BBO Discussion Forums: Mathe defense vs strong C revised - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

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

Mathe defense vs strong C revised

#21 User is offline   mgoetze 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,942
  • Joined: 2005-January-28
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cologne, Germany
  • Interests:Sleeping, Eating

Posted 2010-September-11, 03:20

JLOGIC, on Sep 10 2010, 10:43 PM, said:

Personally I am not willing to give up my 2D bid, I think it's quite useful, but I am perfectly happy giving up 1N showing the minors.

So... just make 1N your 2 bid and use 2 to show majors?
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision"
    -- Bertrand Russell
0

#22 User is offline   fromageGB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,674
  • Joined: 2008-April-06

Posted 2010-September-11, 12:13

gwnn, on Sep 10 2010, 06:09 PM, said:

fromageGB, on Sep 10 2010, 01:41 PM, said:

Psycho suction seems to work well : I've never known them risk missing something by passing.

of course you want to use reverse psycho suction instead.

1x=this suit and the next OR only the suit after the next (H=majors or clubs)

This way you pass a little less often so end up in silly contracts less often but they still can't afford to pass.

and of course you should play
2=hearts or spades.

Thanks, Gwnn, I haven't come across this one. I am not sure it is better, though, in a 1 defence. Psycho suction means that partner is going to commonly pass, and if you are doubled when you have 2 suits, he can still give preference.

Reverse psycho suction means (if responder passes) that partner is going to give preference half the time (or more), and that bid means that the strong club hand can afford to pass to give responder another bite at the cherry. With normal psycho suction there is pressure on opener to bid, and the bid can have only one meaning. If you allow him to bid, or pass then bid, it doubles the options for them.

There is also the thought that if opener buys the contract after your partner gave preference, declarer can use that fact to help determine which hand type you had, whereas if partner had passed, it might be initially ambiguous.

Where reverse psycho suction gains is that with normal PS, responder can presume you have bid your suit and their partnership's orthodox handling applies. RPS may throw them into less clear waters.

Anyone tried both methods?
0

#23 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,011
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:bye

Posted 2010-September-11, 12:14

I tried both of them but they never came up often enough.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#24 User is offline   gwnn 

  • Csaba the Hutt
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,011
  • Joined: 2006-June-16
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:bye

Posted 2010-September-12, 04:23

It's still unbelievable to me when I see real Suction against strong club on vugraph!!
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
      George Carlin
0

#25 User is offline   benlessard 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,464
  • Joined: 2006-January-07
  • Location:Montreal Canada
  • Interests:All games. i really mean all of them.

Posted 2010-September-12, 07:42

I think some non-bigclubber are traumatize by hands where bigclubber bid a perfect slam and they just want to make noize too much . I think many gagdet over 1 clubs are bad and some just terrible.

Just bidding 2x natural with 6 is what i find the most annoying. followed by 1M natural.

1NT can be used for both M, for 5H+5m or all 5-5 is nice too. By default we play crash but i think we should just bid 1NT with any 55. Giving them space + telling them how to play the hand is dumb imo. (The pass or correct raise dont seems to come up oftne enough in my book)

I doesnt bother me when opps bid 1Nt for both m and i like it more when they X 1C with 4/4 or 4/5 in the M. I semi-liked it when they bid a short suit. PS or suction is annoying but not more than an natural bid.
From Psych "I mean, Gus and I never see eye-to-eye on work stuff.
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
0

#26 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,663
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 2010-September-15, 21:37

Free, on Sep 10 2010, 07:46 AM, said:

Why not reverse the meanings of Dbl and 1NT?

Your comparison is flawed. After Double, if we could raise to 3m when it showed minors then why can we not raise to 3M when it showed majors? Now we took away even more space. Similarly after 1NT = majors they can still play UvU if they want to. Of course 1NT showing C or D or H+S does make sense if combined into something cohesive. The main reason Mathe is suggested often is because it is one of the simplest defences (and thus very suitable for B/Is) and because it is used at the highest level - Meckwell play it for example.

On the subject of using X and 1D as something sound, this is a perfectly good philosophy. The idea of using these as major suit overcalls, usually combined with 1M/1NT as CRASH calls, is quite popular. It is also quite possible to use these bids to show lots of shape. I think either of these approaches is fine. An example of the latter method is

X = both majors, at least 5-5
1D = 6+ in unspecified major
1M = canape major + longer unspecified minor
1N = 6+ in unspecified minor
2C = both minors, usually 4-4 or 5-4
2D = both majors, 4-4 or 5-4
2M = major + unspecified minor
2N = both minors, at least 5-5

This suffers from the normal drawback for 2-suited schemes of not getting into the action easily with 5332 shape, as well as (probably) giving away too much information. But it illustrates the option of using X and 1D for quite distributional hands to offset the extra space potential.

Like Ben I am yet to be fully convinced that any of these schemes are actually better than fairly natural methods where you bid with a decent suit as high as you dare as quickly as you can.
(-: Zel :-)

Happy New Year everyone!
0

#27 User is offline   dake50 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,211
  • Joined: 2006-April-22

Posted 2010-September-16, 08:16

Agree benlessard.
Why stop playing bridge just because they start artificial 1C=16+? Not even sure they have game, nor sure slam they find is making.
Sure you want to get to 3-level often --take space and close to safe. But why does the weaker side want to tell "I have 5-5 minors weak. Does that help you 1C bidders judge this hand better?" I have often ranted against weak blabbing bids for that very reason --they judge well, NOW.
Most 1C forcers have seen this foolish "not-playing-bridge-just bidding" and have agreed how to handle that. Do you think your interference is special they haven't seen? Do you think your bids work this time? "Well, do ya, punk?" --Insp Callahan
0

#28 User is offline   nige1 

  • 5-level belongs to me
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,128
  • Joined: 2004-August-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glasgow Scotland
  • Interests:Poems Computers

Posted 2010-September-19, 16:24

Over strong 1, I like:
_X = and another.
1N = and a minor.
2N = Minors.
1 level suit bids = Lead directing.
2 level suit bids = Intermediate.
3 level suit bids = Weak.
0

  • 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