What about BEST convention ?

[Cave_Draco]

To name the best convention I will choose as criteria:

1) high frequency

2) high benefits

3) no memory burden

Whether it is a convention or not depends on your basic system, :D

 

However, on Chamaco's criteria?

 

The Weak NT!

[Trpltrbl]

Weak NT, 2 way and Roman carding.

 

Mike :D

[EricK]

To name the best convention I will choose as criteria:

1) high frequency

2) high benefits

3) no memory burden

Whether it is a convention or not depends on your basic system, :D

 

However, on Chamaco's criteria?

 

The Weak NT!

Given x HCP in your hand, your partner's expected HCP holding is (40-x)/3, so your combined expected holding is (40+2x)/3.

 

From this we deduce, that a 12-14 NT has an expected combined HCP around 22 i.e. just right for making 1NT, but a 15-17 NT has an expected combined HCP of 24 ie almost enough for 3NT!

 

Hence it is the 15-17 NT which could be considered conventional (cowardly, even!). The 12-14 NT is 100% natural.

 

Eric

[1eyedjack]

To name the best convention I will choose as criteria:

1) high frequency

2) high benefits

3) no memory burden

Whether it is a convention or not depends on your basic system, :lol:

 

However, on Chamaco's criteria?

 

The Weak NT!

Given x HCP in your hand, your partner's expected HCP holding is (40-x)/3, so your combined expected holding is (40+2x)/3.

 

From this we deduce, that a 12-14 NT has an expected combined HCP around 22 i.e. just right for making 1NT, but a 15-17 NT has an expected combined HCP of 24 ie almost enough for 3NT!

 

Hence it is the 15-17 NT which could be considered conventional (cowardly, even!). The 12-14 NT is 100% natural.

 

Eric

Strictly, I think it is not the "expected number of tricks" that determines the issue, but the integral of the product of the score achieved by every possible number of tricks (from 0 to 13) and the frequency of that event, on the assumption that undertricks are doubled.

 

That is I think the basis of the arguments of those who advocate the strong NT. It is a weak argument and not one to which I subscribe (after all I prefer the weak 1N), but it is nevertheless a stronger argument than the alternative of looking just to the expected number of tricks without considering the consequences should the expected result not materialise.

[Cave_Draco]

Hence it is the 15-17 NT which could be considered conventional (cowardly, even!). The 12-14 NT is 100% natural.

Yup, but the thread is "SAYC and 2/1 Discussion", :lol:

 

Where the Weak NT would count as a convention?

[EarlPurple]

Weak NT is not conventional in the sense of "artificial" as you bid it intending to play there. (Shouldn't artificial bids therefore be called unconventional?)

 

Take-out doubles are artificial as you do not intend partner to pass them. But they are the most common convention and I think even the naturalists were allowed to use them against the scientists in their contests (which were played around 1990 I think).

 

For bidding conventions, I think I would like to add good-bad 2NT (Lebensohl, but extends to more situations).

 

Smith peters (echos) are occasionally useful for example if West leads against NT from an ace and it goes to jack and king. (Reverse-smith is an alternative and I guess it's a matter of taste). It's useful for opening leader to know who has the queen. When it is obvious not to continue the suit, or it is irrelevant, you can often play suit-preference signals on opponent's suit (especially trumps) and it can be more useful.

[helene_t]

Gambling 3NT and support (re)-doubles, to name a few of those that were also mentioned as "worst" conventions.

[bearmum]

Gambling 3NT and support (re)-doubles, to name a few of those that were also mentioned as "worst" conventions.

guess that proved the old saying"one man's meat is another man's poison" :)

[Chamaco]

An article on an italian magazine mentions the result of the poll "what's the best convention" held in Reno(USA) at the nationals.

 

Grant Baze: he'd prefer to have no conventions at all. He mentions the anecdote of the old Portland Club, where all conventions where rigorously banned; one day someone suggested to allow tht the double of 1 club opener by opps was not for penalty; there was a reunion of the Portland Club Members and when they finnaly allowed the double of 1C to be NOT for penalty, Reese commented: "You made a huge mistake: you opened the door!"

