Defense against Moscito

[mich-b]

I am interested in simple and effective defense against moscito

(1♣ = 15+ ,

1♦ = 4+♥ 10-14 , denies 4♠

1♥ = 4+♠ 10-14 , denies 4♥

1♠ = both majors 10-14)

 

We can play our usual defense against the strong 1♣ so I am really looking for suggestions how to deal with the 1♦/1♥ openings , and in particular , how to use Double and 1♥/1♠.

Since I need this for one 16 board match , I really need something simple , but any advice is welcome.

 

 

Additionally , I am also interested in suggestions for a (simple!) defense to a system where generally :

1♣ = ♥

1♦ = ♠

1♥ = ♣ or balanced

1♠ = ♦

[sfi]

My standard approach (and what I recommend to opponents when I play this sort of system) is to use:

 

X = takeout of shown suit

bid of shown suit = natural

2 of shown suit = Michaels

 

Other stuff is like they opened one of the suit they have shown.

 

IMO it's important to have a natural overcall of their suit when it could be 4 cards, particularly if it can be canape.

[Zelandakh]

There are 2 generally standard meta defences to transfers. The first is

 

X = shows the suit they actually bid

min bid in T = take-out of T (where T is the opps' suit)

jump bid in T = Michaels

 

and the second is

 

X = take-out of T (where T is the opps' suit)

min bid in T = Michaels (where T is the opps' suit)

 

You might also like to look up Marvin French's defense to transfers, which has a more comprehensive approach and deals with both 1 under and 2 under transfer bids. While not the specific situations mentioned here, the methods are designed to be easily adaptable.

[gordontd]

There are 2 generally standard meta defences to transfers.

The one quoted by sfi above is fairly standard too.

[Zelandakh]

The one quoted by sfi above is fairly standard too.

As a defence to potentially 4 card suits, yes. As a meta defence to transfers, I would suggest not.

[kreivi68]

I would like to add one more defence. This is something I've been playing:

 

X= Take out of their shown suit

Their shown suit at one level= four cards in other major + longer minor (Raptor)

Their suit at two level= Michaels

 

T.

[sfi]

As a defence to potentially 4 card suits, yes. As a meta defence to transfers, I would suggest not.

 

That's true, but I have yet to encounter a system where opener transfers to a 5 card suit. When that happens, I'm sure we'll adopt one of the other defences.

[WellSpyder]

IMO it's important to have a natural overcall of their suit when it could be 4 cards, particularly if it can be canape.

So do you also reserve 2 of oppo's suit as natural when you play against those using the perhaps more common natural 4-card majors (whether canape or not)?

[sfi]

So do you also reserve 2 of oppo's suit as natural when you play against those using the perhaps more common natural 4-card majors (whether canape or not)?

 

3 of the suit is natural there if it's potential canape. If not, we've given up the immediate natural overcall since it's more likely that opener has a 5+ card suit (at least in the partnerships where we have discussed this) and showing 2 suited hands has a fair bit of positive potential. We don't get to use the bid as often as at the one level or even if we had it available at the two level, but there are times we get to bid their suit naturally later in the auction.

 

If they play transfers against you, it is important to put the extra space to good use one way or another. And I dislike not having a bid with my good 6 card major when they show hearts on my right with K3 7542 A KQT832.

[gordontd]

As a defence to potentially 4 card suits, yes.

Well that covers Moscito-like openers, and transfer responses to 1C - two of the more common modern uses of transfer bids.

[nigel_k]

My standard approach (and what I recommend to opponents when I play this sort of system) is to use:

 

X = takeout of shown suit

bid of shown suit = natural

2 of shown suit = Michaels

 

Other stuff is like they opened one of the suit they have shown.

 

IMO it's important to have a natural overcall of their suit when it could be 4 cards, particularly if it can be canape.

Agree 100% - just play that a direct overcall in their suit at the one level is natural and everything else as if they opened the suit they showed. Simple and close to optimal IMO.

 

You may also need an agreement over the responses. If they make a GF relay, you will be bidding obstructively so 1NT=minors etc. Probably the same if their relay is invit+. But if they have some kind of artificial response which may be invit/GF or responder may just pass whatever opener does next, then you will need to know what you are doing over that.

