at least makes 1♠ natural so taking up actual room with a useful hand. But I can't see it being much better. Don't know what "modifications" to Hello we're talking about, but if it's the standard, then 1♥ majors is at least better than 1♦ majors; 1♦ known suit while giving more options than 1♥ still allows a 2♥ (or higher) push before opener gets a second call.

So, yeah, better than Cappelletti, but don't really care. My opinion for those who play against strong club rarely is to minimize forgets and either play "bid something" or Mathe (which is easy to remember after one mistake). If you play seriously, or play against strong club enough that you can remember something more complicated, then lots to choose from.

Now, note that I am on the "ambiguity doesn't work; what does work is getting to at least 2 of a major fit before opener's first real bid" train. Several players, including several strong strong club players, disagree with me (witness any of the many threads here before) and I'm not saying I'm right. I just know what it feels like from the strong club side of the auction.

[shugart24]

mycroft, on 2024-December-11, 10:36, said:

My favourite defence to a strong club is the one played in That Other City, which is Cappelletti at the 1 level.

My favourite defence when I am *playing* a strong club, that is. "Double is a suit"? Great, I'll ignore it (and use pass and redouble for free) until they're defending. 1M "this suit and a minor"? Great. I have a cuebid, I can double, and if they look for the minor, we know it's a misfit ourselves. 1♦ as both majors is good - double for the majors is basically as good, so there it is - but we have a defence to 1♦ overcalls no matter what they mean. And if we end up playing in our major fit, at least we know it breaks badly before the second round of trump.

Hello is a Cappelletti variant, which at least makes 1♠ natural so taking up actual room with a useful hand. But I can't see it being much better. Don't know what "modifications" to Hello we're talking about, but if it's the standard, then 1♥ majors is at least better than 1♦ majors; 1♦ known suit while giving more options than 1♥ still allows a 2♥ (or higher) push before opener gets a second call.

So, yeah, better than Cappelletti, but don't really care. My opinion for those who play against strong club rarely is to minimize forgets and either play "bid something" or Mathe (which is easy to remember after one mistake). If you play seriously, or play against strong club enough that you can remember something more complicated, then lots to choose from.

Now, note that I am on the "ambiguity doesn't work; what does work is getting to at least 2 of a major fit before opener's first real bid" train. Several players, including several strong strong club players, disagree with me (witness any of the many threads here before) and I'm not saying I'm right. I just know what it feels like from the strong club side of the auction.

ok, you caught me. I am really asking for myself. When we run into a strong 1C opener, should I (make up and) teach my sone a variant of Hello, which we currently use against opponents 1NT open.

[mycroft]

My response applies. It's okay, but you don't gain much over Mathe (or even "bid" - playing a strong club yourself, you'll know what the "toll-free overcall" hands look like), so you know what to bid on) except opportunity to forget.

If you're willing to bid it at the 2 level (like you do over 1NT), then it gains a bunch of effectiveness, but then you have to think about what 1-level bids (and double) mean. They can mean nothing - witness the people who play the (not legal, it's a PDIA) 1♠ "forced, means he wants to play somewhere on the 2 level", with or without higher bids having a meaning, but you need to think about it.

I think if your strong club opponents can't handle interference well, and don't count hands better with hints like "one minor or major and a minor", then playing Hello at the 1 level gains something. I shouldn't need to beat those people by "system check"ing them, so I don't.

My dream defence still is a Truscott variant where 1-level actions (including double) are "suits worth leading" and 2-level are "this suit and the next one", aggressive (with 1NT being "non-touching suits"). But it's been 20+ years since I played that, and I no longer play tournaments where I can expect to have a strong club bid against me once a day or more. So "something we won't forget that isn't stupid" vastly outshines any other criterion. I play Mathe.

[DavidKok]

Both the strong club players and the defenders go completely bonkers when they get to open 1♣. I think most discussions on merit of approaches there fail to be productive.

With that in mind, if you enjoy playing (with or against) HELLO, it is the right system. Not because of (a lack of) merit, but because it's fun.

[mw64ahw]

The Hello booklet suggest combining a modified Hello and Mathe with the 1-level overcalls showing less shapely hands with limited playing strength.
X Majors 54/weak 55
1♦/♥/♠ nat. good suit lead directing
1N minors 54/ weak 55
2♣ ♦
2♥ Majors 55
2♠ ♠
2N ♣
3♣ minors

[pescetom]

Over a strong 1C it is best to interfere with a sound set of methods, as often as possible at 2 level. I don't think Hello meets that bill.

My favourite low memory cost agreement is to play Multilandy almost exactly as if it was a strong NT. With the tactical modification that 1NT over 1C substitutes Double over strong NT (undisclosed 4M and 5m).

[PrecisionL]

2 suited defenses are best. Truscott, Roman, Suction, Crash, are a few to consider.

[mw64ahw]

pescetom, on 2024-December-11, 14:46, said:

Over a strong 1C it is best to interfere with a sound set of methods, as often as possible at 2 level. I don't think Hello meets that bill.

My favourite low memory cost agreement is to play Multilandy almost exactly as if it was a strong NT. With the tactical modification that 1NT over 1C substitutes Double over strong NT (undisclosed 4M and 5m).

Sound methods depend on appropriate application by the player. Hello was designed to optimise putting the strong hand on lead.

