[1eyedjack]

Trinidad, on Jun 25 2008, 09:00 AM, said:

1eyedjack, on Jun 25 2008, 12:39 AM, said:

I don't know what it is called.  It is so bad that I suspect no individual would lend his or her name to it.  I have no idea why it has achieved popularity here in the UK among the LOLs but popularity it has definitely achieved (I think it is probably some non-theoretician scrabbling about for the use of 2S bid after adopting transfers into the majors).  But here goes:

In response to 1N (12-14), uncontested:
2S = 11 points
2N = 12 points

ROOAARRING!

I immediately admit that this convention wouldn't make it on my top 1000 list of favorite conventions, but I think that you are a little harsh.

LOLs will not be able to understand the more complicated stuff (4 suit transfers, minor suit Stayman, etc.) Given that, and given the fact that most LOLs are incredible walrusses, I think that 2♠=11, 2NT=12 is an enormous improvement over 2♠= idle, 2NT=11-12.

In the setting of LOLs playing LOLs (which is what most LOLs do) playing this convention gives an edge over opponents who don't have this 'weapon' available.

Or to put it differently: If I would have to fight a war, I would prefer to have fighter planes rather than frying pans. But if an LOL is in a fight with her neighbor, given that she can't fly an F14 anyway, a frying pan might come in very handy.

Rik

Think on reflection you are probably right. That said, even the LOLs using this method cannot distinguish the 11 from 12 count when going via Stayman when they have a 4 card major, which detracts further from the method. I quite like the idea of leaving both 2S and 2N as undefined. Pass with 11, bid 3N with 12.

[gnasher]

manudude03, on Jun 25 2008, 11:30 PM, said:

To play in some number of diamonds or even 2H? Maybe picky but make partner's hand x Axx KJxxx xxx and 5 diamonds has some play if defenders don't lead trumps (though feel free to say if you would do anything over 1S with this) especially when the x's may not be 2,3,4s.

That's a very specific, perfectly-fitting hand on which responder would have wanted to bid, except that his methods didn't allow it. Even so, some players would choose to double or bid 2♦. Also, advancer would often have bid. If the worst feature of the methods were that they couldn't cope with this pair of hands in this auction, it would suggest that it was an excellent system.

I don't, in fact, think much of the system; I just think even less of your example.

[brianshark]

Ghestem has to be the worst convention for the sheer number of accidents that ghestem players use. Even otherwise good players mess it up from time to time, usually costing plenty of imps.

I hate DONT and any such convention that sacrafices the penalty double over 1NT, even strong NTs.

I dislike Gambling 3NT because it wrong-sides the contract, makes defence fairly easy for the opponents and because people bid it on non-solid suits all the time.

Regarding other conventions that people are bashing:

2/1: The improved slam bidding gains many imps. Occasionally you can get too high in a partscore hand but in practice, these times are fairly infrequent. I like it.

Flannery: I have played this for a while. It only came up 3/4 times over a few years. It's never cost imps. It's never gained imps. It usually results in the auction 2D-3NT or 2D-4H (occasionally transferring declarership) for a push board. Unnecessary but harmless.

Capp/DONT: My personal preference is to play a 1NT defence which allows a penalty double which is why I dislike DONT. Everyone here plays Capp and it works just fine. Though I prefer something simple like 2C=Majors, rest natural.

Gerber: You need a way to ask for aces over a NT bid. There's nothing wrong with Gerber if used only in situations it needs to be used in. Gerber in a suit auction is silly. Gerber when you actually want to know if pard is min or max is silly.

Specific Ace Ask: I play this. This has never come up.

Bergen: This works fine if played properly.

Support Doubles: I've never had a problem with them. But I doubt I'd have a problem without them either.

Transfers in various situations: I highly recommend them if you are sure you and your pd know your system. Transfers save space and are more efficient means of describing your hand. I'd play rubensohl if I knew it and I knew my partner knew it. I'm sure transfer overcalls and transfer pre-empts and transfer responses to 1♣ and transfer advances and whatever work well.

Weak 2D: When used as a constructive descriptive bid instead of a pre-empt (as weak 2s were originally intended) works well. Though my preference would be to play weak 2-suited openings and weak multi, or maybe bad weak 2s and constructive multi or something.

Puppet stayman: I can't remember ever losing imps because the extra info helped the defenders find a killing lead. I can remember plenty of times we elected not to use puppet (by choice or by not playing it at the time) and losing imps because of missing a superior 5-3 Major fit.

Kickback: Never played it, but it seems like a good idea in minor suit auctions. I don't bother because of the extra memory load and the situations where it is necessary don't come up all that often.

[hrothgar]

My experiences in the Newton Individual this last year have convinced me that "Stolen Bid Doubles" are [probably] the worst thing ever invented

[han]

Stolen bid doubles? My favorite!

[pclayton]

brianshark, on Jun 26 2008, 03:06 AM, said:

Serious flame bait advocating Gerber, Capp, Bergen and Puppet Stayman

We've discussed the drawbacks of these conventions before.

I am teaching a two part lecture in Newport Beach entitled, "Why I have Cappeletti". I will send you the notes if you like.

[neilkaz]

pclayton, on Jun 26 2008, 11:07 AM, said:

brianshark, on Jun 26 2008, 03:06 AM, said:

Serious flame bait advocating Gerber, Capp, Bergen and Puppet Stayman

We've discussed the drawbacks of these conventions before.

I am teaching a two part lecture in Newport Beach entitled, "Why I have Cappeletti". I will send you the notes if you like.

I trust you mean " why I hate Capp " ? If so, I'd like to see the notes also if you don't mind.

thx .. neilkaz ..

[blackshoe]

On the assumption that Neil's assumption is correct, me too. :-)

[32519]

mr1303, on 2006-February-22, 18:11, said:

You missed puppet stayman. The "please tell opponents both player's hands before they lead" convention.

Jlall, on 2006-February-22, 18:22, said:

Yes, can't believe I overlooked it it's one of my LEAST favorite

keylime, on 2006-February-28, 23:11, said:

8. Five card majors opened 1NT
Yet again the "modernists" preach that we should open 1NT even with a five card major. Yet the same modernists don't tell us that on a non-descript 7-9 point hand 4 of the major will often give us 10 tricks. The scoring table is set up for major fits - yet, the "modern" bidder will languish at 1NT-P-3NT with 8-9 tricks instead of +420/+620. We can't bid our hands the way they were intended to? Do we HAVE to open 1NT on AKx A9xxx xx Axx? What about AQ9xx KTx Kxx Jx? With this point in mind, LONG LIVE MARSHALL MILES AND ZEKE JABBOUR! :-)
13. Puppet Stayman
Do we HAVE to play this treatment? Eek. I want to cut the strings from this treatment. Then again, a natural 2NT is the aunt or uncle that is unwelcomed after three days.

[Free]

Oh, a nice old topic reopened. I've found another convention that really sucks: 2NT as either minors or majors.