[peachy]

The_Hog, on Jul 20 2010, 10:04 PM, said:

Bbradley62, on Jul 21 2010, 09:26 AM, said:

The_Hog, on Jul 20 2010, 09:50 PM, said:

Yes, Ron does play it as a balanced game invite.

What does 2NT show over 1M-2M?

To be honest, I can't really remember, though I have a suspicion it asks for shortness.
One of the points rdk makes is that if you play some form of Bergen or Lott raise, you will be at the 3 level anyway in 5-4 fits. It is only the 6-3 hand that would raise to the 3 level. He comments, among other things, that 6-3 shapes do not play as well as 5-4 shapes and that often the opps would not have balanced anyway.

Maybe just quote from the book or article, if you don't remember. What book or what article?

[Lobowolf]

TylerE, on Jul 20 2010, 06:53 PM, said:

If they bid on over that, holding less than half the deck, on a hand where we were content in 2M... well, let's just say I like my matchpoint expectations.

How about when they have more than half the deck? I open most 12s and a fair number of 11s when I have a 6-card major, and my partners respond on most 6s, so...

[JLOGIC]

Lobowolf, on Jul 20 2010, 10:49 PM, said:

TylerE, on Jul 20 2010, 06:53 PM, said:

If they bid on over that, holding less than half the deck, on a hand where we were content in 2M... well, let's just say I like my matchpoint expectations.

How about when they have more than half the deck? I open most 12s and a fair number of 11s when I have a 6-card major, and my partners respond on most 6s, so...

Yeah obv, but when they have 23 and only 4 of the suit you've bid and raised, they've usually raised.

It's not that likely to come up given that they've both passed. But as I said I don't think 3M is useful as a game try either so I play this just in case it's ever happened!

[dbsboy]

As an intermediate player and as I play in an intermediate field, I found this 1-2-3 stop quite useful (but I agree that it is more useful in hearts), because opponents may not be able to balance at 3 level, and sometimes opps even have game and miss it. Moreover, when I am playing sayc with a few partners, I also like a style that partner can raise to 4 if he has extra trumps and some distribution. I don't raise to 3 with random 6322 though.

I'm not sure about the effectiveness of 1-2-3 stop in a better field, and would like to hear more opinions.

[MarkDean]

I call this the 1-2-3 down 1 convention.

I had one partner force it upon me. I am not a fan.

[H_KARLUK]

I play uncontested those :
1M>2M (8-10 3 cards raise)
3M ( bid game if you're maximum)
As i cannot open 1N with a 5 cards M suit i have to play :
1M>2M
2N(15-17 bal.)
But i think i noticed some interesting thing when i play GIB abt that. Will try to find where i noted.

[the hog]

peachy, on Jul 21 2010, 10:41 AM, said:

The_Hog, on Jul 20 2010, 10:04 PM, said:

Bbradley62, on Jul 21 2010, 09:26 AM, said:

The_Hog, on Jul 20 2010, 09:50 PM, said:

Yes, Ron does play it as a balanced game invite.

What does 2NT show over 1M-2M?

To be honest, I can't really remember, though I have a suspicion it asks for shortness.
One of the points rdk makes is that if you play some form of Bergen or Lott raise, you will be at the 3 level anyway in 5-4 fits. It is only the 6-3 hand that would raise to the 3 level. He comments, among other things, that 6-3 shapes do not play as well as 5-4 shapes and that often the opps would not have balanced anyway.

Maybe just quote from the book or article, if you don't remember. What book or what article?

Someone else who only half reads or comprehends posts.

[gnasher]

I've never heard it called this, but yes, I play 1M-3M;3M as a signoff. You're not obliged to bid it on unsuitable hands.

Obviously the value of this treatment is less if your openings are sound or your raises are constructive. There is a significant set of hands that would be opened at the one-level in England but at the two level in North America, so I would expect to hold more hands where I wanted to bid 3M preemptively than some of the other posters in this thread.

Regarding various other comments:

- The main benefit is against good players. A weak pair is less likely to balance against 2M, and less likely to judge well if they do.

- There is at least one good reason for doing this even when holding spades. At matchpoints, if you pass and then bid 3♠ after they compete, they will be better placed to double you.

nigel_k, on Jul 21 2010, 04:21 AM, said:

But when one side is quoting the LAW and the other side is quoting a book by Ron Klinger, I really feel bad about supporting either.