[32519]

I like the DOOM defence, an acronym for Deadly Overcall Obliterating Majors. Playing DOOM, then –

1. X = 5/4 in the majors, 5-cards in the suit shown by the opponents and a full opening hand (12+ HCP).

2. Bidding the major suit shown = 5/5 in the majors and a full opening hand (12+ HCP).

3. 1NT = Natural, 15-17 HCP with a double stop in the suit shown.

4. Irrespective of the major suit shown, 2♦ = 6-cards in the other major, 10 – 13 HCP (sort of Multi style)

5. 2 of the major shown = Michaels

6. 2 of the other major = natural and pre-emptive, 6-card suit and 5 – 9 HCP

 

DOOM has all sorts of continuations including –

1. Dealing with misfits (overcaller has majors, responder has minors)

2. Playing in NT contracts

3. Playing in the major suit shown by the opponents (finessing the suit for any missing cards becomes a no-brainer). This could be a part score battle on the 2-level, playing in a 5-2 fit and responder has a minor suit orientated hand, or, in game with a 5-3 fit and the hands dovetailing well or responder with enough tricks in the minor suits to land the contract.

[the hog]

I like the DOOM defence, an acronym for Deadly Overcall Obliterating Majors. Playing DOOM, then –

1. X = 5/4 in the majors, 5-cards in the suit shown by the opponents and a full opening hand (12+ HCP).

2. Bidding the major suit shown = 5/5 in the majors and a full opening hand (12+ HCP).

3. 1NT = Natural, 15-17 HCP with a double stop in the suit shown.

4. Irrespective of the major suit shown, 2♦ = 6-cards in the other major, 10 – 13 HCP (sort of Multi style)

5. 2 of the major shown = Michaels

6. 2 of the other major = natural and pre-emptive, 6-card suit and 5 – 9 HCP

 

DOOM has all sorts of continuations including –

1. Dealing with misfits (overcaller has majors, responder has minors)

2. Playing in NT contracts

3. Playing in the major suit shown by the opponents (finessing the suit for any missing cards becomes a no-brainer). This could be a part score battle on the 2-level, playing in a 5-2 fit and responder has a minor suit orientated hand, or, in game with a 5-3 fit and the hands dovetailing well or responder with enough tricks in the minor suits to land the contract.

 

As someone who has played Moscito for a long time, I can say I would love my opponents to use this "defence".

[hrothgar]

I like the DOOM defence, an acronym for Deadly Overcall Obliterating Majors. Playing DOOM, then –

1. X = 5/4 in the majors, 5-cards in the suit shown by the opponents and a full opening hand (12+ HCP).

2. Bidding the major suit shown = 5/5 in the majors and a full opening hand (12+ HCP).

3. 1NT = Natural, 15-17 HCP with a double stop in the suit shown.

4. Irrespective of the major suit shown, 2♦ = 6-cards in the other major, 10 – 13 HCP (sort of Multi style)

5. 2 of the major shown = Michaels

6. 2 of the other major = natural and pre-emptive, 6-card suit and 5 – 9 HCP

 

DOOM has all sorts of continuations including –

1. Dealing with misfits (overcaller has majors, responder has minors)

2. Playing in NT contracts

3. Playing in the major suit shown by the opponents (finessing the suit for any missing cards becomes a no-brainer). This could be a part score battle on the 2-level, playing in a 5-2 fit and responder has a minor suit orientated hand, or, in game with a 5-3 fit and the hands dovetailing well or responder with enough tricks in the minor suits to land the contract.

 

Stupidest defense ever

[hrothgar]

Stupidest defense ever

 

It occurs to me that I should probably provide a bit more detail:

(With apologies to Browning)

 

How are thee stupid? Let me count the ways

 

1. Your two lowest level bids (pass and a cue bid) both promise

 

5+ cards in the suit shown by the opponents

4+ cards in the other major.

the identical point range

 

The bids are incredible rare, overlap almost completely, and aren't event that useful.

