Name this convention

[MickyB]

I have found that Multi-Landy works fine when you use dbl as 4M5+m but is far too restrictive when you need double as penalties. At the opposite end of the scale, Astro and its variations allow you to get in on a lot of hands but fare poorly in some situations, especially when overcaller has both majors.

 

For a while, I have been playing David Collier's "Half-Astro", with 2C as both majors and 2D as spades and a minor. Compared [superficially] with Multi-Landy, this allows you to get in on 4♠5m hands at the expense of being able to show both suits on 5♥4m; an improvement IMO.

 

I have now taken this a step further; 2D still shows spades and a minor, but 2C shows 3+S4+H - basically, either [both majors] or [hearts and a minor with three spades on the side]. This 2C overcall is still much better defined than a regular Astro 2C overcall showing hearts and another, but allows you into the auction on 34(15) which many methods do not. Indeed, its ability to offer several places to play works so well that I advocate overcalling 2C on 35(32) and even 3442 when appropriate.

 

All this leads to my question - what on earth should I call this defence? My initial thought was to call it "Three-Quarters Astro", referring to the 2D overcall being the same as Astro and the 2C overcall being half Astro, half Landy, but as names go that really sucks.

[glen]

... should I call this defence? ...

Micky

[nige1]

Superfically, it resembles Sharples.

 

• 2♣ = Two or three suits including 4+ ♠ (but denies a three-suiter short in ♣)
• 2♦ = T/O of ♣ i.e. 3+ ♦ & 3+ ♥ & 3+ ♠. eg 4441, 4450, 3451.
• 2♥/♠ = Natural.
• 2N = Minors.

[Zelandakh]

Micky, similar logic to yours led to the development of the following defence which you might find to your taste...

 

X = pen

2C = majors; or 4S + 5m; or 4S + H + D

2D = H or S

2H = 5H + m

2S = 5S + m

2N = C + D

 

You should really also take a look at Asptro, which fixes the Astro problem of both majors elegantly while allowing overcalls on all of the 4M5m hands. You do need to look at follow-ups (there are 2 common methods) but that is probably not a major issue for you when you have been playing an Astro-variant anyway. Using the 'Middlesex' version, where 2M shows 5M, and 2m shows either 4M or 6M, makes these followups simpler by limiting the number of hand types within the 2m overcalls (at the cost of losing the natural 1-suited 2M overcall).

[MickyB]

As I think I implied in my original post, I've looked at Asptro before. It's better than Astro, but still has its fair share of issues. The biggest is if you have something like 2434 or 3451 and partner overcalls 2D. How do you show interest in game opposite hearts but stop in a safe part-score when partner doesn't have hearts? A lesser issue is that with 3442 or 3352 opposite a 2D overcall I would prefer to play 2S in a 4-3 rather than 3C in a 5-2, but I cannot do that without risking missing a superior heart fit.

[gnasher]

I think you should call it "Bell". You're not (yet) well enough known to be able to use only your first name.

[mr1303]

What happened to the "Bell" 1 Spade convention? Did anyone ever play that at any point in time, ever? :-p

[wank]

gnasher, did you ever play the wank 2♣?

 

2♣ is 0-5 with 4+ cards in diamonds/hearts/spades and may have a side suit. i never had a bad result with it in imps, including versus fantoni and nunes who missed a cold slam.

 

admittedly they might have called the pigs on us for playing a brown sticker convention with no convention card, but they had already banked 25 vips.

[MickyB]

What happened to the "Bell" 1 Spade convention? Did anyone ever play that at any point in time, ever? :-p

 

No idea - what was it?

[Finch]

gnasher, did you ever play the wank 2♣?

 

2♣ is 0-5 with 4+ cards in diamonds/hearts/spades and may have a side suit. i never had a bad result with it in imps, including versus fantoni and nunes who missed a cold slam.

 

admittedly they might have called the pigs on us for playing a brown sticker convention with no convention card, but they had already banked 25 vips.

 

I didn't know it was called that. We've always called it the 2♣ fert.

[mr1303]

No idea - what was it?

 

http://www.bridgeguys.com/BGlossary/GlossB.html

 

I remember you telling me about some convention you had approved at one point - I presume it was this.

[MickyB]

http://www.bridgeguys.com/BGlossary/GlossB.html

 

I remember you telling me about some convention you had approved at one point - I presume it was this.

 

Oh, I applied for loads of stuff at one point. I thought the Bell 1S was going to be an opening bid showing either minor. As for the 1S response to 1C, surely it is played by quite a lot of T-Walsh pairs?

[gnasher]

Is this one yours as well?

 

Bell

An echo; encouraging signal.

[wank]

I didn't know it was called that. We've always called it the 2♣ fert.

 

yes, can you get all the EBU documents suitably updated to give it its proper name? thanks.

[MickyB]

I'd also heard it referred to as Terrorist 2C, not sure where that came from. 2C fert sounds like any hand within a point range, like in a forcing pass system.

[Rossoneri]

I'd also heard it referred to as Terrorist 2C, not sure where that came from. 2C fert sounds like any hand within a point range, like in a forcing pass system.

 

Now, now, that's a sensitive name in this day and age!

[Zelandakh]

As I think I implied in my original post, I've looked at Asptro before. It's better than Astro, but still has its fair share of issues. The biggest is if you have something like 2434 or 3451 and partner overcalls 2D. How do you show interest in game opposite hearts but stop in a safe part-score when partner doesn't have hearts? A lesser issue is that with 3442 or 3352 opposite a 2D overcall I would prefer to play 2S in a 4-3 rather than 3C in a 5-2, but I cannot do that without risking missing a superior heart fit.

There are different follow-ups to Asptro depending on whether you use 2NT or a raise of the minor as the GF bid. If you use 2NT as the GF then you have the 3m calls available for something constructive but less than game strength. Over 2D it makes sense to use these bids to show interest in a heart game. Thus with your example shapes you might bid 3C (2434) which partner can pass/correct, or 3D (3451) which partner can pass with diamonds or bid 3S with clubs. Yes you might be too high now - you cannot have everything.

 

With weaker hands (most) Asptro bidders believe it is better to find a 7 card fit at the 2 level than to try to find the absolutely best fit. Thus with 3 spades and longer hearts you go with the odds and respond 2S, missing out on the 5-4 heart fit on the odd occasion.

 

As for naming your method I would suggest a visit to David Stevenson's site to find the conventions most similar and then either to take a derivative thereof or to attach your own name.

[Echognome]

Oh, I applied for loads of stuff at one point. I thought the Bell 1S was going to be an opening bid showing either minor. As for the 1S response to 1C, surely it is played by quite a lot of T-Walsh pairs?

I don't have the most recent version of the Orange Book, but in the 2006 OB, they have:

 

11 C 15 Other permitted agreements

Stevenson 1♠:

This shows a hand with Clubs or Diamonds the longest suit.

Darren and I used to play it using the following opening scheme:

1♣ 16+ Any

1♦ 10-15, 4+♥ may be canape

1♥ 10-15, 4+♠ may be canape

1♠ 10-15, Clubs, or Diamonds, or both unbal

1NT 12+-15, Balanced