BBO Discussion Forums: defensive bidding against NT - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

defensive bidding against NT CAPP vs DONT or natural or?

#1 User is offline   aisha759 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 286
  • Joined: 2004-March-19

  Posted 2004-March-19, 17:46

:rolleyes: Hello all you experts out there! I hope you can help me with my question.
I noticed most players prefer CAPP as defensive bidding against NT, some use both, depending on which seat. My regular partner and myself started out with CAPP and then switched to DONT.. DONT ask me why :)) I would really like to know which is relatively the best to use and why, and if one can play both.. is one better against weak NT, than the other? I would appreciate anyone who can give me "expert" advice. Thanks in advance :P
You know its time to diet, when you nod one chin and 2 others second the motion :)
0

#2 User is offline   slothy 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 689
  • Joined: 2003-October-14

  Posted 2004-March-19, 19:12

:angry: As the (self-appointed) expert who happens to be your regular partner, Aisha...since when did we chagne our defence to DONT????????? :o :rolleyes:

Ironic that this my first post: baptism of fire!
gaudium est miseris socios habuisse penarum - Misery loves company.
0

#3 User is offline   slothy 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 689
  • Joined: 2003-October-14

Posted 2004-March-19, 19:27

At the risk of turning my regular partnership into an ex-partnership i feel duty-bound to rescind what i have just said...whatever amendment that may have been in the US constitution??

yes we have changed to DONT, amazing how one remembers things with one's neck nestled in the guillotine ... the reason being that we came to the conclusion that the frequency of a CAPP penalty coupled with the frequency of it back-firing made a DONT defence more worthwhile IMHO (gotta practice these totally redundant and fatuous netabbreviations)......

waiting in morbid anticipation for other, no doubt more lucid, replies to aisha's post than mine....
gaudium est miseris socios habuisse penarum - Misery loves company.
0

#4 User is offline   mikestar 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 913
  • Joined: 2003-August-18
  • Location:California, USA

Posted 2004-March-19, 21:59

DONT would be my choice over a strong NT--we won't have game on power and disturbing their auction as ofter as we can safely is imporortant. The penamlty double just isn't that frequent and partner often can't leave it in when it does happen.

Against a weak NT, you will want to have a penalty double. And in a way CAPP and DONT can be combined:

X=Penalties.
2C=unspecified one-suiter as in CAPP.
2D=diamonds and another suit.
2H=hearts and (spades or clubs)
2S=spades and clubs.
0

#5 User is offline   Free 

  • mmm Duvel
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,728
  • Joined: 2003-July-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium
  • Interests:Duvel, Whisky

Posted 2004-March-20, 06:20

Mikestar said what had to be said I think: against strong NT, a penalty dbl will not occur very much, so it's better to use disrupting methods. Against weak NT, you need a penalty dbl... So in general, DONT has more hands it can show, so DONT is a better disruptive method, so better against strong NT. Against weak NT, I think CAPP is better.

But if you want to play DONT, why dont you play Meckwell? It's a slight improvement imo:

Dbl = minor suit overcall OR 44+ -
2 = 44+ and another suit
2 = 44+ and another suit
2M = natural (5+ card)

This will take possible transfers away when you can bid 2 right away. Also, when you dbl, opps will still have their Major suit fit, or we have time to find out a playable 2M contract :rolleyes:
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
0

#6 User is offline   aisha759 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 286
  • Joined: 2004-March-19

Posted 2004-March-20, 06:44

Thank you Mikestar and Free, and hope Slothy reads this too (he being my regular partner) :angry:
It makes sense to use DONT against strong NT... this answers my question that both can be used depending on openers NT... we will take Meckwell into consideration, and see if we can make it work for us.
I still have not gotten an answer though about my other question: what is the better one to use in balancing position, and does it matter if opener's NT is weak or strong; i have seen players do that, and would like to know the advantages or disatvanges.
Good Saturday all
:rolleyes:
You know its time to diet, when you nod one chin and 2 others second the motion :)
0

#7 User is offline   mikestar 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 913
  • Joined: 2003-August-18
  • Location:California, USA

Posted 2004-March-20, 11:44

I agree with Free that Meckwell is a technical improvment over DONT. In the balancing seat, you can use the same methods as in the direct seat with some strength adjustment (especially vs weak NT).

