Why is drury hated by many?

[tnsaint]

I really don't see the problem with the bidding on this hand

It seems to me the only thing that would defeat the contract is

the AJ or KJ of clubs behind the Q - or a bad trump split

[awm]

Well it seems clear that when you have a fit for partner, it is silly to make a non-forcing bid that doesn't show the fit. This causes you to play a lot of poor contracts and miss a lot of games.

 

But I don't see that as necessarily a reason to play drury. If you're willing to play at the three-level with a limit raise opposite a third seat opening, there is really no problem at all. The advantage of drury is that you don't have to play at the three level with a limit raise opposite a third seat opening. These examples where "oh no, we missed our best fit" because we weren't playing drury are missing the point. Basically responder was afraid of the three level and so decided to make a non-forcing bid in a side suit instead of using a fit jump or making a normal limit raise.

 

Now obviously there are advantages to stopping at the two-level when you have a limit raise and opener doesn't want to go to game opposite that raise. In particular, sometimes the three level doesn't make. Sometimes the extra space allows opener to make a game try which enables a more accurate decision between 3M and 4M. The more frequently opener has a lousy hand, the more useful this is likely to be. The tradeoff is that it's harder to get to the right spot with a suit-oriented hand that would bid 2m natural. Now you have to either bid 1NT (which partner could pass, and in fact will pass when he has a balanced hand, which is almost exactly the time when the minor plays better) or jump to 2NT or above to show your hand on what could be a misfit opposite a light opening bid. It's all very well to say "I play 2♣ drury but I can still bid clubs -- 2NT shows clubs" but how happy will you be when partner has some ten count with singleton club opposite your ten count with six clubs and you get to play at the three-level, quite possibly doubled, when other people reached (say) 2♦ in a 4-3 fit or 2M in a 5-2?

[MickyB]

Basically responder was afraid of the three level and so decided to make a non-forcing bid in a side suit instead of using a fit jump or making a normal limit raise.

Fit-jumps and direct limit raises are often played as showing four-card support. It's the three-card limit raises that are the issue.

[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.

 

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.

1) Gerben if you open lite then 12-13 becomes an invite hand...not ten or 11. B)

2) if you change the hand as you do then i can bid a natural 2clubs.......that is the whole point. :) Partner will play me very often for some weak two bid in the bid minor.

3) As I said a few days ok if you open sound in first or second seat, drury is great. Heck we could have a slam with my passed sound hands in first seat. :)

4) none of this means fit jumps or nonfit jumps or whatever are bad, I just do not know them....

[ceblair]

I think most people open light too often, and that Drury encourages them

in doing so.

[Zelandakh]

The only issue I have with Drury is that it is inefficient. It seems far more useful to use 1M - 2♣ for a variety of hands, only one of which is a [3-card] limit raise. There are several such methods to choose from. Many of these methods even partially hide one of the drawbacks of Drury (easy double) by making the bid natural a large portion of the time.

 

So why use Drury, when you can play Drury+? (no I don't really need an answer :))

[Gerben42]

I think most people open light too often, and that Drury encourages them

in doing so.

 

You make that sound like a bad thing. It's a tactical concept.

[calabres]

I think DRURY conventios is very usefull as many others, if well agreed.

Is a strong tool po play a Partial Score, to bid a Game and sometimes a Slam.

 

I use Drury with 3 and 4 cards, and I have obtained amazing results with the Convention.

 

My DRURY:

 

2♣ = 4+ cards 8/11

 

2♦ by ptn asks strenght: 2♥ = 8/9 and 2♠ = 10/11

 

2♦ = 3 cards 10/11

 

After Knowing strenght and nº of support cards, its very easy to make decisions.

[mike777]

I think DRURY conventios is very usefull as many others, if well agreed.

Is a strong tool po play a Partial Score, to bid a Game and sometimes a Slam.

 

I use Drury with 3 and 4 cards, and I have obtained amazing results with the Convention.

 

My DRURY:

 

2♣ = 4+ cards 8/11

 

2♦ by ptn asks strenght: 2♥ = 8/9 and 2♠ = 10/11

 

2♦ = 3 cards 10/11

 

After Knowing strenght and nº of support cards, its very easy to make decisions.

Why do your opp allow you to play at the two level in a 9 card fit. No wonder you get amazing results. :)

 

If you are being forced to the 3 level then why not use your two level minor bids as natural?

[skjaeran]

One reason I like Drury (2-way) is that I frequently open 4cM in 3rd and 4th seat. 2-way Drury is then a good tool to evaluate the fit (number of trumps) and strength at the same time.

[nige1]

I only hate it out of principle: it's a psych control...

 

Otherwise I just like it very much!  :blink:

Drury seems a useful convention :( but. if your local legislature has a psych-control regulation, adopting Drury seems to prevent you from psyching 1♥/♠ in 3rd seat :)

[foo]

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.

Ah, the dulcet tones of those attempting to confuse an issue to protect or push their agenda.

 

So let's put paid to such attempts at confusion with a bit of clarity.

