Why is drury hated by many?

[mike777]

If I played a system of very light openers in first two seats, I would be MORE likely to open light in 3rd not less. It's called stealing from your opponents and making their lives tough, and it works even better if you know partner's pass is weaker.

Agree 100%. Great post.

[hrothgar]

If I played a system of very light openers in first two seats, I would be MORE likely to open light in 3rd not less. It's called stealing from your opponents and making their lives tough, and it works even better if you know partner's pass is weaker.

There's a couple problems with this approach:

 

1. You end up with massive amounts of dead bidding space. If you open very light in first and second seat, you'll rarely have hands suitable for advancing over partner's light 3rd/4th seat opening.

 

2. You'll often end up very exposed. Suppose that partner has passed in first or second seat. You open a 10-12 NT in 3rd... You won't have any values or shape when the opponent's put down the red card. Obviously, this is an extreme example, but the basic concept holds true...

[jdonn]

If I played a system of very light openers in first two seats, I would be MORE likely to open light in 3rd not less. It's called stealing from your opponents and making their lives tough, and it works even better if you know partner's pass is weaker.

There's a couple problems with this approach:

 

1. You end up with massive amounts of dead bidding space. If you open very light in first and second seat, you'll rarely have hands suitable for advancing over partner's light 3rd/4th seat opening.

 

2. You'll often end up very exposed. Suppose that partner has passed in first or second seat. You open a 10-12 NT in 3rd... You won't have any values or shape when the opponent's put down the red card. Obviously, this is an extreme example, but the basic concept holds true...

1. what do you mean?

 

2. It's not totally safe but I'm not that worried. It's very effective.

[ArtK78]

I have always been intrigued by the idea of a 10-12 1NT opening bid in third seat opposite a passed partner playing a light initial action system. What is the logic in that? You announce to the world that you have less than 13 HCP facing a partner who failed to open in a light opening system. Does the word double occur to anyone?

[hrothgar]

If I played a system of very light openers in first two seats, I would be MORE likely to open light in 3rd not less. It's called stealing from your opponents and making their lives tough, and it works even better if you know partner's pass is weaker.

There's a couple problems with this approach:

 

1. You end up with massive amounts of dead bidding space. If you open very light in first and second seat, you'll rarely have hands suitable for advancing over partner's light 3rd/4th seat opening.

 

2. You'll often end up very exposed. Suppose that partner has passed in first or second seat. You open a 10-12 NT in 3rd... You won't have any values or shape when the opponent's put down the red card. Obviously, this is an extreme example, but the basic concept holds true...

 

1. what do you mean?

Suppose that you've passed in 1st seat playing an highly aggressive opening system like Magic Diamond.

 

Partner opens a light 1♠ in third seat and RHO passes:

 

What should a 2/1 show?

What should a jump to 2NT show?

What show a jump to the three level show?

 

The fact that you passed in 1st seat rules out most of the traditional meanings for these bids: You aren't going to have hands suitable for a fit jump or a mini-splinter or even drury. You probably can't ever make game on power...

 

It might be possible to define some reason meaning for a sequence like

 

P - 1S

3S

 

or

 

P - 1S

2D

 

however I'm at a loss to know what that would be...

[jdonn]

I would make 1NT 2C 2D 2H natural and everything else a raise, I don't see a problem.

[hrothgar]

I have always been intrigued by the idea of a 10-12 1NT opening bid in third seat opposite a passed partner playing a light initial action system. What is the logic in that? You announce to the world that you have less than 13 HCP facing a partner who failed to open in a light opening system. Does the word double occur to anyone?

Thats my point:

 

Most pairs who play light opening systems use a 14-16 or 15-17 NT in 3rd/4th...

[Echognome]

I have always been intrigued by the idea of a 10-12 1NT opening bid in third seat opposite a passed partner playing a light initial action system.  What is the logic in that?  You announce to the world that you have less than 13 HCP facing a partner who failed to open in a light opening system.  Does the word double occur to anyone?

Thats my point:

 

Most pairs who play light opening systems use a 14-16 or 15-17 NT in 3rd/4th...

Played 8-14 balanced in 3rd NV for awhile. Purely for the preemptive value. No systems afterward, so P - (P) - 1NT - (P); 2♣ would be natural.

