[manudude03]

32519, on 2012-March-21, 00:51, said:

This statement is absurd. Many defences to 1NT are major suit orientated. My 2♦ overcall incorporates 3 different major suit holdings:
1. 6S-4H 10-15 HCP
2. 4S-6H 10-15 HCP
3. 4S-5H 11-15 HCP (Flannery)

When partner has nothing (or not enough) to push for game, it still becomes a part-score battle. In 2/3 of these hand patterns you end up in 3 of a major. How bad is that compared to a 2NT overcall promising 5-5 in the minors and 5-10 HCP? You end up on level 3 (often doubled) with less HCP. What makes the 2NT overcall A HUGE GAIN FOR THE OPPONENTS is this: you have just succeeded in telling them the hand layout and HCP distribution. They can now bid a thin game in the majors, finessing partner for the major suits.

My 5-10 HCP hands guarantee a 5-card major. When the major is ♠, I can still push the opponents out of their comfort zone into level 3.

When I show 5-5 in the minors 11-13 HCP, partner at least has something to work with now. At favourable vulnerability, 4mX down 1 obviously scores better than the opponents making 3M.

Your 2D bid is fatally flawed by an incredible common hand type. What is advancer supposed to do with a poor hand with 3-3 in the majors? I'd rather play 6-3 fits than 4-3 fits. The problem is even worse with 2-2 (and maybe even 3-2). And don't say you pull 2H to 2S with the 6S4H hands, why would you want to push it up a level for no reason when advancer is 4-0 in the suits. The problem is exasperated when the opponents compete further. Say partner bids your 2D and RHO bids 2NT lebensohl (most good pairs won't play double=diamonds), what do you do with 3-3 in the suits? If you pass, what do you do if 3C is passed around to you? If you want a full hand, I'll give you AQx xxx Axxxx xx.

If you double with the above hand (and have it defined as no preference), then you have no way of penalising since the 2D bidder will never double.

While 2NT for the minors tells the opponents a lot, it also tells partner the same information, and can make a proper decision most of the time. Your perception of people bidding 2NT with both minors is that they all have fused dynamite belts attached to them. I'd like to think even the most aggressive bidders would know to stay out of the way with x xx Qxxxx Kxxxx, at least if vulnerable.

Long story short, you can take your -100s, I'll take my +110s.

[32519]

manudude03, on 2012-March-22, 11:33, said:

Your 2D bid is fatally flawed by an incredible common hand type.

Long story short, you can take your -100s, I'll take my +110s.

Before answering your questions:
1. After 2♦, advancer is forced to bid 2♥ allowing overcaller to say which of the 3 hand patterns is held.
2. With 6+ ♦ and a bust hand, advancer is allowed to pass the 2♦ bid.
3. Likewise with a ♣ bust, advancer is allowed to bid 3♣ with long ♣ and nothing else.
4. Why allow bidding like this? Easy, advancers hand is useless outside of the suit bid whereas the 2♦ overcaller has a trick taking hand in the majors. 2♦ or 3♣ has a reasonable chance of making.

Your 2♦ bid is fatally flawed by an incredible common hand type.
1. What is advancer supposed to do with a poor hand with 3-3 in the majors? I'd rather play 6-3 fits than 4-3 fits. The problem is even worse with 2-2 (and maybe even 3-2). And don't say you pull 2♥ to 2♠ with the 6♠4♥ hands, why would you want to push it up a level for no reason when advancer is 4-0 in the suits.
...a) 2-2 or 3-3 or 3-2 hands are the easiest to cope with when holding 6♠4♥. Advancer is forced to bid 2♥ to allow 2♦ overcaller to say which hand pattern is held. With 6♠4♥ it will always be pulled to 2♠.
...b) Showing the 4♠6♥ or 4♠5♥ will always go to level 3 WHEN THERE IS NO FURTHER OPPOSITION INTERVENTION. Further opposition intervention would indicate that advancer is very weak. If advancer’s RHO made further intervention, pass is now easy with a bust. The hand belongs to the opponents.
...c) Playing a 4-0 fit has real playable options for obvious cross-ruffing reasons.
2. The problem is exasperated when the opponents compete further. Say partner bids your 2♦ and RHO bids 2NT Lebensohl (most good pairs won't play double=diamonds), what do you do with 3-3 in the suits? If you pass, what do you do if 3♣ is passed around to you? If you want a full hand, I'll give you AQx xxx Axxxx xx.
Lebensohl or a 3♣/3♦ overcall is easily handled when advancer has competitive values and 2-2 or 3-3 or 3-2 in the majors. Advancer simply bids 3♦ (or X a 3♦ bid) conveying this message: Bid your 6-card suit. I have competitive values.
3. If you double with the above hand (and have it defined as no preference), then you have no way of penalizing since the 2♦ bidder will never double.
3♣X would be for penalty. 3♦X = competitive asking the 2♦ overcaller to bid the 6-card major. You are correct in saying that a 3♦ bid from the opponents can never be doubled for penalty with our current continuation bidding structure.
4. While 2NT for the minors tells the opponents a lot, it also tells partner the same information, and can make a proper decision most of the time. Your perception of people bidding 2NT with both minors is that they all have fused dynamite belts attached to them. I'd like to think even the most aggressive bidders would know to stay out of the way with x xx Qxxxx Kxxxx, at least if vulnerable.
I will leave you to continue with 2NT for the minors with 5-10 HCP. I still rate it as one of the poorer options for describing your hand to partner. It just becomes too easy for declarer to count out the hand (both in HCP and distribution).

