[crapdown4]

In the somewhat ossified world of bridge, one topic has predominated. You HAVE to play SOMETHING over their 1NT opener. Frabulon. Hambone. Snapdoodle. CAN'T. WON'T. Modified Osscowinsinsisky. If you don't--well, you're not manly.

This has resulted in a perversion wherein people will waltz into the auction after their opponents open 1NT pretty much regardless of their holdings. Minimum requirements seem to be 0 hcp and 4-3-3-3 shape. I frequently feel sorry for the poor slob in fourth seat who now has to bid with his balanced three-count and hope he doesn't get doubled.

You see, I've found one simple truth. Particularly if they're vulnerable, you very often score better by keeping your mouth shut and leading your best suit. Many's the time my partners, who of course all play Snapdoodle, drag out a +110 or a -50 only to find that if they'd just defended, we would have gotten a +200. But noooo.

Aside from the fact that most people hate to defend, I wonder why all these conventions over their NT are so %^%$@#$ popular. I don't see good results when we use them or our opponents use them. Could it be simply that many pairs are poorly prepared to handle interference? (It's childishly easy, but you DO have to talk about it.)

Also, there's always a regional perversion of some kind. Roll into Skeleton Flats on a Saturday afternoon, and you'll find that everyone plays Modified Yeehaw, where an overcall of 2C shows an unspecified three-card suit and both red fives. It all seems ludicrous to me, but I'm sure many of you will tell me I'm an idiot and avow that without Enhanced Snapdoodle, they would NEVER have the 80% games that they routinely achieve.

[Stephen Tu]

Well in general declaring is easier than defending for most people. Weaker pairs certainly tend to deploy their gadgets on inappropriate hands more often, and often also choose poorer gadgets. But stronger pairs who are more judicious about when to bid generally think we are winning more often than it backfires with our defenses otherwise we wouldn't use them. Certainly I'd want to play many of the well-known defenses rather than be forced to play natural only. Shapely hands, quite a few double partial swings are available since in NT they may be running off a lot of tricks in your singleton.

Yeah, one should be more judicious when they are vul at MP, passing can be better. But it's often hard to tell in advance that 200/300 is available AND that LHO was going to pass 1nt. Maybe it is if you lead double dummy, but maybe if you just lead your longest and strongest it gives one trick and that's enough for declarer to get out for -100. Or maybe making. One useful tactic is if you are using an artificial double, keep some standards for deploying it so advancer can pass it with enough strength that can stand probable leads.

[Vampyr]

crapdown4, on 2020-August-28, 18:05, said:

In the somewhat ossified world of bridge, one topic has predominated. You HAVE to play SOMETHING over their 1NT opener. Frabulon. Hambone. Snapdoodle. CAN'T. WON'T. Modified Osscowinsinsisky. If you don't--well, you're not manly.

This has resulted in a perversion wherein people will waltz into the auction after their opponents open 1NT pretty much regardless of their holdings. Minimum requirements seem to be 0 hcp and 4-3-3-3 shape. I frequently feel sorry for the poor slob in fourth seat who now has to bid with his balanced three-count and hope he doesn't get doubled.

You see, I've found one simple truth. Particularly if they're vulnerable, you very often score better by keeping your mouth shut and leading your best suit. Many's the time my partners, who of course all play Snapdoodle, drag out a +110 or a -50 only to find that if they'd just defended, we would have gotten a +200. But noooo.

Aside from the fact that most people hate to defend, I wonder why all these conventions over their NT are so %^%$@#$ popular. I don't see good results when we use them or our opponents use them. Could it be simply that many pairs are poorly prepared to handle interference? (It's childishly easy, but you DO have to talk about it.)

Also, there's always a regional perversion of some kind. Roll into Skeleton Flats on a Saturday afternoon, and you'll find that everyone plays Modified Yeehaw, where an overcall of 2C shows an unspecified three-card suit and both red fives. It all seems ludicrous to me, but I'm sure many of you will tell me I'm an idiot and avow that without Enhanced Snapdoodle, they would NEVER have the 80% games that they routinely achieve.

