[Dinarius]

fromageGB, on 2015-August-27, 05:23, said:

A different system for different scoring methods, not a different system for different vulnerabilities.

Interesting point.

I find it interesting that systems that try to avoid advancer having to make enquiries at the dreaded three level aren't more popular. But, maybe I'm missing something.

A few versions of Pinpoint Astro, for example, seem to manage this. http://www.bridgeguy...nse_method.html Though I haven't played it, I like the look of Variant VI.

D.

[jimmyg010]

Multi-Landy and penalty double against weak NT.

Multi-Landy and Woolsey double (4M-5m) against strong NT.

[jodepp]

Advice from a world champion in my youth:

"play anything you want reserves 2♥ and 2♠ as natural calls"

It's worked for me

[Dinarius]

If people are happy to discard Dbl in favour of a conventional meaning, would it be possible to also discard 2NT for the minors and try to avoid the three level?

Something like....

Dbl = ♣♦
2♣ = ♥♠ (with a 2♦relay)
2♦ = ♦♥
2♥ = ♥♣
2♠ = ♠ and either ♦ or ♣

Yes, you risk the three level with both major bids, but might Dbl be better to show the minors?

Based on my own experience, I agree that finding a fit, or generally making a nuisance of oneself is, over the long haul, going to win more matchpoints than the occasional successful double for penalties.

D.

[brettnj]

Against a limited (i.e., a rnage with a high of no more than 15) 1NT, you should NEVER give up the penalty double.
Against a 15+ lower range NT or more, at mp's, since the frequency of having an actual penalty double (18+ or 7 tricks) is so small, most players use the double as an artificial call. Any system that permits you to show a one-suiter, and most two suiters, should work. At imps, the chance to get a "big" number may change things (and I have a partner who refuses to give up the penalty x for that reason). Nevertheless, my personal preference is the same as previously stated, although with a major 1-suiter, I like to show it immediately, as it has some pre-emptive value.

[Zelandakh]

Dinarius, on 2015-August-27, 08:12, said:

Something like....

You have no call to show a major in this scheme and this is generally regarded as a very important hand type. You could take away 2♦ for that purpose and make the double diamonds + a rounded suit. That would certainly give you a call for all one and two suited hands, albeit with the usual caveat of not being able to differentiate lengths at all between those two suits.

[Zelandakh]

brettnj, on 2015-August-27, 08:46, said:

Against a limited (i.e., a rnage with a high of no more than 15) 1NT, you should NEVER give up the penalty double.

Fans of Lionel and various other popular defences would disagree with you. Something to consider is that the number of hands with 11hcp opposite 11hcp is considerably greater than 16 opposite 6, so it is not necessarily the case that you get fewer penalties when not playing a penalty double. What the penalty double does provide is an upper bound on the strength of an overcall and that is certainly useful.

[Dinarius]

Zelandakh, on 2015-August-27, 08:57, said:

You have no call to show a major in this scheme and this is generally regarded as a very important hand type. You could take away 2♦ for that purpose and make the double diamonds + a rounded suit. That would certainly give you a call for all one and two suited hands, albeit with the usual caveat of not being able to differentiate lengths at all between those two suits.

By which I take it you mean no call to show a single-suited major, such as the 2D bid in Multi-Landy?

Yes, you're correct.

So, Dbl could be Minors, as I've stated above, OR a single suited ♥ or ♠. Advancer, chooses his favoured Minor and now I correct to the long major. Make sense?

Also, by using Dbl for the Minors, Advancer can now use 2NT as a forward moving inquiry bid.

So, in summary.....

Dbl = Minors or long ♥ or long ♠. If it's a Major, doubler corrects after Advancer has chosen his Minor.
2♣ = Majors (with 2♦ relay)
2♦ = ♦ and ♥
2♥ = ♥ and ♣
2♠ = ♠ and ♦ or ♣

2NT is Advancer's inquiry bid.

D.

[Zelandakh]

Dinarius, on 2015-August-27, 09:33, said:

Dbl = Minors or long ♥ or long ♠. If it's a Major, doubler corrects after Advancer has chosen his Minor.
2♣ = Majors (with 2♦ relay)
2♦ = ♦ and ♥
2♥ = ♥ and ♣
2♠ = ♠ and ♦ or ♣

I still think you are far better off switching your "1M" and "reds" hands, so:-

Dbl = Minors; or ♦ and ♥
2♣ = Majors (with 2♦ relay)
2♦ = long ♥ or long ♠
2♥ = ♥ and ♣
2♠ = ♠ and ♦ or ♣

It is not optimal, since you cannot differentiate between 5M4m and 4M5m, but this ought to be playable. Incidentally, if it is the idea of being able to stop in 2m opposite both minors that is encouraging you, I should point out that there are a few defences that include this hand type in a 2♣ overcall and one of these might also be of interest to you.