 

First, the concept of a psychic control has not been discarded. What has been discarded is the concept that allowing them is good for Bridge. Psychic controls are not allowed in most jurisdictions of Organized Bridge. They are unlikely to ever be as acceptable again as they were in days of yore.

 

Second, the problem with using a raise like Drury opposite a 1st or 2nd chair opener is not that Opener might be light.

 

The problem is playing a convention like Drury when the partnership's assets are unlimited.

 

The opponents then have an impossible evaluation problem for at least the 1st 2 rounds of the auction while the Drury users have a method for communicating that the opponents are not privy to until it is very likely too late to be useful.

 

...and that, folks violates the basic concept that all players at the table should be able to judge the likely worth of the hands at the table given the bidding. No partnership is allowed to "speak in code" that the other side does not understand.

 

The use of a psychic control by a partnership whose assets are not yet limited gives them the ability to bid more safely than others at the table in any of the partscore, game or slam levels. It does so in such a way that inhibits competition to such an extent that the side using psychic controls basically has "free rein" at the table as long as they are first to speak.

 

In short, psychic controls are a way of a creating a Dominant bidding system.

 

Such things are not good for Bridge.

[Guest Jlall]

fooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

[TimG]

psychic controls

Can you define "psychic control" for us?

[awm]

A psychic control is a method that specifically protects against or makes allowances for the possibility that partner holds a hand which does not fall within the range of hands officially agreed and disclosed.

 

The possible issue with Drury is, say we have the following agreements:

 

(1) Our opening range in 3rd seat is (say) 10+ hcp and 4+ in the bid suit.

(2) If partner opens 1M in 3rd seat, any good hand with a fit must bid 2♣.

(3) If partner opens 1M in 3rd seat and then bids 2M over 2♣, then responder must pass.

 

The problem is that these agreements aren't internally consistent. I could have a hand which makes game excellent opposite 4+♠ and 10+ points, for example:

 

♠xxxxxx

♥x

♦AKQx

♣xx

 

Game has play opposite ♠AKxx and out. It's ridiculous to bid 2♣ (drury) with this and then pass 2♠ from partner... unless when partner bids 2♠, he could have less strength and/or fewer spades than our stated agreement. So something is fishy here. There is a strong indication that our "real" agreement about 1♠ is not the agreement we've disclosed.

 

I'd go so far as to say that, for drury not to be a psychic control there must exist hands where responder will bid game (or drury followed by game). Any agreement whereby drury is the strongest possible raise and yet opener's 2M rebid bars responder would seem to suggest that the 1M opening could systemically be garbage without even four cards in the suit named. Obviously if you in fact state an agreement that 1M is 3+ cards and 0+ points you are okay (but playing an illegal agreement in many places); but assuming any reasonable (perhaps any natural/legal) agreement about 1♠ there will be super-fitting hands where responder can raise to game.

[han]

I have never heard of anybody having the agreement that 2S has to be passed with a hand like that. Where is this coming from, could you name a pair that plays that? It is just as true that constructive raises by a passed hand can be used as a psychic control yet I have never heard anybody make that argument.

 

It seems to me that passing 2M with that hand is just bad bridge and has little to do with drury.

[hrothgar]

Ah, the dulcet tones of those attempting to confuse an issue to protect or push their agenda.

 

So let's put paid to such attempts at confusion with a bit of clarity.

Oh mastery of clarity, please explain the following:

 

You claim that Drury over first and second seat openings was "rightfully" banned because its a psychic control. Moreover, Drury was explictly sanctioned in the same jurisdication over third and fourth seat openings.

 

Why was it so necessary to ban psychic controls over first and second seat openings but not over third and fourth seat opening?

 

What makes this especially puzzling is the frequency of so-called "psyches" over third and fourth seat opening bids as opposed to first and second seat openings. My impression is that "Psyches" are several orders of magnitude more frequent over third and fourth seat opening. (I'd almost go so far as to say that I can't ever recall hearing of a "Psyche" in first or second seat. "Systemic Psyches ala Roth-Stone or K-S don't qualify for obvious reasons)

 

In short: If you are actually banning Drury because its a psychic control, then there is no logical reason why you'd ban this over first and second seat opening but not over third and fourth seat opening.

 

The logicial conclusion is that the refusal to sanction the bid came about for other reasons...

 

For anyone who cares, there was a decent thread on rec.games.bridge last year title "Drury as psych control".

[glen]

...I'd go so far as to say that, for drury not to be a psychic control there must exist hands where responder will bid game (or drury followed by game)...

Following your logic, if there are 1 or more hands where responder will bid 1M-4M, then drury is not a psychic control? In other terms, using your phrasing and italics, for drury to be a psychic control there must exist no hands where responder will bid 1M-4M. Is there anybody who has zero hands possible for 1M-4M?

[awm]

...I'd go so far as to say that, for drury not to be a psychic control there must exist hands where responder will bid game (or drury followed by game)...

Following your logic, if there are 1 or more hands where responder will bid 1M-4M, then drury is not a psychic control? In other terms, using your phrasing and italics, for drury to be a psychic control there must exist no hands where responder will bid 1M-4M. Is there anybody who has zero hands possible for 1M-4M?

