[badderzboy]

Playing in the UK I face the weak NT and hate passing with a balanced hand over a 1NT opener.

I've looked at various defences and they all look great in certain circumstances so I started thinking what would require the least memory load?

Why not treat bids by the defence as the same as if partner had opened 1NT but with an adjusted point count. IE if opps open 1NT (12-14) then ptr on average has 9pts ((40-13)/3)) so pretend he has a balanced 8-10 NT range.

Bids in 2nd/3rd seat therefore promise about 12-15 pts...

X - 16+ - ptr with weak hand 0-4 escapes with natural bids.
2C - staymanish at least 4-4 in majors or if 1 4card major a 5 card minor (over 2D response bid the minor at 3 level)
2D - Tfr to H good 5 or 6 card suit
2H - Tfr to S good 5 or 6 card suit
2S - shows balanced 14-15 pt hand no 4 card major
2NT - tfr to clubs good 6/7 card suit
3C - tfr to Diamonds good 6/7 card suit

Partner with a better hand can break the transfer with a NT bid showing 2 or fewer cards in the transfer suit but 11+pts so we then show our next best suit and so on or super accept with a new suit?

Bids in 4th Seat are the same except dbl is 13+ with the same get-outs?

Feel free to shoot the idea down in flames

Steve

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

your structure looks playable.

- penalty double
- 2C for the mayors
- transfer overcalls (... giving you the chance to
bid the other 2 suiter)

Altough I doubt, that this structure will solve
your problem.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Fluffy]

Your structure is almost what I play, except that I use 2NT for minors and 2♠ for ♣s, not showing the 14-15.

The advantages are that the NT guy will normally lead wich normally is good for us, and that we have a rebid.

[bearmum]

Playing here at our local club (where about 90% play Acol with 12-14 NT ) my p and I play Cappeletti overcalls -- BUT they could be 4/4 suits if we are NON VUL and X shows 15+ Seems to have given reasonable results (and because we play Capp over strong NT too ) it doesn't strain my 'senior' brain

I agree the structure you suggest looks good too

[Walddk]

bearmum, on Jul 11 2005, 02:06 PM, said:

Playing here at our local club (where about 90% play Acol with 12-14 NT ) my p and I play Cappeletti overcalls.

I never understood the wisdom of playing Capp. Maybe someone would care to explain why

1) You must play at the 3-level when overcaller bids 2MA and you want to play in his minor?

2) You must play in 3♣ if his one-suited hand is based on a club suit (2♣)?

I am not saying that for instance DONT is ideal, but at least you avoid those flaws compared to Capp.

Roland

[FrancesHinden]

badderzboy, on Jul 11 2005, 05:53 AM, said:

2S - shows balanced 14-15 pt hand no 4 card major

That part is insane, particularly vulnerable. I'd love people to play it against me.
If partner is weak you now have to play at the 3-level.

As for the rest of it....
Personally I don't have a problem passing with a balanced hand over 1NT. But if I did I would lower the requirements for a double to, say, 13+ and say it has to be balanced. Or I might play 2C not so much as Stayman but a balanced hand with emphasis on competing in the majors (so a 4423 would be a ideal).

The time not to come in over 1NT is when they were about to play there, and you push them into a major suit fit instead. That's most likely when you have a balanced hand with minor suit length - if you are unbalanced there's a greater chance LHO was going to bid anyway.

[inquiry]

You may want to try "Cansino"

Here. a 2♣ overcall is playable in 3 suits including 4+ clubs. This can be fairly or completely balanced, but 4441 or 4432 are more typical. Res[ponses to 2C (arrows) are:
----> suit bid pass correct looking for fit
----> Jumps playable suit opposite singleton, invite
----> 2NT, I play show biddable suit (other than clubs) up the line (some play ask for singleton, but I overcall 2C without singleton)

2D = both majors (some play diamonds and support for both majors)

Dbl = natural

2H/2S = natural

Double by passed hand or pass out seat = "close to opener wit 4+ spades). This is useful as it allows direct seat to pass sometimes with spades and modest values, knowing partner will balance if he has spades.

In response to balance double or pass hand double, 3 of a suit is a splinter agreeing spades.

I only play this against Mini-NT (something including 10 hcp and not including 14 hcp), 9-11, 8-11, 9-12, 10-12, 10-13,

[david_c]

Walddk, on Jul 11 2005, 01:14 PM, said:

I never understood the wisdom of playing Capp. Maybe someone would care to explain why

1) You must play at the 3-level when overcaller bids 2MA and you want to play in his minor?

