[tytobyto]

FM75, on 2012-December-10, 22:22, said:

Fair question. Opener's hand is only limited on the low side and the partnership is limited as well, but opener has very narrow window - 3 point range on the total partnership hcp. He could be opening on 27 (I had that yesterday in a Swiss Teams match), with possible slam, or he could have a meager 16.

The opponents will have a very hard time staying out of trouble opposite even as little as 21. Won't they get there even against any standard system? There danger is when opener is just a bit strong, because neither opponent has much of a clue as to their strength - CRO is about shape.

While others in this thread have stated that they essentially ignore intervention, you mention "danger" for your opponents. I want to develop my inner sadist. How do you punish people for butting in?
you: 1C (strong hand)
LHO: 1S (no info and possibly no cards)
partner: X (from what you wrote earlier, 5-8 hcp)

you: ? (you and partner know you have majority pts but nothing about other's distribution or a fit

[tytobyto]

FM75, on 2012-December-10, 22:22, said:

Fair question. Opener's hand is only limited on the low side and the partnership is limited as well, but opener has very narrow window - 3 point range on the total partnership hcp. He could be opening on 27 (I had that yesterday in a Swiss Teams match), with possible slam, or he could have a meager 16.

The opponents will have a very hard time staying out of trouble opposite even as little as 21. Won't they get there even against any standard system? There danger is when opener is just a bit strong, because neither opponent has much of a clue as to their strength - CRO is about shape.

While others in this thread have stated that they essentially ignore intervention, you mention "danger" for your opponents. I want to develop my inner sadist. How do you punish people for butting in?
you: 1C (strong hand)
LHO: 1S (no info and possibly no cards)
partner: X (from what you wrote earlier, 5-8 hcp)
RHO: P
you: ? (you and partner know you have majority pts but nothing about other's distribution or a fit. do you pass to watch your opponents squirm)

[tytobyto]

Wow!
How do you properly use edit here?
And is there an option to delete a post?

[SteveMoe]

Let's not forget that the bigger benefit for adopting strong♣ systems is the limited nature of 1♥/♠ 2♣/♦ opening bids. The improvement in competitive bidding and slam bidding is worth any possible distraction opponents create over our 1♣ opening. Besides, we can handle even 4-3 crash attempts...

[FM75]

tytobyto, on 2012-December-11, 18:31, said:

While others in this thread have stated that they essentially ignore intervention, you mention "danger" for your opponents. I want to develop my inner sadist. How do you punish people for butting in?
you: 1C (strong hand)
LHO: 1S (no info and possibly no cards)
partner: X (from what you wrote earlier, 5-8 hcp)

you: ? (you and partner know you have majority pts but nothing about other's distribution or a fit

I should have said 5-7, not 5-8...

balanced
16-18 1N,
19-21 2N GF and use standard methods to ferret out the strain
With 5+ spades, pass.
Bid as you might have anyway over 1 spade opener, forcing for one round. Lebensohl after that if appropriate. Or can use what ever splinters / game tries you have in the tool kit.

[Zelandakh]

tytobyto, on 2012-December-11, 18:31, said:

you: 1C (strong hand)
LHO: 1S (no info and possibly no cards)

This is MI unless you never make any other call other than 1♠. You need to tell your opponents what every other call means (including pass) - what is left is your meaning for 1♠. There are many pairs out there hiding behind "any 13 cards" for their 1♠ overcalls but this is always nonsense and should be punished more often by TDs.

tytobyto, on 2012-December-11, 18:38, said:

How do you properly use edit here?
And is there an option to delete a post?

To edit, view your post and press the Edit button. To have a post removed, send a private message to a moderator.

[tytobyto]

I'm still trying to encourage my inner sadist by learning how to punish people. Here's a suggestion for how you might assist me.

Present a bidding sequence in which your 1C opening is frivolously overcalled (i.e. your opponents are not interested in continuing the contest unless they feel compelled to scramble to a better suit) by your LHO with a bid of 2D or less and your opponents wind up in a doubled contract. Then, even if the bidding should make it obvious, explain to me how your side knew the double was for penalty (because in this scenario the bidding should not go higher than you can afford) and how you calculated that you will score better with a set than in playing your own contract.

Thanks in advance. You folks are great.

[tytobyto]

Yet another question: does anyone still use "Italian style" asking bids (Alpha, Beta, Gamma, etc) after positive responses to 1C? And if so, under what circumstances to you continue to employ them after 1C is overcalled?

Apologies in advance if I'm wearing on anyone's patience. I actually wrote to the ACBL, outlining the nature of my questions and offering to pay a tutor modestly for help, but I never received a reply. Here I seem to get replies in minutes. This is a good place.

[SteveMoe]

tytobyto, on 2012-December-16, 17:28, said:

Yet another question: does anyone still use "Italian style" asking bids (Alpha, Beta, Gamma, etc) after positive responses to 1C? And if so, under what circumstances to you continue to employ them after 1C is overcalled?

Apologies in advance if I'm wearing on anyone's patience. I actually wrote to the ACBL, outlining the nature of my questions and offering to pay a tutor modestly for help, but I never received a reply. Here I seem to get replies in minutes. This is a good place.

