[Free]

the hog, on 2013-July-20, 03:12, said:

Numeric one, your posts are replete with logical errors. Playing 2NT as Majors is very foolish. Majors outbid minors, don' you know? Hence you ar forcing your partnership to the 3 level on a hand where you can outbid the opponents. Best is actually to open 2H with Majors.
Secondly 2NT with the minors is also not a good idea as you allow the opps 3C/3D to show various hand types. Again, best is to open 3C with minors and reserve 2NT for something else. (C pre emt only gives the opps 1 option_

Agree with most of this post. The only thing I'm not so sure about is which of the 2NT vs 3♣ combinations is best. I've played both, and there isn't much difference overall in my experience.
- The transfer preempt has a lot of issues (wrongsiding NT contracts, loss of tempo, extra step for opps, opps can easily penalize,...) while 3♣ as both minors is definitely better (NF preempt, only 1 cuebid available).
- The natural 3♣ preempt puts pressure and allows more flexibility, but the 2NT opening as both minors is as good as forcing, gives opps extra space and penalty opportunities,...

Basically you should have two 3♣ openings and no 2NT opening for optimal result.

A better alternative imo is to play 2NT as ♥+m: only 1 suit is known, the only cuebid available is higher, with this hand you can't outbid opps' ♠ suit,...

[gwnn]

32159, don't listen to awm (or Free, or the hog, or Zelandakh, or helene_t, or...)! He's also a part of the conspiracy!

[manudude03]

You keep mentioning these hands that come from BBO or from the clubs whose standards are generally mediocre at best. If you really want to prove the usefulness of your treatments, you need to take them to a national or international scale (and by international, I mean actually representing the country, not on BBO).

[the hog]

manudude03, on 2013-July-20, 14:11, said:

You keep mentioning these hands that come from BBO or from the clubs whose standards are generally mediocre at best. If you really want to prove the usefulness of your treatments, you need to take them to a national or international scale (and by international, I mean actually representing the country, not on BBO).

What about suggesting them for the secret Bridge Olympics?

[32519]

the hog, on 2013-July-20, 18:33, said:

What about suggesting them for the secret Bridge Olympics?

The idea is not new. It was part of the Blue Team Club system (see OP). S'far as I can remember the BTC was pretty decent. They disbanded when? In the seventies? And then the geniuses threw away this bid in preference for 5/5 in the minors.

[gwnn]

32519, prove that the system was used by the blue team or shut up. The link is just a writeup from 1999 of a modified version. If you can't prove it, shut up.

[the hog]

Gwnn, I believe this was part of some of Squaddra Azzura's systems. This proves nothing, of course as bidding has changed drastically. It is a sub optimal use of 2NT

[32519]

gwnn, on 2013-July-21, 00:28, said:

32519, prove that the system was used by the blue team or shut up. The link is just a writeup from 1999 of a modified version. If you can't prove it, shut up.

Nice try. But if you really want to silence this bid, contact Dan to take it off his website. But before he does remove it, first make yourself a hardcopy printout of the BTC continuation bidding structure. Now set up a teaching table for yourself on BBO and do the following -
1. Click on "Deal Source"
2. Choose any seat as the dealer
3. Now set up the restrictions for the seat chosen as follows -
...Number of ♠ = 5
...Number of ♥ = 5
...Number of HCP = 8-12
...(The odds of being dealt the hand pattern are low at 0.43%
4. Click on close
5. Don't set any restrictions on the other three seats
6. Now start redealing as many hands as you want to and bid them using BTCs continuation structure

For sure you get some horrific misfits or hands which belong to the opponents. But they aren't that many. This opening bid comes out tops more often than not. Partner and I have made some alterations/additions to the BTC structure which suits our style. You can do the same.

[PhilKing]

32519, on 2013-July-21, 06:49, said:

Partner and I have made some alterations/additions to the BTC structure which suits our style. You can do the same.

Did the modifications include the brilliant decision to play take-out doubles when they overcall?

