[han]

adhoc3, on Nov 2 2005, 10:21 PM, said:

Quote

I like to agree with partner that we give up on strength-games after the opponents open a strong notrump. The idea is to come in as often as possible without getting burned by partner.

I think this is the point of “all conventions off at 4th seat”. The safety of balancing with 1 suiter is somewhat promised by PD’s strength. So just bid it when having a decent suit, or just double when having some decent honors. The risk of being punished is limited.

For CAPP players, it could be quite unnecessary to self-raise to 3 level to find a minor part score AT BALANCE PLACE. I wonder why so many profiles stated: “CAPP” in BBO. Isn’t DONT more appropriate against strong NT? Meckwell’s approach is DONT alike.

Your reasoning seems backwards. Most conventions (lets just forget about capp, who still plays that these days??? ) allow you to come in more frequently over 1NT.

Taking two free bids with two queens should be enough to get any partner excited, but here partner should probably restrain herself.

[Al_U_Card]

Hannie, on Nov 4 2005, 03:30 PM, said:

Taking two free bids with two queens should be enough to get any partner excited, but here partner should probably restrain herself.

I usually need rope to restrain my partners....lol

[mikeh]

Kalvan14, on Nov 2 2005, 06:15 PM, said:

Hannie, on Nov 2 2005, 03:14 PM, said:

The goal is not to bid constructively, it is to come in often and be a nuisance. But whenever possible we want to be able to bid our games.

I do share completely this philosophy: get in, and be a nuisance for opponents. Keep them out of balance. This hand can also work: suppose they double 2S, expecting our honors under the 1 N opener. They would not be pleasantly surprised.

I fully agree that the primary goal of bidding DIRECTLY over a strong notrump is obstructive. But how does a thin balance here interfere with the opponents' bidding? They have passed out 1N. They have narrowly defined responder's hand: almost certainly no 5 card major, almost certainly no 6 card minor, somewhere between 0 and a mediocre 8 count. You step in now on light values (unable to show the shape) and you give the opps an easy decision, while giving your partner a potentially tough one.

The only convincing reason I have seen posted so far, in favour of opening, is the fear of getting the wrong lead. This is not to be underestimated, and it I were playing DONT, for example, I would happily bid 2♣, expecting to get the chance to bid 2♠. But playing no methods, and expecting partner to have some modest red suit length (because of the opps' red suit silence) I hope for 1 fit but do not expect two fits. Bidding 2♠, when wrong, is likely to be fatally wrong (suppose they double, expecting their honours to be over ours... and they find out that they hold all the missing honours... won't they be pleasantly surprised? )

Equally, bidding 2♣, natural, even if it 'works' in the auction, is not likely to inspire a good lead.

So I still pass

[han]

I think that we are basically saying the same thing mikeh, but let me clarify my comment.

I said the goal is to be a nuisance, and this includes not letting them play in 1NT. 1NT is perhaps the hardest contract to defend against, not only does the lead often give away a trick, declarer can also often score an extra trick in the later play. Often passing out 1NT at these colors (none VUL) is not winning bridge at any form of scoring.

A good reason to play DONT (or similar) in passout seat too.