[inquiry]

pclayton, on Jul 9 2004, 08:19 PM, said:

inquiry, on Jul 9 2004, 08:50 PM, said:

hands down,
no question
about it....

The takeout double.  Try playing without it....

I DONT play takeout doubles (1N is takeout). I have no problems whatsoever.

How about if they open 2♠ or 3♦? Overcall structure has some problem there if you are not allowed a takeout double.

How about your partner opens 1♦ and next hand bids 1♠, don't you play DBL as takeout (call it negative if you like, but takeout it is).

Ben

[keylime]

Bidding: The Precision System, the concept of two suited overcalls, and the mini NT

Declaring: The rule of 11 versus 4th best leads

Defending: Obvious Shift, UDCA

[pclayton]

inquiry, on Jul 10 2004, 03:09 AM, said:

pclayton, on Jul 9 2004, 08:19 PM, said:

inquiry, on Jul 9 2004, 08:50 PM, said:

hands down,
no question
about it....

The takeout double.  Try playing without it....

I DONT play takeout doubles (1N is takeout). I have no problems whatsoever.

How about if they open 2♠ or 3♦? Overcall structure has some problem there if you are not allowed a takeout double.

How about your partner opens 1♦ and next hand bids 1♠, don't you play DBL as takeout (call it negative if you like, but takeout it is).

Ben

Hi Ben.

Of course I can't play a 1N takeout over 2♠ and 3♦...or through 4♥ for that matter.

We are saddled with standard agremeents here; although we are experimenting with power doubles over weak 2's with some artificial takeout like Weiss or Fishbein. The book is still open on this. Over 1 bids, power doubles almost nearly right-side the contract; but its not as important over weak 2's.

Negative doubles are a whole different story. I don't consider them in the same category as takeout doubles, as they can show a multitude of hands, especially at higher levels.

[MarceldB]

I think a RELAY in all it's appearances
such as

- after a multi (strong) opening
- transfers
- forcing-, artificial- (inviting) relays
- complete (symmetric) relay systems
- to create a possibility who will be the declarer
etc.

Even in the most simple systems without any further conventions
you use a relay:
- Stayman relay
- Blackwood etc.

[luke warm]

i don't know of anyone who really doesn't play takeout doubles, despite several posters saying they don't... how is it possible? true, some might call the double in a certain situation something other than takeout (ie, neg doubles), but as ben said, it's still for takeout

as for jacoby transfers being one of the best, or even necessary, i can't grasp this... i'd need to see some hands to determine whether or not it's true (given a 12-14 nt, of course)

[Cave_Draco]

Chamaco, on Jul 9 2004, 05:44 PM, said:

To name the best convention I will choose as criteria:
1) high frequency
2) high benefits
3) no memory burden

Whether it is a convention or not depends on your basic system,

However, on Chamaco's criteria?

The Weak NT!

[Trpltrbl]

Weak NT, 2 way and Roman carding.

Mike

[EricK]

Cave_Draco, on Jul 10 2004, 03:38 PM, said:

Chamaco, on Jul 9 2004, 05:44 PM, said:

To name the best convention I will choose as criteria:
1) high frequency
2) high benefits
3) no memory burden

Whether it is a convention or not depends on your basic system,

However, on Chamaco's criteria?

The Weak NT!

Given x HCP in your hand, your partner's expected HCP holding is (40-x)/3, so your combined expected holding is (40+2x)/3.

From this we deduce, that a 12-14 NT has an expected combined HCP around 22 i.e. just right for making 1NT, but a 15-17 NT has an expected combined HCP of 24 ie almost enough for 3NT!

Hence it is the 15-17 NT which could be considered conventional (cowardly, even!). The 12-14 NT is 100% natural.

Eric

[1eyedjack]

EricK, on Jul 10 2004, 12:09 PM, said:

Cave_Draco, on Jul 10 2004, 03:38 PM, said:

Chamaco, on Jul 9 2004, 05:44 PM, said:

To name the best convention I will choose as criteria:
1) high frequency
2) high benefits
3) no memory burden

Whether it is a convention or not depends on your basic system,

However, on Chamaco's criteria?

The Weak NT!

Given x HCP in your hand, your partner's expected HCP holding is (40-x)/3, so your combined expected holding is (40+2x)/3.

From this we deduce, that a 12-14 NT has an expected combined HCP around 22 i.e. just right for making 1NT, but a 15-17 NT has an expected combined HCP of 24 ie almost enough for 3NT!

