BBO Discussion Forums: -1080, don't hold back. - BBO Discussion Forums

Vampyr, on 2014-December-22, 04:36, said:

Certainly not amongst strong players.

the hog, on 2014-December-22, 07:05, said:

Over all 1NT ranges? I am not convinced.

Yes over all. I am convinced.

South holds AQxx support for partner's suit and never mentioned it? Hard to expect a good result from that.

I would bid 4♦ over 3♥. Having done so, I can double 4♥ and respect partner's decision, which would surely be to pull.

the hog, on 2014-December-22, 07:26, said:

OK; please share your evidence.

We don't have a method to get out in a minor after the 12-14 1nt opening, we are playing 2 way stayman, 2M to play and 2N as invitational. I'd rather use 2N as a minor relay and 2C for any invitational hand but I haven't had chance to work through it all yet.

After the opponents double our 1nt opening I would like to play systems on if X shows a single suit and off if it shows majors or "values". If we are playing a regular club game I imagine a number of pairs won't have a defence to weak nt and won't know what a double is. Any advice on how to handle that would be appreciated.

Vampyr, on 2014-December-22, 04:36, said:

That is agreement that I always have. I only drop stayman from the NT system bids. I have seen too many penalty doubles with solid suit and no real defense that can beat 1NT but not our other games.

jillybean, on 2014-December-22, 10:14, said:

It'd seem that an answere to your (we don't have a method..) can be found if you use Stayman for a minor suit fit ( see my post in "Stayman.." in Novice.." forum ).

While North's ♦ invite here opposite a doubled WNT is certainly aggressive we can see that South could hold the a magic hand to make game cold, I have to give the blame to South for several bad calls, and as requested by the OP, I'll let her have it .

South's X of 3♥ is awful. Was it intended as penalty oriented? Too many ♦ for that. Dubious black suit quacks.
OK so you have 4 trumps and the ace, however, this isn't a stack by any means unless you have more honor(s). Rather than this X, South must support with support and bid 4♦. It is possible to accept the invite with 3NT, but there's the fear to be set in either black suit. If south just bids 4♦, north will be well positioned to respond to further competition and will know of the big ♦ fit. (Alternately, south could just blast to 5♦ but that seems pushy.) Was the double card showing? What cards weren't shown by opening WNT?

South's final X is also very bad. North ran from the initial X with 4♦ rather than 3♠ or 4♣ so now South's black suit quacks seem even more dubious and it is likely that North really holds lots of ♦. Expected ♦ tricks on defense are few and it seems quite possible that 4♥ is cold and might even get an OT.
South should bid 5♦ rather than doubling 4♥.

If south had properly shown support with 4♦ then north could bid 5♦ over 4♥.

West gave the N-S pair another chance with his XX. But North can't run after hearing PD make TWO penalty doubles of H contracts and not knowing that S has more than 2D in support! It is south who must realize that she's misread the hand and that her undisclosed D fit isn't good for the defense. West is XXing bcuz he thinks he's cold. South must run to 5♦.

the hog, on 2014-December-22, 07:26, said:

Title of a Dutch book: "Beware of people who are convinced" ("Hoedt U voor mensen die het zeker weten" by Jan Terlouw, renowned author and retired politician, just as renowned).

Rik

jillybean, on 2014-December-22, 10:14, said:

You play 2-way Stayman. So, without interference, invitational hands are supposed to begin with a 2♣ call. After that, 3♦ should be natural and invitational.

This frees up the immediate 3♦ bid as natural and to play (presumably weak).

Whether you want to adopt a different responding scheme over a double is up to you, but I would retain jumps to the 3 level over a double as natural and preemptive.

As for your club games, I find it hard to believe that any opponents at any level would not know what a double of a weak NT is supposed to mean. Many weak players play the double of a 1NT opening of any strength as an equivalent hand (very silly - do they double with a 10 count over a 10-12 1NT?). Better players double with stronger hands, and have agreements as to subsequent actions. Some play the double of the weak NT opening as conventional. But no idea? I don't believe it.