 

2. With the exception of your 1NT overcall (which requires a double stop in the opponent's 4 card suit) you have no way to show a balanced hand with values

 

3. You have no option to show a classic takeout double shape (4441, 5440, 5431 with shortness in the opponent's suit)

 

4. You can't show a diamond suit below the three level

 

You have neutered your ability to show many of the most common and useful hand patterns in exchange for hand types that are both rare and of dubious value.

 

The entire structure, start to finish, is one of the worst conceived pieces of crap that I have ever seen.

 

As a practical matter, if anyone ever offers you a handful of magic beans in exchange for a cow, don't do it!

(Its a scam)

[32519]

MOSCITO is an acronym for Major Oriented Strong Club - In Trouble Often

 

In its current incarnation, MOSCITO is defined by:

1. A strong club opening

2. Light and limited constructive opening bids

3. A Majors First opening style

4. Frequent use of relays with strong hands

5. Transfer openings

 

Light /Limited Openings: The MOSCITO opening structure was designed to support a highly aggressive "quick-in / quick-out" auction style.

 

MOSCITOs constructive opening bids typically promise approximately 9-14 HCPs

 

Majors First Openings: MOSCITO uses a Majors First bidding style. Opener is expected to show a four card major in preference to a longer minor. MOSCITO advocates a Majors First style for several reasons:

1. The Majors First bidding style facilitates quick and non-descriptive auctions to major suit contracts

2. Majors First bidding is more preemptive and often prevents opponents from making cheap 1 level overcalls

3. Majors First bidding improves system accuracy during competitive bidding sequences

 

With Majors First Openings in MOSCITO, the DOOM(ed) defense was designed to upset the Light/Limited Openings at the earliest option.

[hrothgar]

MOSCITO is an acronym for Major Oriented Strong Club - In Trouble Often

 

In its current incarnation, MOSCITO is defined by:

1. A strong club opening

2. Light and limited constructive opening bids

3. A “Majors First” opening style

4. Frequent use of relays with strong hands

5. Transfer openings

 

Light /Limited Openings: The MOSCITO opening structure was designed to support a highly aggressive "quick-in / quick-out" auction style.

 

MOSCITO’s “constructive” opening bids typically promise approximately 9-14 HCPs

 

Major’s First Openings: MOSCITO uses a Major’s First bidding style. Opener is expected to show a four card major in preference to a longer minor. MOSCITO advocates a Major’s First style for several reasons:

1. The Major’s First bidding style facilitates quick and non-descriptive auctions to major suit contracts

2. Major’s First bidding is more preemptive and often prevents opponents from making “cheap” 1 level overcalls

3. Major’s First bidding improves system accuracy during competitive bidding sequences

 

With “Majors First Openings” in MOSCITO, the DOOM(ed) defense was designed to upset the Light/Limited Openings at the earliest option.

 

How, pray tell, are you disrupting anything?

 

As far as I can tell, you're spending an awful lot of time passing...

 

You're passing with balanced hands with values, you're passing with unbalanced hands with shortness, you're passing with any hand with diamonds...

 

How the $#(*#& is your partner supposed to know what to do after an auction like

 

(1♥) - P - (2♠)

(P) - X - (P) - ?????

[gwnn]

http://www.drewsmarketingminute.com/images/2007/04/10/picture_4_3.png

[32519]

Suggested defences from others:

1. X = Takeout of the suit shown [this doesn’t stop the opponents playing in a 4-3 fit on level 2]

2. X = Shows the suit actually bid [same as 1]

3. Bid of shown suit = Natural [same as 1]

4. Bid of suit shown = 3-suited takeout [same as 1]

5. Bid of suit shown = 4-cards in the other major + longer minor (Raptor) [this has more potential]

6. Bid of suit shown = Michaels [interesting concept which could possibly be expanded upon e.g. 1 of suit shown = the other major and the higher ranking unbid suit. 2 of suit shown = other major and the lower ranking unbid suit]

7. 2 of shown suit = Michaels [standard for many systems]

8. 2 of shown suit = Natural, 6-card suit

9. Other bids = Natural

 

Other Quotes:

1. IMO it's important to have a natural overcall of their suit when it could be 4 cards, particularly if it can be canapé. [someone else agreed with this: Agree 100% - just play that a direct overcall in their suit at the one level is natural and everything else as if they opened the suit they showed. Simple and close to optimal IMO.]

