[lexlogan]

I've never really liked the 3NT bid of "fast denies" lebensohl in an auction like 1NT-(2S)-3NT; a recent push board, -300 both ways, got me thinking about alternatives. What I don't like about lebensohl/reverse lebensohl/rubensohl is that with 25-27 hcp, responder having no major, you're going to play 3NT or 4,5 or 6 of a minor. 4C or 4D are silly contracts of course, risky with no upside, while 5 and 6 are unlikely if responder has a fairly balanced hand.

My first humorous thought was to play 3C or 3D over the interference as "bid 3NT with a stopper, otherwise pass." Of course that leaves responder no good way to handle shapely hands where 5 or 6 might make. Then I googled reverse lebensohl, but responder's 2NT still forces us to 3NT or higher (unless he passes opener's forced 3C, but that style just means the direct 3C is still forcing.)

So here's my idea: after 1NT-(2S), most bids are natural/normal: game bids including 3NT are to play, same for slams, jump bids in a suit are forcing, cue-bid is Stayman, non-jump suit bids are merely competitive. That leaves 2NT as a general force. 2NT promises at least the values for 3NT, presumably with no major suit, but suggests some concern about 3NT (no stopper, or slam interest.)

Opener bids 3NT with a stopper; otherwise, 3C = no stopper, 3D = good club support, 3H = five card suit, 3S = good support for both minors. "Good support" should be 4+ cards and a hand with reasonable prospects of game.

This scheme allows responder to pass 3C, 3D or 3H when he judges game to be unlikely, or of course raise as appropriate. Going plus on such hands seems to be quite valuable, possibly worth the ambiguity when responder instead has a shspely hand with slam interest.

If you're having trouble understanding how 25-27 hcp might want to stop in a part-score, here are the approximate hands that got me thinking:

♠Qx......xx
♥AKxx....Jxx
♦xxx.....AKQxx
♣AKxx....Jxx

-300 at both tables after 1NT-(2S)-3NT when opener guessed to leave it in (overcaller had AJxxxxx, low to partner's King, defense ran first 7 tricks); 4D is ugly, 4H has a prayer but seems to take some guesswork to get there. We play 14-16 notrumps so note that opener has a max, 27 hcp between us and no obvious game. I'd be happy stopping at 3D on such hands, and note that opening could have xx in spades or KQxx in either hearts or clubs.

Comments?

[JLOGIC]

I think you are losing way too much on hands that would normally bid 3 of a minor forcing (namely slam, or choice of game decisions) and catering to a too unlikely hand type, but interesting idea.

Also, I do not agree at all that you cannot play 4 of a minor when you have no stopper.

1N 2M 3N p 4C/4D all pass is certainly possible. Playing 4 of a minor with a lot of HCP will usually be safe enough. I don't understand why opener passed 3N in your auction when partner showed no stopper and opener had no stopper. At least 1N 2S 3N p 4C p 4D p p p would have been playable (not as good as 3D though obviously, but better than 3N!)

You say:

Quote

4C or 4D are silly contracts of course, risky with no upside

and

Quote

4D is ugly

You seem to have a prejudice against 4 of a minor. If no game can make and that's the last spot you can bail out in, there's nothing wrong with it. 3N -300 instead of 4D +130 is like 9 imps. If 4D is down 1 it's 5 imps. There is no real shame in 4 of a minor.

[lexlogan]

JLOGIC, on 2011-February-22, 17:14, said:

You seem to have a prejudice against 4 of a minor. If no game can make and that's the last spot you can bail out in, there's nothing wrong with it. 3N -300 instead of 4D +130 is like 9 imps. If 4D is down 1 it's 5 imps. There is no real shame in 4 of a minor.

I can't imagine being "happy" with -100 holding 27 hcp. Partner had a max, diamonds split well and yet 4D is very odds-against. So yes, I'm highly prejudiced against a system that forces us to 4C or 4D just because we hold "x" hcp.

[JLOGIC]

lol

[shevek]

Damn. I was hoping this would be a genuine anti-Lebensohl thread.
Always amusing to witness 1NT - (2♣) - 2NT "Alert"
My #1 bad convention, just edging out DONT, with it's proven ability to miss 9-card fits.