[awm]

I've always liked an approach where we pass weak balanced hands, but open very aggressively with shape (i.e. rule of 18).

 

Opposite such a 1st/2nd seat style, it still makes sense to open aggressively with shape and/or a good suit in 3rd seat. Typically I use responses like:

 

1N = semi-forcing, can be 9-11 balanced with less than 4 trumps

2m = 5-7 with 6+ in the minor (2m openings are not this weak)

2M = normal single raise

Various jumps show raises with 4 trumps, either 9-11 balanced w/4 trumps or 8-9 three-suited

 

Of course it's possible to get to the three-level with 17 hcp pretty easily, but you're protected by having a nine-card fit and non-flat hands.

[EricK]

There are quite a few issues Drury:

 

1. It allows LHO a cheap pre-balance at the two level on a known fit auction (eg P (P) 1S (P) 2C allows LHO to bid X, 2D or 2H).

2. It takes away a natural bid.

3. The hands where you are most likely to benefit (i.e. where partner has opened very light) are the hands where you are least likely to be able to use it - because your RHO, with the strongest hand at the table, will probably bid.

4. Conversely, the hands where you get to use it (i.e. where RHO ha passed) are likely to be the hands where you don't need it - because partner will probably have the strongest hand at the table

5. If, because you play Drury, you open some hands which you otherwise wouldn't, then it does look like you are using it as a psychic control.

6. On the other hand, if you would open those hands anyway, then agreeing to play Drury is rather cowardly!

 

Most people think the upsides compensate for these. Some don't.

[Gerben42]

Drury is not needed if you open lite in first or second seat.

 

Nonsense.

 

Monday I held as dealer:

 

[hv=d=s&v=a&s=sxxxhxxdkjtxxcajx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

Calling this an opening bid even when "opening light" is just ridiculous. Your bid after

 

P P 1♠ P ?

 

You can choose between:

 

* 2♠ (underbid)

* 2♦ (not forcing)

* 1NT (denies fit)

 

Have fun!

 

That is how the cookie crumbles!

 

1. It allows LHO a cheap pre-balance at the two level on a known fit auction (eg P (P) 1S (P) 2C allows LHO to bid X, 2D or 2H).

 

Which might be a bad idea if it's only a 4-3 fit.

 

2. It takes away a natural bid.

 

Replaced by 2NT which now shows ♣.

 

3. The hands where you are most likely to benefit (i.e. where partner has opened very light) are the hands where you are least likely to be able to use it - because your RHO, with the strongest hand at the table, will probably bid.

 

Opposite my hand from Monday, I'd want to play 2♠ not 3 opposite a standard Rule-of-20 minimum. Being able to invite without going to the 3-level saves MP and IMPs alike.

 

5. If, because you play Drury, you open some hands which you otherwise wouldn't, then it does look like you are using it as a psychic control.

 

Not if you now open rule-of-18 hands now rather than rule-of-20 which you couldn't before because partner on the hand above would force to the 3-level to invite, fearing to miss a very cold game.

 

6. On the other hand, if you would open those hands anyway, then agreeing to play Drury is rather cowardly!

 

The cowards are the ones standing in the end when the brave have died in battle!

[Gerben42]

Suppose that you've passed in 1st seat playing an highly aggressive opening system like Magic Diamond.

 

Partner opens a light 1♠ in third seat and RHO passes:

 

What should a 2/1 show?

What should a jump to 2NT show?

What show a jump to the three level show?

 

In my Magic Diamond, opening 1♠ in third seat does no longer show "not too bad 8" to 12 but "whatever you feel like" to 15 HCP so you can use these bids after all. Still these bids are quite rare but the occasional 22-23 point game can be reached this way.

[mike777]

There's a couple problems with this approach:

 

1. You end up with massive amounts of dead bidding space. If you open very light in first and second seat, you'll rarely have hands suitable for advancing over partner's light 3rd/4th seat opening.

 

2. You'll often end up very exposed. Suppose that partner has passed in first or second seat. You open a 10-12 NT in 3rd... You won't have any values or shape when the opponent's put down the red card. Obviously, this is an extreme example, but the basic concept holds true...

 

1. what do you mean?

Suppose that you've passed in 1st seat playing an highly aggressive opening system like Magic Diamond.