[gwnn]

The link is a writeup of a modified version of Blue Team Club. It was written in 1999 and then modified again in 2000 and 2001. The link is a writeup of a modified version of Blue Team Club. It is not the original version. It is a modified version. The modified version is not the original version. The original version is also not the modified version. The 2NT opening from the 1999 version may or may not be the same as used by the Blue Team. Perhaps it is. Perhaps it is not. Do you see where I am getting at?

the hog seems to remember it was a part of some versions of the BTC in the 60-70's. It would surprise me but as he points out, going back to bidding treatments from 1960 would not be progress. Maybe it would be progress if you compare them to the ones widespread in your RSA clubs but that does not really mean much. There may be some great ideas used in the 60's that have been forgotten or unfairly dismissed. Nevertheless they are definitely exceptions to the rule and if someone says that your convention is not good (and gives reasons why), simply observing that it has possibly been used back in the 60's is not a real counter-argument.

Just in case you missed my point from the first paragraph, let me briefly summarise it here. The Blue Team played a system. Then adherents of this system changed it here and there (for 30 years) and then published it in 1999-2001, making it clear that it is a modified version (ie, not the original version). So we are talking about two different systems. My point is not that this 2NT is not a terrible preempt. I will not repeat it here, if you still don't get it, repeating it here will do little good.

[32519]

PhilKing, on 2013-July-21, 08:22, said:

Did the modifications include the brilliant decision to play take-out doubles when they overcall?

Yes. We have had opponents stop in a minor suit partial when they were cold for 5m or 5NT. So an overcall, when we judge the hand belongs to them, will simply get passed and we hope they stop short of game. Never lose sight of the fact that they need to go up another two levels for 5m after the overcall.

[32519]

Who introduced, and why was the 5/5 minor suit bid introduced, 5-10 HCP?

[mfa1010]

I have had good results with 2N both minors, weak. Mostly when partner can bid 5m or when they misjudge to enter a misfit deal. Two weaks ago I had KQJxx, AKJxx, x, Kx and an opponent made a crazy balancing double against 3♣ vul vs not, going for -1400 in 3♥X against a touch and go 3♣ (defeated on a trump lead). I don't expect such a result against world class opponents, but noone plays against world class opponents all the time.

3♣ both minors is fine in theory, but alas 3♣ is already occupied as a club preempt.

Preempting in both minors is more annoying to the opponents than preempting with 5-5 majors, since both major suits are still in play for them, and they will have more to sort out. Opening with the boss suits will buy the contract often right there, so we better be right.

[the hog]

Give up Michael and Gwnn. It is clear that the numeric one has as much nous about bidding theory as my dog. I note with interest that he has not commented on any of the disadvantages of using this bid that people pointed out to him. You now the old saying - "Don't wrestle with a pig. The pig will enjoy it and you just get dirty."

[mfa1010]

the hog, on 2013-July-21, 18:48, said:

Give up Michael and Gwnn. It is clear that the numeric one has as much nous about bidding theory as my dog. I note with interest that he has not commented on any of the disadvantages of using this bid that people pointed out to him. You now the old saying - "Don't wrestle with a pig. The pig will enjoy it and you just get dirty."

I'm not discussing with someone in particular. I'm posting in a thread with an interesting topic.

[Zelandakh]

the hog, on 2013-July-20, 18:33, said:

What about suggesting them for the secret Bridge Olympics?

Or playing them in a jec match.

[gwnn]

the hog, on 2013-July-21, 18:48, said:

Give up Michael and Gwnn. It is clear that the numeric one has as much nous about bidding theory as my dog. I note with interest that he has not commented on any of the disadvantages of using this bid that people pointed out to him. You now the old saying - "Don't wrestle with a pig. The pig will enjoy it and you just get dirty."

To some people, wrestling with pigs is fun. It is shark wrestling with all the excitement but much less danger.

[32519]

the hog, on 2013-July-21, 18:48, said:

You now the old saying - "Don't wrestle with a pig. The pig will enjoy it and you just get dirty."

This is priceless! Consider your own login name before posting stuff like this. Sheesh!

[the hog]

32519, on 2013-July-25, 06:08, said:

This is priceless! Consider your own login name before posting stuff like this. Sheesh!

Apparently irony, just like basic bridge theory, is lost on you.

[FM75]

Or you can use 2NT as 3 possible hand types (but not in regular ACBL events)

http://pigpen.org.uk/BBO/2n.php

It does not come up often. But we ended up in 3M= for a plus tonight.