2. If they play transfers against you, it is important to put the extra space to good use one way or another.

 

Now let’s look at your gripes:

1. With the exception of your 1NT overcall (which requires a double stop in the opponent's 4 card suit) you have no way to show a balanced hand with values (OK, so remove the double stop! Most 2/1 or SAYC players bid 1NT as natural and 15-18 HCP over 1-level openings. I don’t see any need to change this).

 

2. You have no option to show a classic takeout double shape (4441, 5440, 5431 with shortness in the opponent's suit) (I use 2NT to show either, a) a 3-suited takeout with values, shortness in the suit opened, or b) a good 6+ card suit of my own with values. Without a hand prepared to compete to level-3, little is gained (see point 3 below).

 

3. You can't show a diamond suit below the three level (I have no desire to do this as it does not “get-in-face” of the MOSCITO players who typically have auctions which proceed like this: 1♥ (showing ♠, 9-14 HCP)-2♠. Responder's single raise shows three card spade support and ~8-9 losers. Additionally opener could easily be holding a canapé styled hand and now I fall into the trap of bidding openers minor on level 2. The situation has been reversed. As declarer now I’m dead).

 

Some info on MOSCITO’s minor suit openings:

2♣ = Natural, 6+ ♣, 9-14 HCP

2NT = Bad 3-level preempt in either minor. By bad I’m assuming 5-10 HCP and probably a 7-card suit.

Since you are advocating “assumed fit” with your 2♦/2♥/2♠ bids and 4-10 HCP, your 3-level constructive bids could easily be made on a 5-card suit and 11-14 HCP (see 2♣ above and 3♣/3♦ below).

3♣/3♦ = Natural and constructive, 2 of the top 3 honours. Here I am assuming 11-14 HCP (15 would be opened 1♣) and a maximum of 3-cards in either major.

 

4. The entire structure, start to finish, is one of the worst conceived pieces of crap that I have ever seen. (Then why have you gone to so much trouble to shoot it down? If it doesn’t interfere with YOUR MOSCITO system, you can just ignore it and play your regular system unhindered.)

 

5. Major’s First bidding is more preemptive and often prevents opponents from making “cheap” 1 level overcalls.

 

6. How, pray tell, are you disrupting anything? (I don’t want MOSCITO to steal a major suit part score or game form my side. So if I don’t have anything to say, then I don’t say anything).

 

7. As far as I can tell, you're spending an awful lot of time passing...(Showing minor suits below the 3-level achieves little [see 2 & 3 above]. The opponents can still play in a 4-3 major suit fit and they have more info on the hand layout which will assist them. When the auction proceeds 1x-P-2y-? partner still has a bid. Both opponents have shown limited values. Partners hand strength/distribution will determine whether or not to enter the auction. Without a suitable hand, then hooray! Plus 1 for MOSCITO).

 

8. You're passing with balanced hands with values, you're passing with unbalanced hands with shortness, you're passing with any hand with diamonds...(Now this is an idea that needs some further consideration – a possible trap pass with a hand containing values that doesn’t conveniently fit in anywhere else. When both opener and responder have shown limited hands, partner should be able to work out what is going on and make some sort of balancing bid. Granted, entering the auction after 1♥-P-2♠-? will be tough. So you will possibly gain here).

[aguahombre]

A couple big organizations provide a very effective defense.

[sfi]

Then why have you gone to so much trouble to shoot it down? If it doesn’t interfere with YOUR MOSCITO system, you can just ignore it and play your regular system unhindered.

 

If I knew this is what you were playing against transfer openings, I would actually change my system to include them.

 

I would point out the reasons why but (a) others have done it and (b) you would then accuse me of trying to divert you from the One True Way. So good luck with it.

[aguahombre]

32519: There actually are a few posters on here who "shoot things down" because they have reasons to believe what they are saying is correct, and think it might be helpful information to the advocates and those who also employ a certain toy.

