Help
This topic is locked
It's difficult to criticize, since the book clearly states the target audience is those people who say "let's play <convention>" without discussing any followups, and for those people, the riveting half-page section titled "Texas in competition" gives no less than three examples where it applies.
The book is arranged by four sections, from "basic conventions" through "bread and butter conventions" to "fine arts conventions". It's unclear what separates a basic convention from a bread-and-butter one, but jumping to the last section suggests "fine arts conventions" are those conventions (like XYZ or exclusion keycard) for which the amount of space (six pages and three pages, respectively) is outright insufficient, so presumably the complexity of the convention is the criterion.
My other gripe, beyond the misleading book title (I think "conventions at a glance" would've been more fitting), is that even at my B/I level of expertise, some of the advice in the book seems wrong. For example, in the first chapter, about Stayman (the most detailed one in the book, surprisingly), the authors advocate against "garbage Stayman", and as a corollary, suggest opener with a five-card major reply to 2♣ with his major at the three-level (also, never open 1NT if your majors are 5-2). That is the last sentence of the chapter, without further suggestion on how responder can proceed if his hand is of invitational strength - presumably the five-card major is worth forcing to game at all strengths, regardless of responder's holding.
Another example: the 11th convention is "three card support vs. support double in competition". The section shows how using the support double loses in cases opener wants to penalize the overcalled suit, and giving the opponents more room to describe their hand. A third example is provided, where opener uses a support double instead of bidding his second suit (since support double is mandatory), and a good game is missed (due to the opponents not raising their 10-card fit to the 4-level immediately). Then the chapter ends, presumably advocating always raising with three cards in competition, and suggesting no way to tell responder when he should compete further with extra length.
By that point I had my doubts about the benefit from this book, so I started leafing through it, when "The best defense to multi" caught my eye. This defense, one page long, has the philosophy that "because the convention is going to hurt you on some hands, you must hurt them back". With this principle in mind:
X shows a good hand with one of the majors. If it's the multi opener's major, you're in luck because you didn't overcall with yours. If it's not, "you or your partner may have a chance later to double responsively, showing the other major".
But wait, since X shows a good hand with a major, that leaves 2♥/♠ for showing clubs/diamonds, instead of overcalling them naturally on the three-level which is clumsy. And THIS allows your 3♣/♦ to be weak, "another counter-attacking tool against the multi".
The page-and-a-half concludes with the following example:
And N/S are robbed blind of their 4♠ by the Best Defense to Multi. Hurray!
Don't read this book.
