Defence to a 1NT opening bid

[fromageGB]

...

Ben, I am interested in your reversed Vertigo, where 2m is 4M5m, and X is 5M4other.

What are your advancer's replies to this double?

FAO benlessard

You seem to have missed this. When it goes (1NT) X (p) ? to you, what do your bids mean when X shows 5M4m? I can't figure out sensible continuations that can play in a fitting minor when there is no major fit.

[Codo]

The leaving, or the coming back ? :D

Don't they say: Beauty lies in the eye of the beholder.

[benlessard]

Sorry ive missed the question.

 

our responses are

 

2C= pass or correct at least 3 clubs (except 1642) (this almost always show a stiff in 1 M wich is always partner 5 cards suit IRL)

2D = natural at least 5D (because i dont like both M and dont have 3 clubs so 1552/5152/1462/4162

2H pass or correct (implies i have at least 2 in both M)

2S to play

 

only hand that i find lead to a bad contract is 1642 where you must bid 2C and hope partner got 5 of them when he passed. When advancer has both m and the overcaller/X has both M you are risking to play in 42 fit in any system.

With 2254/2245/your proper bid is 2H to be sure to play in a 5-2 fit/ (you will miss ur 44 if hes 5M+4m but opps have a sure M fit anyway so it doesnt cost that much. The problem with a 2245 is taht partner is just too likely to be 54 in the M. playing in the 52 and avoid the 42 is too important. This is the reason i really hate 2H (dont) or 2D as showing both M.

 

Also with 1525/1624 over partner X it will go 2C--2D (4/5D+5S) and 2H here is showing a stiff S and only 2D. the doubler will pass with 2 hearts and

 

2S = 6S/5D or 6 very bad S and 4 great D

2Nt = 5152

3C = 5143/5053

[fromageGB]

our responses are ...

Thanks. I think this works well. You can get some bad ones, such as advancer with 4144 bidding 2C and playing there when doubler has 5314, but nothing is perfect and this won't happen often.

(Even if responder then bids 2H, you can't assume doubler has spades, because he could be 2524 for example. So your 9 card spade fit remains lost.)

[benlessard]

If you have some pts you can double 2H to ask partner to pass or bid 2S, if you are broke then they have points and a 9 card suit so they are going be to 3H/4H and maybe you will still be able to double 3H/4H for example asking the double to bid 3S/4S or pass with 5H. Anyway ive been playing this defense for 10 years now and as far as i rememebr the case you just gave never happened. What happen however is

 

2344/3244, with that the correct response is 2C and the doubler bid 2H (both M) and you correct to your 3 cards suit playing in 43 rather than 52. Also we did get some bad boards with bidding 2C with (??54) and see partner pass with only 2 clubs. Im almost sure that its better to play that 2C is always at least 5 and you need to pass with ??54 or bid 2nt if you have guts.

[gwnn]

Ha, this kenrexford book is like a long long BBF post of his! It's a really great read! But I haven't finished yet so I can't comment.

[pirate22]

I have found that many defences to opps 1n/t give a lot of information away to the declarer

of the 1n/t,and his pard has machinery to overcome the problem...

Whether ones opp is ply a weak or strong n/t ones anti system should be the same...

Vulnerability comes into the equation as well....

 

Suggestion---"Pirate def to opps 1n/t" its all about what position one is in.

we have 2nd pos'n and 4th pos'n.this depends who opens the 1n/t,you are in either pos'n.

 

So in second position we have transfers {Major's} Stayman asks pard do you have a 4 card major?

if no bid 2d...but you can agree to bid a 3 card major.also 2n/t is asking pard for Minors.

 

now 4th position...we have Natural-Stayman-2n/t minor orientated.

whatever position one is in we are competing not neccesary slamming or game orientated...

think on this sequence opp 1n/t you 2d=Bid hts pard,this besets a problem for the other opp?

if they pass message understood a calm bid of 2hts ensues.but if opp has a problem,:):)

and if it went 1n/t 2n/t{Minors)?????

I have used and compiled this defence with 80% success--Im prepared to admit the odd time it

backfires with no damage incurred

[Zelandakh]

I have used and compiled this defence with 80% success

How do you calculate your success rate?