In both direct and balancing positions, if you are a passed hand you can use Meckwell or DONT even vs a weak NT, as you can't have a penalty double in this case.

Perhaps CAPP by an unpassed hand vs weak NT and Meckwell in all other cases?
0

#8 User is offline   slothy 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 689
  • Joined: 2003-October-14

Posted 2004-March-20, 14:18

Adding this in my quest to become an intermediate poster - principal of 'fast arrival'
gaudium est miseris socios habuisse penarum - Misery loves company.
0

#9 User is offline   aisha759 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 286
  • Joined: 2004-March-19

Posted 2004-March-20, 14:26

Thank you again for a very clear explanation.... i still have so many questions, about so many different things, but i'll leave that for some other time, whilst i master my capps and donts and meckwells :)
You know its time to diet, when you nod one chin and 2 others second the motion :)
0

#10 User is offline   1eyedjack 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,575
  • Joined: 2004-March-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 2004-March-20, 14:55

Just a suggestion, v weak NT I have played "Asptro" for some time and am reasonably happy with the results.

X by non-passed hand = penalties, by passed hand = both minors
2 = + another which, if , is longer (at least 5-4) (canape)
2 = + another which, if , is longer (at least 5-4) (canape pass of 2)
2/2/3/3 = single-suited
2N = strong 2-suited (prefer to declare than double. Double unlikely to be passed out, and auction can get murky)

In the UK Cappelleti evolved originally in parallel under the name of Pottage. In my experience it has not really caught on in the last 20 years or so in face to face in the UK where weak NT is king. My experience may be flawed, of course.
Psych (pron. saik): A gross and deliberate misstatement of honour strength and/or suit length. Expressly permitted under Law 73E but forbidden contrary to that law by Acol club tourneys.

Psyche (pron. sahy-kee): The human soul, spirit or mind (derived, personification thereof, beloved of Eros, Greek myth).
Masterminding (pron. mPosted ImagesPosted ImagetPosted Imager-mPosted ImagendPosted Imageing) tr. v. - Any bid made by bridge player with which partner disagrees.

"Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts." 9th battalion, King's own Yorkshire light infantry,
2000 years earlier: "morituri te salutant"

"I will be with you, whatever". Blair to Bush, precursor to invasion of Iraq
0

#11 User is offline   Trpltrbl 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,230
  • Joined: 2003-December-17
  • Location:Ohio
  • Interests:Sailing, cooking, bonsaitrees.

Posted 2004-March-20, 16:08

Capp against Weak NT, Meckwell in Passout seat. All others I play something I don't even know the name of. But it seems to work.

Mike :)
If there is dissatisfaction with the status quo, good. If there is ferment,
so much the better. If there is restlessness, I am pleased. Then let there
be ideas, and hard thought, and hard work.
0

#12 User is offline   aisha759 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 286
  • Joined: 2004-March-19

Posted 2004-March-20, 16:28

1eyedjack, is apstro similar to astro? It seems a bit familiar to me.
How do you all feel about Brozel?
I think after all these conventions, my brain might explode, I may need an Aspro :)

Regards to all
Aisha
You know its time to diet, when you nod one chin and 2 others second the motion :)
0

#13 User is offline   Yzerman 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 138
  • Joined: 2003-March-25
  • Location:Garden City, MI

Posted 2004-March-20, 16:41

I personally prefer CAPP, with some conditions. Substitute the double to show the 5+minor/4 Major hand, as well as the what some refer to as "reverse capp" or "mod capp" in which 2H/2S are single suits and 2C includes 5+major/4+minor. Personally, I think the capp double to show "cards" does not add value and is infrequent (as per MikeStar).

