[mikeh]

jdonn, on Feb 14 2008, 07:07 PM, said:

You bid fine. Probably the best gain for weak and mini notrumps vs strong opposition is when both opponents have about 12 or 13 balanced, in which case neither can get into the auction (without what is generally considered too much risk anyway.) One good point for discussion is that it's a good idea to play if south doubled stayman here it would show general values, about the same as doubling the 1NT itself. That is much more useful over a weak notrump than showing clubs. Same with doubling a transfer (even moreso in fact.) So if he had a little better hand south couldnt have doubled 2♣ and you would be in the auction.

agreed

While it is frustrating to get a horrible result on this type of layout, the reality is that bidding methods are always a compromise between risk and reward. Every method has 'unbiddable hands', and we have to accept this. What we cannot do is change our methods in response to every bad result... all we do then is to change the hand-types on which we are going to get bad results.

Now, if our methods are less-than-optimum, and we are getting too high a number of bad results, we should think seriously about what alternatives are out there, but the expert community has been playing with and against mini-notrump for decades now, and the consensus appears to be that we stay out with this particular combination of hands, because requiring either hand to bid is simply too dangerous.

Expert consensus is not always optimum but it is rarely really wrong

[hotShot]

awm, on Feb 15 2008, 05:22 PM, said:

This has really nothing to do with Lionel. You can bid 2♣ (clubs and a major) with the north hand playing DONT, or in principle bid 2♠ (spades and a minor) playing CAPP. You could double (major and a minor) playing Woolsey.

The point is just that if you play a defense without a penalty double and then regularly come into the auction on 4432 hands, you have a bid with the north cards. That style will work out great any time this situation comes up -- your points are equally divided, you have two balanced hands, and you have a clear majority of the strength.

However, coming into the auction with a balanced hand at the two-level when RHO's hand is a known quantity to all at the table is going to get you crushed any time LHO has a good hand! And you're also going to have trouble when your high card points are not evenly divided (say 16-9 instead of 13-12) because the person with the 16-count has no way to show his extras.

Unmodified D.O.N.T. requires a 5-5 shape, so you seem to play a modified version.

Unmodified Cappelletti also requires 5-5 shape. Of cause there are 5-4 and 4-4 modifications. If you have ♠ and ♣ you need to play ♣ at the 3 level.

Unmodified Woolsey requires a 5 card minor and a 4-card major.

Additionally with all 3 conventions you need to adjust strength of your bids.

The Lionel convention handles 4-4 shapes by default and the assigned strength can be used playing against opps mini-, weak-, strong- or extra strong 1NT bids. It allows you to play all 4-4 combinations at the 2 level. The only disadvantage it the missing penalty double holding a 4333 shape. But this is no big problem, because your partner can guess your strength and shape from opps bidding, if your side hold the majority of points.

[jdonn]

hotShot, on Feb 15 2008, 03:37 PM, said:

awm, on Feb 15 2008, 05:22 PM, said:

This has really nothing to do with Lionel. You can bid 2♣ (clubs and a major) with the north hand playing DONT, or in principle bid 2♠ (spades and a minor) playing CAPP. You could double (major and a minor) playing Woolsey.

The point is just that if you play a defense without a penalty double and then regularly come into the auction on 4432 hands, you have a bid with the north cards. That style will work out great any time this situation comes up -- your points are equally divided, you have two balanced hands, and you have a clear majority of the strength.

However, coming into the auction with a balanced hand at the two-level when RHO's hand is a known quantity to all at the table is going to get you crushed any time LHO has a good hand! And you're also going to have trouble when your high card points are not evenly divided (say 16-9 instead of 13-12) because the person with the 16-count has no way to show his extras.

Unmodified D.O.N.T. requires a 5-5 shape, so you seem to play a modified version.

Unmodified Cappelletti also requires 5-5 shape. Of cause there are 5-4 and 4-4 modifications. If you have ♠ and ♣ you need to play ♣ at the 3 level.

Unmodified Woolsey requires a 5 card minor and a 4-card major.

Additionally with all 3 conventions you need to adjust strength of your bids.