[akwoo]

Being in North America, most players have never ever seen any strong club system played against them, sometimes despite being quite experienced.

When partnering such a player, my preferred improvised defense when we get the pre-alert is that 1 of a suit is natural (double being clubs), and everything higher is our strong NT defense (including 1N to show whatever a double of a 1N opener shows).

[DavidKok]

 akwoo, on 2024-December-11, 22:58, said:

When partnering such a player, my preferred improvised defense when we get the pre-alert is that 1 of a suit is natural (double being clubs), and everything higher is our strong NT defense (including 1N to show whatever a double of a 1N opener shows).

Strong club is not pre-alertable under ACBL rules, if I understand correctly.

[johnu]

DavidKok, on 2024-December-12, 01:01, said:

Strong club is not pre-alertable under ACBL rules, if I understand correctly.

From the alert procedures,
____________________
Pre-Alerts
Before the auction begins on the first board of a match or round, you must inform the opponents if you have any of these agreements:
1. A 1-level Opening Bid that is not Natural or that is Forcing
2. A canape system.
3. Playing different systems depending on seat or vulnerability. It is not considered a different system if the only change is No Trump Range (and responses) or Opening Bid strength.

Additionally, you must inform the opponents about any Artificial Opening Preempts below 3NT.
___________________________
And depending on how 1♦ is played, that may also have to be pre-alerted.

[DavidKok]

Thanks! I only looked in the charts, which also have a section on pre-alerting.

[shugart24]

PrecisionL, on 2024-December-11, 15:04, said:

2 suited defenses are best. Truscott, Roman, Suction, Crash, are a few to consider.

HELLO shows both 2 suited hands and single suited

[shugart24]

johnu, on 2024-December-12, 02:26, said:

From the alert procedures,
____________________
Pre-Alerts
Before the auction begins on the first board of a match or round, you must inform the opponents if you have any of these agreements:
1. A 1-level Opening Bid that is not Natural or that is Forcing
2. A canape system.
3. Playing different systems depending on seat or vulnerability. It is not considered a different system if the only change is No Trump Range (and responses) or Opening Bid strength.

Additionally, you must inform the opponents about any Artificial Opening Preempts below 3NT.
___________________________
And depending on how 1♦ is played, that may also have to be pre-alerted.

so our 2D opening bid ( 3 suited) needs to be pre-alerted. Ty

[awm]

On the topic of pre-alerts, a “preempt” is defined as a bid at the two level or above that could (by agreement) have less than average strength. So a three suited 2♦ showing 10+ points is not a preempt and not a pre-alert. If it could be less than average strength it may not even be a legal convention in ACBL.

As to using Hello vs 1♣, in general it is okay (but probably not best) to use your notrump defense as a defense to strong club. If you are looking for something simple that will be okay.

I don’t personally think Hello is a good defense to notrump, but that’s a different discussion.

[shugart24]

awm, on 2024-December-12, 08:38, said:

On the topic of pre-alerts, a “preempt” is defined as a bid at the two level or above that could (by agreement) have less than average strength. So a three suited 2♦ showing 10+ points is not a preempt and not a pre-alert. If it could be less than average strength it may not even be a legal convention in ACBL.

As to using Hello vs 1♣, in general it is okay (but probably not best) to use your notrump defense as a defense to strong club. If you are looking for something simple that will be okay.

I don’t personally think Hello is a good defense to notrump, but that’s a different discussion.

I guess I was picking up on the comment that opponents need to be informed of any artificial bids below 3NT , 2D meeting that criteria. Not sure how else to interpret that statement, unless it's just wrong

[P_Marlowe]

akwoo, on 2024-December-11, 22:58, said:

<snip>
When partnering such a player, my preferred improvised defense when we get the pre-alert is that 1 of a suit is natural (double being clubs), and everything higher is our strong NT defense (including 1N to show whatever a double of a 1N opener shows).

This is our agreement, works and is simple.
X of their 1C, and 1D response to 1C, showes a strong NT.

Also works against polish, replace strong NT defence with weak
NT defence.

[mycroft]

Artificial Opening Preempts, not artificial bids.

Despite the continual frustration we get from our Precision pre-Alerts ("you'll alert it when it happens, right?" "why are you saying this?"), I think they've made a good balance.

- 1-level bids that are not Natural.
- 1-level bids that are Forcng.
- Canapé (although how that's defined, how it's explained to people who have never seen canapé, etc. is not completely clear. Also, boes does the C&CC *hate* canapé)
- Two (or more) system methods.
- 2NT weak minors (yeah, more exist on the Open+ chart)

[Zelandakh]

Some relatively simple options probably better than Hello:
X = majors, 1NT = minors, others nat (Mathe)
X = reds or blacks; 1♦ = majors or minors; 1M = nat; 1NT = ♠+♦ or ♥+♣; 2m = nat (Crash)
X = hearts, 1♦ = spades; 1♥ = reds or blacks; 1♠ = majors or minors; 1NT = ♠+♦ or ♥+♣; 2m = nat (Modified Crash)
X = ♥+♣; 1♦ = reds; 1♥ = majors; 1♠ = blacks; 1NT = ♠+♦; 2♣ = minors (Truscott)
X = hearts, 1♦ = spades; 1♥ = ♥+♣; 1♠ = blacks; 1NT = ♠+♦; 2♣ = minors; 2♦ = reds; 2♥ = majors (Modified Truscott)