[antonylee]

So advancer has a 22(54), bust, and overcaller a Flannery hand. Oops, you just ended up in 3♥ in a 5-2 fit.

[32519]

antonylee, on 2012-March-23, 00:58, said:

So advancer has a 22(54), bust, and overcaller a Flannery hand. Oops, you just ended up in 3♥ in a 5-2 fit.

Hoo-boy!!

The probability of being dealt 2♠2♥4♦5♣ and 0-5 HCP = 0.12%.
The probability of being dealt 2♠2♥5♦4♣ and 0-5 HCP = 0.12%.
So with real crap and no further opposition intervention, if you want to avoid getting to the 3-level at all costs, take your chances and pass with 2♠2♥5♦4♣. That leaves you with a 0.12% chance of the worst possible hand as advancer with 2♠2♥4♦5♣. Yes, you lose here.

The probability of being dealt 4♠5♥?♦?♣ and 11-15 HCP = 0.74%
The probability of being dealt 4♠6♥?♦?♣ and 10-15 HCP = 0.32%
The probability of being dealt 6♠4♥?♦?♣ and 10-15 HCP = 0.32%

The total comes to 1.38% versus the downside of 0.12%. A net gain of 1.26%.

Add to this the 4th major suit holding which I can show 5♠5♥?♦?♣ and 10-15 HCP = 0.42% for a total net gain of 1.68%.

If you are afraid of a 0.12% chance of ending up in a 5-2 fit opposite a bust hand, my defence to a 1NT opening bid isn’t for you.

[Zelandakh]

Are those a priori odds? You need to calculate the probability of being dealt an awkward hand given that Opener has a NT of the opponents' range and given that partner has one of the hand types shown by the 2♦ call. It should also be pointed out that there are other problem shapes without a fit at the 3 level (for example 1255, where you are almost certainly losing) and some shapes where you will lose if 8 tricks are the limit in your major despite a fit.

You need to calculate all of these to determine if you are plus or minus on the specific hands where you respond 2♦. You then need to do the same procedure for all of the other hand types to see if your method is overall good, bad, or neutral. And the odds will change depending on the NT range so it might be that your method is good against 12-14, neutral against 14-16 and bad against 15-17, for example. It is certainly correct to say that every method has hands which it finds difficult. It is certainly not correct to say that your methods are only minus in comparison to a baseline (such as Multi-Landy, say) on 0.12% of hands.

[32519]

Zelandakh, on 2012-March-23, 03:01, said:

Are those a priori odds? You need to calculate the probability of being dealt an awkward hand given that Opener has a NT of the opponents' range and given that partner has one of the hand types shown by the 2♦ call. It should also be pointed out that there are other problem shapes without a fit at the 3 level (for example 1255, where you are almost certainly losing) and some shapes where you will lose if 8 tricks are the limit in your major despite a fit.

You need to calculate all of these to determine if you are plus or minus on the specific hands where you respond 2♦. You then need to do the same procedure for all of the other hand types to see if your method is overall good, bad, or neutral. And the odds will change depending on the NT range so it might be that your method is good against 12-14, neutral against 14-16 and bad against 15-17, for example. It is certainly correct to say that every method has hands which it finds difficult. It is certainly not correct to say that your methods are only minus in comparison to a baseline (such as Multi-Landy, say) on 0.12% of hands.

So what are we looking at here?

Kamikaze = 10-12 HCP (We will ignore this one)
Weak = 11-14 HCP (fairly common at top level)
ACOL = 12-14 HCP (if you play in GB or the Netherlands, you see this all the time)
Precision = 13-15 HCP (fairly common as well)
Precision = 14-16 HCP (less common than the 13-15 HCP range)
Standard = 15-17 HCP (my guess this is the most common)
Old Goren = 16-18 HCP (rare to see this nowadays)

A lot of people play a different defence against a strong NT versus a weak NT. Just make sure you or partner don’t forget or mix them up. Having the same defence against a weak and strong NT reduces memory load. This may prove beneficial in a lengthy tournament.