Because bidding 2♣ or 2♦ would be insufficient?

But seriously, the reason people play Capp rather than DONT is so that they can double for penalties. Once you've decided to do that (for better or worse) then clearly you can no longer describe all your 1- and 2-suiters at the two-level.

[Walddk]

david_c, on Jul 11 2005, 04:55 PM, said:

But seriously, the reason people play Capp rather than DONT is so that they can double for penalties.

Right, and how often do you have a hand that can penalise a strong NT? Once in a blue moon, so forget about that. Capp is useless against a 15-17 NT in my opinion. It's on my Top 3 among conventions that should never have been invented.

People who know me also know what the other two are.

It's a different story against a mini and weak (12-14) NT of course. Then you need the double for penalty, and, if playing DONT as an example, you must skip the one-suiter.

Roland

[FrancesHinden]

Walddk, on Jul 11 2005, 10:08 AM, said:

Right, and how often do you have a hand that can penalise a strong NT? Once in a blue moon, so forget about that.

Yes, and 1NT in third position NV is one of the commonest psyches around.
Whatever else I play, I always play
P P 1NT x as penalties

When I sat down against Zia in the Lederer, the ONLY thing he wanted to know about our system before we started was our defence to 1NT. And the ONLY part he wanted to know was how we played the double of 1NT.

[Walddk]

FrancesHinden, on Jul 11 2005, 05:12 PM, said:

Yes, and 1NT in third position NV is one of the commonest psyches around.
Whatever else I play, I always play
P P 1NT x as penalties

When I sat down against Zia in the Lederer, the ONLY thing he wanted to know about our system before we started was our defence to 1NT. And the ONLY part he wanted to know was how we played the double of 1NT.

Are you saying that you should base your defence to 1NT on possible psyches? I can imagine Zia as a person who would quite frequently psyche 1NT non vul against vul right enough, but I think it's wrong to have a specific defence against that.

I think it's sounder to base your defence on the assumption that the opponents actually have what they show according to their agreements.

Roland

[FrancesHinden]

I think this is an exception.
Zia is not the only person who psyches in this position.

Psyche is a little strong: I see a lot of "strongies" on hands such as Kx Qx AQxxxxx Jx which may not be a "gross deviation" but I'd still like to be able to double for penalties.

Obviously it depends where & against who you play. But in my experience 1NT in third position NV is not 15-17 balanced about 30% of the time.

There are various auctions where ones methods need to include a "psyche revealer". Here are a few:

(1x) - x - (1S) - x = PENALTIES
(3x) - P - (3NT) - x = Take-out of 3x
(2H) - x - (2S) - x = PENALTIES

Most of these it would be more "efficient" from a bidding viewpoint to play double as the opposite (penalties of 3NT, take-out of the spade bids) but they are psyched so often you need to tell your partner you have to suit.

[Walddk]

FrancesHinden, on Jul 11 2005, 05:29 PM, said:

There are various auctions where ones methods need to include a "psyche revealer". Here are a few:

(1x) - x - (1S) - x = PENALTIES
(3x) - P - (3NT) - x = Take-out of 3x
(2H) - x - (2S) - x = PENALTIES

Agreed. They are all baby-psyches and can easily be revealed. Your method is excellent.

As far as your first example is concerned, I would like to add that double should show exactly 4 spades, and 2♠ 5+.

Roland

[pigpenz]

my old parnter and i used to play 10-13 1nt so we have seen about eveything that happed with weak no trumps....people tend to double when they should bid and bid when they should double.

as suggested we play double shows equivalent of strong notrump

double=14+hcp
responses to double we treat just as if we had opened notrump ignoring the weak notrump bid, so whatever your systems are they are on including lebensohl. Remember they are more in the dark than you are. One thing to find out before play is what their runouts are and wether or not they play negative doubles after overcalls.

alot of times they have to guess when to play part score when the points are equally divided, so directly overcalling should be some of two suiter system.

In pass out seat double should still be 14+ hcp, weak notrumpers will usually bid on weak hands and pass on hands with values so there is more danger when it has gone
1nt(weak) pass pass you

[MickyB]

badderzboy, on Jul 11 2005, 11:53 AM, said:

Why not treat bids by the defence as the same as if partner had opened 1NT but with an adjusted point count. IE if opps open 1NT (12-14) then ptr on average has 9pts ((40-13)/3)) so pretend he has a balanced 8-10 NT range.

Bids in 2nd/3rd seat therefore promise about 12-15 pts...

