[kenberg]

I cite two articles. There are many others.
Letizia
and
Cohen

Now consider the DONT auction
1NT-(2H, showing hearts and spades)

The first article advises:

Quote

When the opponents interfere with a bid showing two specific suits:
A Double is for penalty. It shows a desire to penalize at least one of the suits shown by the opponent and is forcing to 2 No Trump.

I suspect that this is not intended to apply here. Doubling 2H would show a desire to penalize at least one of their suits?? Is partner supposed to pass and hope that my desire is to punish hearts? I take the "forcing to 2NT to mean if the opponents compete further. I am guessing, perhaps I am wrong, but I am guessing that she is talking about 1NT-(2D, showing the majors) or something of that order.

Cohen says something very similar, that when they show both majors a double shows that you can double at least one of their suits. But then he goes on with an example where we have 1NT-(2D, both majors). So it is clear that he is speaking of the case where neither major was actually bid.

So let us proceed, assuming that the double of 2H is not being used to say you think we can beat one, but not which one, of the major suit contracts.


Using the double as negative was once considered far out but it is now pretty mainstream, I think. And of course Lebensohl, in one form or another, is common.

OK. 1NT-(2H, showing hearts and spades). We could X, negative. We could bid 2S, some sort of take-out. We could bid 2NT, relay to clubs. That's threee artificial bids available to us. What means what?

Can we sort this out?


LC suggests that "If the opponents show majors (with some contraption that is below 2H) I suggest that 2H is a GF in clubs, 2S is a GF in diamonds". Following that logic perhaps, after the DONT 1NT-(2H), X should be a GF in clubs, 2S should be a GF in diamonds.


But other uses are possible. We could use X as suggesting competitive values in the minors, and 2S as showing GF values in the minors. We could use the bids to try to sort out stoppers. Or we could use the X of 2H to say we think we can set hearts. Shockingly old fashioned, I know. It would still leave us the artificial calls of 2S and 2NT.


Anyway, this is the I/A Forum and in my experience few I/A players (I am one such) have sorted this all out. These two articles suggest to me that the literature may well not have sorted it all out either.

The DONT auction 1NT-(2H) is common The Spingold starts on Monday, I suppose/hope that most teams playing in it have worked this though. The rest of us? Maybe not so much. It could be worthwhile.

Of course there are (many) similar artificial auctions over 1NT that are of interest. Leb is fine when the overcall shows the suit they bid and nothing else, but nobody does that anymore.

[steve2005]

DONT presents a problem, if your goal is punishing. All 2 suited bids hard but 2♥ is the worse.

[kenberg]

steve2005, on 2016-July-19, 10:00, said:

DONT presents a problem, if your goal is punishing. All 2 suited bids hard but 2♥ is the worse.

Which of course is a compliment to Marty Bergen and Larry Cohen.

Still, DONT has been around for a long time and I would hope that there is some sort of consensus on the meaning of X, of 2S, and of 2NT.

My inclination: Over 2H an immediate 3m shows m and is gf. 2NT is a relay to 3C, usually followed by pass or correct, but sometimes by a cue bid. 2S shows game forcing values, and opener can cue a stop or bid a good minor. X of 2H shows a hand with something in both minors and competitive values.

But that's me sitting around musing. Surely someone has thought more deeply about this.

[helene_t]

2S does not have to be gf. Competitive with 45 minors will do.

2n and 3c could be some kind of sohl.

Dbl could be pure penalty but I think optional wins on frequency.

[helene_t]

2S does not have to be gf. Competitive with 45 minors will do.

2n and 3c could be some kind of sohl.

Dbl could be pure penalty but I think optional wins on frequency.

[FrancesHinden]

People overcall showing the 'majors' with 4-4. I don't see the need to be particularly sophisticated. If you usually play lebensohl, then

double = takeout
2S = natural, non-forcing
2NT = lebensohl
3C, 3D, 3H, 3S = natural, game forcing

You might prefer to play some form of Rubensohl or transfers, but I think the principle is correct: don't be terrified of playing in one of their "suits"

[kenberg]

Here is a DONT from yesterday in a NAP qualifier at the local club. I will give you my hand first.

---

Partner and I had discussed the 2H situation a bit, not at length. I could have bid 2S to show a spade stop.We had agreed, I think, that bidding 3NT instead is simply hoping for the best. I think it is not unreasonable. I stop spades, I can contribute to stopping hearts. Additionally, after the hand my rho said he was planning to lead a spade against 3NT had his partner passed. Not that it mattered, we were not making 3NT. If I had shown my spade stop he would have led a heart, except we probably would not be in 3NT since pard, as you might guess from the 4H on my left, does not stop hearts.

Anyway, here I am in the pass out seat. I have a 10 count, partner has opened 1NT, they are in 4H, I imagine partner is expecting me to do something. I did, I passed. My rho noted that this is not an auction you hear every day. I was right, at least sort of. Here are the hands.

---

I led the diamond T, I think it doesn't matter what I lead. Gib agrees, it makes 4H. Declarer was down 1. Looking at all four hands, you win the diamond Ace, you lead a spade. If the spade J is left to go to the A, a ruffing finesse sets up spades. If, instead, W rises with the K at T2, the A can be ruffed out. For example, spade to K, D, C, another C ruffed, ruff a S, two trump ending in hand, ruff a spade establishing spades, trumps are drawn, you can still ruff a club back to hand to take the spades, and you still have a trump on the board to ruff the diamond. I think this is right. Anyway Gib says making 4, but as is often the case declarer does not have Gib's ability to see through cards and he was off 1.

A good part of the charm of bridge is that no matter how much you discuss, there are still choices to be made, often choices where it is not at all obvious. We have 25 highs, but we can make only 3D if they get their ruff. They can make 4H, but didn't. We have an 8 card fit, they have a 10 card fit, LOTT says 18 total tricks but it seems to me there are 10 in hearts, 9 in diamonds.

I am not sure there is any great lesson here, I just found the hand interesting.+50 was slightly below average. better than -40 in 4D, not as good as +400. I didn't ask the +400 players how they made it.