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?

#21 User is offline   mikestar 

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

Posted 2004-March-23, 17:12

The simplest and probably most commonly played Lebensohl version:

After 1NT-2X-2NT-3C:

3 of a lower ranking suit than X: signoff.
3X: GF Stayman, stopper in X.
3 of a higher ranking suit than X: invitational.
3NT: natural with stopper in X.


Bids directly over 1NT-2X:

Dbl: natural 2NT bid.
2 of any suit: signoff.
3 of any suit: natural GF.
3X GF Stayman without stopper in X.
3NT natural but no stopper in X.


This variant is "slow shows", some partnerships reverse the meanings of 3NT and the cuebid in the two contexts--this is called "fast shows".

Various forms of transfer Lebensohl are technically superior but involve more memory work for the partnership.
0

#22 User is offline   Chamaco 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,902
  • Joined: 2003-December-02
  • Location:Rimini-Bologna (Italy)
  • Interests:Chess, Bridge, Jazz, European Cinema, Motorbiking, Tango dancing

Posted 2005-January-10, 03:19

Whatever your defense vs strong NT and weak NT, I strongly suggest that against strong NT, in the BALANCING SEAT, you use the same defense used against vs weak NT, in order to be able to show that we have the balance of power despite opener bidding a strong NT.

The reason is that when bidding goes
1NT-pass-pass-?

The situation is often the same regardless of the NT range: responder is either weak, or has something but not enough to bid; even when responder has something, often hcp are split and a partscore battle may be justified, especially at MP.
Obviously, if responder is broke, there is still possibility of bidding game espite strong NT opening, and at least a partscore.
In these cases , regardless of the NT strength, it is useful to have ways to compete *with a grain of salt*, but also ways to show that we have the balance of power.

Therefore I am against the use of purely disruptive methods (e.g. Dont/Meckwell) in the balancing seat vs strong NT.
This will be especially helpful when some opp opens a strong 1NT in the 3rd position stealing 1 or 2 hcp, to preempt our side.
"Bridge is like dance: technique's important but what really matters is not to step on partner's feet !"
0

#23 User is offline   Gerben47 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 428
  • Joined: 2003-October-27

Posted 2005-January-10, 04:43

I think Cappelletti is used so widely because of the system regulations in the ACBL. An obvious improvement would be to have 2 as both majors and 2 as an unspecified major (Multi Landy), but this is not allowed in the ACBL as 2 must have an anchor suit.

About the passout seat, I disagree. The essential difference between them opening weak NT and them opening strong NT is the likelyhood that the hand belongs to us. After 1NT (15-17) pass pass this likelyhood is small, after 1NT (12-14) pass pass it is much larger. In both cases their maximum is 23 HCP (15+8 or 12+11) but their minimum is lower in the weak NT case.

My suggestion is this:
In passout use the same system as in direct seat. After a strong NT this does not include a "points" double, after a weak NT it does.

Actually you also might want a third system: interference with a passed hand. Remember that your hand was not worth opening before so playing weak 2 bids you will not have a hand that will want to bid pass pass 1NT pass pass 2S (natural).
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do!
0

#24 User is offline   Chamaco 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,902
  • Joined: 2003-December-02
  • Location:Rimini-Bologna (Italy)
  • Interests:Chess, Bridge, Jazz, European Cinema, Motorbiking, Tango dancing

Posted 2005-January-10, 04:52

Gerben47, on Jan 10 2005, 10:43 AM, said:

About the passout seat, I disagree. The essential difference between them opening weak NT and them opening strong NT is the likelyhood that the hand belongs to us.

This would be true if responder did not pass.
But if responder does passes, the 2 following sequences will often be similar:

1NT(12-14)-pass-pass-?
1NT(15-17)-pass-pass-?

In both cases, if you bid, sometimes you'll stumble in opps having 23-24 hands, some other times you'll get a good contract that would be missed otherwise.