Hence it is the 15-17 NT which could be considered conventional (cowardly, even!). The 12-14 NT is 100% natural.

Eric

Strictly, I think it is not the "expected number of tricks" that determines the issue, but the integral of the product of the score achieved by every possible number of tricks (from 0 to 13) and the frequency of that event, on the assumption that undertricks are doubled.

That is I think the basis of the arguments of those who advocate the strong NT. It is a weak argument and not one to which I subscribe (after all I prefer the weak 1N), but it is nevertheless a stronger argument than the alternative of looking just to the expected number of tricks without considering the consequences should the expected result not materialise.

[Cave_Draco]

EricK, on Jul 10 2004, 05:09 PM, said:

Hence it is the 15-17 NT which could be considered conventional (cowardly, even!). The 12-14 NT is 100% natural.

Yup, but the thread is "SAYC and 2/1 Discussion",

Where the Weak NT would count as a convention?

[EarlPurple]

Weak NT is not conventional in the sense of "artificial" as you bid it intending to play there. (Shouldn't artificial bids therefore be called unconventional?)

Take-out doubles are artificial as you do not intend partner to pass them. But they are the most common convention and I think even the naturalists were allowed to use them against the scientists in their contests (which were played around 1990 I think).

For bidding conventions, I think I would like to add good-bad 2NT (Lebensohl, but extends to more situations).

Smith peters (echos) are occasionally useful for example if West leads against NT from an ace and it goes to jack and king. (Reverse-smith is an alternative and I guess it's a matter of taste). It's useful for opening leader to know who has the queen. When it is obvious not to continue the suit, or it is irrelevant, you can often play suit-preference signals on opponent's suit (especially trumps) and it can be more useful.

[helene_t]

Gambling 3NT and support (re)-doubles, to name a few of those that were also mentioned as "worst" conventions.

[bearmum]

helene_t, on Jul 11 2004, 11:03 PM, said:

Gambling 3NT and support (re)-doubles, to name a few of those that were also mentioned as "worst" conventions.

guess that proved the old saying"one man's meat is another man's poison"

[Chamaco]

An article on an italian magazine mentions the result of the poll "what's the best convention" held in Reno(USA) at the nationals.

Grant Baze: he'd prefer to have no conventions at all. He mentions the anecdote of the old Portland Club, where all conventions where rigorously banned; one day someone suggested to allow tht the double of 1 club opener by opps was not for penalty; there was a reunion of the Portland Club Members and when they finnaly allowed the double of 1C to be NOT for penalty, Reese commented: "You made a huge mistake: you opened the door!"
However, having to pick one, Baze chose splinters and minisplinters(he says 2useful to show shortness below 3NT").

Brian Senior: Splinters, weak or strong (intermediate splinters bid differentlky) bcos they help pard to evaluate the hand correctly.

Paul Soloway: Splinters help pard to "weights" his cards; RKCB very useful to bid good slams.

Ron Sukoneck : unusual 3NT opening (7-10 hcp, 6-5 or better in minors)

Jill Meyers : "Polish weak 2s" = 2♥/♠ to show 5 cards + a side suit. Says: "I like it because it create a lot of movement"

Bart Bramley : Flannery . "I like it because it covers a difficult hand to bid and it preempts opps".
Second choice of Bramley is: step responses to strong 2♣.
"The number of controls is the primary information needed by opener to decide if slam/game is possible"

Chris Compton: Stayman. "Fundamental in matchpoints events, to find 8 cards fit". Compton plays non forcing stayman.

Steve Robinson: Support double. "This allows to differentiate the type of support and decide according to the law of total tricks".
Second choice for Robinson: Last Train to Clarksville: "One more chance to communicate extra strength and to hand the decision to partner, an essential action if things go wrong and somebody will have to be blamed"

Betty Ann Kennedy: Negative double. "Useful for all those hand which cannot bid at the 1 level and do not have a comfortable 2-level bid".

Eric Kokish: double in all its forms. "Nowadays double is rarely penalty, and there are lots of messages that can conveyed to partner. It is a useful and necessary tools, and requires thorough discussion of the situations of forcing pass"

John Mohan: Odd-even carding. "They say that using o-e you may miss the right card for encourage or discourage; well believe me, this is much more common using standard or udca. With o-e carding you have all the options and this is essential when you want to convey the nmaximum info to pard. Believe me, o-e is by far the best carding system"

Richard Freeman: RKCB is no doubt the best tool to reach a good accuracy in slam bidding. If used correctly, it's amazing how accurate you can be in selecting the final contract.
Second choice: Stayman.