So, pays yer money and makes yer pick!

[benlessard]

Quote

Precision = 14-16 HCP (less common than the 13-15 HCP range)

huh ?

[mgoetze]

benlessard, on 2012-March-23, 20:55, said:

huh ?

Just put him on ignore already...

[32519]

It is not good enough to just have an agreement on overcalling the opponents 1NT opening bid. You also need agreements on how to cope with interference over your 1NT bid.

Here is a great thread Dealing with NT Interference for you to study as well.

[32519]

Coping with interference again, this time over 2NT.

Someone at the recent Vanderbilt got their knickers in a knot after interference 2NT-P-3C-X. Again, some nice suggestions on how to deal with this sort of interference.

[32519]

TONT stands for Transfers Over No Trump.

More information on TONT can be found in this thread.

[32519]

Zelandakh, on 2012-March-23, 03:01, said:

It should also be pointed out that there are other problem shapes without a fit at the 3 level (for example 1255, where you are almost certainly losing) and some shapes where you will lose if 8 tricks are the limit in your major despite a fit.

With these hands types, my reply is the same as I gave antonylee. Where advancer sees an absolutely awful fit looming, the best decision would be to simply pass the 2♦ overcall. Advancers hand is useless outside of the suit bid whereas the 2♦ overcaller has a trick taking hand in the majors. 2♦ still has a chance of making. Furthermore, it is unlikely to get doubled as this would allow the overcaller to escape to his 6-card major.

What I like about this defence of mine is that it brings three suits into play, both majors in overcaller’s hand and either minor suit in advancer’s hand.

[klozetia]

hi all you forgot about MULTI LANDY ASTRO SO IN SHORT THIS LOOKS THAT

• x - 6+♠ or 4♥ -5+♣/♦
  • 2♣ - to suit partner (usually without 4 hearts) next:
    • 2♦-4♥ -5♦;
    • 2♥ - 6+♠ little more down (!);
    • 2♠ - 6+♠, down
  • 2♦ -® next:
    • 2♥ -4♥ -5♣/♦, down
    • 2♠-6+♠, down
    • 2BA - 6+♠, max
    • 3♣/♦ - 4♥ -5♣/♦, max
  • 2♥ -to partner suit 4+♥
  • 2♠ - to partner suit, invite if overcall was option with hearts
  • 3♣ - block, support in ♣, ♦ i ♠
  • 3♦ - invite on majors
  • 3♥ - block on majors
• 2♣ - 5-4+ in majors (landy)
• 2♦ - 6+♥ or 4♠-5♣/♦
  • 2♥ - to partner suit next: with hearts pass with spades - 2♠ (2nt- ask about minor)
  • 2♠® next:
    • 2BA - any hand max, next: 3♣® :
      • 3♦ - 5♦-4♠;
      • 3♥ - 6♥ ;
      • 3♠ - 5♣-4♠
    • 3♣/♦ - natural with 4 spades, minimum
    • 3♥ - 6♥ , minimum
  • 3♦ - invite on majors
  • 3♥ - block on majors
• 2♥ /♠ - natural 5 with 4 minor
• 2BA - 5-5 ♣/♦

GREETINGS KLAUDIUSZ

[32519]

Does your defence to a 1NT opening bid make room for game exploration after the interference? Board 4 here at the USBC both teams were playing DON’T and both teams made 10 tricks. The difference? The one stopped in 2♥, the other bid the ♥ game.

If your methods don’t allow for game exploration when overcalling a 1NT opener, you are playing losing bridge.

[32519]

Board 30: Round of 16 – Segment 2 of 8.

The amount of hands thus far in the USBC allowing you to –
1. Test your defence over a 1NT or 2NT opening, and
2. To play your Puppet Stayman sequence
thus far have been staggering.

DON’T was again employed here. A mis-defence allowed 4♥ to make.

[Statto]

32519, on 2012-May-01, 01:40, said:

If your methods don't allow for game exploration when overcalling a 1NT opener, you are playing losing bridge.

I don't know of any method that doesn't.

[32519]

DON'T appears to be an extremely popular defence to 1NT by the players in the USBC. It keeps appearing.

If these guys have figured out DON'T is effective, why bother with anything more exotic? What I have noticed as well, the lower ranking suit overcalled is usually 5-cards, while the higher ranking suit, only 4-cards. Or have the boards been rigged again in favour of DON'T?