[gwnn]

unwarranted paranoia.

i play it as 6 cards here and more than minimum, partner is welcome to bid game over it.

[Fluffy]

playing 1♠-2♠-3♠ as balanced game try makes sense, that way you can play 1♠-2♠-2NT as a relay for shortness or whatever, for people like me who have slam invitational hands after opening 1♠ at least.

[hanp]

gnasher, on Jul 21 2010, 04:49 AM, said:

- There is at least one good reason for doing this even when holding spades. At matchpoints, if you pass and then bid 3♠ after they compete, they will be better placed to double you.

Agree with this.

[Bbradley62]

Cool. So, the answer to my question is yes, some people do still play 123Stop. Thanks for the feedback.

[MickyB]

hanp, on Jul 21 2010, 11:26 AM, said:

There is at least one good reason for doing this even when holding spades. At matchpoints, if you pass and then bid 3♠ after they compete, they will be better placed to double you.

RHO may be able to indicate a lead also.

[Pict]

I recall (or misrecall) Zia and Forrester on a cruise ship, in a TV programme, having a slightly acrimonious disagreement about this sequence.

I have never bid 3S as an invite, but I would respond to it as an invite if I heard it.

[hanp]

MickyB, on Jul 21 2010, 12:30 PM, said:

hanp, on Jul 21 2010, 11:26 AM, said:

There is at least one good reason for doing this even when holding spades.  At matchpoints, if you pass and then bid 3♠ after they compete, they will be better placed to double you.

RHO may be able to indicate a lead also.

Thanks for the credit, I'll take it!

[peachy]

In the olden days [I have played for decades, the last two decades in ACBL],
1M-2M-3M was some sort of invite. To my knowledge, nobody that I have met plays it that way nowadays. The popularity of using this as a blocking bid to avoid opp's balance and opp's opportubnity to find out if they should double, became mainstream with the emergence of the Law of Total Tricks. It all should be taken with a grain of salt, but there is some validity to using it that way.

[aguahombre]

Pict, on Jul 21 2010, 01:33 PM, said:

I have never bid 3S as an invite, but I would respond to it as an invite if I heard it.

If you ever ask yourself to be your partner, decline in favor of someone who is more compatible.

[ggwhiz]

1-2-3 stop is most prevalent in competition, ie. 1M-p-2M-3X (or double) -3M but I still thought 1-2-3 as game invite was the old fashioned route.

Everybody balances aggressively these days. Apply some fear and loathing to them.

[junyi_zhu]

Bbradley62, on Jul 20 2010, 11:31 PM, said:

If I open 1M and partner raises to 2M, I can make any of the four bids between 2M and 3M to invite game. Sometimes, especially with a minimum (and possibly a sixth trump), I just want to make it harder for the opponents to compete, and I like bidding 3M to accomplish this. Is this another of my 1980s anachronisms?

Even against weak players, it's unnecessary IMO. First, both have passed; Second, they may balance for a very small amount of time; Third, if they are really fans to balance, you can always trap with some pretty good hands once in a while to make big penalties against them at 3 level. Fourth, if they balance, they may play in the wrong suit and you may want to actually defend it. So bidding 3M only achieves when they balance and they can find their best fit which you don't want to defend, even at that time, you can still bid 3S if you don't want to defend.

[awm]

junyi_zhu, on Jul 21 2010, 05:42 PM, said:

Even against weak players, it's unnecessary IMO. First, both have passed; Second, they may balance for a very small amount of time; Third, if they are really fans to balance, you can always trap with some pretty good hands once in a while to make big penalties against them at 3 level. Fourth, if they balance, they may play in the wrong suit and you may want to actually defend it. So bidding 3M only achieves when they balance and they can find their best fit which you don't want to defend, even at that time, you can still bid 3S if you don't want to defend.

Well, the tradeoffs are that:

By balancing opponents may find a good lead against 3♠ when they'd otherwise be guessing.

Opponents may find a way to compete to the four-level after their balance.

Opponents have an easier time doubling 3♠ after the balance pushes you there.

------> With all this said, I'm not a big fan of this style. Certainly it can sometimes help you to bid to the three-level when you're not forced there (for the reasons above), but I think opponents sell to two of a major just often enough (and 3M goes down just often enough) that I'm better off waiting to be pushed rather than bidding up to 3M on my own. While the point has been made that you have a lot of other ways to try for game in a major, the big advantage of 1M-2M-3M as a game try is that it doesn't disclose much information to the opponents on defense.