The likelihood is about the same.
Actually, if our line has about 23-24 hcp, it will be much more likely that we have game vs the STRONG NT rather than vs the Weak NT, since all the defensive strength being in one hand it will be easier to read the hand, with marked finesses and frequent endplays.

I want to emphasize that the use of disruptive methods in a balancing seat, when opps already gave up the hopes for game, appears to me to be VERY inadequate: disruption should be used to prevent opps bidding the right game or slam, not when they are passing out, and this applies regardless of whether they opened a strong or weak NT (or 1 of a suit for what matters).

When opps are passing out, I believe one should be able to have ALL of the following options:
1. compete safely,
2. cooperate with partner in case game is there
3. cooperate with partner in case we can penalize 1NT or any other partscore.

Disruptive methods handle well only option 1, and in the balancing seat it is a serious handicap in my opinion.
This is why I advocatite using in the balancing seat cs Sttrong NT the same methods used vs weak NT: it has nothing to lose and much to gain.
(Please note that I DO NOT advocate reopening with ANY hand vs neither strong nor weak NT; this is a matter of judgement; I only say that *if you judge that reopening is wise*, then it is better to do so with your defense vs weak NT).
"Bridge is like dance: technique's important but what really matters is not to step on partner's feet !"
0

#25 User is offline   mila85 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: 2004-September-02

Posted 2005-January-10, 08:49

I don't like bidding over 1nt with anything. I prefer normal score than randomize the board.
I play DONT over strong nt but I rarely bid with 5-4 and never with 4-4. I played CAPP over weak nt.
I prefer to pass with a lot of hands and bid more precise with the others.
This is why I switched 2c and 2d in CAPP. I can't bid with every hand with diamonds but I can ask which major is better and I'm in better position when responder bids.
This is also why I don't like DONT. (1nt-2c-p-? What do you bid with Q Qxxx Qxxxx Qxx?)

I remember I played with unknown partner. He doubled strong 1nt in balancing seat. Because we didn't discussed it I passed it as natural. Down two in red was +500 and very good result. I wanted to play penalty dbl. in this position with my regular parner. Then I saw the movie.
1nt-p-p-dbl.
p - p - 2d - all pass
This was frequent bidding. Made +1 and -110 instead of +200.
Sorry, my english is not perfect :(
0

#26 User is offline   Chamaco 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,902
  • Joined: 2003-December-02
  • Location:Rimini-Bologna (Italy)
  • Interests:Chess, Bridge, Jazz, European Cinema, Motorbiking, Tango dancing

Posted 2005-January-10, 09:14

mila85, on Jan 10 2005, 02:49 PM, said:

I play DONT over strong nt but I rarely bid with 5-4 and never with 4-4.

This is not bad, but in my opinion, the main issue is to whether the DONT overcall will suggest a good lead or not: if I have a good lead directing bid, I'll stretch to make it; if my 54/55 may cause pard to lead a bad suit, I won't.


--------------

If you switched 2C and 2D bids you are more or less usinga variant of Landy, which I personally like better than Capp.

Vs weak NT I play

X = (semi)balanced 15-17 or bal 20+ or huge unbalanced hands. Advancer will bid assuming I have 15-17 bal, using stayman weak/strong (usually weak, scrambling), transfers, lebensohl in competition, etc

2C = 54 or better in majors or "Raptor" hand ( 4cM + longer minor)

2D is weak relay, over which
2H =majors,
2S = Raptor with S,
3m = Raptor with H + the bid minor

2NT is strong relay, over which
3C = majors with a longer major (3D asks),
3D = majors with equal length, min;
3M = Raptor + M,
3NT = majors equal length, max;

2D = "Multi" = ANY single suiter, minimum opener OR 18-19 balanced

2H/S = 5+, usually has a side minor, opening srength

2NT = minors, opening srength

3X = single suiter, reverse

The use of double is not strictly "penalty" but rather a "balance of power" bid.

