32519 Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 When in 1st seat partner passes and the auction continues, P-(1M)-?, AGAINST GOOD OPPONENTS I no longer bid the Unusual 2NT promising 5/5 in the minors. Good opponents have demonstrated time and again that they can use the information given (the hand layout) to nail me. Nowadays I choose to pass instead. Sure the opponents may now have an uncontested auction but declarer doesn't have the hand layout. This only becomes apparent by trick 4 or 5 and by then he sometimes has chosen a wrong line of play. I still use it against weak opponents as they appear unsure how to deal with the bid. How about you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinidad Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 I suppose your convention cards says: "2NT: unusual against weak players, does not exist against strong players". Rik 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel_k Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 Dumped inverted minor raises long ago and have never regretted it. I've lost count of the number of times the other table has gone down in a silly 1NT from the wrong side while we were getting a plus score. Being one step higher on the good hands is immaterial because there is plenty of space. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manudude03 Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 I've pretty much dropped Gerber from the convention card completely, it's very rare we need to use gerber to stop at the 4 level, while it is taking up valuable space. In my weak NT partnership, we play 4C as a transfer to 4H, 4D transfer to 4S, 4M to play. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulg Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 We no longer play Good/Bad 2NT. Although good in theory, we found it came up infrequently and, when it did, the definition of Good and Bad was too imprecise. Two notrump in competition is still rarely natural, but it no longer has strength implications. We haven't missed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 We no longer play Good/Bad 2NT. Although good in theory, we found it came up infrequently and, when it did, the definition of Good and Bad was too imprecise. Two notrump in competition is still rarely natural, but it no longer has strength implications. We haven't missed it. good/bad/2nt may indeed be the most confusing conventionAS YOU note Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 I guess I have tried and dropped as many things as anyone over the years. Some examples:- FILM (loved this as a junior)SJOs and Strong 2 openings (proper old school)1M-3M and 1M - 4♦ as GF raise (from my first ever 2 bridge books)1NT as 16-18 (from the same books)Lebensohl-style 1NT in response to a takeout double"2♣ Asking Range" (insisted upon by my first partner until I talked him out of it with a compromise agreement)SJSs and Mixed JSs (the latter incorporating invitational fit jumps)Gerber, Rolling Gerber, Roman Gerber, modified Gerber (the latter using 4NT as the king ask)1NT - 2NT natural (such a waste of bidding space since it is a terminal sequence)1NT - 2♠ as Baron range ask (more efficient to filter this through 2♣)2NT - 3♣ Baron; and later Skip Baron (Puppet is more useful, more often)2NT - 3♠ as 5♠4♥ (waste of a bid and wrong-siding all in one)2NT - 4♣ as both majors (but it is still there for 1NT - 4♣)any sort of discipline for tactical bids facing a passed hand1♣ opening as 4+ hearts, 1♦ opening as 4+ spadesLebensohl over 1NT - (2X) and a reverse (transfers are so nice) I daresay I could fill a couple of pages if I thought of every little thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 We dropped most of our defences against weak bids and moved to straight ToXs with lebensohl where appropriate. So Dixon, 3x4x etc bit the dust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
32519 Posted June 21, 2013 Author Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 We no longer play Good/Bad 2NT. Although good in theory, we found it came up infrequently and, when it did, the definition of Good and Bad was too imprecise. Two notrump in competition is still rarely natural, but it no longer has strength implications. We haven't missed it. I had to Google Good/Bad 2NT. The theory certainly sounds good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manudude03 Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 I had to Google Good/Bad 2NT. The theory certainly sounds good. It is a good convention, you just need very solid agreements on when it applies. Playing the reverse of this is probably better (you're probably more worried about getting pre-empted out of your competitive bid, while at least if you've shown a good hand, you can afford to go higher and be more likely to penalise). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 It is a good convention, you just need very solid agreements on when it applies. Playing the reverse of this is probably better (you're probably more worried about getting pre-empted out of your competitive bid, while at least if you've shown a good hand, you can afford to go higher and be more likely to penalise).We do this, in all suits other than clubs, the immediate 3 bid is the worse version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 Generally in each of my partnerships, agreements have become more and more complex and artificial with time. When one gadget was dumped it was generally just to replace it with another gadget. There were two gadgets that Shogi and I replaced with more natural methods, though. One was to get rid of G/B 2NT. The other was to replace Multi-Landy with Landy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 Good/Bad good? No, bad. