[kgr]

Scoring: IMPs

---

(1♥)-DBL!-(P)-2♣!!
(2♦)-3♣-(3♦)-p
(Pass)-3NT-(Pass)-Pass
(4♦)-Pass-(Pass)-DBL
All Pass
 
DBL!: in your system 1NT would show minors. You can pass or DBL. DBL followed by NT shows 16+
2♣!!: 2♣ shows at least 7HCP, otherwise we go via 1NT.
...4♦x +1
 
Who do you blame?

(Edited the bidding)

This post has been edited by kgr: 2009-January-18, 18:15

[helene_t]

(Edited) South's 3NT may be a little too much but not terrible. No blame really.

[kgr]

helene_t, on Jan 19 2009, 02:12 AM, said:

North shouldn't bid 3NT without extras. South has too many clubs and too few diamonds to double 4!d. What's wrong with a (forcing) pass?

South did bid 3NT.
North DBLed 4D.
..I edited the bidding after reading your forcing pass comment. North DBLed in pass out seat.
Should this be a forcing pass situation? South did bid a non-forcing 3C before bidding 3NT. This should show doubt about 3NT and not much extra's?

[jdonn]

The system designer 110%, and whichever of north or south hired him another 110%.

[kgr]

jdonn, on Jan 19 2009, 02:19 AM, said:

The system designer 110%, and whichever of north or south hired him another 110%.

I doubt this. System designer plays at the top in Belgium (..ok; I know that it's a small country and that this is not really a reference). It will rather be the system applicators then the designer.
Note that you loose a natural 1NT overcall, but gain a bid to show minors early. I wonder how you can say this is a bad system without doing a simulation or anything. I agree that system was not good for these hands. We loose IMPs one these kind of hands, but maybe gain Imps on other hands (where overcaller can bid 1NT with both minors and 3th hand can preeempt opps out of their best contract).

[gnasher]

North. He had a minimum in high cards and very little defence. He can expect a singleton heart on his left and he knows that both red suits are breaking well. Partner's sequence suggests that 3NT was based partly on a club fit rather than purely on high cards. All in all, it's a horrible hand to be doubling on.

[hatchett]

Quote

Note that you loose a natural 1NT overcall, but gain a bid to show minors early.

Agree with jdonn the system is crazy. Why don't you use 2NT to show the minors like the rest of the world and then you won't have a serious of bizarre bidding problems caused by you having to make offshape doubles with 15-18 balanced hands?

[gnasher]

hatchett, on Jan 19 2009, 02:00 AM, said:

Agree with jdonn the system is crazy. Why don't you use 2NT to show the minors like the rest of the world and then you won't have a serious of bizarre bidding problems caused by you having to make offshape doubles with 15-18 balanced hands?

I don't think that part is so bad. These days partner isn't expecting a three-suiter anyway; all we're doing is adding the balanced 15-18 counts to the hands of the same shape in the 13-14 range, which we're already doubling on. OK, I wouldn't want to do it with 2=3=3=5, but with 3=3=3=4 it's not such a problem.

If I did this, though, I wouldn't waste the 1NT overcall on showing the minors. Some way of showing a Canape overcall is obviously more useful.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2009-January-19, 04:03

[nige1]

kgr, on Jan 18 2009, 07:02 PM, said:

Scoring: IMPs

(1♥)-DBL!-(P)-2♣!!
(2♦)-3♣-(3♦)-p
(Pass)-3NT-(Pass)-Pass
(4♦)-Pass-(Pass)-DBL
All Pass
 
DBL!: in your system 1NT would show minors. You can pass or DBL. DBL followed by NT shows 16+
2♣!!: 2♣ shows at least 7HCP, otherwise we go via 1NT.
...4♦x +1
 
Who do you blame?

---

Blame bad luck. South's bidding seems OK. North is reluctant to pass 4♦ on his balanced hand opposite a fairly balanced strong hand, after the partnership have bid 3N to make, North reasonably expects to defeat 4♦X most of the time. His excuse is that bidding -- especially competitive bidding -- is not an exact science. The system seems OK, especially, on this hand. If anything,, it made the double of 4♦ less attractive than in a more orthodox competitive auction, starting with a no-trump overcall.

[Hanoi5]

Both are culprits. Why double when you have no certain trick of your own? Why leave the double when almost half your points are in your partner's bid suit (and you have 5 cards)?.

[Codo]

I don`t blame the system, I agree that it is uncommon but I have no prove that it is good or bad or just different.

I blame south for doubling. Do you really treat this hand as a strong NT after a 1 HEart opening? Why? YOu know that this will give you problems. Bid 2 ♣ and see what happens.
When you have a strong NT avaiable you can bid 1 NT here. But when you have to put the strong NT hands in your double, better bid natural as often as possible.
I play raptor quite often and aviding doubling with strong NT hands is a net winner.

I do not like 3 NT, but it is okay as a gambling.
I do not like doubling part socres but after this bidding I had doubled too.

I wonder how they made it, bad luck. Clubs 3-0 hearts 8-1? Spades behind the king?
Happens.

[gwnn]

I don't understand double from north, it makes no sense, he/she has an absolute minimum and one more club making his/her defence almost negative.

BTW if you play these methods, it will be very hard to get good solid advice from anyone, except maybe from the top Belgian player. Not saying that this makes it definitely and unequivocally an inferior method, just that it is definitely a factor to consider. Apparently Chip Martel stopped playing weak NT because he thought too few people were playing so he'd be left out of an expert brainstorming (problems in the context of a strong NT system) of some sorts.

[kgr]

Codo, on Jan 19 2009, 05:00 PM, said:

I don`t blame the system, I agree that it is uncommon but I have no prove that it is good or bad or just different.

I blame south for doubling. Do you really treat this hand as a strong NT after a 1 HEart opening? Why? YOu know that this will give you problems. Bid 2 ♣ and see what happens.
When you have a strong NT avaiable you can bid 1 NT here. But when you have to put the strong NT hands in your double, better bid natural as often as possible.
I play raptor quite often and aviding doubling with strong NT hands is a net winner.

..to make the sytem worse : 2C would show 4c♠ and 5+c♣. So, 2♣ was not possible.
Other possibilities beside DBL were:
Pass
3♣: intermediate, but shld normally have 6c♣

Quote

I wonder how they made it, bad luck. Clubs 3-0 hearts 8-1? Spades behind the king?
Happens.

Yes (♥ 6-1)

[kgr]

gwnn, on Jan 19 2009, 06:32 PM, said:

...BTW if you play these methods, it will be very hard to get good solid advice from anyone, except maybe from the top Belgian player. ....

good point!

[jdonn]

You can neither overcall a suit nor notrump naturally, forcing you to double with a doubleton in the other major, it goes wrong, and you want us to not blame the system. Sorry you can keep that snake oil.

[Codo]

Koen, when you give up natural bids for special meanings, you better take care about your scores with this systems.
Write down the wins (when 2 ♣ as a two suiter wins imps) and loses (like on this hand). And be honest to yourself.

Most of us (To put it midly) do not belive that your methods are an overall winner.