I do not play transfers over a weak (10-13) 1NT opening. If there is a double, I play Moscow escapes - very much like DONT - 2♣ is clubs and another suit, 2♦ is diamonds and a major, 2♥ is majors, 2♠ is spades, redouble is a one-suited hand (you can decide what the distinction is between 2♠ directly and redouble followed by 2♠), and higher level bids are natural and preemptive. With a good hand, or with nothing to say, I pass.

I play runouts (which in my case is 2♣ scramble, everything else NAT) over 1NT-X, no matter what X means. Sure, it could be "one-suited" or whatever, or "one minor or both majors" or, again, whatever. But it's stuff, and partners have been known to pass (even if it isn't stuff, partners have been known to have the strong NT). 1NT-X (one suit)-p-p to you, and all you know is that partner has 13 cards? Good luck. But maybe that is influenced by the fact that our runouts are so natural, and allow 1NTx to be played.

Sure you win when they don't know what they're doing and you get +280 into nothing, but that won't happen twice with the same pair.

As for club games, I'm quite certain that 2/3 of the pickup pairs and 15% of the regular pairs don't know what a double should show (as opposed to "it's 'one-suit') in her area, because that's about the percentage here. Most common question after a 1NT-X auction and play is "oh, so double is *all* 14+? And our overcalls are 10-13 or so, then?" or the equivalent inverse.

Lovera, on 2014-December-22, 12:25, said:

We play 2 way stayman so your 2♦ bid to show minors is not available.

Vampyr, on 2014-December-22, 07:47, said:

30 years of playing that style successfully enough evidence for you?

jillybean, on 2014-December-22, 19:06, said:

I used to play 2 way stayman for a while because my mentors, the Borins, played it. It was a total waste of time that gained nothing and lost a bit.

the hog, on 2014-December-22, 19:21, said:

Well, no, because although I am sure that you are a good player, you are not *all* good players.

Vampyr, on 2014-December-22, 19:56, said:

Well Stephanie, it will have to do I am afraid as I have not kept stats on this. I have on a number of other things that have been of interest, such as Burgess' law on opening 7-4s, but not on what I regard as matters of no importance. Btw I did mean ALL NT openings - pd and I even played t/f over 10-12 NTs, just for the extra room and flexibility, and even over the 17-20 Power experiment of many years ago.

the hog, on 2014-December-22, 19:25, said:

Apparently you did not play it very well.

I find that 2-way Stayman has a lot of advantages, more so when playing a weak NT. It is playable with a strong NT, but is very anti-field.

The version of 2-way Stayman that I play was created by a couple of duffers named Soloway and Passell, but despite that it seems to work well.

Well as you probably know, the Borins were the best mixed par in the world for many years. I never saw a real advantage that even they gained with 2 way stayman. They played it as part of their Precision system for many many years and then finally switched to t/fs Oh, that is not quite true, I did see them bid a nice minor slam that MAY have been hard to get to playing other methods. (Not relay of course). However there are other methods that are not popular in the US, such as the Scanian responses which are also better imo.<br>Transfers allow flexibility and provided you have good follow ups are certainly a very effective way to play.<br>

Jillybean, Imho any method that disables you from playing your fit at 2 level, after they penalty double your weak NT, is bad. Any method that disables you sitting on 1NT after they double, whether that might be due to having a balanced hand or hoping to make it doubled. So I agree with Vampyr.

I know you will be worried about the hands where they double and you want to punish them with rdbl and wherever they run. It ain't gonna come very often, if at all. It also gives opponents a delayed option, knowing that your pass is forcing to xx.

I agree with WesleyC that 3♦ is a textbook preemptive bid. There are ways to invite pd with long minor even after they start a penalty double. I started bridge with precision club, played weak NT almost all my life and I would definitely play it in 2/1 system if I regularly played live bridge with a regular pd.

Method I play and suggest is very simple;


xx=1 suited (running or invite hands)
2x=x+higher (like dont)
2NT=minors preemptive
3x=preemptive.
pass= I like 1 NT doubled or I like it better than playing anything else at 2 level. Does NOT force opener to xx.