Thursday, September 22, 2005
Don't play DONT. Just don't!
There are over 50 known conventions after opponents open 1NT. One of the most widely used and one of the worst is DONT. Just a recap of what it means. After 1NT from opponents:
Dbl shows a 1-suited hand
2♣ shows ♣ and a higher suit
2♦ shows ♦ and a major
2♥ shows both majors
and
2♠ is natural, but weaker than over Double.
The advantages, so say the fans of this convention, is to be able to show all 1- and 2-suiters AND be able to stop in 2♣. The question is: do I want to and at what price?
Let's look for the weak spots of this convention.
1. Double - Opponents will just ignore this and bid whatever they were planning on bidding, and if they do you can either bid your suit on the 2-level or you can't. If you can't, it'll be lost. Partner cannot help as he can after for example a Multi, with fit in two of two possible suits.
2. 2♣ - Again opponents will just ignore you. Double for Stayman and system on. Nice is that partner can raise your ♣ with a fit. What about if opponents leave you alone, and you do not have a fit in ♣? Suppose responder has 4♠2♥4♦3♣. A very common shape you might say. You have two options. Option 1 is pass and play the (possibly) 4-3 fit in a minor. If it happens to be a 5-3 fit, nice. But possibly partner's second suit corresponds to one of your 4-card suits (♦ and ♠). Wouldn't you want to play there? But if you try 2♦ relay, partner will bid 2♥ and now you are in big trouble. So you cannot find out about partner's side suit and have to accept the 4-3 fit in ♣.
3. 2♦ - This is better but still faces the same problem of not finding the best fit
4. 2♥ - This is a nice bid but still a bit gambling as you cannot find out which major is longer. Not much against this as I like to play this as an opening bid.
Conclusion: Three of the six 2-suiters and three of the four 1-suiters would be better off in a different convention as they are likely to be buried or played in a suboptimal fit! Great convention!
If you like a DONT-like style, I suggest you play Lionel:
Dbl = ♠ and another suit (or very strong hands)
2♣ = ♣ and ♥
2♦ = ♦ and ♥
2major = natural
The 2m-overcalls allow you to choose between two fits directly, and the Dbl? It looks similar to the DONT 2♣ but it isn't! You can play in ♠ at the 2-level if you do not find the required fit in the 2nd suit whereas with ♣ as the anchor-suit, if you bid on you are at the 3-level if the 2nd suit doesn't suit you. You give up on bidding hands with no major suit interest (minor 1- or 2-suiter) on the 2-level, but be realistic: when were you going to play 2m on those hands anyway?
Dbl shows a 1-suited hand
2♣ shows ♣ and a higher suit
2♦ shows ♦ and a major
2♥ shows both majors
and
2♠ is natural, but weaker than over Double.
The advantages, so say the fans of this convention, is to be able to show all 1- and 2-suiters AND be able to stop in 2♣. The question is: do I want to and at what price?
Let's look for the weak spots of this convention.
1. Double - Opponents will just ignore this and bid whatever they were planning on bidding, and if they do you can either bid your suit on the 2-level or you can't. If you can't, it'll be lost. Partner cannot help as he can after for example a Multi, with fit in two of two possible suits.
2. 2♣ - Again opponents will just ignore you. Double for Stayman and system on. Nice is that partner can raise your ♣ with a fit. What about if opponents leave you alone, and you do not have a fit in ♣? Suppose responder has 4♠2♥4♦3♣. A very common shape you might say. You have two options. Option 1 is pass and play the (possibly) 4-3 fit in a minor. If it happens to be a 5-3 fit, nice. But possibly partner's second suit corresponds to one of your 4-card suits (♦ and ♠). Wouldn't you want to play there? But if you try 2♦ relay, partner will bid 2♥ and now you are in big trouble. So you cannot find out about partner's side suit and have to accept the 4-3 fit in ♣.
3. 2♦ - This is better but still faces the same problem of not finding the best fit
4. 2♥ - This is a nice bid but still a bit gambling as you cannot find out which major is longer. Not much against this as I like to play this as an opening bid.
Conclusion: Three of the six 2-suiters and three of the four 1-suiters would be better off in a different convention as they are likely to be buried or played in a suboptimal fit! Great convention!
If you like a DONT-like style, I suggest you play Lionel:
Dbl = ♠ and another suit (or very strong hands)
2♣ = ♣ and ♥
2♦ = ♦ and ♥
2major = natural
The 2m-overcalls allow you to choose between two fits directly, and the Dbl? It looks similar to the DONT 2♣ but it isn't! You can play in ♠ at the 2-level if you do not find the required fit in the 2nd suit whereas with ♣ as the anchor-suit, if you bid on you are at the 3-level if the 2nd suit doesn't suit you. You give up on bidding hands with no major suit interest (minor 1- or 2-suiter) on the 2-level, but be realistic: when were you going to play 2m on those hands anyway?
Friday, September 16, 2005
Defending against a Strong Club
Many people like to bid a lot against a Strong Club opener. This in a way makes a lot of sense because they will be ahead of the field when you leave them alone. In my opinion there are only two types of bid you can/should use against a Strong Club.