Zia Mahmood: Blackwood "i want to know if we miss 2 aces because if it is true that u can make a slam one ace off, 99% of the times you go down when you miss 2 aces"

Geoff Hampson: rkcb. "There's nothing I hate more than bidding a slam 2 aces off"

Chip Martel: Transfer bids and every form of takeout/negative/responsive double
" Transfer bids have many advantage: high frequency, may be used with many ranges of strength, right-side the contract and easy to use. The frequency of use is also a plus for non-penalty doubles, which let partner describe his hand further and help figuring the combined strength"

Jan Martel: Weak NT opening. "It is good to be able to have a sound opening 1 of a minor, either a real suit or a strong NT hand"

Barry Rigal: Fitshowing jumps. "They are a very good tool in competitive auctions, help partner decide"

Mike Passell: Drury. "Using Drury you may open light in 3rd seat to give a good lead to pard and not going overboard"

Bob Hamman: Drury. " I can live without transfer and ace asking bids, but Drury is necessary to stop at a reasonable level and to suggest good leads by 3rd hand opener"

[Free]

Best conventions and openings:

- A step-1 relay (which doesn't say anything about the bidder's hand). Saves most bidding space, and lets one player know 2 hands.
- Forcing-pass! Great bid, stays low and is forcing for at least 1 round...
- RKCB. Great slam tool, weither it is bid by 4NT, through kickback or redwood, or at low level.
- Lorenzo-two's when NV (2X = 0-7HCP, 4+ cards in X). These gave me many good scores in MP events, and some good ones in imp events. In the long run they gain a lot. I'm used to play these only in following positions: 2♥ in 1st & 2nd seat, 2♠ only in 1st seat, and only when we are NV. No 4-3 in Majors allowed since we'd lose the 5-3 fit too much playing in a 4-2... 4-4 or 5-3 is allowed
- Gambling 3♠. Right-sides the contract.
- Inverted lead-directing Dbl's when opps bid our suit (Pass = lead, Dbl = don't lead). Gives great pressure, and keeps opps from finding a double-half-stop like Jxx vs Qx.

Best carding (my opinion):
- coded 9/10's. Gives a lot of useful info to p.
- o/e discards on first discard, count on second discard unless in same suit as first discard. Has both encouraging as discouraging methods, and gives count in certain suits. Most usefull situation is when you have a long suit which you have bid, you can show exactly what suit you want, or don't want, without giving away a possible trick.
- obvious shift. Guess

[mishovnbg]

"Equality" - the first complete method of transfer bids in competition, invented by me and Ben. It is even better than regular take out double, because it is extension of it. It is better than use of NT bid as take out, because add possibilty of nat 1NT/3NT contracts, without losing distributional bids. It is the best :

http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...?showtopic=2727
http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...?showtopic=2731
http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...?showtopic=2730
http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...?showtopic=2728
http://bridgebase.lunarpages.com/~bridge2/...?showtopic=2729

Misho

[luis]

I'd say Ogust: Allows you to open horrible hands, medium hands and good hands without making pd guess the contract every time. Opps do have to guess.

[hrothgar]

From my perspective, the most useful development in bridge was the recognition that first step responses to most bids should be treated as artificial and forcing.

Note what is covered by this:

1. Relays
2. Asking bids
3. Conventional doubles
4. Stayman (for those of you who don't recognize that Stayman is a relay)
5. Checkback
6. Herbert Negatives
7. Gerber
...

[Fluffy]

PriorKnowledge, on Jul 9 2004, 04:32 PM, said:

[*]Lead of Ace against NT demands partner's highest honor or count if none

I play that King lead is the one that demands such thing, and I am happier with it (althou a closer look makes me think they are equal).

The best conevention in my opinion is support double, because I don´t even consider takeout double a convention, adn at carding none convention is so neccesary because you coudl stand playing oen another .

Tjhe same happens to rkcb, you can play kcb instead .

[1eyedjack]

luis, on Jul 13 2004, 07:53 AM, said:

I'd say Ogust: Allows you to open horrible hands, medium hands and good hands without making pd guess the contract every time. Opps do have to guess.

I am not a great fan of ogust. It ain't "bad", but I would not rank it among the best conventions (if only because there is too much competition for that spot). There are other good schemes of continuations following a weak 2 opener.