Defense against strong two club opening

[Zelandakh]

At this aim i have choose the Astro convention

Why is your personal choice of any interest to any experts that might be reading the thread? Are you seeking input or do you feel in a position to be teaching the experts that visit BBF?

[Lovera]

Why is your personal choice of any interest to any experts that might be reading the thread? Are you seeking input or do you feel in a position to be teaching the experts that visit BBF?

Hi. This part, infact, can be different for other players (as in your first post here).

[Lovera]

Why is your personal choice of any interest to any experts that might be reading the thread? Are you seeking input or do you feel in a position to be teaching the experts that visit BBF?

This conv. (I thought was italian by the name "Astro" that instead is an acronim) and has also a good structure (more of using for).

[Zelandakh]

Hi. This part, infact, can be different for other players (as in your first post here).

Which part? I asked 2 questions but this reply does not appear to relate to either.

 

This conv. (I thought was italian by the name "Astro" that instead is an acronim) and has also a good structure (more of using for).

Astro is not an acronym. It was rather something "clever" in allowing the overcaller to be called the "Astronaut". For the record, the related methods Aspro and Asptro are also not acronyms. One major issue with using this sort of method is that it gives the opps a cheap cue in all cases, which is generally not regarded as a positive. There are, simply put, better alternatives for this but I have no issue with your using Astro if that is your preferred option. I do have an issue with your using it as the apparent basis for teaching the BBF community via the expert forum. I fail to see what expert level discussion is being generated here, as is perhaps evidenced by the two of us being so prominent in the thread.

[johnu]

Astro is not an acronym. It was rather something "clever" in allowing the overcaller to be called the "Astronaut".

 

Allinger - Stern - Rosler

 

Thus the acronym, A-St-Ro

 

FWIW, I played Astro as a defense over 1NT at one time.

[Zelandakh]

I stand corrected. I was, naturally, thinking of the Aspro convention. The difference between them is in the way both majors are handled and most regard the combination of both - Asptro - to be better than either.

[Lovera]

Allinger - Stern - Rosler

 

Thus the acronym, A-St-Ro

 

FWIW, I played Astro as a defense over 1NT at one time.

Exactly so. This conv. can be used also vs strong 1NT with about 14/15+HD.

[Lovera]

I stand corrected. I was, naturally, thinking of the Aspro convention. The difference between them is in the way both majors are handled and most regard the combination of both - Asptro - to be better than either.

Infact i wonder myself for your answer. Now when i say "this part" the meaning is that this conventionated bidding (in my case with Astro) at second level can have a different agreement for another different convention (as for you with CRASH or Truscott or i.e. Cappelletti) by anyone other player.

[Zelandakh]

Astro is:-

2♣ = ♥ + another

2♦ = ♠ + minor

 

Aspro is:-

2♣ = ♥ + minor

2♦ = ♠ + another

 

Asptro is:-

2♣ = ♥ + another (if both majors then longer/better spades)

2♦ = ♠ + another (if both majors then longer/better hearts)

 

The closest 1NT defences I can find to your idea are Pinpoint Astro:-

2♣ = ♥ + ♣

2♦ = ♥ + ♦

2♥ = ♠ + ♥

(2♠ then handles ♠ + minor)

 

...and Kent

2♣ = ♠ + ♣

2♦ = ♠ + ♦

2♥ = ♠ + ♥

(X then handles ♥ + minor)

 

You can find out more about possible 1NT defences at Dave Stevenson's website if you are interested.

[Lovera]

Astro is:-

2♣ = ♥ + another

2♦ = ♠ + minor

 

Aspro is:-

2♣ = ♥ + minor

2♦ = ♠ + another

 

Asptro is:-

2♣ = ♥ + another (if both majors then longer/better spades)

2♦ = ♠ + another (if both majors then longer/better hearts)

 

The closest 1NT defences I can find to your idea are Pinpoint Astro:-

2♣ = ♥ + ♣

2♦ = ♥ + ♦

2♥ = ♠ + ♥

(2♠ then handles ♠ + minor)

 

...and Kent

2♣ = ♠ + ♣

2♦ = ♠ + ♦

2♥ = ♠ + ♥

(X then handles ♥ + minor)

 

You can find out more about possible 1NT defences at Dave Stevenson's website if you are interested.

Thanks, it seems Pinpoint Astro with ♠+♣ or ♥+♦ (and 2NT relay over pass) for 2♠ ambiguous (see also post #25) and ♦ + ♠ for 2♦

[Lovera]

This conv. very good structured has a lot of options covering shapes (expecially if you have a long suit). The "anchor suit" is the higher suit in the couple indicated by partner conventionally (i.e. over 2NT is diamond suit).