1. Natural bids
2. Bids that may include the bid suit or not (for example 2♣ showing either ♣ or ♥+♦)
My favorite convention against all kinds of strong conventional opening bids is Psycho Suction. This is just a wacky name for the example I gave above. If you bid a suit on the 2-level or higher this shows the bid suit or the next two, if you bid NT you have the two combinations that are left: a non-touching 2-suiter (♥♣ or ♠♦). At the 1-level I like to reserve for constructive hands: Double for ♥, 1♦ for ♠, 1 of a major for a 4-card major with a longer minor. With hands that are even stronger, pass first.
What most people forget is that sometimes the strong 1♣ is on your left. Do YOU know what you play after the 1♦ negative or the positive responses? I suggest that after a positive response you play that you assume this was the opening bid. So after 1♣ pass 1NT you bid as after a strong NT opening bid (I hope you weren't playing penalty doubles there!). After the 1♦ negative: Double for the majors, 1 of a major is natural and the rest? Psycho Suction again.
1. Natural bids
2. Bids that may include the bid suit or not (for example 2♣ showing either ♣ or ♥+♦)
My favorite convention against all kinds of strong conventional opening bids is Psycho Suction. This is just a wacky name for the example I gave above. If you bid a suit on the 2-level or higher this shows the bid suit or the next two, if you bid NT you have the two combinations that are left: a non-touching 2-suiter (♥♣ or ♠♦). At the 1-level I like to reserve for constructive hands: Double for ♥, 1♦ for ♠, 1 of a major for a 4-card major with a longer minor. With hands that are even stronger, pass first.
What most people forget is that sometimes the strong 1♣ is on your left. Do YOU know what you play after the 1♦ negative or the positive responses? I suggest that after a positive response you play that you assume this was the opening bid. So after 1♣ pass 1NT you bid as after a strong NT opening bid (I hope you weren't playing penalty doubles there!). After the 1♦ negative: Double for the majors, 1 of a major is natural and the rest? Psycho Suction again.
Sunday, September 11, 2005
Educational slam hand
Playing IMPs I recently held:
♠AQ652
♥KQ942
♦J53
♣-
Partner opens 1♦ (promises 4 cards), I respond 1♠, partner raises to 2♠. I splinter to 4♣ which is doubled by my LHO! This makes things a lot easier, as partner now bids 4♦, denying a ♣ control but showing a ♦ control. The auction is easy now. Bid 4NT, RKC. Partner responds 5♥, 2 without the ♠Q. I conclude with 6♠.
Partner tables:
♠T984
♥A3
♦AKQT8
♣J6
As all other suits are solid, how do you play the ♠ suit? Missing King and Jack your first reaction might be: Ah, a double finesse. Indeed, this play has a chance of 74% to succeed. But as chess champion Lasker once said: "When you see a good move, wait---look for a better one!"
What can possibly be better?
Right! Cash the Ace and then lead towards the Queen. You will risk an irrelevant overtrick, but assure the contract against KJ doubleton offside in addition to all the chances of the double finesse. And guess what: KJ offside was the actual distribution! So what did my LHO double 4♣ on? Here it is:
♠KJ
♥T865
♦74
♣KQ983
This was bad for several reasons: First, if it was for the lead, he'll be on lead against ♠ himself. Second, it gave us an easy road to slam because I could find out that partner didn't have much in ♣. Third, even if his partner would have been on lead, leading ♣ is useless as it is my short suit. It is better to play such a double as asking for the lead in a DIFFERENT suit, for example the lowest suit that is not trumps or the splinter suit (and make sure that you are not on lead yourself).
♠AQ652
♥KQ942
♦J53
♣-
Partner opens 1♦ (promises 4 cards), I respond 1♠, partner raises to 2♠. I splinter to 4♣ which is doubled by my LHO! This makes things a lot easier, as partner now bids 4♦, denying a ♣ control but showing a ♦ control. The auction is easy now. Bid 4NT, RKC. Partner responds 5♥, 2 without the ♠Q. I conclude with 6♠.
Partner tables:
♠T984
♥A3
♦AKQT8
♣J6
As all other suits are solid, how do you play the ♠ suit? Missing King and Jack your first reaction might be: Ah, a double finesse. Indeed, this play has a chance of 74% to succeed. But as chess champion Lasker once said: "When you see a good move, wait---look for a better one!"
What can possibly be better?
Right! Cash the Ace and then lead towards the Queen. You will risk an irrelevant overtrick, but assure the contract against KJ doubleton offside in addition to all the chances of the double finesse. And guess what: KJ offside was the actual distribution! So what did my LHO double 4♣ on? Here it is:
♠KJ
♥T865
♦74
♣KQ983
This was bad for several reasons: First, if it was for the lead, he'll be on lead against ♠ himself. Second, it gave us an easy road to slam because I could find out that partner didn't have much in ♣. Third, even if his partner would have been on lead, leading ♣ is useless as it is my short suit. It is better to play such a double as asking for the lead in a DIFFERENT suit, for example the lowest suit that is not trumps or the splinter suit (and make sure that you are not on lead yourself).