However, having to pick one, Baze chose splinters and minisplinters(he says 2useful to show shortness below 3NT").

 

Brian Senior: Splinters, weak or strong (intermediate splinters bid differentlky) bcos they help pard to evaluate the hand correctly.

 

Paul Soloway: Splinters help pard to "weights" his cards; RKCB very useful to bid good slams.

 

Ron Sukoneck : unusual 3NT opening (7-10 hcp, 6-5 or better in minors)

 

Jill Meyers : "Polish weak 2s" = 2♥/♠ to show 5 cards + a side suit. Says: "I like it because it create a lot of movement" :)

 

Bart Bramley : Flannery . "I like it because it covers a difficult hand to bid and it preempts opps".

Second choice of Bramley is: step responses to strong 2♣.

"The number of controls is the primary information needed by opener to decide if slam/game is possible"

 

Chris Compton: Stayman. "Fundamental in matchpoints events, to find 8 cards fit". Compton plays non forcing stayman.

 

Steve Robinson: Support double. "This allows to differentiate the type of support and decide according to the law of total tricks".

Second choice for Robinson: Last Train to Clarksville: "One more chance to communicate extra strength and to hand the decision to partner, an essential action if things go wrong and somebody will have to be blamed" :P

 

Betty Ann Kennedy: Negative double. "Useful for all those hand which cannot bid at the 1 level and do not have a comfortable 2-level bid".

 

Eric Kokish: double in all its forms. "Nowadays double is rarely penalty, and there are lots of messages that can conveyed to partner. It is a useful and necessary tools, and requires thorough discussion of the situations of forcing pass"

 

John Mohan: Odd-even carding. "They say that using o-e you may miss the right card for encourage or discourage; well believe me, this is much more common using standard or udca. With o-e carding you have all the options and this is essential when you want to convey the nmaximum info to pard. Believe me, o-e is by far the best carding system"

 

Richard Freeman: RKCB is no doubt the best tool to reach a good accuracy in slam bidding. If used correctly, it's amazing how accurate you can be in selecting the final contract.

Second choice: Stayman.

 

Zia Mahmood: Blackwood "i want to know if we miss 2 aces because if it is true that u can make a slam one ace off, 99% of the times you go down when you miss 2 aces"

 

Geoff Hampson: rkcb. "There's nothing I hate more than bidding a slam 2 aces off"

 

Chip Martel: Transfer bids and every form of takeout/negative/responsive double

" Transfer bids have many advantage: high frequency, may be used with many ranges of strength, right-side the contract and easy to use. The frequency of use is also a plus for non-penalty doubles, which let partner describe his hand further and help figuring the combined strength"

 

Jan Martel: Weak NT opening. "It is good to be able to have a sound opening 1 of a minor, either a real suit or a strong NT hand"

 

Barry Rigal: Fitshowing jumps. "They are a very good tool in competitive auctions, help partner decide"

 

Mike Passell: Drury. "Using Drury you may open light in 3rd seat to give a good lead to pard and not going overboard"

 

Bob Hamman: Drury. " I can live without transfer and ace asking bids, but Drury is necessary to stop at a reasonable level and to suggest good leads by 3rd hand opener"

[Free]

Best conventions and openings:

 

- A step-1 relay (which doesn't say anything about the bidder's hand). Saves most bidding space, and lets one player know 2 hands.

- Forcing-pass! Great bid, stays low and is forcing for at least 1 round...

- RKCB. Great slam tool, weither it is bid by 4NT, through kickback or redwood, or at low level.

- Lorenzo-two's when NV (2X = 0-7HCP, 4+ cards in X). These gave me many good scores in MP events, and some good ones in imp events. In the long run they gain a lot. I'm used to play these only in following positions: 2♥ in 1st & 2nd seat, 2♠ only in 1st seat, and only when we are NV. No 4-3 in Majors allowed since we'd lose the 5-3 fit too much playing in a 4-2... 4-4 or 5-3 is allowed :)

- Gambling 3♠. Right-sides the contract.

