[inquiry]

Suppose the bidding goes...

(1♠) - Pass - (1NT*) - ?

Where 1♠ is a five card major, and 1NT is forcing. Please define the following bids by an unpassed hand..... You can use pick from the answers in the quiz and/or elaborate on your theory here by explaining the meaning of at least these bids..

DBL -
2C -
2D -
2H -
2S -
2NT -
3C -
3D -
3H -
3S -
3NT -

[han]

Dbl as take-out is standard I believe, just as over a non-forcing 1NT.

[inquiry]

Hannie, on Sep 23 2004, 01:41 PM, said:

Dbl as take-out is standard I believe, just as over a non-forcing 1NT.

Thank you. Yes I suspect dbl as takeout is pretty much standard. But somehow, the cast of characters here come up with some oddball things. I have a set that I play, but I didn't come up with it... I play two "takout double" bids, neither of which is double. I play a bid of 2 in their major as strong takeout of that suit. I play a bid of 2 of the other major as weak takeout of that major. I belive this came from either ETM victory or Robson/Segal's book on partnership bidding.

Ben

[pclayton]

inquiry, on Sep 23 2004, 09:58 AM, said:

Hannie, on Sep 23 2004, 01:41 PM, said:

Dbl as take-out is standard I believe, just as over a non-forcing 1NT.

Thank you. Yes I suspect dbl as takeout is pretty much standard. But somehow, the cast of characters here come up with some oddball things. I have a set that I play, but I didn't come up with it... I play two "takout double" bids, neither of which is double. I play a bid of 2 in their major as strong takeout of that suit. I play a bid of 2 of the other major as weak takeout of that major. I belive this came from either ETM victory or Robson/Segal's book on partnership bidding.

Ben

Ben - I like a lot of the ideas you present, but I'm having a hard time with this one. I would assume double shows some kind of single suiter; or maybe clubs and something else? Other than the ability to show 2-suiters, what is the advantage of playing this method?

OTOH, I see a few disadvantages:

1. Giving up the double gives up partner's ability to convert holding a trump stack. Certainly a very likely outcome, since usually RHO will have at most a doubleton.

2. The weak takeout / strong takeout pushes us to the 3 level if partner can't tolerate our major.

I can see some merit to double remaining a 3 suited takeout and a method to show 2 suiters here. I think Meckwell have methods to show 2 suiters of various lengths, although many of these involve jumps to the 3 level.

By the way, I don't think this is in the Robson / Segal book. Im not familiar with the ETM book you reference.

[inquiry]

Well, if you have never looked at ETM victory or total victory, you owe it to youself to at least take a look. There is SOOOO many good ideas hidden in there.

Here is a link http://www.bridgemat...com/bidding.htm

Second, here is what I play over forcing 1NT by them....

(1M)-Pass-(1NT*)-? (where 1NT is forcing...)

• DBL= transfer to clubs
  
• 2C = transfer to diamonds
  
• 2D = transfer to unbid major
  
• 2M = good takeout
  
• 2OM = weak takeout, guarantees four of a major
  
• 2NT = both minors
  
• 3C/3D = 4/6, six in minor, four in "other major"

With five-five in a minor and the unbid major, transfer to the minor and then bid the major.

As far as missing out on penalty double if partner is stacked. Doesn't seem to happen. If they pass the double and partner is stacked, he can pass too. But 99% of the time, they will pull the double anyway (unless their second suit is clubs). Remember, this is only used when 1NT is forcing!!

I would like to give credit (or lay the blame) on where-ever it is that I got this treatment.. so if it looks familar to you, let me know. Maybe Levy's "what the pro's play?"

Ben

[laughter]

Ben, your method is not so uncommon.

It is called Vasilevsky, described in Miles' book on Competitive Bidding.
Btw, he recommends NOT to play this toy when you are passed hand, since you don't need two bids to define your hand.
Also, holding OM and m, it is important to show your major first when you are contesting spades, as you can't produce the transfer-to-minor-then-show-major if opener rebid 2S.

I don't like this method, for a number of reasons:

1. It may propel the partnership to three level when agressor overcalls a takeout bid and advancer holds minors.

2. It doesn't right side your contract. You want to declare when you overcall in the fourth seat, placing opener on lead.

3. The transfer method provides a lot of additional sequences for opener's side. Just as this toy can give additional sequences for your side, it also works for the opener. He can cue-bid at two levels, double, pass-then-double. It is much more likely for opener to need the additional sequences than the defensive bidding side.

Imho, fancy toys are not quite necessary for intervening a 1M-1NT sequence:

1. Two suiters are not quite as common as one suiter, therefore, an artificial 2C/2D would not come up nearly as often as natural 2C/2D.

2. The number of hand type that you want to intervene is smaller. You don't want to play in opener's five card major. Therefore, you have to deal with one 3 suiter, three 2 suiter and three one suiter. Note the differerence when you consider contesting an 1NT opening. Many artificial toys are quite useless now. (e.g. how can you want to overcall a Capp 2D (both Ms) vs. 1S-1NT?)

3. The 3 suiter type becomes much more common as opener promises 5+ length. The most effective way to deal with this type is to play a takeout double.

I guess the artificial gadget would be more useful when opp bid 1m-1NT (more possible hand types).

[Chamaco]

I am not very experienced, and I only have played natural bidding vs forcing NT.

However, what has always striked me is the fact that 1NT forcing is very ill-defined, so, like any catchall bid, it is very vuulnerable to preemption.

So - while ignoring most methods - if I had to pick one, I would choose one that focuses on preemptive one and two suiters, whilst not losing the option of constructive bidding (after all the hand may still belong to us).

Is there any ?

[xx1943]

inquiry, on Sep 23 2004, 06:57 PM, said:

Suppose the bidding goes...

(1♠) - Pass - (1NT*) - ?

Where 1♠ is a five card major, and 1NT is forcing. Please define the following bids by an unpassed hand..... You can use pick from the answers in the quiz and/or elaborate on your theory here by explaining the meaning of at least these bids..

First ask, what type of hands RHO may have. Maximum .........?
But all bids the same as after 1!S from RHO.

DBL - takeout 12+ HCP 4 hearts
2C - natural just like after 1♠ from RHO
2D - natural
2H - natural

pass isn't that in your bag Ben?
with the most hands, to hear what RHOs hand is.

Only in rare occasions:

2S - Michaels

2NT - unusual

3C - weak jump
3D - weak jump
3H - weak jump

3S - ?????????? what agreed with pd. Super Michaels perhaps.

3NT - just kidding or super-unusual


Cheers

Al

[flytoox]

inquiry, on Sep 23 2004, 05:58 PM, said:

Hannie, on Sep 23 2004, 01:41 PM, said:

Dbl as take-out is standard I believe, just as over a non-forcing 1NT.

Thank you. Yes I suspect dbl as takeout is pretty much standard. But somehow, the cast of characters here come up with some oddball things. I have a set that I play, but I didn't come up with it... I play two "takout double" bids, neither of which is double. I play a bid of 2 in their major as strong takeout of that suit. I play a bid of 2 of the other major as weak takeout of that major. I belive this came from either ETM victory or Robson/Segal's book on partnership bidding.

Ben

2N should be two suiter takeout, perhaps minors?