In the balancing seat, the ranges of balanced hands lowers down:
X = 12-15 or 20+ bal and Multi2D includes the 16-19 range, the rest is the same.
"Bridge is like dance: technique's important but what really matters is not to step on partner's feet !"
0

#27 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 2005-January-10, 10:21

Mila,

Ben did some research a few months ago about this area, and the result was following: if you don't intervene their 1NT they gain an average of +1imp over not intervening.

I've played DONT and Meckwell for a long time now, I've bid with 4432 and 6520 hands (and everything in between these ofcourse :huh: ) and I think I've gained more than I lost. Sure I've had some horible results to, but when you get more good scores than bad scores, I think you have a good convention.

"This is also why I don't like DONT. (1nt-2c-p-? What do you bid with Q Qxxx Qxxxx Qxx?)"
Pass, you have found yourself a nice 4-3 fit with a singleton in the short trump suit! I think this contract is a very nice one with big chances to get to a nice result. Even if opps double for penalty I'll let partner play this...

"I remember I played with unknown partner. He doubled strong 1nt in balancing seat. Because we didn't discussed it I passed it as natural. Down two in red was +500 and very good result. I wanted to play penalty dbl. in this position with my regular parner. Then I saw the movie.
1nt-p-p-dbl.
p - p - 2d - all pass
This was frequent bidding. Made +1 and -110 instead of +200."

Sure, here a penalty Dbl made a very good result. I also remember one hand last year when partner opened a 1NT (with a 4333 and 15HCP) and I had 0 HCP and also a 4333. Opps doubled (they didn't have a cc with them so they weren't allowed to play any fancy stuff) and we ended up in 2* and a lot down.
Does this 1 hand prove much? No, since I remember a lot more hands where opps doubled (even weak NT's) and we ended up in 1NT**+1 or they tried to save the ship and got doubled for a telephone number of downtricks.
You can also look at these games from another perspective (just imagine, I don't mean a word of what I'm about to say): the guy who opened 1NT went -2 doubled, so that 1NT opening is a poor thingy. Lets make our 1NT opening even stronger, say like 18-20, so when partner doesn't have anything we won't get heavy downscores.
As you can see, several visions can easily be constructed about such hand, but somehow most people keep playing their 1NT 15-17 or weaker and take the risk of getting doubled and lose 500 or more. Also a huge number of players keep risking their head by intervening opps NT openings with as few as 2 good 4-card suits.

It's all a matter of style ofcourse, but I think some people sometimes just focus too much on the bad results, and never on the good ones and the whole picture. Most important thing is you feel comfortable with what you play, and that you know your partner's style. B)
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
0

#28 User is offline   mikestar 

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

Posted 2005-January-10, 10:24

Gerben47, on Jan 10 2005, 10:43 AM, said:

About the passout seat, I disagree. The essential difference between them opening weak NT and them opening strong NT is the likelyhood that the hand belongs to us. After 1NT (15-17) pass pass this likelyhood is small, after 1NT (12-14) pass pass it is much larger. In both cases their maximum is 23 HCP (15+8 or 12+11) but their minimum is lower in the weak NT case.

Not quite. Responder is statistically more likely to hold say a nondescript 2 count opposite 15-17 than he is opposite 12-14, Also there will be at least a portion of those hands where he will attempt an escape from a weak NT but take his chances passing a strong NT. So while the hypothetical minimum may be lower for the weak NT, the average expectation is very similar.

Also to be noted: in the case of the strong NT, more of the enemy cards will be concentrated in the NT hand. If we play a partial or a game after balancing, how many finesses will we misguess?
0

#29 User is offline   Flame 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,085
  • Joined: 2004-March-26
  • Location:Israel

Posted 2005-January-10, 12:38

The first question is about Dobule, should we use it for penalty, i think today almost all experts gave up the penalty double.
Dont is just a simple system which catched nicely like other tools of bergen, i dont think its because its that good, its few factors that working together, bergen's books popularity, the cool name, the simplicity and the agressivness.
I dont think dont is the best because if you look at exeperts no one play it, infact you can see they are all using a version of the same idea using the double to show minor +major with longer minor. I also play this but i never really took the time to think whats so good with it.
Anyway in balancing position, things change and the double is used as a t.o double, something like an opening streangh.
0