 

Sometimes they are mistaken ---not about their logic ---but about whether the advocate cares for input. That should be the nature of a forum. You are free to ignore the advice.

[hrothgar]

I’m going to address your contributions slightly out of order, dealing with the most egregious issues first:

 

1. You completely misunderstand competitive bidding. Playing MOSCITO, our goal is to reach a 2M contract ASAP to deprive from making an informed decision whether or not to compete to the 3 level.

 

The overcall structure that you are advocating makes this much much easier.

 

• 
   
  
• You are severely overloading a direct seat pass.
  
• You are depriving yourself of natural 2m overcalls. (Trust me, if you have a real 2m overcall, the odds that you have bid opener’s 5+ card suit are pretty slim)
  
• You are forcing partner to bid at the three level opposite a normal takeout double. You’re going to be overbidding opposite a broke partner and forcing partner to jump to the four level to show values before strain has been identified.
  
• The point behind a takeout double is not to prevent the opponent’s from bidding to 2M, but rather to let partner make an informed decision about whether or not to compete to the three level, while still having options like Rubensohl or Lebensohl
  

 

2. You seem to believe that partner is going to be able to look at his hands, trust in our limited openings, and guess when it’s right to balance.

 

• 
   
  
• By overloading your pass, you’re making life much too difficult for partner. There are too many hand types.
  
• Any kind of mandatory balancing strategy is extremely vulnerable to psyches. I’ve played against folks who advocate this type of strategy. Its fun making a natural, non forcing 1NT advance on a flat 20 count and watching them balance at the two level… (We used to describe this as the Binkley Oriented Trap Pass)
  

 

3. You are far too concerned with MOSCITO picking off your major. Repeat after me, if we open in a major

where you hold length

• 
   
  
• There aren’t all than many cards available for partner to hold
  
• Even if you find an eight card fit, you’re facing a really bad break.
  

 

4. You completely misunderstand the minor suit preempt style and the nature of the 1S and 2C opening. True, this is not central to your argument, but it shows a fairly poor level of reading comprehension. FWIW, a classic 2N opening looks like

 

S x

H xxx

D KJT8xxx

C xx

 

While a classic 3C opening looks like

 

S x

H xxx

D AQT9xxx

C xx

 

I’m not sure whether I still have the suggested defense that I submitted to the ACBL’s convention’s committee. However, as I recall, the key elements of said defense were

1. 
    
   
2. The direct seat double showed a balanced / semi-balanced hand with values. (Think of a Power double playing The Overcall Structure)
   
3. Bidding opener’s “suit” showed a takeout double
   
4. A 1NT overcall was raptor. 4 cards in the other major with a longer minor
   
5. 2m overcalls were natural
   
6. (1H) – 2H = Natural
   
7. (1D) – 2H and (1H) – 2S were natural (Think of a natural auction like (1C) – P – (1H) – 2H)
   
8. Jump overcalls = Roman
   

 

Last, but not least, you ask why I am bothering to stop you from employing methods that I feel are badly flawed:

My link

[Free]

I prefer something quite simple:

Dbl = takeout (like the auction would go natural 1M-Dbl)

1M (their suit) = natural, good suit

Rest = like they opened a natural 1M

 

In my experience showing the suit they bid with a Dbl is quite useless because the suit is lower than their actual suit. Like Richard says, the goal is to quickly get to 2M in maybe a 4-3 fit. This happens a lot, so what was your Dbl really worth? Just overcall at the 2-level (taking their relay away at the same time). I've also encountered several times that opps had the Major opener promised. Imo it's quite useful to be able to just bid opener's real suit. It's a bit like (1X)-p-(1Y)-2Y, where 1Y doesn't promise any values in the suit, just 4+ cards.

 

Also note that it's not necessary to disrupt the system. Bidding natural and constructive does a nice job, trying to interfere on trash doesn't.

 

If there's anything that I would change to this scheme, it's using 1M (their suit) as some kind of Raptor, showing 4OM and 5+m.