The ability to differentiate which suit is longer for major/minor 2 suiters is an added value that I believe creates tremendous advantage. These bids allow the partnership to compete to the proper level, make sound judgements in game bidding and stay out of trouble when applicable. I see some players bidding 2H/2S with Jxxx of major and AKQxxx of minor and I would like to vomit.

My vote goes for straight capp with special double;

X=5+m/4M
2C=1 suit
2D=both M
2H=5+M/4+m
2S=5+M/4+m

Regards,
MAL
MAL
0

#14 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,164
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2004-March-20, 16:59

Guess I'm in the minority, because I'm not fond of Capelletti

Given my Druthers, I prefer to play a slightly modified version of "Lionel"
Lionel is very aggressive: We frequently intervene with 4-4 patterns.

Correspondingly, the structure is designed to maximize pressure on the opponents. Unlike some of the structures being described, we don't telegraph whether we have 4 or 5 card suits. It helps the opponents as much as it helps us.

Rather, we prefer to be able to make natural bids which maximizes the pressure on LHO.



3C shows both minors
2NT shows an offensively oriented 2-suited hand
2S shows a single suited hand with Spades
2H shows a single suited hand with hearts
2D shows Diamonds and Hearts
2C shows Clubs and Hearts
X shows Spades and another suit
Alderaan delenda est
0

#15 User is offline   the hog 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,614
  • Joined: 2003-March-07
  • Location:Laos
  • Interests:Wagner and Bridge

Posted 2004-March-20, 18:22

"Guess I'm in the minority, because I'm not fond of Capelletti"

I guess thats why we often play together. Cappelletti is imho an inferior method of competing against any strength NT. Why? Look at this sequence:
(1N) 2C* (2S)

2C* (or X depending on which flavour you are using), shows some single suiter. You now have NO idea whether you have a fit with partner or not. Can you compete to the three level? Who knows! Maybe you even have a game on extreme shape. How to get there? Far better to show your suits. Capp also leads to a lot of UI problems in auctions like the one mentioned.

I have also had great fun bidding 2S on
x xxx xxxx xxxxx when the opps compete with a Cappelletti 2C over my partner's weak nt.

Personally I think you can't beat Asptro. Lionel is fine as well. Dont is ok against strong nt, suspect against weak nt.
"The King of Hearts a broadsword bears, the Queen of Hearts a rose." W. H. Auden.
0

#16 User is offline   cnszsun 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Yellows
  • Posts: 720
  • Joined: 2004-January-06
  • Location:CHINA

Posted 2004-March-20, 20:47

The following is quoted from Meckwell's CC:

"Vs Strong: X forces 2C, either m or M's or good hand. 2m=nat + side M. 2N=good with 55+ H+m. 2M=nat.
Vs Weak: X=14+, 2C=S+(H or C), 2D=D+M, 2M=NAT, 2NT=onesuiter, 3C=55+ C+H, 3D=55+ D+H, 3H=55+M's, 3S=55+ S+D. By PH, use Strong NT defense."

No matter against strong or weak NT, their 2 major bidding always natural. I think that's their uniqueness.
Michael Sun

#17 User is offline   mishovnbg 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 769
  • Joined: 2003-February-14
  • Location:Bulgaria, Varna
  • Interests:Bridge - new bidding systems, psyches; Computers - education, service, program; Computer games great fan :-)

Posted 2004-March-21, 04:47

aisha759, on Mar 21 2004, 12:28 AM, said:

1eyedjack, is apstro similar to astro? It seems a bit familiar to me.
How do you all feel about Brozel?
I think after all these conventions, my brain might explode, I may need an Aspro :unsure:

Regards to all
Aisha

Spoiler
Hi Aisha!

