Best Defence to 1NT

[Flem72]

Would it not be easier to have X, then 2M to be M+♦ and 2♣ followed by 2M to be M+♣ (or vice versa) with X then 2♦ being both majors? That seems easier to remember and slightly more workable in competition as well as closing the (strange) hole of ♠+♦ present in the original scheme. Not that either method is a good idea for N/B players imho. Then again, nor is my defence, which is why I did not post it here (for a change).

 

2D = D & S. My bad for the omission....

[Douglas43]

Astro is a step up from Landy in frequency and is reasonably easy to learn and play. As noted by other correspondents it has its limitations

[nige1]

I like Modified Crowhurst:

• DB = 10+ HCP 4+ M 5+m (RAPTOR) then 2♣ = P/C 2♦ asks for M
• 2♣ = MM
• 2♦ = 6+ M (MULTI)
• 2M = 5+ M & 4+ m.
• 2N = mm.

Raptor is quite frequent so reaps more penalties than powerhouse penalty-doubles.

 

Over all these, 2N = enquiry with similar responses

• 3♣/♦ = MIN
• 3♥/♠ = MAX
• 3N = same as 3♠ but also showing high-ranking fragment).

e.g.

 

After (1N) 2♦ (P) 2N (P) ??

• 3♣ = MIN with ♥ (Cheaper for cheaper).
• 3♦ = MIN with ♠
• 3♥ = MAX with ♠ (Paradox to right-side contract).
• 3♠ = MAX with ♥.
• 3N = MAX with ♥ and OM fragment.

After (1N) DB (P) 2D (P) 2M (P) 2N (P) ??

• 3♣ = MIN with ♣.
• 3♦ = MIN with ♦.
• 3♥ = MAX with ♣.
• 3♠ = MAX with ♦.
• 3N = MAX with ♦ and OM fragment.

[AL78]

Ideally you want a convention which allows you to get the majors into the auction quickly, something like Landy or multi-Landy, but ultimately, whatever convention you adopt, you will soon pick up a hand where you wish you were playing a different one (that is my experience anyway).

[blackshoe]

One advantage to being a beginner is that you don't usually have a lot of "unused" methods in your head about which to obsess over when your agreed method doesn't work out so well.

[thepossum]

At what stage in history did novice and beginner become intermediate plus

 

There are people playing who don't even understand the basics of the game

 

I use Cappeletti/Hamilton since it's what the bot uses and I had never learned a defence before or even what it meant. I've read up on DONT. They all are basically variants on a theme

 

When I learned to play any bid over weak NT was a natural bid. A suit was what I had and double was penalty

[Douglas43]

I agree with the possum. Many of these are not methods for inexperienced pairs. Landy is the simplest. If you want to play something more comprehensive with a regular partner, Astro is fine.

 

There is a good description on the Bridgebum website here: Astro Bridge Convention - Bidding and Responses (bridgebum.com)

[nige1]

I agree with the possum. Many of these are not methods for inexperienced pairs.

Ying Piper adopted a different approach. When introducing Bridge to primary school children, she taught them full standard 2/1. She reckoned that they would appreciate effective main-stream bidding-tools, that potential partners might understand; and they would have less to unlearn, later. Her novel, brave approach paid off. Her charges loved it and took to Bridge like ducks to water. They performed well in competition with secondary school children,

[Douglas43]

Ying Piper adopted a different approach. When introducing Bridge to primary schoolchildren, she taught them full standard 2/1. She reckoned that they would appreciate effective bidding tools. And they would have less to unlearn, later. Her novel, brave approach paid off. Her charges loved it and took to Bridge like ducks to water. They performed well in competition with secondary school children,

 

I stand corrected Nigel, You make a fair point about younger learners and my advice is age-specific. Please ignore it if you are a reader under 30. I learned as a teenager memorised all sort of gadgets really easily. Our university team included pairs playing Precision with all the whirly bits, Vienna Club, Schenken Club and a Strong Diamond system.

 

Following a successful teaching programme by another person on the Island we have plenty of adults who are taking up bridge or returning to it at middle age and upwards. For them I would definitely recommend not over-complicating matters. The memory just doesn't seem to work the same way...

[blackshoe]

Following a successful teaching programme by another person on the Island we have plenty of adults who are taking up bridge or returning to it at middle age and upwards. For them I would definitely recommend not over-complicating matters. The memory just doesn't seem to work the same way...

Many if not most adults have lost the sense of wonder they had when they were children. That's a shame, but it's true.

 

"It's amazing how much mature wisdom resembles being too tired" -- R. A. Heinlein

[thepossum]

Ying Piper adopted a different approach. When introducing Bridge to primary school children, she taught them full standard 2/1. She reckoned that they would appreciate effective main-stream bidding-tools, that potential partners might understand; and they would have less to unlearn, later. Her novel, brave approach paid off. Her charges loved it and took to Bridge like ducks to water. They performed well in competition with secondary school children,

 

I don't know. The point I was making is there are early beginners loading up with tome after tome of complex bidding systems who dont actually have a clue about the fundamental principles of the game. My philosophy actually applies to anything. I prefer broader intellect and feel and less dependence on extreme technical approaches. Thats just me. Old fashioned I guess

 

The whole world is going excessive technical, overfitted, overcomplex and in my view actually getting worse and often the wrong answer. Like sitting in a lecture theatre with a basic bit of mathematical manipulation on the board leading to a solution that can only be represented as a fraction (or infinite series whatever) and everyone in the class going for their calculators or spreadsheets to work it out and get the wrong answer

 

But seriously. If you sit at a table with 3 strangers what is the best approach to a fun game :)

[TylerE]

If I was teaching rank beginners, I'd teach them EHAA. No conventions. *Maybe* a basic Stayman. Certainly no blackwood.

 

Let them development judgement.

 

The nice thing about playing 4cd suits + mini NT is that you don't NEED any conventions for basic constructive bidding.