[Free]

First of all, I am calm! I used to get upset by people going offtopic everytime a little opportunity arised, but that's over. I just wanted to highlight the most important part of the text, if you read the rest as well you'll see that I'm calm...

Second, this is a hand I had to play with that method, and my partner (a much better player than me) told me the bid I choose was wrong. It's no useful information for me to know what anyone would do when playing psychosuction, woolsey, lionel, multilandy, natural, dontno, whatever,... That's all.

3rd, if you want a discussion about systems, read the existing threads (there must be like 1000 of them) and if you're still not satisfied start a new one. It's not difficult, and you'll start one of the most popular topics for sure!

[luis]

Free, on Feb 22 2006, 08:43 PM, said:

First of all, I am calm! I used to get upset by people going offtopic everytime a little opportunity arised, but that's over. I just wanted to highlight the most important part of the text, if you read the rest as well you'll see that I'm calm...

Second, this is a hand I had to play with that method, and my partner (a much better player than me) told me the bid I choose was wrong. It's no useful information for me to know what anyone would do when playing psychosuction, woolsey, lionel, multilandy, natural, dontno, whatever,... That's all.

3rd, if you want a discussion about systems, read the existing threads (there must be like 1000 of them) and if you're still not satisfied start a new one. It's not difficult, and you'll start one of the most popular topics for sure!

I don't know what you bid or what your pd thought was right but I'm quite sure he was wrong saying that your bid is wrong.
Either dbl showing a one suited hand, or pass, or 3♣ or 2♣ can be rightish or wrongish, it's a very gray bid.

Luis

[cherdano]

By the way, playing don't or Meckwell, I think partner should expect that my clubs are always at least as good as my spades (when I show them subsequently), because when the spades are better, it is way more attractive to overcall 2♠. That's why I think 2♣ followed by 2♠ is reasonable -- although partner of course won't expect 2-card disparity.

Arend

[Al_U_Card]

In DONT (the weapon of choice in this bombastic duel) since a single suiter in S can be shown by dbl and 2S, and Spades and a minor can be shown by bidding the lower suit first, does anyone play 2S to Show 4+S and a longer minor?

[Echognome]

My concern on this hand is that partner may still not known my relative lengths if I back in with 2♠ later. Could I not bid this way with:

♠KQTxx
♥xxx
♦x
♣KQT9

or am I always bidding 2♠ with that hand? I just don't play enough DONT to know.

[Free]

Echognome, on Feb 22 2006, 11:56 PM, said:

My concern on this hand is that partner may still not known my relative lengths if I back in with 2♠ later. Could I not bid this way with:

♠KQTxx
♥xxx
♦x
♣KQT9

or am I always bidding 2♠ with that hand? I just don't play enough DONT to know.

This hand would be a 1♠ opener...

[joshs]

Echognome, on Feb 22 2006, 05:56 PM, said:

My concern on this hand is that partner may still not known my relative lengths if I back in with 2♠ later. Could I not bid this way with:

♠KQTxx
♥xxx
♦x
♣KQT9

or am I always bidding 2♠ with that hand? I just don't play enough DONT to know.

If the auction goes:
1N-2C-P-P
bid-2S

Or
1N-2C-bid-P
P-2S

I would expect 5S and 4/5C playing dont.

If you start with a x:
1N-x-P-2C
P-P-bid
and later bid spades you will have shown your hand, but its much more likely that the auction goes:
1N-x-bid

or 1N-x-P-2C
bid

In which case you can't show your hand at all (you have to bid 3C next to show the 6 card suit, and that shows clubs and a better hand then you have, so you would have to pass)

Now in dont, there are two ways of showing spades:
2s Direct
x then 2S

Traditionally these are used to differentiate a stronger and weaker 2S bid (although there is little agreement as to which sequence should be stronger). But it might be better to use one of these sequences for another purpose (like 4S and a 6 card minor). But thats not a normal agreement...

