[jillybean]

Then there is this, given to me a few years ago by MikeH.

double = 15+
2♣ = majors
2♦ = ♥s a transfer. This allows you to bid a good hand with 5+♥ and a side suit: transfer and bid the side suit
2♥ = transfer
2♠ = both minors
2N = long minor, good hand
3minor: long minor, good but usually not solid suit, semi-preemptive
3Major see 3minor

[the hog]

What about SOAP?
2C/D trfs to H/S respectively. Resp bids intermediate suit with no fit.
2H/S 4 card suit and a long minor
2NT ms

[cherdanno]

Kathryn I would never play transfers over their strong NT. It's just extremely rare that you have a two-suiter that has the strength to force to the 3-level. I think just Landy is better than what you describe.

[bluecalm]

Quote

Kathryn I would never play transfers over their strong NT. It's just extremely rare that you have a two-suiter that has the strength to force to the 3-level. I think just Landy is better than what you describe.

Or in multi landy you can play that 2♦ is either 6M or strong 5M-5m (again it's from top Italians' system) . I play that way but I can't remember it ever coming up.

[jillybean]

cherdanno, on May 29 2010, 11:30 PM, said:

Kathryn I would never play transfers over their strong NT. It's just extremely rare that you have a two-suiter that has the strength to force to the 3-level. I think just Landy is better than what you describe.

My partner is away at the moment but when he gets back I will sugest we swap to Landy. Wayne introduced me to this years ago but I never did have a serious regular partner and those I did play with wanted to play their methods.

It is interesting to learn that Landy was the first conventional defense against 1nt and the many other methods people have have since devised. Noone has mentioned suction which seems popular with some of the better players, and Wikipedia lists even more:

http://en.wikipedia....defenses_to_1NT

[blackshoe]

There's also David Stevenson's list.

[aguahombre]

blackshoe, on May 30 2010, 08:55 AM, said:

There's also David Stevenson's list.

Great job by Bluejak on the charts. Now I know what we are supposed to call our GCC modification of CRASH (CHASM). Seem to remember another name used also, but it escapes me.

[rogerclee]

Defenses to your opponents' NT is one of those things that is extremely hotly debated, yet in the end none of it really makes that much of a difference at the B/I level. Too much has been written about it, and B/I players are fascinated by the topic (partially because of the gross amount of literature in books and magazines talking about it), even though it is a totally nonconstructive use of their time.

[aguahombre]

rogerclee, on May 30 2010, 10:16 AM, said:

Defenses to your opponents' NT is one of those things that is extremely hotly debated, yet in the end none of it really makes that much of a difference at the B/I level. Too much has been written about it, and B/I players are fascinated by the topic (partially because of the gross amount of literature in books and magazines talking about it), even though it is a totally nonconstructive use of their time.

Very good point(s). The OP asked about what kind of hand should use the given convention, and we have strayed.

A very constructive use of B/I time would be to learn when not to use a convention over their NT, whatever that toy might be.

[Free]

I play the following and I'm very happy with it:
Dbl = 4M, 5+m
2♣ = both majors
2♦ = ♥ or ♠
2M = 5+M, 4+m

The only thing I wonder is if it would be better to play 2♦ as 5+M & 4+m, and 2M natural.

As others have said, I think for beginners a simple "Dbl=Majors, rest natural" is probably best.