I generally find that playing Italian asks work better in constructive auctions than in competitive auctions. If the interference does not change the level of the auction we play systems ON. If the interference changes the level of our bids, then we revert to natural bidding. You can always keep 4♣ as beta, too.
So:
1♣-1♥-1♠-pass
Opener can use the tool kit. You need to decide what 2♥ by opener would be here.
1♣-1♥-1♠-2♥
Natural bidding ensues.

Practical experience says to turn off the asking bids in competition - easier to remember and avoids bigger errors.

[tytobyto]

SteveMoe, on 2012-December-16, 18:15, said:

Practical experience says to turn off the asking bids in competition - easier to remember and avoids bigger errors.

People claim that passing a strong club is OK, but your observation makes me think that interference is mandatory. That is, unless you feel that asking bids are just an ornament. I have to admit, they were the reason my roommates and I decided to learn Precision in the first place. The asking bids (we'd never heard of anything more exotic than Blackwood) seemed way cool, and it is a great loss (of enjoyment if not accuracy) that they can no longer be used because wise opponents will always interfere without any fear of being penalized.

[SteveMoe]

tytobyto, on 2012-December-16, 19:09, said:

People claim that passing a strong club is OK, but your observation makes me think that interference is mandatory. That is, unless you feel that asking bids are just an ornament. I have to admit, they were the reason my roommates and I decided to learn Precision in the first place. The asking bids (we'd never heard of anything more exotic than Blackwood) seemed way cool, and it is a great loss (of enjoyment if not accuracy) that they can no longer be used because wise opponents will always interfere without any fear of being penalized.

Not mandatory - purposeful.
I always invite interference since I expect to gain more than I lose.
Asking bids are cool if used with discipline. When they become a silver hammer, beware.
You know you're holding a silver hammer when everything looks like a nail.

[Zelandakh]

tytobyto, on 2012-December-16, 17:17, said:

Present a bidding sequence in which your 1C opening is frivolously overcalled (i.e. your opponents are not interested in continuing the contest unless they feel compelled to scramble to a better suit) by your LHO with a bid of 2D or less and your opponents wind up in a doubled contract.

As per my post on 1♠ overcalls, 1♣ - (1♠) - P (4+ spades) - (P); X, presumably followed by running and doubling. This is hardly rocket science. There are many incidents of 1mXX being played in Expert level competition after a frivolous double. Why not just go to a database of vugraph hands and find your own examples; I am confident there are enough to get a feel for the times when the overcalling side was caught. What you will not see so easily are the many more times when the overcall helps Declarer play the hand after reaching the normal contract. If you are not taking this into account regarding your overcalls then any analysis you come up with is meaningless.

[mycroft]

or 1♣-(1♠)-X ("any" 5-bad 8)-whatever; forcing pass (tends to be balanced minimum) leading to doubling. or 1♣-(1♠)-X-p-p- leading to doubling. Any time we're "known to not have a game" or "game is going to be borderline" we start hunting for penalties. I've seen several 1Mx-2 for 500 into partscores, and at least one 1♥x-4 1100 into a game that might not even have made.

One of the benefits of this strategy, even if we don't get a good board (-500 into potential -600 or something like that) is that the opponents now know we'll look for blood when they come in; and they let us be a little more often the rest of the match.

[steve2005]

tytobyto, on 2012-December-11, 18:31, said:

While others in this thread have stated that they essentially ignore intervention, you mention "danger" for your opponents. I want to develop my inner sadist. How do you punish people for butting in?
you: 1C (strong hand)
LHO: 1S (no info and possibly no cards)
partner: X (from what you wrote earlier, 5-8 hcp)

you: ? (you and partner know you have majority pts but nothing about other's distribution or a fit

1 level penalties just dont pay. so i dont think a system to penalize at 1-level overcall will pay-off, too easy they make or penalty not enough. should get to right level and denomination.

[mycroft]

1 spade showing 13 cards doubled can pay...Assuming they explain their system properly and we know what they can't have, of course.
Knowing that we have not game values immediately, their runout into 2 of a suit can pay...
At matchpoints, even +200 will pay nicely (and they *will* come in vulnerable, for some reason. Especially if they're the "13-cards" type.

Knowing partner's 5-8 opposite bare 16-17, I'll double anytime they've bid my suit; pass if I'm pretty balanced; bid normally if I have something to bid. Converting to XXX seems right, and means that I'll pass in the first two cases, bid if they've bid a really short suit or I have something to bid, and double if I basically have a takeout double of their call. Downside of that is that partner doesn't know if I'm on a minimum (and we should look for X00) or not (and we should only settle for game-type penalties).

[mgoetze]

mattias, on 2012-December-11, 03:24, said:

The reason for playing a strong club system is usually to make the other opening bids limited. Either that or getting to use the alert card a lot.

SteveMoe, on 2012-December-12, 16:18, said:

Let's not forget that the bigger benefit for adopting strong♣ systems is the limited nature of 1♥/♠ 2♣/♦ opening bids. The improvement in competitive bidding and slam bidding is worth any possible distraction opponents create over our 1♣ opening. Besides, we can handle even 4-3 crash attempts...

Would just like to reinforce this point as it seems not to have gotten through to the OP yet. Yes, opening 1♣ sucks. You should be unhappy when you get dealt 16+ HCP. If you think the 1♣ opening is the strong point of your system, change systems.