[Zelandakh]

The "anchor suit" is the higher suit in the couple indicated by partner conventionally (i.e. over 2NT is diamond suit).

I am not sure what you mean here. If 2NT shows both minors then both are anchor suits. The term is generally used where one suit is known and a second suit is unknown (or possibly non-existent).

[Lovera]

I am not sure what you mean here. If 2NT shows both minors then both are anchor suits. The term is generally used where one suit is known and a second suit is unknown (or possibly non-existent).

Because in mine variation of Astro i' m useing the same terms you have to see in "Responses Summarized" (here "After 2♣ Hearts is the anchor suit and a new suit p.. "and here "After a 2♦ by intervenor showing Spades as the anchor suit, this fir..") cliking on url in post #24.

[Zelandakh]

If 2♣ shows hearts and another then hearts is the anchor suit. If, as here, 2♣ shows hearts and clubs then calling hearts the anchor suit is more than misleading. Similarly for 2♦ as spades + another versus showing spades and diamonds. This is merely terminology and not especially important but I would suggest to you that it is difficult enough to communicate effectively in a foreign language already without additionally using specialist terms in an unexpected way.

[Lovera]

If 2♣ shows hearts and another then hearts is the anchor suit. If, as here, 2♣ shows hearts and clubs then calling hearts the anchor suit is more than misleading. Similarly for 2♦ as spades + another versus showing spades and diamonds. This is merely terminology and not especially important but I would suggest to you that it is difficult enough to communicate effectively in a foreign language already without additionally using specialist terms in an unexpected way.

Anyhow is at this Higher Suit ( termed "anchor suit" or not) which we refer when bidding the new suit at level (6th/+) are denieing support whilest jumping we show a suit of six cards (or more) plus support (in this Higher Suit - i.e. Diamond for ♦+♣ responding at 2NT by partner).

[Zelandakh]

It is not absolutely clear what is meant here but if 2NT shows the minors, as originally stated, then the term anchor suit is inappropriate. On the other hand, if 2NT really shows ♣+♦ or ♦ then anchor suit would indeed be correct.

[Lovera]

It is not absolutely clear what is meant here but if 2NT shows the minors, as originally stated, then the term anchor suit is inappropriate. On the other hand, if 2NT really shows ♣+♦ or ♦ then anchor suit would indeed be correct.

It is right what you say because indetermination for second unspecified suit in original "Astro" whilest in my variation vs 2♣ all couple of suits are known (in second round for 2♠ ambiguous) as you can see in my post #25. Than talking about two suits is better use term "Higher Suit (i.e.♦)" and "Lower Suit(i.e.♣)" (for ranking).

[AyunuS]

Defense against 2♣ is tricky. I find that it's best to NOT just bid every good suit. Consider this, if you have ♥KQJxx, and you bid them, with no other points, you probably just blew it. Why? Well, they'll probably both bid and realize they have a ton of points, and as soon as one of them notices they have an Axxx in the suit you bid, they'll know it's facing shortness and all of their partner's points are in the other suits, and then they can bid higher than if you hadn't interfered. But if you have the same and 2 aces of other suits, you have to bid something, even with only a 5-card suit. They can't slam, and your partner leading your suit to help you establish it is huge.

 

Other than that, I'd mostly just bid naturally against 2♣. Although I'd recommend using a couple gadgets, such as double to mean both majors and 2NT to mean both minors, if you want ways to show a few more different hands. I find these the most important since if you have a major and a minor, it's better to bid the major anyways as it'll give them less bidding room at the same level, and is the more important suit for your partner to know in 3NT defense. Honestly this is enough to cover everything I feel all that important and it seems good to use the other bids for just as safe as you can possibly get away with type of bids.

 

Honestly you probably can't find much because there isn't much else you can do that would help any more than this.

[Lovera]

Defense against 2♣ is tricky. I find that it's best to NOT just bid every good suit. Consider this, if you have ♥KQJxx, and you bid them, with no other points, you probably just blew it. Why? Well, they'll probably both bid and realize they have a ton of points, and as soon as one of them notices they have an Axxx in the suit you bid, they'll know it's facing shortness and all of their partner's points are in the other suits, and then they can bid higher than if you hadn't interfered. But if you have the same and 2 aces of other suits, you have to bid something, even with only a 5-card suit. They can't slam, and your partner leading your suit to help you establish it is huge.

 

Other than that, I'd mostly just bid naturally against 2♣. Although I'd recommend using a couple gadgets, such as double to mean both majors and 2NT to mean both minors, if you want ways to show a few more different hands. I find these the most important since if you have a major and a minor, it's better to bid the major anyways as it'll give them less bidding room at the same level, and is the more important suit for your partner to know in 3NT defense. Honestly this is enough to cover everything I feel all that important and it seems good to use the other bids for just as safe as you can possibly get away with type of bids.

