[jillybean]

(P) P (1nt) ?

---

1nt 15-17

Playing Capp, 2♠ is the only bid I have here. Does the AK make up for the lack of stature or do you pass?

[TylerE]

Strongly disagree. Penalty X if I'm going to come in over 1NT.

[P_Marlowe]

#1 Playing Cppelletti, usually 2C shows a arbitary one suiter,
i.e. you can bid 2C.
If you happen to play Reverse Cappelletti, i.e. the meaning
of 2C and 2D are switched, some play that in this case 2D
showes a one suiter in the majors, in which case you still
have the option to bid 3D.

#2 Usually peoble require 5-5 for a 2H / 2S bid, for some 5-4
is enough, the major being longer.
... If you want too weaken the requirements, my preference would
be, that the minor is a 5 carder, but I believe that I belong to a
minority in this case.

#3 Your aim should be to find playable spot, i.e. you can ignore the
mayor.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[han]

2S shows 5, never do it with 4.

[jillybean]

Thanks, thats what I needed to know.
So my bid is 2♣ and never show the ♠

[whereagles]

get off cappelletti. that's such a horrible convention even it's inventor stopped playing it.

[Winstonm]

Advise not to play Capp - it really doesn't cause opponents any problems. Capp seems to have been designed to provide a method of bidding strong playing hands and not much else.

[matmat]

whereagles, on May 11 2008, 11:24 AM, said:

get off cappelletti. that's such a horrible convention even it's inventor stopped playing it.

and don't try playing Hamilton either.

[mikeh]

I join with whereagles and winston in suggesting you stop playing capp. I know it is incredibly popular in online bridge.. I have no idea why, since it is inferior to a host of alternatives.

While the deficiencies are numerous, consider how the auction is likely to develop after a 2♣ overcall.

Most opps play that double is stayman, so if LHO has any hand with long hearts or a moderate hand with a 4 card major, the opps are bidding. Even if partner gets a chance to bid 2♦, to ask about your suit, opener may be bidding 2♥... and, of course, LHO may already have beaten him to the punch.

So there you are, at your second turn to bid, and your side is confused. Your partner has no idea what your suit is, so has not been able to really bid at all, and you are now having to bid at the 3-level... now, this hand probably warrants it, but you will often have lesser hands that don't.

Now, other popular methods suffer similar problems on one-suiters.. .DONT can also be preempted.

But DONT allows you to bid major minor 2-suiters starting with the minor.... a huge edge.. you can get out in 2minor, which capp won't allow.

And Capp essentially means that you can never play 2♣... again, a lot of methods deprive you of that as well, but they (usually) give you compensating advantages elsewhere... capp seems not to.

[jtfanclub]

mikeh, on May 11 2008, 12:03 PM, said:

I have no idea why, since it is inferior to a host of alternatives.

Because it's the only system that works equally well/badly against 10-12 NT and 15-17NT, IMHO. Less confusion = fewer bad boards. I think DONT in particular is unplayable against a 10-12 NT.

Just my opinion.

[hotShot]

jtfanclub, on May 11 2008, 07:27 PM, said:

mikeh, on May 11 2008, 12:03 PM, said:

I have no idea why, since it is inferior to a host of alternatives.

Because it's the only system that works equally well/badly against 10-12 NT and 15-17NT, IMHO. Less confusion = fewer bad boards. I think DONT in particular is unplayable against a 10-12 NT.

Just my opinion.

It's not the only system Lionel is playable against any strength NT.
It's just less known.

[jtfanclub]

hotShot, on May 11 2008, 01:19 PM, said:

It's not the only system Lionel is playable against any strength NT.
It's just less known.

The disadvantage of Lionel is that it requires opening strength to make an overcall, as I understand it. So it runs into the same problem of not knowing whether the call is constructive, destructive, or simply shows a concentration.

[han]

... you can play any convention the way you like it. Lionel just shuffles the meanings a bit, you can play it aggressively or constructively as you like just as DONT.

[jillybean]

mikeh, on May 11 2008, 10:03 AM, said:

I join with whereagles and winston in suggesting you stop playing capp. I know it is incredibly popular in online bridge.. I have no idea why, since it is inferior to a host of alternatives.

"everyone" both online and at the club seems to play Capp - just trying to fit in

[NickRW]

I like Vertigo. It is explained here:
http://www.bruntonbr...org/vertigo.htm

There is a thread on Bridgetalk discussing it and some related stuff here
http://forums.bridge...opic=1878&st=15

Nick

[rbforster]

With good hands like this one, even distributional ones, I used to think I was supposed to bid something. I've learned that especially when the opponents are Vul you can just pass and hope to set them several tricks. If partner's got the Q♦ or declarer doesn't have 6 top tricks in clubs and hearts this is going down on a small diamond lead, quite possibly a lot.