[pirate22]

How does one calculate the success rate ??? by the results-which i have documented,and recorded--both in Live Tourneys and internet tourneys-and i accept one can play say 24 boards and it does not come up-as if one plays splinters-the same oppurtunity does not come up

[Zelandakh]

How does one calculate the success rate ??? by the results-which i have documented,and recorded--both in Live Tourneys and internet tourneys-and i accept one can play say 24 boards and it does not come up-as if one plays splinters-the same oppurtunity does not come up

So your method is 80% as successful as typical BBO Intermediate pick-up partnerships? Does that mean that a well-played mainstream method is 200% successful?

[32519]

Another strange defense to a 1NT opening bid I stumbled across. It's called VROOM

[Vampyr]

Another strange defense to a 1NT opening bid I stumbled across. It's called VROOM

 

Looks pretty playable to me.

[pirate22]

with due respect to all inputee's--- Surely one of the objects is to have defences available,but one must conserve ones brain power,with kens no doubt well concieved and written,but so much to remember..

One of the objects to arrive at if possible,is if we win the auction the 1n/t bidder is on lead...

The penalty x is always there,and to minimise sytems use same defence whether the opps 1n/t is 12/14----------- or 15-17.

My comment with 2 suiter hands in defence,it gives the opponents to much information away.

However this topic is developing very well

[Zelandakh]

Another strange defense to a 1NT opening bid I stumbled across. It's called VROOM

It is OK but insisting on 5-5 is too restrictive. The base (X = ♥, 2♣ = ♠) is essentially the same as my defence to a strong NT but the author has missed a trick by failing to include the major 2-suiters here (thus allowing length differentiation) instead of the 1-suiters. The 1-suiters can be shown through 2♦ instead, for example.

[campboy]

It is OK but insisting on 5-5 is too restrictive. The base (X = ♥, 2♣ = ♠) is essentially the same as my defence to a strong NT but the author has missed a trick by failing to include the major 2-suiters here (thus allowing length differentiation) instead of the 1-suiters. The 1-suiters can be shown through 2♦ instead, for example.

Agree with you about the shape requirements being excessive. Perhaps the reason for not doing what you suggest with the 1-suiters was to keep it GCC legal, though.

[Statto]

Surely one of the objects is to have defences available,but one must conserve ones brain power,with kens no doubt well concieved and written,but so much to remember..

I disagreed with the brain drain argument on another of 32519's threads, but I guess it's a small factor. If one system over another may or may not have a minor advantage, or it's not clear which is better, then the simpler system wins until you are ready to tackle the more complex system, as an experiment at least.

 

What has also been pointed out here recently, is that it depends on your general methods and style. What is advantageous for one partnership may not be for another... B-)

[32519]

I agree with Adam. I am not concerned about the game hands, let alone the slam hands. I want multiple bids that show the hand types I have, and my objective is to compete the part scores. Admittedly I have a lousy memory, but I can remember only one time there was a possible (missed) game our way, and many, many times there wasn't. This may be a matchpoint opinion, but I value frequency more than game tries.

 

If you lump ALL "competitive" hands into one bid, yes you "compete" but you have no hope of reaching a sensible contract.

 

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.

[fromageGB]

Oh dear. I thought we were going to be safe until the end of June :(

[pirate22]

To 32159--while your shape of 6/4 or 4/6 is a good incentive to get the opponents out of their comfort zone-one should have the frequencies in mind-also this frequency-4/4/4/1 or 4/4/1/4 and one is not Vuln V vuln,also having a minimum system to impart info to partner,who can or may not contribute,consider the partner of the 1n/t bid if you stick your oar in {2cl ! }your pard knows you have both majors could be 6/4 or 4/6 or 4/4,let the opps sort it out,if they pass your bid pard is in the driving seat

[pirate22]

To Statto--- you are getting my drift,have a simple def 2nd pos'n tou have transfer's stayman and UNT------ and in 4th position one has natural stayman and UNT,its a question of judgement and the Vulnerability--- and it covers opps 1n/t opening be it 12-14--or 15-17----and one still keeps the x available

[manudude03]

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]

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]

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.