 

Partner opens a light 1♠ in third seat and RHO passes:

 

What should a 2/1 show?

What should a jump to 2NT show?

What show a jump to the three level show?

 

The fact that you passed in 1st seat rules out most of the traditional meanings for these bids: You aren't going to have hands suitable for a fit jump or a mini-splinter or even drury. You probably can't ever make game on power...

 

It might be possible to define some reason meaning for a sequence like

 

P - 1S

3S

 

or

 

P - 1S

2D

 

however I'm at a loss to know what that would be...

Thoughtful system theory inquiry post that made me take time to respond.

 

here was one response.

 

"These questions are almost too broad to answer.

 

 

 

"Assuming you meant after partner opens 1M? Probably a hand that you don’t want to play 1N, probably a hand that you SHOULD have opened or nearly opened but did not have the courage of your convictions. Possibly a really good weak 2 bid in diamonds (not available to those who play Modified Mexican). Possibly a hand that defied description either as an opening bid or an opening pre-empt, for example possibly xx,xx,xx,AQJTxxx. Not good enough for 1C and too good for 3C (except possibly at VUL versus not).

 

 

 

..... and I play 2N as Jacoby over a major (“since you opened 1S, I now have a game force hand, example Kxxx,x,AQxxxx,xx, that I did not open”). The responses are different though. 3M says I have a DOG, and you bid more at your own risk, anything else would retain it’s normal meaning. Fo.. and me, that is a little backwards though because we play a souped up version of Jacoby that would not apply here. We would probably just leap to game or bid something to IMPLY slam interest, etc. This change in approach only works well if you use normal Jacoby 2N.

 

 

 

2N over a MINOR opening does not exist. You should have opened.

 

 

 

If you bid it, you own the responsibility for the result. This is also one case where P-----P-----1minor-------P------2N (ugh, does not exist)------P-----3same minor would NOT be forcing, it would be corrective (leave me alone, I want to play 3 of my suit).

 

 

 

Regards,"

[mike777]

Drury is not needed if you open lite in first or second seat.

 

Nonsense.

 

Monday I held as dealer:

 

[hv=d=s&v=a&s=sxxxhxxdkjtxxcajx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

Calling this an opening bid even when "opening light" is just ridiculous. Your bid after

 

P P 1♠ P ?

 

You can choose between:

 

* 2♠ (underbid)

* 2♦ (not forcing)

* 1NT (denies fit)

 

Have fun!

 

Nonsense

Easy 2S bid and not close to an underbid. Constructive raises are 3 card support and around 8-11.

 

 

 

Major suit raises still on, same as if first or second seat opener.

 

btw I agree not close to light opener. :)

 

Have fun!

[tysen2k]

I have always been intrigued by the idea of a 10-12 1NT opening bid in third seat opposite a passed partner playing a light initial action system.  What is the logic in that?  You announce to the world that you have less than 13 HCP facing a partner who failed to open in a light opening system.  Does the word double occur to anyone?

We take that to the next level.

 

We open very light in 1st/2nd and our 3rd seat 1NT is 8-15 HCP with no 4cM. We'd do 0-15 if it were GCC legal. As is, it is legal if there are no conventions after it. 2 of anything as a sign-off response is just fine with us. It works great and is an excellent preempt.

 

Our other 1-bids are sound and constructive.

 

Tysen

[Yogeshdg]

Drury is cool especially 2 way drury. It allows you to open 4 card majors in balancing seat with 8+ HCP.

[EricK]

Drury is not needed if you open lite in first or second seat.

 

Nonsense.

 

Monday I held as dealer:

 

[hv=d=s&v=a&s=sxxxhxxdkjtxxcajx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]

 

Calling this an opening bid even when "opening light" is just ridiculous. Your bid after

 

P P 1♠ P ?

 

You can choose between:

 

* 2♠ (underbid)

* 2♦ (not forcing)

* 1NT (denies fit)

 

Have fun!

 

That is how the cookie crumbles!

 

1. It allows LHO a cheap pre-balance at the two level on a known fit auction (eg P (P) 1S (P) 2C allows LHO to bid X, 2D or 2H).

 

Which might be a bad idea if it's only a 4-3 fit.

 

2. It takes away a natural bid.

 

Replaced by 2NT which now shows ♣.