X - 16+ - ptr with weak hand 0-4 escapes with natural bids.
2C - staymanish at least 4-4 in majors or if 1 4card major a 5 card minor (over 2D response bid the minor at 3 level)
2D - Tfr to H good 5 or 6 card suit
2H - Tfr to S good 5 or 6 card suit
2S - shows balanced 14-15 pt hand no 4 card major

The problem with this logic is that partner has shown neither 8-10 points, nor that he is balanced!

Double is fine, 2D and 2H are ok but not to my taste. 2C as the majors is good, but using it on 4M5m intending to play in 3m if you don't have a fit is scary - you will reach 5-1 fits and you will get doubled! Similar with 2S, there's no reason to presume pard will have 8-10 points, particularly as your strength leaves less for him.

[cherdano]

With one partner online I play X=penalty, 2C=landy and 4-suit transfers (with superaccept when xferring to minors). We haven't played enough that I could pass judgement on the method, but I do like it.

Arend

[MickyB]

I quite like Woolsey against a strong NT, despite the Capp 2M overcalls forcing us to the 3 level at times...that loss is counteracted by differentiating between 5M4+m and 4M5+m hands.

I know that when I first psyche a strong NT in 3rd seat, it will go P-3NT-P-P-X so I guess I should make sure I have a run-out suit!

[badderzboy]

Thanks for the comments so far

It seems very sensible to change the 2♠ bid to minors 5/5+.

The reasoning behind 8-10 balanced is to give partner an anchor in what we have assumed when we bid not what he may have. It should allow him/her to judge where we can play...

The thinking behind the other bids (as close as if we opened 1NT)

X - 16+ - ptr with weak hand 0-4 escapes with natural bids.
Typical penalty dbl

2C - staymanish at least 4-4 in majors or if 1 4card major a 5 card minor (over
2D response bid the minor at 3 level)

2C is effectively Landy but also allows us to show 5-4 with a major bid over 2D
The 4M5m exit is the same as Astro etc

2D - Tfr to H good 5 or 6 card suit
Hides partners hand from opps, the 1NT opener won't know ptrs point count (openers ptr will have a good idea) and can show good 5M/5m+ hands

2H - Tfr to S good 5 or 6 card suit
Hides partners hand from opps, the 1NT opener won't know ptrs point count (openers ptr will have a good idea) and can show good 5M/5m+ hands

2S - changed to 5/5+ in minors 12-15pts

2NT - tfr to clubs good 6/7 card suit
Hides partners hand from opps, the 1NT opener won't know ptrs point count (openers ptr will have a good idea)

3C - tfr to Diamonds good 6/7 card suit
Hides partners hand from opps, the 1NT opener won't know ptrs point count (openers ptr will have a good idea)

Steve K

[awm]

I'd actually prefer a more natural scheme. The transfer approach has some serious disadvantages.

One of the big issues for the opening side after 1NT-(some bid) is the meaning of double. If double is penalty, you can hammer the opponents when they step out of line, but you lose a lot of partscore battles on the more frequent "takeout double" shape hands. If double is takeout, it puts a lot of pressure on opener to balance (otherwise you again lose a lot of partscore battles) and this can occasionally get you doubled for a big number.

Using transfer overcalls completely solves this problem for the opening side. My recommendation would be after:


1NT-(2♦ transfer to hearts)...

X = takeout double of hearts; among other things this promises some diamonds, so opener can freely pass with no good bid (unlikely overcalling side wants to play 2♦). opener can also double a subsequent 2♥ by the overcalling side for penalties, knowing partner has some values. Note that this is especially good over a sequence like 1NT-(2NT transfer to clubs) because you can make a takeout double and then subsequently pass the hand out (defend 3♣) if partner has no good bid.

Pass, then double = penalizing hearts.

This is the opposite of the strictly "standard" scheme over such interference, and perhaps slightly more effective. Either way, the choice of transfer overcall has given opponents much more room to act.

I've actually been playing the "2♣ stayman" part of this defense for a while now and it seems to work pretty well. Otherwise I prefer natural bids for the most part.

[luis]

I think it may be good to invert the meanings of double and 2♠. I think you will be able to penalize 1Nt more if you double with 13-15 balanced (no major) instead of 16+. And if it's not your hand you can escape to 2x.
Using 2s for 16+ will also be better, since 2s is probably the worst call on the scheme and 16+ is less frequently, if it's not your hand you are more likely to be safe in 3x with 16+ in one hand.

Just my 2 cents.

Luis