[32519]

I’m not sure whether I still have the suggested defense that I submitted to the ACBL’s convention’s committee. However, as I recall, the key elements of said defense were:

[1]The direct seat double showed a balanced / semi-balanced hand with values. (Think of a Power double playing The Overcall Structure)

[2]Bidding opener’s “suit” showed a takeout double

[3]A 1NT overcall was raptor. 4 cards in the other major with a longer minor

[4]2m overcalls were natural

[5](1H) – 2H = Natural

[6](1D) – 2H and (1H) – 2S were natural (Think of a natural auction like (1C) – P – (1H) – 2H)

[7]Jump overcalls = Roman

 

This defense of yours doesn’t place enough pressure on your side jamming the bidding, especially when the opener is showing ♠, QUOTE: “Direct raises are powerful preemptive weapons designed to jam the opponent's constructive auctions.”

 

If the ACBL (or any other committee) asked me to submit a suggested defence to MOSCITO, I would have done the same. Submit a defence which on face value is both, credible and workable, yet will not hamper my side from jamming the auction. Having another look at the system notes, it is quite possible for your side to jam the auction in 3♠ on a combined 15 HCP count, 9 HCP with opener and 6 HCP with responder (or sacrifice if necessary at favourable vulnerability).

 

These are some extracts from the system notes:

 

Light /Limited Openings: The MOSCITO opening structure was designed to support a highly aggressive "quick-in / quick-out" auction style. There is a significant advantage to being able to place the partnership in an acceptable contract as quickly as possible. This bidding style consistently forces the opponents to guess whether or not to balance at the three-level. Furthermore, if the opponents are unable to exchange information during the bidding, they will often be poorly positioned when defending hands. MOSCITO achieves this design goal by using a descriptive and constructive opening structure that often allows responder to place the final contract with his first bid.

• The range of MOSCITO’s opening bids is limited to approximately 6 High Card Points. Tightly defining opener’s strength allows responder to apply judgment more accurately.

• The minimum strength of MOSCITO’s constructive opening bids is extremely aggressive. MOSCITO believes that our limited opening bids are powerful constructive tools. The system is designed to maximize the frequency of these openings without “overloading” the strong club opening.

MOSCITO’s “constructive” opening bids typically promise approximately 9-14 HCPs.

 

Major’s First Openings: MOSCITO uses a Major’s First bidding style. Opener is expected to show a four card major in preference to a longer minor. MOSCITO advocates a Major’s First style for several reasons:

1. The Major’s First bidding style facilitates quick and non-descriptive auctions to major suit contracts

2. Major’s First bidding is more preemptive and often prevents opponents from making “cheap” 1 level overcalls

3. Major’s First bidding improves system accuracy during competitive bidding sequences

 

MOSCITO’s designers believe a pressure bidding style yields enough positive results to outweigh the occasional disaster. Playing MOSCITO, you should expect to open:

1. Most unbalanced hands with 9+ HCP

2. Some unbalanced hands with 8 counts

3. Most balanced hands with 11+ HCP

4. With a 4333 hand pattern with a 4-card major, opener MUST open 1NT

5. Holding 4 Spades and a balanced hand:

...(a)Open 1NT with 13 – 14 HCP

...(b)Open 1♥ with 11 - 12 HCP

6. Holding Hearts, competitive bidding becomes a much more important consideration. Here, we face a very real danger that the opponents can outbid us at the two level in a Spade contract. Therefore holding 4 Hearts and a balanced hand (4333 or 4432 or 4423):

...(a)Open 1NT with 11 – 12 HCP

...(b)Open 1♦ with 13 – 14 HCP

 

Direct raises are powerful preemptive weapons designed to jam the opponent's constructive auctions. Our raise structure advocates that responder raise a 1♥ opening to 2♠ holding three-card trump support. Responder’s single raise is a constructive bid promising approximate 6 – 10 HCPs. If responder holds a weaker hand he is expected to pass the transfer opening bid. Responder's 3♠ raise promises four+ card trump support.

 

Don’t count me out yet Boet. I have every intention of looking for something which transfers a lot of the pressure back onto the MOSCITO players, something with a higher frequency of occurrence than DOOM.

 

Watch this space for the next installment.