[glen]

junyi_zhu, on Sep 1 2010, 12:40 PM, said:

... in the future, the 1NT overcall strength will be lowered to 14-16 when white for many.

It will if ideas like in the latest Bridge World of using 1x=1NT=Double as a transfer takes off

[jdonn]

junyi_zhu, on Sep 1 2010, 11:22 AM, said:

JLOGIC, on Aug 30 2010, 02:45 PM, said:

Yep, if someone in the Venice Cup makes a bid I would make it too!

Really? I thought you are way better than most playing Venice cup.

nah

[Mbodell]

lexlogan, on Aug 30 2010, 10:48 AM, said:

JLOGIC, on Aug 29 2010, 08:24 PM, said:

I am one of the most avid followers of this style probably, I feel that I have had good results with it and it is effective.

The main reason I haven't attempted this style is I have no clue how to respond to it. Some of my partners often double with what looks like junk to me and I bid aggressively and get a bottom. Care to describe how to advance one of your own doubles, Justin?

This. When partner is "also" short in opponents suit they will compete very aggressively. Do those who like this style also think it is a good style when played by int- players with poor to middling judgment? Or does it take a more sophisticated appreciation for auction, hand valuation, table presence, etc. to compete well.

[jdonn]

What style is supposed to be good by design for players with poor judgment?

[bluecalm]

In my opinion this style is not only much better but also much easier/safer to play.
The reason is that you avoid very awkward balancing situation as well as situations when you first pass and then feel you should somehow show your strong hand.
You often penalize partner for his light overcall in the process.
For example if you pass with after 1♦.
KTxx
ATxx
xxx
Ax

and it goes:

1♦ pass - 1♥ - 1♠
3♦ ???

Here you wouldn't be comfortable bidding only 3♠ but going to game may result in -500 and opponents are in good position to judge it.

The same goes for overcalls. It's better to overcall at first opportunity than balance at higher level or worse jump around after partner's action.
In short: bid at the first opportunity and then shut up unless you have something really exceptional.

[JLOGIC]

junyi_zhu, on Sep 1 2010, 11:22 AM, said:

JLOGIC, on Aug 30 2010, 02:45 PM, said:

Yep, if someone in the Venice Cup makes a bid I would make it too!

Really? I thought you are way better than most playing Venice cup.

I was being sarcastic, mainly just making fun of han, but I don't want to hijack this thread with the inevitable convo this will lead to so my bad.

Quote

Care to describe how to advance one of your own doubles, Justin?

I feel like I bid pretty normally in response to it, just don't do stuff like upgrade 3 small in the enemy suit, it is partner who should upgrade if you invite and he has a stiff and 4 trumps. Eg if it went 1D X p ? and I had AJxxx x xxx Kxxx I would not go insane. If partner had a stiff diamond and a min t/o X they would probably be bidding them, but even if they somehow failed to partner can evaluate his own stiff.

Basically I think the t/o Xer should be upgrading over an invite with a classic t/o X shape a lot, that is a lot of extras if you can be 4333.

I guess the main difference would be I wouldn't introduce a minor in a competitive auction on a 4 card suit since it could be a 4-2 fit. I would either pass, or make a responsive X if possible. Responsive doubles can help you sensibly land in the right fits imo. I also wouldn't go crazy because I had a 6 card suit in a minor, again if we have a 10 card fit and partner has minimum HCP the opps will be bidding a lot (and if he has 4 trumps and extra high cards he will bid more in competition most likely).

Sorry if that's not a great explanation of how I advance to a takeout double, it's kind of a difficult question since it covers so much ground. If you have any other specific questions about it I would be happy to answer what I do at least.

Quote

Do those who like this style also think it is a good style when played by int- players with poor to middling judgment? Or does it take a more sophisticated appreciation for auction, hand valuation, table presence, etc. to compete well.

I think it's fine if you are not thinking partner has an opening bid with 4441. If you just start by assuming he has a 4432 12 count or something and bid accordingly, you should be fine. Obv if the opponents show a lot of trumps then you need to know how to adjust your bidding accordingly.

Competitive auctions will always be hard for int- players with poor judgement since they are all about judgement. That said, I don't think the solution is to simply pass on some hands where you should be competing. Sure it makes life easier when you do compete, but I think you will miss out on a lot of partials this way, or even worse have to judge whether or not to balance (which is much higher risk and requires good judgement also).

I don't think bidding this way takes any special agreements.

[JLOGIC]

bluecalm, on Sep 1 2010, 10:31 PM, said:

For example if you pass with after 1♦.
KTxx
ATxx
xxx
Ax

and it goes:

1♦ pass - 1♥ - 1♠
3♦ ???

Here you wouldn't be comfortable bidding only 3♠ but going to game may result in -500 and opponents are in good position to judge it.

This is a really bad example since you have 3H available heh, but I agree with what you are saying.

Getting in early on hands and then not feeling pressure to bid/catch up later solves a lot of later problems that people often have that require even more judgement. And more importantly, on some hands someone has to bid in order to get to their making partial. If both players are simply passing on hands like this you will lose a lot of 6 imp swings imo (or even worse at MP).

[bucky]

cloa513, on Aug 29 2010, 05:58 PM, said:

Just goes to show that playing at a high level doesn't mean you are world class. The pair who passed 3H- barely intermediate. Other partnerships barely advanced. To count as an expert, need to know your partner very well and opponents somewhat and most cardplays. Worldclass- know partner, opponents as well as possible, all cardplays- variations will occur with contract and play due to bidding system, slight aggressiveness variations, opponents counter action.

I think these comments are a bit too harsh. Yes, I am surprised to see a pair landing in 3H at top level game, but that doesn't deserve words like "barely intermediate". In fact, this is a very subtle area of bidding inference and agreement. In general, when the advancer bid spades then hearts, he/she is offering 2 places to play, presumably 4-4 in both majors. On the other hand, if the hand with 4-4 is good enough to jump to 2-level initially, maybe for some partnerships it is good enough to cuebid first, for other partnerships it is not. We know that bidding screw-ups do occur at all levels, and I wouldn't hasten to deliver the judgment based on one bidding disaster in a not-so-familiar sequence for many partnerships.

[lexlogan]

Mbodell, on Sep 2 2010, 03:02 AM, said:

lexlogan, on Aug 30 2010, 10:48 AM, said:

JLOGIC, on Aug 29 2010, 08:24 PM, said:

I am one of the most avid followers of this style probably, I feel that I have had good results with it and it is effective.

The main reason I haven't attempted this style is I have no clue how to respond to it. Some of my partners often double with what looks like junk to me and I bid aggressively and get a bottom. Care to describe how to advance one of your own doubles, Justin?

This. When partner is "also" short in opponents suit they will compete very aggressively. Do those who like this style also think it is a good style when played by int- players with poor to middling judgment? Or does it take a more sophisticated appreciation for auction, hand valuation, table presence, etc. to compete well.

I think you might get away with this style with a fairly passive partner, but I can assure you from experience you'll set an active partner up for disaster. Bridge is a partnership game. If I'm playing with someone I can count on to have a six card suit when he opens a weak two, I bid one way; if I know he may have only 5 under certain conditions I pull in and let the initial bid do the damage. Likewise, if I can count on partner to have an opening bid in support of any suit when he doubles, short perhaps a card in a minor, I can bid aggressively; if I knew partner liked to doubled on a flat 11, or 9 hcp (no ace) and a void I would exercise restraint. Making such bids without warning will get us a bad board immediately AND damage the partnership AND have partner stewing instead of concentrating on the next hand.