[blackshoe]

When "everyone" plays a convention, that's a good reason imo to take a close look at whether it's really worth it. Some are - Stayman, for example. But often you can find a better alternative. Personally, as an alternative to Capp, I like Hello:

Double is for penalties.

2♣ is in the first instance a transfer to diamonds, but overcaller may have a major-minor two suiter, in which case he bids his major over advancer's 2♦. 2NT then asks for the minor.

2♦ is a transfer to hearts.

2♥ shows both majors.

2♠ is natural.

2NT is a transfer to clubs.

3♣ shows both minors.

3♦ shows both majors, forcing.

Jerry Helms developed Hello after he decided that Cappelletti (which he claims to have independently developed himself at about the same time Mike Cappelletti — and Fred Hamilton and Julian Pottage — did) sucks, and "modified Cappelletti" isn't much better.

Helms wrote a small book (still in print, I think) called "Helms to Hello" in which he outlines the method, and suggests it can be used (perhaps with some modification) over any range 1NT, over a natural 2NT, or over an artificial 1♣ or 2♣ opening. I dunno how well it works in all those, as none of my current partners have been willing to give it a try - they insist on sticking to Cappelletti over strong 1NT (well, one likes Pinpoint Astro, although she insists on calling it Brozel), and having no defense over those other openings.

[Mbodell]

In spite of what most people have posted Capp (or Hamilton as most people call it around me) is very playable. I will not claim it is necessarily the best system, but it certainly works well enough for most hands. It has a way to penalize nt which is essential against mini and weak nt IMO. It has a way to show the 2 suiters fairly effectively. It can show the 1 suiters, but it hides them for a round, which is a mixed blessing in direct seat. It means your partner can't judge to sac over a direct game type bid, but it also means opponents don't know what your long suit is and you are on lead which makes 3nt a gamble.

As for your hand in OP I use 2♣ for most 6+ suited hands, including 6-4 with 4 in the major like this, and use the 2-suited version only if you want to like when the 6 card is the major. Also, many people play that a failure to X the NT means you have limited your hand, so if your hand was a little stronger and the same shape you'd have to X first as partner will generally not go to game when it is on if you don't X first.

As to what the 2-suited bids show, I usually agree they show 54 or better shape with the only caveat being that the 2M bids show either at least 5 in the major or, where 4 in the major, about a trick stronger hand then what you'd normally need to bid if the suits were reversed. Many people play that they always show 5 in the major.

[Winstonm]

You can decide to play anything you want, and Capp can be used - but I think it a poor 2nd seat choice for these reasons. Consider the reasons for bidding in 2nd seat over a 1N opener: 1) to interfere with the machinations of constructive bidding that the opponents possess, or 2) to bid a partscore or game of our own.

By the nature of the reasons, the major-suits are more strongly aligned with both reasons above. As MikeH pointed out, Capp's double and 2C do nothing to interfere with any convention the opps might be playing, so the advantage of holding a biddable single-suit major is negated by Capp.

Personally, I believe the old-fashioned, simple Ripstra superior in second seat because it accomplishes both goals above.

Fourth seat is another matter: after 1N-P-P-?, the goals change, and competing safely and successfully has greater priority. Fourth seat Capp to me would be O.K., and Ripstra would fall in value.

More than system, considering the reason for bidding yields a better return on invested time, IMO.

[jtfanclub]

blackshoe, on May 11 2008, 06:23 PM, said:

I like Hello:

Double is for penalties.

Works well constructively, or against opponents who don't know what they're doing.

Against seasoned opponents, they can use:

1NT (2♦) X
1NT (2♦) P (2♥) P P X
1NT (2♦) 2♥
1NT (2♦) 2♠
1NT (2♦) P (2♥) P P 2♠


That's 5 different calls over 2 diamonds to show spades, which can be used for, say, 4 spades and shapely (inv+), 4 spades and balanced (inv+), transfer (any count), 4 spades weak invitation, and 5 spades weak plus a a 4+ card minor. None of which need to go higher than 2♠.

Against a 2♥ call meaning hearts, the opponents get two calls below 2NT: X and 2♠.

I don't even get why people insist on weird shape calls. Does anybody here play a DONT system over a natural 1 club opening (3+)? If not, why use it over a 10-12 NT?