#30 User is offline   mila85 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: 2004-September-02

Posted 2005-January-11, 07:03

Quote

Sure, here a penalty Dbl made a very good result. I also remember one hand last year when partner opened a 1NT (with a 4333 and 15HCP) and I had 0 HCP and also a 4333. Opps doubled (they didn't have a cc with them so they weren't allowed to play any fancy stuff) and we ended up in 2♦* and a lot down.
Does this 1 hand prove much? No, since I remember a lot more hands where opps doubled (even weak NT's) and we ended up in 1NT**+1 or they tried to save the ship and got doubled for a telephone number of downtricks.


When I wrote about our very good result after penalty double over strong 1nt I wanted to say that double worked but only because of a mistake from one of the opps (He didn't bid 2d). I don't want to play pen. double over strong no trumph.

Quote

The first question is about Dobule, should we use it for penalty, i think today almost all experts gave up the penalty double.


But I want to play pen. double over weak nt. I play weak no trumph as long as I play bridge (not so long but I opened it a lots of times). I made some redoubled 1nt but I had bad results much more often than good ones after 1nt-(dbl.)
The very big advatage of pen. double is that all your other bids are limited. When opps opened weak no trupmh you can still make a game. It's very difficult to find it when your overcall is 12-20.
I always double weak no trumph with 14+hcp. I will see if they will find a playable contract. If yes I can bid my suit now or use takeout double. If not simply pass (takeout dbl :D ). This doesn't cost anything. Ok, sometimes 1ntxx+1 :)
Someone told me about a board opened by mini nt (9-11). LHO interfered with 18 poins and did -800. But this doesn't mean I won't play penalty double over mini nt...
Sorry, my english is not perfect :(
0

#31 User is offline   mila85 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: 2004-September-02

Posted 2005-January-11, 07:09

Free, on Jan 10 2005, 11:21 AM, said:

Ben did some research a few months ago about this area, and the result was following: if you don't intervene their 1NT they gain an average of +1imp over not intervening.

Isn't it because on BBO play a lots of partners without good agreement?
When I play with an unknown partner I do not discuss with him how to bid after interfernce over our 1nt opening...
Sorry, my english is not perfect :(
0

#32 User is offline   bearmum 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 757
  • Joined: 2003-July-06
  • Location:Perth Australia

Posted 2005-January-11, 07:18

aisha759, on Mar 20 2004, 12:46 PM, said:

:unsure: 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  B)

well ONLINE I find that the TWO most popular defences are Capp and DONT - I actually prefer Capp against weak NT and DONT V strong NT :unsure:

I KNOW there are "better" defences (and most have been mentioned by those who play them ;) ) but in general I find that (at least in a 24-30 board f2f tourneyas opposed to a BBO tourney [normally 12 boards MAX!!]) that there will possibly be one board where you WISHED you were playing another defence than the one you have agreed :rolleyes:

I normally don't inquire as to what overcalls P plays UNLESS they are specified on his/her profile - then I can say "I can play/not play *** " convention on your profile P" :)
0

#33 User is offline   inquiry 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 14,564
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amelia Island, FL
  • Interests:Bridge, what else?

Posted 2005-January-11, 07:26

mila85, on Jan 11 2005, 09:09 AM, said:

Free, on Jan 10 2005, 11:21 AM, said:

Ben did some research a few months ago about this area, and the result was following: if you don't intervene their 1NT they gain an average of +1imp over not intervening.

Isn't it because on BBO play a lots of partners without good agreement?
When I play with an unknown partner I do not discuss with him how to bid after interfernce over our 1nt opening...

This early data appears to be somewhat flawed in that

1) I did not take vulnerabilty into account
2) At the time I did this, I looked at auctions ending in 1NT that started with 1NT. Turns out, this includes 1NTx and 1NTxx contracts as well.

Obviously the data is not valid then for 1NT-P-P-P auctions, and the data may change depending upon the seat in which 1NT was opened (for example is P-P-1NT-P-P-P likely to give the same results as 1NT-P-P-P? I don't know).