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 I suppose your convention cards says: "2NT: unusual against weak players, does not exist against strong players".If he uses it against you, you know what he thinks of your expertise. Does that make it a violation of Law 74A2 ("action that might cause annoyance or embarassment to another player") for him to bid Unusual 2NT against someone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awm Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 To name some that seem popular here: Fit jumps by UPHPuppet (and muppet) stayman over 2nt2nt asking after 1m-1M-2MKaplan interchangeSuction as a defense to strong clubWoolsey as a defense to notrump2c drury Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSGibson Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 I dumped puppet stayman in most of my partnerships. I've also stopped playing any conventional first discards in favor of straight UD attitude or standard attitude (if partner won't play UD). In one of my partnerships, we've abandoned count signals except for potential hold-up situations, preferring suit preference instead. I play a similar thing with two-suited calls - I won't make a two-suited call unless I think we are more likely than not to take the bid. It tends to favor acting with pure non-crap hands NV, and constructively when red. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdeegan Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 Dumped inverted minor raises long ago and have never regretted it. I've lost count of the number of times the other table has gone down in a silly 1NT from the wrong side while we were getting a plus score. Being one step higher on the good hands is immaterial because there is plenty of space. :P I will second your motion. Maybe it is just that I never learned to play it properly. In any event, I got to the point I hated them so bad that I was bidding 1♦ over 1♣ instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted June 21, 2013 Report Share Posted June 21, 2013 What have I abandoned? My last partner, an ex British International and Tollemache, Pachabo and Gold Cup winner convinced me to not bid 3NT in an auction such as(3X) P (P) 3NT on a balanced 15-16 count with no source of tricks - the sort of bid that is popular with certain posters on this forum. Before playing with this partner I too made the error of bidding 3NT here. I was sceptical about not bidding game, arguing as Rainer did in a recent post "I can make 3NT with my high cards added to those of partner. After reluctantly following partner's advice and analyzing '000s of hands it became obvious that partner was correct. This was not his theory, but rather that of his partner, Nicola Smith. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted June 22, 2013 Report Share Posted June 22, 2013 I dumped the blood RDbl in most cases and replaced it by the extreme opposite hand: SOS ;) In one partnership we dropped Smolen and haven't regretted it. This needs some adjustment of the rest of the NT system ofcourse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenMan Posted June 22, 2013 Report Share Posted June 22, 2013 In one partnership we dropped Smolen and haven't regretted it. This needs some adjustment of the rest of the NT system ofcourse. I can't remember who it was, but someone posted on RGB years ago that in years of observing national and WC events he had never seen the presence or absence of Smolen make a difference on a board. Regardless of theory, it appeared, the number of deals where it actually matters is vanishingly small. I'm generally willing to play it if a partner wants to, but I never suggest it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenMan Posted June 22, 2013 Report Share Posted June 22, 2013 Dumped inverted minor raises long ago and have never regretted it. I've lost count of the number of times the other table has gone down in a silly 1NT from the wrong side while we were getting a plus score. Being one step higher on the good hands is immaterial because there is plenty of space. What's your approach to hands that would normally make an inverted raise? I've played IM for long enough that I don't really know alternatives for creating forcing auctions in those situations. Would like to hear more. :) (Somewhere I read an article by Matt Granovetter about a client who insisted on some insanely complicated system that nonetheless didn't have any way to show support for a minor with a strong hand, as he realized on an early deal when partner opened 1D opposite his 2362 17-count.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggwhiz Posted June 22, 2013 Report Share Posted June 22, 2013 In one partnership we dropped Smolen and haven't regretted it. After a deep discussion in the bar one of our pairs decided to play reverse Smolen and alert it as such. In my case I've played 1nt - 3 of a suit as everything from 5-5 weak/strong in the minors and 5-5 invite strong majors, natural invite... you name it. None of them come up or would have and get dumped on a regular basis. Currently playing 3 of a major as 1-3 - (45 or 54) hoping it will be the good imp swing (that never happens). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted June 22, 2013 Report Share Posted June 22, 2013 Five card majors, short club, forcing no trump, 2/1 game force, Drury, weak jump shifts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EarlPurple Posted June 23, 2013 Report Share Posted June 23, 2013 Having a 2NT on your convention call as "unusual" does not mean you have to bid 2NT everytime you hold 5-5 in the minors. It just means when you make that bid, it is what you are supposed to hold. A lot of these "butt-in" conventions can help place the cards if you lose the auction. It can also sometimes lead to the opponents making correct bidding decisions, e.g. play in NT rather than a major if they are likely to suffer ruffs and bad breaks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted June 24, 2013 Report Share Posted June 24, 2013 What's your approach to hands that would normally make an inverted raise? I've played IM for long enough that I don't really know alternatives for creating forcing auctions in those situations. Would like to hear more. :)Many players use Criss-Cross: 1♣-2♦ and 1♦-3♣ are good raises. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.