- Inverted lead-directing Dbl's when opps bid our suit (Pass = lead, Dbl = don't lead). Gives great pressure, and keeps opps from finding a double-half-stop like Jxx vs Qx.

 

Best carding (my opinion):

- coded 9/10's. Gives a lot of useful info to p.

- o/e discards on first discard, count on second discard unless in same suit as first discard. Has both encouraging as discouraging methods, and gives count in certain suits. Most usefull situation is when you have a long suit which you have bid, you can show exactly what suit you want, or don't want, without giving away a possible trick.

- obvious shift. Guess B)

[mishovnbg]

"Equality" - the first complete method of transfer bids in competition, invented by me and Ben. It is even better than regular take out double, because it is extension of it. It is better than use of NT bid as take out, because add possibilty of nat 1NT/3NT contracts, without losing distributional bids. It is the best ;) :

 

http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...?showtopic=2727

http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...?showtopic=2731

http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...?showtopic=2730

http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...?showtopic=2728

http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...?showtopic=2729

 

Misho

[luis]

I'd say Ogust: Allows you to open horrible hands, medium hands and good hands without making pd guess the contract every time. Opps do have to guess.

[hrothgar]

From my perspective, the most useful development in bridge was the recognition that first step responses to most bids should be treated as artificial and forcing.

 

Note what is covered by this:

 

1. Relays

2. Asking bids

3. Conventional doubles

4. Stayman (for those of you who don't recognize that Stayman is a relay)

5. Checkback

6. Herbert Negatives

7. Gerber

...

[Fluffy]

[*]Lead of Ace against NT demands partner's highest honor or count if none

I play that King lead is the one that demands such thing, and I am happier with it (althou a closer look makes me think they are equal).

 

The best conevention in my opinion is support double, because I don´t even consider takeout double a convention, adn at carding none convention is so neccesary because you coudl stand playing oen another ;).

 

Tjhe same happens to rkcb, you can play kcb instead :D.

[1eyedjack]

I'd say Ogust: Allows you to open horrible hands, medium hands and good hands without making pd guess the contract every time. Opps do have to guess.

I am not a great fan of ogust. It ain't "bad", but I would not rank it among the best conventions (if only because there is too much competition for that spot). There are other good schemes of continuations following a weak 2 opener.

[Trpltrbl]

Thx for all the responses.

 

Mike :D

[paulhar]

The Lightner double. When used well, it will swing a thousand points into your side.

How frequently do you use the Lightner double ?

Once every how many boards ?

Maybe once every twenty thousand? I've been playing since 1973 and when I was young and foolish I played almost every day. I have used the Lightner Double twice. The first time was against a grand slam in hearts calling for a spade with a singleton ace. The opponents duly ruffed...

 

The second time was just last month on BBO. I was playing in a game with some very strong players. I had the ♣AQ over an auction that started in 1S P 2C and they ended up in 6♠. I doubled and they ran to 6NT making from the club side and the whole table had a good laugh at my expense.

 

By far I think the most useful convention (if you could call it that) is a new suit forcing over a 1-level opening bid.

[1eyedjack]

The first time was against a grand slam in hearts calling for a spade with a singleton ace.  The opponents duly ruffed...

That should come as no surprise. If they have bid a grand missing an ace then they presumably have the void?

The second time was just last month on BBO.  I was playing in a game with some very strong players.  I had the ♣AQ over an auction that started in 1S P 2C and they ended up in 6♠.  I doubled and they ran to 6NT making from the club side and the whole table had a good laugh at my expense.

Is either of these examples a Lightner double? I would just call them a double.

[Rebound]

I wouldn't drag this discussion out any further if there wasn't something to add, however, although I agree that the classics are probably the best, e.g. t/o dbls, ace asking bids (Blackwood, RKB, Gerber), strong 2C, and Staymen, there are a couple I really like that no one else I run into on BBO seems to play.