 

3. The hands where you are most likely to benefit (i.e. where partner has opened very light) are the hands where you are least likely to be able to use it - because your RHO, with the strongest hand at the table, will probably bid.

 

Opposite my hand from Monday, I'd want to play 2♠ not 3 opposite a standard Rule-of-20 minimum. Being able to invite without going to the 3-level saves MP and IMPs alike.

 

5. If, because you play Drury, you open some hands which you otherwise wouldn't, then it does look like you are using it as a psychic control.

 

Not if you now open rule-of-18 hands now rather than rule-of-20 which you couldn't before because partner on the hand above would force to the 3-level to invite, fearing to miss a very cold game.

 

6. On the other hand, if you would open those hands anyway, then agreeing to play Drury is rather cowardly!

 

The cowards are the ones standing in the end when the brave have died in battle!

On your hand, 2♠ isn't really an underbid - a 9 loser hand with 3 small in support. Obviously it would accept any game try but if partner passes I doubt you'd be too high.

 

But note that if you play fit non jumps here, so that 2♦ would show the raise to 2♠ plus a ♦ suit then that is a massive improvement on Drury. For one thing, it allows partner the chance to evaluate the ♦Q or singleton ♦.

 

As to some of my original 6 points,

 

1. It must be an advantage for them to be able to balance at the 2 level rather than the guess whether to balance at the 3 level. Even if you have a 4-3 fit you have to decide whether to bid to 2M (which might make) or let them play or double them. And I don't think either player will generally have enough info to make consistently good choices.

 

2. If the benefit of Drury is that it allows you to play at the 2 level instead of the 3 level, I am surprised you are so blase about replacing a bid which allows you to play at the 2 level with one which forces you to the 3 level! Especially as Drury is used when you have a known fit but your 2NT bid may be on a total misfit.

 

3. But this applies whether you are a passed hand or not. You are really making a case for an artificial low-level invitational raise of partner's suit in all positions.

[lilboyman]

I don't like Drury because it doesn't come up very often due to aggressiveness of my opening bids. Thus, when it does come up, if my partner doesn't forget it, then I do.

[foo]

Drury is great if you open sound in first or second seat.

Drury is not needed if you open lite in first or second seat.

I knew of a very aggressive matchpoint pair who used permanent Drury, so as to be able to open consistently on 8-9 hcps <_<

Barry Crane wanted to be be able to play Drury in all seats. The ACBL would not let him.

 

Drury by an unpassed hand was considered a psychic control by the reviewing authorities.

They were and are correct.

 

If you are playing Drury in 1st or 2nd chair, you are playing a method that is not legal in many jurisdictions.

 

OTOH, Drury in 3rd and 4th chair is a very useful way of probing for games and slams based on degree of fit and controls or of getting into the auction and out quickly with hands that are not interested in game or slam.

 

I prefer Two Way Reverse Drury because

a= as the saying goes, "The 9th trump is the most important card in Bridge."

b= Robson and Segel: "We need more ways of raising partner."

(which is why I disagree with them about Support X's not being needed sometimes. They always are.)

c1= Responder is rarely going to have a natural 2m bid

c2= When they do, the opponents are not letting you play 2m very often.

 

The bottom line here is that Drury is not a license to open on dreck (Yiddish for crap, filth, or garbage).

 

Even "light" 3rd seat 1M openings should have a reason, for instance being lead directing, for the opening.

 

EDIT: and xxx/xx/KJxxx/AJx or the like is a perfectly normal raise to 2S.

9 losers, 9 HCP, 3 controls, etc. I could go on and on.

An Invitational+ hand has 8- losers and 3+ cover cards:

xxx/x/KJxxx/AJxx

This hand is an Invite and might be worth a GF opposite the correct minimum 1S.

xxxx/x/KJxxx/AJx

This hand is a GF opposite a full opening bid of 1S.

Yes, the 9th trump is that important.

(I suspect Gerben gets too high a lot...)

[hrothgar]

Barry Crane wanted to be be able to play Drury in all seats.  The ACBL would not let him.

 

Drury by an unpassed hand was considered a psychic control by the reviewing authorities.

They were and are correct.

More "wisdom" from Foo

 

Playing Drury opposite a first or second seat opening bid can hardly be considered a psychic control. Crane played methods in which a light openings in first and second seat were systemic. The light openings practiced by his partnership were not exceptions. They were not random deviations. They were integral parts of the system and should not be described as "psyches".