[Sigi_BC84]

Jlall, on Feb 22 2006, 08:44 PM, said:

Sigi_BC84, on Feb 22 2006, 02:35 PM, said:

Free, on Feb 22 2006, 08:05 PM, said:

You've said it all: this is NOT a discussion about defenses against NT

Uh, what did you expect -- mention DONT and not have people suggest alternatives?

Yes, I would expect people to just answer the question. If he could show 5+ clubs and a 4 card major there would be no problem. It is a problem because of the methods, and he was trying to stimulate a discussion of the best strategy with this hand.

OK OK, please don't get it the wrong way.

I was not suggesting that it is ok to turn every thread into a religious war about conventions - au contraire.

I'm just saying that simply mentioning debated conventions ("DONT" most certainly being one) is highly susceptible to replies like the ones we got here.

Even more so since the original poster said something like "I have to use DONT here", which of course means that in the situation he was talking about "DONT" was agreed so he was asking for suggestions for such a scenario. This provokes replies suggesting a different method. Human nature.

This is different from saying that the base system is 2/1 or something else: You can't easily replace your entire structure, so it would be extremely foolish to just suggest that because, say, Moscito would have worked better in the situation in question.

--Sigi

P.S.: Take a look at the title of this topic: "DONT or don't". Well, I'd say it's really easy to read that as a request to suggest something else (of course this was obviously not Free's intention, it just happened).

[mike777]

This gets back to the priority of playing DONT, disturbing their nt..not, repeat not having a constructive auction to our best contract.


I think if partner passes my vul 2club and rho reopens I am just passing, I am vul after all and partner has club tolerance, why not let the opp have the last guess and not us? P may pass or be able to make a bid.

[HeartA]

Walddk, on Feb 22 2006, 06:41 AM, said:

I used to like DONT, but that has changed. I have had too many problems with the 2-suiters because advancer can't tell which is the longer. I recommend

Woolsey Defence to 1NT Openings
Dbl = 5-card minor and a 4-card major
2♣ = majors; 2♦ asks for preference
2♦ = 1-suited major
2♥ = Hearts and a minor
2♠ = Spades and a minor
2N = Both minors
3X = Natural

Playing Woolsey, I have a perfect double with this hand, but using DONT I don't have a clear bid. If DONT is what I must play, I prefer pass, alternatively double to show a 1-suiter. However, I don't think 2♣ (clubs and another) is horrible.

Roland

I was used to capp. Then tried DONT for while, didn't like it, for the same reason Roland mentioned here. Then a friend told me Woolsey which I like a lot, though capp (better than DONT) is still in my profile on BBO.

But since DONT is the only convention, I would bid 2C.

[benlessard]

2c is the only bid playing DONT. To not want to show a 4 card spades suit is plain bad bridge.

Plus 2c take more space then X.


For a review of defense over 1nt go to


http://www.firesides.net/mcguinty.htm


What i like to play is

2M to play
2m 5m+ 4M or both minors if 2c

X 5M + 4os or both Maj


The trick is keeping the 2 level safety level.
and sacrificing the 1-suiter minors to be able to show wich suit is longuest.


Woosley over 1nt isnt safe enough IMHO.

[Kalvan14]

2♣. I can probably be back later bidding my spades.
The only alternative is not double, but rather 3♣ (single suiter, ok, but much better pre-emption). Still, vul I would bid 2♣

[Al_U_Card]

I still like 2S = 4+S and a longer minor. (2 other ways to show S)

[pigpenz]

the bad thing about this hand is that neither partne is ever gonna know what to do once you bid 2♣, partner most likely wont sit with 2♣ cards, I guess if someone put a good to your head and made you bid on this hand your better off just bidding 3♣ to start with

[keylime]

Strictly within the guidelines, 2♣ playing DONT. I can play 4-3's well if needed.

Outside the guidelines, Meckwell is perfect here.