[blackshoe]

shevek, on 2011-February-22, 22:08, said:

Damn. I was hoping this would be a genuine anti-Lebensohl thread.
Always amusing to witness 1NT - (2♣) - 2NT "Alert"
My #1 bad convention, just edging out DONT, with it's proven ability to miss 9-card fits.

Explain, please.

[Zelandakh]

How are you planning to bid 14(53) hands that want to try for slam opposite a fit? If the answer is to cue (Stayman) then you cannot locate the minor fit. If the solution is 3m (forcing) then you have lost the ability to compete in a minor suit. Either way you are giving up on a relatively common hand type to cater for hands where stopping on a pinhead in 3m is right and you can make that judgement correctly. The last point is relevant too - in your example if Opener has xx/AKx/xxx/AKQxx both will bid the same way ending in 3D. Yet now 4 of either minor is excellent and 5 will make alot of the time. Of course you play 14-16 and this hand is too strong but I think it gives an idea of what I am referring to. Add to this the loss of distinguishing between hands with 4 hearts and a stop compared with 4 hearts without, an extremely common hands type, and it seems clear that this method is going to lose IMPS in the current form. It may be possible to tweak things to address some of these issues but I see too many downsides here to seriously consider playing this in preference to Rubensohl.

[lexlogan]

Some good points, Zelandakh. Thank you for posting specific criticisms. I've not played Rubensohl, I can see the advantage of showing a 4-5 major/minor hand by way of transfer-then-bid the major. That option is obviously missing from lebensohl, so in my method or lebensohl responder cue-bids, and if we can't play 3NT we're groping at the four level.

For Stayman-plus-stopper, responder could start with 2NT in my method but would generally have to pass opener's 3NT, missing the 4-4 fit. However, there would be a stopper in both hands, so 3NT is probably a good contract and will sometimes make when the 4-4 fit would not. For IMP scoring this may be a break even case.

Your example of xx AKx xxx AKQxx I would not consider too strong for 14-16 unless you added a couple of tens. But I think in any method when you stop at a part-score declining a game invitation you will miss some making games. The advantage of stopping two tricks below game is, I think, worth missing a few magic fits. With either leb or Rub you would presumably land in 5D, perhaps failing on a bad trump split, which is more likely than usual given the overcall. 5C makes barring a void somewhere, but I don't see an obvious way to bid it.

[lexlogan]

Just for drill, I estimated the chances of making 3D, 4D and 4H for the given hands. My calculations are probably flawed, I used a spreadsheet to crunch the numbers but had to examine each combination of enemy cards and probably got the analysis wrong here and there. Anyway, my estimates were 3D 87%, 4D 43%, 4H 34%, with a total point expectation of +91, -30, and +80. 3NT is hard to estimate; if there's a 25% chance overcaller will lead away from AK or refuse to lead the suit (hoping partner gets in to lead through declarer) then 3NT has a zero expectation. (We were vulnerable and I used -100 for 3D failing, -150 for 4D, and -200 for 4H and 3NT since those may be doubled or down extra tricks.)

Can anyone think of a plausible way to get to 4H? But of course opener had a max in this case, and with most weaker hands all contracts other than 3D would have little play. I can't recall the last time I got to a slam after someone overcalled 1NT, so I may give my proposed method a try -- if nothing else, it's apt to be easier on partner's nerves.

I'm thinking of calling the method "Parasol", something of a cross between lebensohl and a parachute (safe landing.)

[TWO4BRIDGE]

If you play a modified form of Rubensohl and GIVE UP the DBL as penalty ( not many will want to do this ) , then you can stop in 3D on this deal:

♠Qx......xx
♥AKxx....Jxx
♦xxx.....AKQxx
♣AKxx....Jxx

1NT - ( 2S ) - DBL[ forces 2NT!] - ( p )
2NT! - ( p ) - 3D! = 5+cd suit, invite, no Sp-stop
pass

Note: I relegated Responder's hand to "invitational"
because w/o a Sp-stop his A K Q +J + J = 11 aren't
enough for 11 tricks if Opener ( 14-16 ) doesn't have
a Sp-stop either .

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
If you really had GF values w/Diam:
1NT - ( 2S ) - 3C! = transfer to Diam - ( p )
3D! - ( p ) - ??
.................3H! ( 3oM = GF, Diam, no Sp-stop )
.................3S! ( cuebid = GF, Stayman, Diams, at least half-Sp stop)
.................3NT ( GF+ in Diam, but have full Sp-stop )