The Lionel convention handles 4-4 shapes by default and the assigned strength can be used playing against opps mini-, weak-, strong- or extra strong 1NT bids. It allows you to play all 4-4 combinations at the 2 level. The only disadvantage it the missing penalty double holding a 4333 shape. But this is no big problem, because your partner can guess your strength and shape from opps bidding, if your side hold the majority of points.

Your source is, how shall I say, unreliable. The conventions just specify how you show suits, it is purely a matter of style how long the suits will be for you to bid in any convention.

Speaking of unreliable, "The only disadvantage it the missing penalty double holding a 4333 shape." is a big LOL

[cherdano]

I think those who dismiss hotspot's Lionel argument out of hand don't understand the convention very well.
It is obvious that it is a lot more playable to agree "X = 4+spades, 4+ other, 11+ hcp" against weak NT than to agree "2♠ = 4+ spades, 4+minor". It is also a lot more more playable to agree 2♣ as "♣+♥, 11+hcp, 4+/4+" than to agree "2♣ = clubs + other, 4+/4+". So Lionel indeed does gain big on hands such as this one; generally it allows you to get in with moderate 4432 hands a lot more frequently. Obviously it loses big on other hands.

I have played Lionel for maybe 1-2 years and still don't know which method gets a penalty double more often against a weak NT.

[jdonn]

I disagree that it's more playable (at least that it's evidently so) that playing double as 4+spades, 4+ other, 11+ hcp is more playable than 2♠ as 4+spades, 4+minor, 10-14 hcp. People playing other conventions won't make a bid that could be passed on unlimited hands, so no one would play 2♠ as anything with spades and 11+ hcp. Anyway the only bad thing I said about lionel is that I implied there is certainly a lot more loss than merely "missing penalty double holding a 4333 shape", which you also state is true ("Obviously it loses big on other hands"). So really the only disagreement I see his hotshots mischaracterizations of the other conventions, for which granted he had a source, just not one that should be trusted. Adam made the objection that if the strength is just a little more unevenly divided, a penalty double would get you to game whereas lionel seems to miss it, unless overcaller should just bid a lot more on a 15 count. It seems like a good and valid objection.

[P_Marlowe]

Jlall, on Feb 15 2008, 08:09 PM, said:

Uhh if you don't have a penalty double (lionel) then your overcalls are unlimited, or you just jump with good hands? That is primative to say the least.
<snip>

Just because something is primitive, does not mean it is bad,
sometimes primitive things work surprisingly well.

Just because your overcalls are not as tighly limited as would
be the case, if you played penalty doubles, does not mean,
that this is really bad, ... it is a loss, no doubt about that.
There was a time 1 level overcalls were limited, but over time
the variantion in strength of a 1 level increased, because people
required more and more strength for a power t/o double.
Peopble felt, that it is more important to show your shape faster,
... worring about level later

You have to believe in the underlying theory, if you dont,
dont use it.
I know a lot of people, better players than me, who like their
penalty double against a weak NT, ... it seems you belong to
this group.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[rogerclee]

Does not matter what system we play; if I found out that my opps did not play penalty x's vs weak NT, I would play 10-12.

[Cascade]

Jlall, on Feb 16 2008, 02:09 PM, said:

The point of penalty Xs of 1N is not to penalize them, it's so your constructive auctions can be much better and you can get to the right suits/strains most often.

Not to mention the right level.

[P_Marlowe]

rogerclee, on Feb 18 2008, 03:34 AM, said:

Does not matter what system we play; if I found out that my opps did not play penalty x's vs weak NT, I would play 10-12.

Than I wish you good luck, if your opponents
play Lionel or a similar method.
Just because Double is not a pure penalty double,
does not mean they cant pass the double.
As long as the double promises a certain amount of
strength, the double can be converted, and it will.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Cascade]

P_Marlowe, on Feb 18 2008, 10:08 PM, said:

rogerclee, on Feb 18 2008, 03:34 AM, said:

Does not matter what system we play; if I found out that my opps did not play penalty x's vs weak NT, I would play 10-12.

Than I wish you good luck, if your opponents
play Lionel or a similar method.
Just because Double is not a pure penalty double,
does not mean they cant pass the double.
As long as the double promises a certain amount of
strength, the double can be converted, and it will.