 

Honestly you probably can't find much because there isn't much else you can do that would help any more than this.

The aim because i address at URL in post#24, is where you can see and have already the schemes and reponses of convention that acts in the same way as Astro that is very duttile and ,combining those, are covered many bidding situations. Than if you like or think is better you can change but probably have to remanage anything.

[Zelandakh]

Other than that, I'd mostly just bid naturally against 2♣. Although I'd recommend using a couple gadgets, such as double to mean both majors and 2NT to mean both minors, if you want ways to show a few more different hands.

Yes, Mathe is fairly effective and probably the best choice for the vast majority of serious I/A pairs. Many use it even at the highest level.

[jogs]

About this argoument i have not found much. Although probably has to be much convenient to interefer with the aim to prevent informations in partnership. Infact, having a suit with 7/8 cards in a range of about 7/8 - 12/13 points and a top honor (or two) can be bid it at third level whilest with a suit more supported (three honors/+) the bidding can be taken at fourth level. How do you think about it ?

 

Let's clarify the discussion.

 

2♣ - ?

 

 

You want to know when should the inteventor bid? Inteventor is a made up word by bridge writers. Therefore the word probably doesn't appear in normal translations.

 

This is one of my favorite subjects. First to bid at the 4♣ level or higher one must be non-vul and needs at least 10 cards(6-4 or better) in two suits. Think in terms of playing tricks, not high card points. Other than an ace, points in the short suits are bad for your side.

[jogs]

Two hands of this type :1) West ♠ KJ109 ♥ KQJ98742 ♦ - ♣ 5 North ♠ A875432 ♥ - ♦ AKQJ10 ♣ A East ♠ Q ♥ 10653 ♦ 76 ♣ 876432 South ♠ 6 ♥ A ♦ 985432 ♣ KQJ109 (7 ♦ for N-S, 7♥ by W then 7NT by S). 2) West ♠ 532 ♥ AKQ109532 ♦ - ♣ 95 North ♠ 94♥ 6 ♦ Q82 ♣ AJ108743 East ♠ - ♥ J874 ♦ J10976543 ♣ 6 South ♠ AKQJ10876 ♥ - ♦ AK ♣ KQ2 Bidding:S 2♣ W 4♥ N 5♣ E(Ilyoucha Babovitch)6♣, 6♠ p p 7♥, X all pass.

I would like to remind you(Lovera) that many of us(posters) are over 70 years old. Posting a board in this manner gives me an headache.

Also it is better to show only one hand.

 

West ♠ KJ109 ♥ KQJ98742 ♦ - ♣ 5

 

What was the auction when this hand first had to act? Also give the vulnerability. I always assume imps unless the OP states MPs.

[Lovera]

Let's clarify the discussion.

 

2♣ - ?

 

 

You want to know when should the inteventor bid? Inteventor is a made up word by bridge writers. Therefore the word probably doesn't appear in normal translations.

 

This is one of my favorite subjects. First to bid at the 4♣ level or higher one must be non-vul and needs at least 10 cards(6-4 or better) in two suits. Think in terms of playing tricks, not high card points. Other than an ace, points in the short suits are bad for your side.

Than you are saying to reserve the 4th level for hands having : 1)a long suit (7/+) plus a suit with four cards for 7/8 winners or 2) a one-suiter hand (8/+) for 9 winners? It can be. About the word "intervenor" i think it is a term indicating the bidder starting convention.

[jogs]

Than you are saying to reserve the 4th level for hands having : 1)a long suit (7/+) plus a suit with four cards for 7/8 winners or 2) a one-suiter hand (8/+) for 9 winners? It can be. About the word "intervenor" i think it is a term indicating the bidder starting convention.

interventor- is the player overcalling.

advancer- is the partner of the interventor.

 

The first bid can be natural or conventional. Opponents open, the first player of our partnership to bid(not pass) is the interventor.

 

After opponents open 2♣ strong, only consider a 4 level bid if both non-vul AND holding at least ten cards in two suits. Mainly you have a max of 3 losers in the side suits. In general when vul don't even bid on the 4 level unless you can make 10 tricks in your own hand.

[Lovera]

 

 

After opponents open 2♣ strong, only consider a 4 level bid if both non-vul AND holding at least ten cards in two suits. Mainly you have a max of 3 losers in the side suits. In general when vul don't even bid on the 4 level unless you can make 10 tricks in your own hand.

You are of a winner more than me restricted. Although if opp cannot bid slam but only game partner surely will have one or two cards covering losers.