This does not logically follow. I stated that "if there is no hand that can force game opposite a 3rd seat major opening then drury is a psychic control" which is not the same as saying "if there exists a hand that can force game opposite a 3rd seat major opening then drury is not a psychic control."

 

I have been told by several pairs when I ask about the auction (two-handed) P-1♠-2♣-2♠-P that the 2♠ bid "bars me from bidding on." They are not necessarily good pairs, and I'm not going to name names.

 

Basically the "psychic control" thing is akin to an undisclosed agreement. The point is that we're not allowed to state that something is our "official agreement" and describe our hands in that manner to opponents, but yet bid in a manner (and/or play follow-ups in a manner) that indicates a different agreement.

 

To give another simple example, with several partners I play Keri responses to notrump, where 2♣ forces 2♦. Suppose I open 1NT and partner bids 2♣, and I bid 2♥. If partner always passes this, or otherwises takes it as an indication that I psyched 1NT and really have a weak hand with hearts, then we don't "really" play natural 1NT bids -- we play 1NT as either natural or a weak hand with hearts! The 2♣ call is acting as a psychic control, giving me a way to show that I psyched in an uncontested auction. Things get even worse if partner virtually always bids 2♣ on game-going hands (i.e. never just raises to 3NT). If partner would assume that my 2♥ call shows a strong notrump with a heart suit so good I can't stand to bid 2♦, or that my 2♥ call is a "forget" of our Keri agreements and response to stayman (both hands consistent with my original 1NT call) then this eliminates the problem. The issue is when I have some follow-up bid that clearly indicates to partner that I did not have a hand described by my prior bidding.

 

Similarly I know a number of pairs who claim to play a 2♦ overcall of the opposing 1NT opening as "majors" but then when the 2♦ bidder rebids diamonds over partner's major suit preference it shows "diamonds only, not majors." Bidding this way implies that their real agreement is "2♦ overcall is diamonds or majors" which really should have been disclosed.

 

Psychic controls via passing forcing bids or in competitive situations are much trickier. For example, if I open 1NT (15-17) and my LHO doubles for penalty, and partner has 13 hcp, he's going to realize that there's a joker at the table. This is just logical inference, not an indication that we have "special methods" to allow me to indicate I don't have my 15-17. Sometimes the line can be kind of fuzzy though, I admit.

[Free]

I only hate it out of principle: it's a psych control...

 

Otherwise I just like it very much!  :)

Drury seems a useful convention :) but. if your local legislature has a psych-control regulation, adopting Drury seems to prevent you from psyching 1♥/♠ in 3rd seat :(

My local legislature allows Drury, allows light openings,..., allows a lot! But in principle Drury is a psych control. It's like multi being a BSC.

 

However, both are soooooo popular that they became exceptions... :D So in principle it's still a psych control, in practice it's a legal convention.

[awm]

Legality of drury also depends on how you describe it. For example if you describe:

 

Pass - 1♠(1)

2♣(2) - 2♠(3)

 

(1) Third seat, so 8+ points and 4+ spades

(2) Maximum pass with 3♠

(3) Less than a first seat opening bid, so 8-11 hcp.

 

Then it's not really a psychic control. If you describe:

 

Pass - 1♠(1)

2♣(2) - 2♠(3)

 

(1) "Just bridge" no explanation

(2) Asking if partner has a real opening bid

(3) No I do not have a real opening bid

 

Then it seems an awful lot like a psychic control.

[ArtK78]

This psychic control argument is totally misplaced.

 

Psychic controls in the traditional sense are bids made in place of the usual bid for a given hand which cater to the possibility that partner has psyched. For example, a classic psychic control is a 2NT response to an opening one bid showing 20 HCP. No one would bid 2NT with 20 HCP opposite an opening one bid unless it allowed partner to pass with less than 4 HCP for his psychic opening bid.

 

Drury is not a psychic control because it SHOWS a hand, it does not ask partner if he psyched. It shows a hand with at least 3 card support for partner's major suit opening bid and invitational values opposite a full opening hand. It allows the partnership to avoid getting to the 3 level when partner has less than a full opening hand, which is quite common for a 3rd seat opening bid. It is not intended to cater to a psychic opening bid in 3rd seat.

[mike777]

Someone told me one of the main goals of competitive bidding is to make sure the opp play as seldom as possible at the two level in an 8 or 9 card fit.

 

Playing Drury seems to assume, the opp seldom overcall or open in first or second seat and allow you to play Drury in third and fourth seat in the first place and two once you find your fit the opp allow you to play at a low level? Of course none of this is 100% but it makes one wonder how frequent Drury wins as opposed to other winning uses for 2 of a minor?

[han]

Adam you hang out with the wrong people.

[ArtK78]

By the time Drury is bid and responded to, the opponents have each passed at least twice. They may still come in, but at least you will have determined how far you want to go in the hand.

 

So, I am not too worried about competition at that point in the auction.