With kind regards
Marlowe

I think you miss the point it is not the penalties that are a problem when you play non strength showing doubles over a weak no trump.

It is your inability to show your values and therefore to get to the right level.

[P_Marlowe]

Cascade, on Feb 18 2008, 01:18 PM, said:

P_Marlowe, on Feb 18 2008, 10:08 PM, said:

rogerclee, on Feb 18 2008, 03:34 AM, said:

Does not matter what system we play; if I found out that my opps did not play penalty x's vs weak NT, I would play 10-12.

Than I wish you good luck, if your opponents
play Lionel or a similar method.
Just because Double is not a pure penalty double,
does not mean they cant pass the double.
As long as the double promises a certain amount of
strength, the double can be converted, and it will.

With kind regards
Marlowe

I think you miss the point it is not the penalties that are a problem when you play non strength showing doubles over a weak no trump.

It is your inability to show your values and therefore to get to the right level.

.-) I know those problems, ... since I play Lionel since a
couple of years, and I agree, those problems are real.
Although not as severe as one may think, since there
do exist certain options, which allow you to differentiate your
strength.

But peoble forget one thing, Lionel gives you the chance to get in early,
showing your shape, allowing you to fight for the part score in a pretty
effective way.
Playing Lionel also reduces the need to reopen the bidding after three
Passes over their NT opening.

As I have said before, either you believe that adv. outweight the
disadv. or you dont, if you dont believe it, those conventions are
not for you.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[rogerclee]

To me, not playing penalty x's over a mini NT (or even 12-14 NT) is about the same as not playing takeout doubles over preempts.

[Zelandakh]

These types of hands are essentially the reason that methods such as Cansino and Sharples became popular in the UK during the heyday of the weak NT. The idea, much as the suggestion of a delayed take-out double, is to get in on almost any hand with some strength and either scramble to a 7+ card fit opposite rubbish, or bid constructively opposite a good hand.

There are a number of such conventions still banging about, almost exclusively (or so it seems) in areas rife with weak NTers. Some common examples...

Sharples (the original (I think) and years ahead of its time)
X = pen
2♣ = 4+ spades
2♦ = short in clubs
2M = natural

Cansino (arguably the most popular 3-suited method in UK still)
X = pen
2♣ = ♣ + 2 others
2♦ = majors
2M = natural
2N = minors

'Reverse' Cansino
X = pen
2♣ = majors or ♦ + ♥ + ♠
2♦ = ♣ + 2 others
2M = natural
2N = minors

French vs weak (a more modern and complicated method)
X = pen
2♣ = ♦ + ♥ + ♠ or ♥ + ♠ or ♠
2♦ = ♥ + ♠ + ♣ or ♠ + ♣ or ♣
2♥ = ♠ + ♣ + ♦ or ♣ + ♦ or ♦
2♠ = ♣ + ♦ + ♥ or ♦ + ♥ or ♥
2NT = ♣ or ♦
3♣ = ♣ + ♥
3♦ = ♦ + ♠

French vs strong (perhaps more akin to the Sharples 'mix-it' philosophy)
X = ♣ + ♦ + ♥ or ♦ + ♥ or ♥
2♣ = ♦ + ♥ + ♠ or ♥ + ♠ or ♠
2♦ = ♥ + ♠ + ♣ or ♠ + ♣ or ♣
2♥ = ♠ + ♣ + ♦ or ♣ + ♦ or ♦
2♠ = natural
2NT = ♣ or ♦
3♣ = ♣ + ♥
3♦ = ♦ + ♠


Of course the disadvantage of these methods is precisely that you do sometimes get involved when you were better off out of it, and your auctions are much less 'clean' than when using Asptro, Pottage, or other more shape orientated conventions.

The main advantage for me when I played them regularly was that they are simply FUN! That said, they are not trendy just now, so even if you decide you like the look of one of them, good luck getting someone to play it with...

As some have suggested you can also 'corrupt' the 2-suited overcall methods such as Lionel and Asptro to be used with 4-4 hands, but this too has downsides. To me, if you're routinely bidding on 4432s go the whole hog and opy for a 3-suited convention; if you stick with 5-4 then 2-suiters are for you.

(-: Zel :-)