 

In much the same vein, the artificial 2♣ advance that Crane wanted to use wasn't a "psychic control" any more that Drury over a 3rd/4th seat opening is a psychic control. (Even the Brits have stopped describing Drury as a psychic control).

 

 

I agree that the ACBL has the authority to ban Drury over a first or second seat opening. (They can sanction or refuse to sanction whatever they damn well please). However, if the ACBL is going to ban a method, they should do so in the correct manner. They should openly state that they don't want to allow methods that support light openings in first / second seat rather than hiding behind intellectually bankrupt arguments.

 

From what I can tell, the entire concept of "Psychic Controls" has gone by the wayside. These concepts were discarded when people got more sophisticated about what constitues an "agreement".

 

Its sad to see folks trying to resurrect this sort of crap.

[Finch]

I play drury opposite 3rd and 4th seat openers, but not because I open rubbish in 3rd seat. I only open light in third with a good suit (or a good lead), and I don't open light in 4th at all (who does?).

 

So for me the main purpose of Drury is not to stop at the 2-level when opener doesn't have an opening bid. Particularly if we have a 9-card fit, there's usually no way to stop at the 2-level anyway as the opponents tend to bid.

 

I started playing Drury because I was fed up with the auction P P 1M P 2m all pass when responder had a limit raise. As opener in third seat, I thought it was normal to pass the 2m bid looking at, say, KQJxx xx Axx xxx and that led to silly contracts. There are various solutions to this:

 

- play 1NT as forcing

- play 2m as natural and forcing

- play non-fit jumps (2m promises a fit for the major)

- give up on 2m natural and play Drury

 

We went for the last option. I know that in theory this costs us because we can't bid 2minor natural, but somehow in practice I don't seem to lose out having to bid 1NT on that hand. Maybe non-fit jumps are better, I haven't tried them.

[Gerben42]

I started playing Drury because I was fed up with the auction P P 1M P 2m all pass when responder had a limit raise.

 

Me too. Okay my hand was a bit light but I hope the idea was clear. Change it to:

 

[hv=s=sq63h5dkjt73ck843]133|100|[/hv]

 

Unsuspecting natural bidder:

 

Pass - 1♠

2♦ - Pass

 

The Drury bidder can show his raise.

Unlike Frances I play 2♦ still as natural (and no fit!) and 2NT as ♣:

 

[hv=s=sq63h5dkjt73ck843]133|100|[/hv]

 

Not a vuln. 3♣ opening, not 1♣ either...

[mike777]

1) example one is an easy 2s.....8-11 support pts. I do not think this aceless wonder is worth 12 support pts but say it is close enough.... If you do then bid a semiforcing 1nt. Partner will pass with a minimum and the opp will bid some hearts I suppose. They have 9 hearts.

2) your example two is an easy one club opener, if you open lite, 2 quick tricks and an easy rebid.

 

My point only is a 3 card limit raise is very rare. A natural 2 of a minor(no wk twos in the minors) over 1M opener is more frequent.

[Trinidad]

I fully agree with Frances. To me Reverse Drury is not a checkback to see if partner had his bid or not. It is a conventional raise of opener's major.

 

Common sense says that the only passed hands that can envision game opposite a minimum are the hands with a fit. That means that it is useful to devide the responses in bids that show a fit and bids that deny a fit. Bids that show a fit are forcing. Bids that deny a fit are not forcing.

 

If you can't separate the forcing bids from the non forcing bids, you will get a mess when it isn't necessary.

 

Rik

[Gerben42]

1) example one is an easy 2s.....8-11 support pts. I do not think this aceless wonder is worth 12 support pts but say it is close enough.... If you do then bid a semiforcing 1nt. Partner will pass with a minimum and the opp will bid some hearts I suppose. They have 9 hearts.

 

1♠ - 2♠ by a passed hand does NOT show 8 - 11 support points for anyone I know. It's simply 6 - 9. Since 1♠ - 1NT can be passed now, it denies a fit.

 

2) your example two is an easy one club opener, if you open lite, 2 quick tricks and an easy rebid.

 

That is for each partnership to decide. You can change it to AJTxxx if you like. If you still open that, I give up.