Spoiler
The best convention you can use is which you and your partner know and understand. There is no such thing like good bidding after nat 1NT, it take too much of bidding space, for any side - the reason why so many conventions here exists, competitive or not. If you feel yourself not advanced enough, my advice is to use Astro/Aspro, because it give you clear picture about majors and most common game/score. If you can handle more complicate way of bidding, best is Meckwell convention, because you can compete with any suit at cheapest level, avoiding penalties when possible. Give up playing penalty doubles vs weak NT - they will not play 1NT, penalty over 2 of suit is under question, defense depend of chance, while you lose tempo to describe own distribution and can lose own contract.
Spoiler
Misho
MishoVnBg
0

#18 User is offline   Shrike 

  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 51
  • Joined: 2004-March-21

Posted 2004-March-21, 14:29

aisha759, on Mar 19 2004, 05:46 PM, said:

:unsure: I noticed most players prefer CAPP as defensive bidding against NT, some use both, depending on which seat.

Others are handling the what-to-play suggestion, but there's another question implicit here:

In many places I've played, it is true that Cappelletti/Hamilton is the most popular to defense to opponents' notrump openings. This is true despite what many believe to be its technical inferiority, to any number of alternatives. It appears to me that few experts play this convention with other experts, and I can't recall seeing too many bidding theorists advocate its use over strong notrumps.

Why? In the case of some bad (let's accept for the moment that the theorists, at least, largely believe Capp to be bad over a strong notrump) methods, it's probably a combination of inertia and simplicity. Inertia, for example, may be what keeps people playing standard attitude, when it is generally conceded that upside-down is superior (albeit only slightly so). Simplicity keeps people playing Blackwood when RKC is conceded to be better, and RKC 4NT when RKC kickback is better.

But why Capp? It wasn't the first reasonable system of interference (Brozel preceded it, didn't it? And wouldn't you rather play Brozel, if you could only choose among these two and your partner was comfortable with both?), it is more complex than some good systems, it is inferior to many systems, yet it thrives. Any thoughts?
0

#19 User is offline   Rado 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 177
  • Joined: 2003-April-04
  • Location:Varna, Bulgaria

Posted 2004-March-22, 05:38

hi Aisha and all,
The basic guidance for overcalling opponents NT is:
1. vs Strong NT (14+ p) - destructive
2. vs Weak NT (15- p) - constructive

View the above, DONT and Meckwell perfectly fit 1., while for 2. almost all schemes including penalty double look fine.

My preference against weak NT is so called Geneva convention:

DBL = 13+ balanced, or minor 1 suiter or both majors 15+ p
2/ = ultra transfer for / with almost opening hand, no upper limit
2 = both majors limited (around good 8 to bad 14 points)
2 - natural weak (abt 10- p)
2NT...... - free as per you wish

Kind regards
Rado
0

#20 User is offline   aisha759 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 286
  • Joined: 2004-March-19

Posted 2004-March-22, 17:04

I thank each and everyone of you for your feed back; i think i will stick to DONT, for now, even though some of the combinations i was given were quite useful, i will not confuse matters, until i am completely sure i can handle a few other conventions, depending on strength of opps NT opening..... I used to like Brozel very much, but i don't see many people using it, so i discarded it, and did the same with astro :)
This question was mainly a sort of a poll i wanted to take, so that slothy and myself (my regular p) could come to some sort of agreement, because i was insisting CAPP was better, as so many players i watched seemed to use it.. he made his point.

Another topic we have a problem with is Lebenshol; and we seem to argue on that also...... I have my notes which tell me one thing, and his notes tell him something else.... i know there is only ONE lebenshol, and can also be used against weak 2 openings... 2NT after interference to 1NT opening, forces partner to bid 3 that's the simplest to remember.... could someone just reinforce the sequences for me, so i can compare it with my notes... i know its so much easier to find a site and read thru it, but i love the communication process which goes on in this forum, and the feedback i get is more convincing and more personal...

Thank you all in advance for taking the time ( this is just the beginning, i have many more questions ;) ) most of my queries are for non-regular partherships though, as regular partners can modify conventions up to a certain point.

Regards,
Aisha
You know its time to diet, when you nod one chin and 2 others second the motion :)
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users