I have since figured out (actual it was easy, but I was too stupid to consider the possibility) how to look at auction by vulnerabilty, and how to keep the double and redbouble contracts out of the mix. When I redo it, I will post here, but my feeling is it will not be as high as +1 imp. Maybe half that at most. Also, vulnerability might affect the resutl since 1NT down one not vul (-50) is better than letting them play 1NT making (-90).... but if vul, these would be an imp wash (-90 versus -100).

Ben
--Ben--

#34 User is offline   whereagles 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 14,900
  • Joined: 2004-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portugal
  • Interests:Everything!

Posted 2005-January-11, 08:25

I have read a study of the french school of bidding where they argue (in a relatively convincing way) that penalty doubles of a strong NT opening are not necessary.
0

#35 User is offline   inquiry 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 14,564
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amelia Island, FL
  • Interests:Bridge, what else?

Posted 2005-January-11, 09:09

I have just finished looking up the results for VUL contracts that go 1NT-P-P-P (1NT can be in any seat, and with any number of hcp). I looked at over 10,000 vul 1NT contracts for both matchpoint and imps (for this data, I used an older database that hand nearly 7 million hands in it).

The results proved my idea correct that we need to remove the doubled and redoubled contracts from the mix (I haven't tested the non-vul yet, but my thought is that non-vul, playing 1NT is better, if they can get you two undoubled for -100, surely they could have made at least 1NT or someother part-score, so you will not be hurt too bad... this is why many who play mini-notrump, strenghten it when Vul... )

The results were, for imps
Number of contract: 13997
Average number of tricks (with +/-) 7.31 +/- 0.01
Average "score" (with +/-): 42 +/- 1
Average number of imps (with +/-): 0.09 +/- 0.02
Average number of hcp (with +/-): 21.47 +/- 0.01

For hands that won imps for the 1NT side
Number of contract (and percentage) 7909 (56%)
Average number of tricks (with +/-) 7.74 +/- 0.01
Average "score" (with +/-) 95 +/- 0
Average number of imps (with +/-) 1.98 +/- 0.01
Average number of hcp (with +/-) 21.37 +/- 0.02

For matchpoints
Number of contract: 10991
Average number of tricks (with +/-) 7.39 +/- 0.01
Average MP score (percentage with +/-) +53.34% +/- 0.24
Average "score" (with +/-) +51
Average number of hcp (with +/-) 21.65 +/- 0.01

For hands that won imps for the 1NT side
Number of contract (and percentage) 6001 (54.6%)
Average number of tricks (with +/-) 8.01
Average "score" (with +/-) 104 +/- 0.01
Average MP result (percentage with +/-) 72.53 +/- 0.15
Average number of hcp (with +/-) 21.63 +/- 0.02
--Ben--

#36 User is offline   inquiry 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 14,564
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amelia Island, FL
  • Interests:Bridge, what else?

Posted 2005-January-11, 10:50

Just finished the non-vul look up.... walked away from computer while compiling data, so a lot more hands, the stadard deviations were 0 or 0.01 so I will not include them.

The results were, for imps
Number of contract: 27,248
Average number of tricks" 7.27
Average "score": 62 (going down was only 50 instead of 100... so hihger)
Average number of imps: 0.33
Average number of hcp (with +/-): 21.47 (same as when vul)

For hands that won imps for the 1NT side
Number of contract (and percentage) 16432 (60%)
Average number of tricks 7.65
Average "score" 95 (same as when vul, oddly enough)
Average number of imps: 1.68
Average number of hcp: 21.34

For matchpoints
Number of contract: 26970
Average number of tricks: 7.38
Average MP score: 55.38%
Average "score": 69
Average number of hcp: 21.64

For hands that won imps for the 1NT side
Number of contract (and percentage) 16104 (59%)
Average number of tricks: 7.83
Average "score" 96
Average MP result: 71.74
Average number of hcp: 21.47


ben
--Ben--

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