Defending: Strong Club Systems

♣ ♥ ♠ ♦

Common Design Factors of strong club systems:

Strong club systems are characterised by an artificial 1♣ opening of at least 16HCP. This is the only message this bid conveys!
The frequency of occurrence is 9.75% this is far too low a figure for such an economical bid and is contre to the theory of information. It is interesting to remark that Terence Reese system: "Little Major" used 1♥ as its strong opening - definetely better! While in BETA we use 1♣ with a significantely higher frequency of occurrence - a lordly 15% now that's talking! This is a serious negative point for PRECISION. simply reversing the roles of 1♣ & 1♦ would be an improvement.
Precision narrow usage of 1♣ heaped multiple possibilities onto 1♦ which became a second alertable opening bid. I'm certainly not against bids which cover multiple possibilities. But they give themselves real difficulties when attacked by aggressive opposition bidding as we shall see!

Nature of required defence to artificial opening bids

One thing we want to do is remove as much bidding room from them as possible
At the same time we need to not hinder our own development
Also we need to be obscure about our precise holding. In this way our bidding does not help them in deciphering their own bids!
One way thais can be achieved is by making bids that hold two possible resolutions - we use this against precision 1♣ openings
Another way is to avoid being explicit about our own holdings - possibly denying rather than promising - we use this approach against Precision 1♦ openings - Knowing we are short does not pinpoint where our length resides!
It is necessary that we design 'fogging' of the actual situation which does not injure us at the same time in our communications with our partner.

Our Defence Style

Against the strong club itself we employ a scheme wherein each intervention has 2 possible outcomes and deploy them as transfers to our partner, who relays and only then is the full meaning known.
Against their kind of multi 1♦ we use a sort of inversion of our actual hand - negatively showing our shortage first!

This then mixed in with the oppositions need to unravel quickly - will do some of our work for us.
Bear in mind too that if we inadvertently show shortage in their suit: this could spell a possibly bad break for them or pinpoint a ruffing opportunity for us!

Defending the strong club

When confronted with a strong Club opening BETA utilises a powerful and aggressive system known as TRAP. Since this is a 3rd party convention we are using, I house it with other conventions BETA uses. Basically each defensive bid of TRAP has two outcomes - only resolved on rebid while partner relays!

To confront the 1♦ opening we use a style of NOT showing what we have but rather showing what we don't have.
Its a philosophy of using a shortage to confront the unknown - aiming to make it more difficult to be resolved.
It cannot be comfortable to Precision bidders if we show shortage in their suit! They could easily be facing a singleton or even a void hinting at a bad trump split.
Shortage in clubs is shown by 2♣ taking out a round of bidding - same with a 2♦ bid!
Our Multi 1N overcall covers 3-4 possibilities so again uncomfortable for the Precision bidder again seeing the whole of the 1 level removed from them which also gives away no information save showing at least 4 cards in Clubs!
Our overcalls are shown in order of preference is: (but we choose the most apt).
2♦ Shorter in Diamonds
2♣ Shorter in Clubs
1NT 9+ HCP and 4+ Clubs.- only the rebid will show more detail of the distribution - and thats perhaps after a further round of bidding! we use a sort of inversion of our actual hand - negatively showing our shortage first!

This then mixed in with the oppositions need to unravel quickly - will do some of our work for us.
Bear in mind too that if we inadvertently show shortage in their suit: this could spell a possibly bad break for them or pinpoint a ruffing opportunity for us!