[Dinarius]

Zelandakh, on 2015-August-27, 10:52, said:

I still think you are far better off switching your "1M" and "reds" hands, so:-

Dbl = Minors; or ♦ and ♥
2♣ = Majors (with 2♦ relay)
2♦ = long ♥ or long ♠
2♥ = ♥ and ♣
2♠ = ♠ and ♦ or ♣

It is not optimal, since you cannot differentiate between 5M4m and 4M5m, but this ought to be playable. Incidentally, if it is the idea of being able to stop in 2m opposite both minors that is encouraging you, I should point out that there are a few defences that include this hand type in a 2♣ overcall and one of these might also be of interest to you.

The reason I stuck with it is that unlike, say, Multi Landy, the overcaller holding a long major is guaranteed to be playing the hand. With ML, the long suit can be on the table.

Either way, I hope I'm onto something!

What are those defences to which you refer?

Thanks.

D.

[Jinksy]

mikeh, on 2015-August-26, 16:35, said:

Plus, and this is not based on any data, merely a suspicion, that there is a correlation, not a 100% correlation, between willingness to play complex methods over 1N and aggression, and a corresponding correlation between wanting to keep it simple and being conservative. I ask Arend not to take offence...I do not include him in my database And I am generally conservative, but like gadgets over their notrump (and that is actually an area where I am more on the aggressive side, I think).

I bid hyper-aggressively in competition, for what that's worth. I'm not wedded to Landy, but I haven't found anything simple enough to be playable in infrequent partnerships (which all of mine are) that I prefer.

[Dinarius]

Question: Could I play what I've outlined above, or would it have to be certified legal first?

How do these things work?

Thanks.

D.

[ggwhiz]

Against weak notrumps we play front of card as if we opened a strong notrump with 4-suit transfers and double is followed by transfers, lebensohl, negative double etc.

The key to me is transfers that give you a 2nd kick at the can, I once picked up ♠Ax, ♥Axxxxxx, ♦AKQx, ♣void and transferred to hearts.

Partner passed 2♦! But the weak notrumper bid 3♣ so I bounced into the diamond slam opposite partners heart void and long diamonds, and 4♥ failed at the other table.

That was a back door miracle but Mikeh also plays methods against a weak notrump that almost guarantee a 2nd opportunity to bid your shapely hands.

We play the same thing against strong notrumps with a double instead showing a 1-suiter strong enough to play for penalty but only because we wanted the bid to come up for practice where we play against very few weak notrumps.

[cnelsen]

A regular partner and I have been trying "preferential treatment" with a some success.

[BillPatch]

Dinarius, on 2015-August-28, 10:17, said:

Question: Could I play what I've outlined above, or would it have to be certified legal first?

How do these things work?

Thanks.

D.

Where do you wish to play? Some tournaments in BBO? Ireland? Great Britain? Elsewhere in Europe? ACBL adopted a new reg this summer so "Anything Goes," in terms of conventions over a natural no trump opening, so your convention is legal in the major North American countries and Bermuda. If you specify another location, it is likely that someone else can come back with the answer within 24 hours.

[Dinarius]

I play in Ireland.

Thanks.

D.

[manudude03]

Yeah, anything goes in Ireland as far as NT defenses go.

[kugw]

Has anyone tried playing Lionel?
x = spades & other 44
2C = clubs & hearts 44
2D = diamonds & hearts 44
2maj = 5 suit
2NT = minors

[BillPatch]

kugw, on 2015-August-29, 19:21, said:

Has anyone tried playing Lionel?
x = spades & other 44
2C = clubs & hearts 44
2D = diamonds & hearts 44
2maj = 5 suit
2NT = minors

The Granovetters play Lionel and swear by it. See their books. By the way the ACBL Bulletin review article in 2010 recommends getting into the auction over 1NT when you do not have a balanced hand. If you must overcall on 4432 hands, use DONT, Meckwell, or the method described in that article by Grue.

[Zelandakh]

BillPatch, on 2015-August-30, 04:19, said:

If you must overcall on 4432 hands, use DONT, Meckwell, or the method described in that article by Grue.

I would suggest using a 3-suited method if overcalling on 4432 hands. Bringing the 3-card suit into the equation gives slightly more safety.