Friday, September 09, 2005
Opening 1NT with a 5-card major
This has been an endless discussion point. You will find multiple world champions saying "never open 1NT on a 5-card major" and others saying you should. Here's my view on this.
What are the advantages of opening 1NT on a 5-card major?
* Puts more constraints on strength and distribution than 1M in one bid
* Harder for opponents to find their right contract
* You might miss a 5-3 fit when 3NT is better
* You solve some rebid problems
What is the disadvantage of opening 1NT on a 5-card major?
* If the major fit is missed you might have lost your best contract
Considering the evidence, my view is to open 1NT systematically on 5♥332, and never/rarely on 5♠332. The advantage of 1NT on ♥ is way bigger than for ♠:
* After 1♥ there is the big rebid problem 1♥ - 1♠ - ?. This is solved if you play Kaplan Inversion, though.
* After 1♥ opponents can overcall 1♠, after 1♠ they couldn't overcall 1♥ anyway.
After opening 1NT on 5♥332 I have one method to find out the 5-card major: After Stayman 2♣, the response 2NT shows this hand. This is safe because of the certain 9-card fit if partner is weak.
What are the advantages of opening 1NT on a 5-card major?
* Puts more constraints on strength and distribution than 1M in one bid
* Harder for opponents to find their right contract
* You might miss a 5-3 fit when 3NT is better
* You solve some rebid problems
What is the disadvantage of opening 1NT on a 5-card major?
* If the major fit is missed you might have lost your best contract
Considering the evidence, my view is to open 1NT systematically on 5♥332, and never/rarely on 5♠332. The advantage of 1NT on ♥ is way bigger than for ♠:
* After 1♥ there is the big rebid problem 1♥ - 1♠ - ?. This is solved if you play Kaplan Inversion, though.
* After 1♥ opponents can overcall 1♠, after 1♠ they couldn't overcall 1♥ anyway.
After opening 1NT on 5♥332 I have one method to find out the 5-card major: After Stayman 2♣, the response 2NT shows this hand. This is safe because of the certain 9-card fit if partner is weak.
Friday, September 02, 2005
The Bermuda Bowl - who are the favorites?
Next month the most important event on the Bridge calendar, the Bermuda Bowl, will be held in Estoril, Portugal. I'll have a look at the contestants.
There will be a total of 21 teams, 8 of which will make it to the Knockout stages. This is my prediction.
Finalists:
* Italy - I think this team will go all the way. Dummy will stay at the table on board 128 this time.
* USA 1 - If anyone is going to stop the Italians, it will be them.
Semifinalists:
* Sweden - A clear best of the rest in Malmö, they are tough to beat when they don't run into time penalties (just kidding mr. Sundelin).
* Netherlands - This is the same team that won the strong open teams in Tenerife. Although they were only 6th in Malmö, after that things have been going so well that only a team the size of the two finalists seem to be able to stop them.
Quarterfinalists:
* USA 2 - A very strong team that can keep up with the very best. I especially wish Fred Gitelman the best of luck.
* England - Their ability to score big against the weaker teams will get them to the QF. Their RR run in Istanbul was very impressive.
* Russia - A very solid team that seems to deliver good results constantly.
* China - A new star on the Bridge map since a few years. I think highly of them and I think they will make it to the KO.
I want to mention some other teams here:
* Poland - They seem to have set their goals on the transnational teams. Except for Jassem and Martens the team does not have much experience on this level. It will be interesting to see how they will do.
* Australia - Since I like to see nonstandard systems in action I'd like to see them get as far as possible, however with so many strong teams participating, it'd be a positive surprise if they did.
There will be a total of 21 teams, 8 of which will make it to the Knockout stages. This is my prediction.
Finalists:
* Italy - I think this team will go all the way. Dummy will stay at the table on board 128 this time.
* USA 1 - If anyone is going to stop the Italians, it will be them.
Semifinalists:
* Sweden - A clear best of the rest in Malmö, they are tough to beat when they don't run into time penalties (just kidding mr. Sundelin).
* Netherlands - This is the same team that won the strong open teams in Tenerife. Although they were only 6th in Malmö, after that things have been going so well that only a team the size of the two finalists seem to be able to stop them.
Quarterfinalists:
* USA 2 - A very strong team that can keep up with the very best. I especially wish Fred Gitelman the best of luck.
* England - Their ability to score big against the weaker teams will get them to the QF. Their RR run in Istanbul was very impressive.
* Russia - A very solid team that seems to deliver good results constantly.
* China - A new star on the Bridge map since a few years. I think highly of them and I think they will make it to the KO.
I want to mention some other teams here:
* Poland - They seem to have set their goals on the transnational teams. Except for Jassem and Martens the team does not have much experience on this level. It will be interesting to see how they will do.
* Australia - Since I like to see nonstandard systems in action I'd like to see them get as far as possible, however with so many strong teams participating, it'd be a positive surprise if they did.