As far as coming in very light it is often right against a strong NT if you have a bit of shape. Against a weak NT your interference should be much sounder.

In any case it is a very good idea to use 2♣ to show both majors. Other features (if any) of your defence are much less important.

[pescetom]

Vampyr, on 2020-August-29, 01:01, said:

As far as coming in very light it is often right against a strong NT if you have a bit of shape. Against a weak NT your interference should be much sounder.

In any case it is a very good idea to use 2♣ to show both majors. Other features (if any) of your defence are much less important.

And also to use double to show sensible distribution rather than punishment (see recent thread).

[Vampyr]

pescetom, on 2020-August-29, 09:47, said:

And also to use double to show sensible distribution rather than punishment (see recent thread).

What qualifies as “sensible” distribution?

FWIW, I use double over a strong NT to show majors or minors or diamonds. Or sometimes a 4-card major with a longer minor. Or whatever my partner wants.

[pescetom]

Vampyr, on 2020-August-29, 13:13, said:

What qualifies as “sensible” distribution?

FWIW, I use double over a strong NT to show majors or minors or diamonds. Or sometimes a 4-card major with a longer minor. Or whatever my partner wants.

Sensible is something that is more likely to procure a good score than pass would, and not easy to show naturally. Like your (our) 4-card major with a longer minor.

[Zelandakh]

I tend to find I score better when I do not constantly leap to a grand slam for no reason, redouble and then claim (or play misere) for 0 tricks. Somehow I think I would ask my team mates to work on that part of their game first before worrying about their 1NT defence.

[Vampyr]

Zelandakh, on 2020-August-29, 19:34, said:

I tend to find I score better when I do not constantly leap to a grand slam for no reason, redouble and then claim (or play misere) for 0 tricks. Somehow I think I would ask my team mates to work on that part of their game first before worrying about their 1NT defence.

I would sack the teammates.

[mycroft]

It has been shown, in particular at Matchpoints, in particular when the 1NT bidder is not vulnerable, that letting them play 1NT leads to bad scores.

Absolutely I agree, if you can get +200 from a vulnerable 1NTer, you get a good score. But 1NT is hard to defend well, and one slip goes from a +200 top to a -180 bottom, worse than all the -50s and -100s the overcallers are getting, even if they were booked for a bad score; and the -90s the "chickens" get on the same less-than-perfect defence.

I have had a lot of luck in the past playing the Eric Landau NT defence: "It's easy, but you've probably never played it before. Clubs shows clubs, diamonds shows diamonds,..., and double for penalty." But a more sophisticated defence has been shown to be better.

Obviously, just because you have a tool, doesn't mean you use it on this hand. You only know a convention well when you know when not to use it (and when you know what it means when partner didn't use it, as well). That applies just as much to NT defences as everything else.

"A bad craftsman blames her tools" And, given that "I never said I was a good bridge player. I am a bad bridge player. It's just that everyone else is worse than me" (not my quote, obviously)...

[akwoo]

I think beginners should start with natural.

At some point, they should realize, perhaps with a little prompting, that they should overcall 2X over a strong NT with a 6 card suit and very few points, because -50 is better than -90, and -200 is better than -420. (However, a lot of players have a psychological block against going down, and would prefer giving up -420 ("they had a good hand; there's nothing we can do") to giving up -200 ("we screwed up by bidding a contract we can't make"). Needless to say, you can't be even a moderately successful bridge player, particularly at MPs, with this psychological block.)

At some point after that, they'll start realizing they should overcall 2X (or at least 2M) with 5431 shape as well, even playing natural. Then they should learn one of the conventions.

(I wrote this for folks in strong NT lands. If you're in a weak NT land, the pathway is different.)