 

#1. Jordan. Over partner's 1M opening, I've found it the best tool for dealing with interferance. I love the idea of being able to double for penalties at the 2 level with confidence.

 

#2. I'm not sure if this is Fishbein or not, frankly. It was taught to me by another player. Over opponent's weak 2, double is for penalty, overcall in nt is takeout, cue bid is Micheals, any suit is forcing for 1 round, jump in nt is natural. As above, I love to be able to double at the 2 level for penalties. You may not be happy about losing 2nt as natural, but I have found if you have enough for that you can either bid it anyway as takeout, or dbl for penalties.

 

#3. SOS redbl, extremely useful, if rarely used.

 

Incidentally, I hate super-weak 2 level openings, except maybe in 3rd seat. But #1 and #2 provide great defense against those who do open or overcall garbage. I prefer disciplined weak 2's showing at least 2/3 top honors with asking bids avail to determine min/max, solid, etc.

 

I would love to hear from the experts what they think of the above.

[the hog]

"#2. I'm not sure if this is Fishbein or not, frankly. It was taught to me by another player. Over opponent's weak 2, double is for penalty, overcall in nt is takeout, cue bid is Micheals, any suit is forcing for 1 round, jump in nt is natural. As above, I love to be able to double at the 2 level for penalties. You may not be happy about losing 2nt as natural, but I have found if you have enough for that you can either bid it anyway as takeout, or dbl for penalties"

 

Losing your natural NT overcall is FAR too heavy a price to pay. If you want to retain a penalty X in some circumstances, you might try CMOBDOR

Cheaper minor over black, double over red. This retains your penalty x over C & S.

 

To be honest, I much prefer to play X for takeout right throughout.

 

Re your choice of sound weak 2 bids, well that is simply whatever you prefer. Be aware though that playing weak 2 bids of varying strengths does put much more pressure on the opponents, (and is more fun).

[Rebound]

Fair enough. It's purely preference. However, it also puts pressure on partner. Anyway, to me, opening with something like x Qxxxxx Qxx xxx (or worse) smacks of a psyche and no matter whether it shows that I am a mediocre player (cause i wouldn't know when to psyche or how to handle one if Eddie Kantar threw one of his books at me,) I detest psychic bids as being contrary to the spirit of the game.

 

Incidentally, I'd still like your opinion of #1,#3 :-)

[the hog]

Rebound,

Jordan I have never played, so can't comment.

Sos xx; well they don't come up very often. Paul Marston had an interesting philosophy here - if the opps are prepared to let you play x in a contract, there has to be a better spot, so xx was always for t/o.

 

Re your comment re psyches, well we have been through all this many times in these forums, but psyches are prefectly legal, and are in fact specifically allowed in the Rules of the game, and are totally within the spirit of the game. I psyche very rarely, but would categorically refuse to play in any event which disallowed psyches.

[Cascade]

I detest psychic bids as being contrary to the spirit of the game.

Detesting psychic bids is contrary to the spirit of the game.

[inquiry]

hey rebound is a new poster.. go light on him. A lot of people dont like psyches (i am not one of them),,, but done in excess or with secret agreement between partners, they can be very bad indeed.

 

Rebound rest assured there are plenty who share your view.... and all views welcome here, even incorrect ones.

 

Ben

[jtfanclub]

I've played where doubles were generally point showing, saying nothing about distribution (and giving partner the option to take out or leave in). We also play Fishbein so we don't take out double pre-emptive bids. It's not my first choice for a bidding system, but it seems to work fine.

 

Takeout doubles also cause problems at the table. Is 1S X P (quick) 2D different from 1S X P (long pause) 2D? Admittedly I'm not playing with experts, but it seems like takeout doubles are the most overused and abused convention.

 

My favorite convention? Opening 1C with a longer suit (like three clubs and four hearts). Without it, how can you play 5 card majors?