In his soon to be released book, Lone Wolfe (2008), 4 time World Bridge Champion Bobby Wolfe talks about opponents whose tactics are devised in the Poison Gas Factory. By that he means opponents who get in your face with seemingly no other reason than they want to be in your face. Among the suspects are rude and intrusive overcalls after partner opens 1NT. We have demonstrated in earlier posts how hard it is sometimes for responder to get deals back on track once the overcall is made. There are two types of “fixes” for these poison gas guys (i) a convention called lebensohl and (ii) everything else. As Larry Cohen said, the small “l” is right, don’t ask!
Lebensohl is the best, so why not just skip “everything else.” As one expert recently said “lebensohl [is superior] but it’s a complex convention (entire books have been written about it) and the average club player is unlikely to want to invest the time to learn it fully.” I couldn’t agree more, and I might add even if you learn it, try to get a partner to do so. While I am going to discuss lebensohl in a later post, I am going to give you some more “doable” alternatives first.
If opponents double 1NT:
For sake of simplicity, most simple solutions suggest that you ignore the double and play all systems on (front of the card). Redouble is an unused option, so you and partner can decide what that means. I like redouble as a relay to partner who bids 2 clubs. Now with xx, xxx, KT9xxx, xx, I can bid 2 diamonds to play. Redouble could alternatively mean “cards.” A third alternative is to use redouble as a “run out” saying partner I have very little, but we would be better off almost any place else. Opener should bid 4 card suits up the line.
If opponents overcall 1NT: (Several options).
(a) Systems Always On/Stolen Bid: This is what we most commonly see and is probably the worst choice. All bids retain their system meaning and double is “stolen bid.” So the sequence 1NT/2c/x is stolen bid for Stayman. 1NT/2d/3c is also Stayman since the opportunity to bid Stayman at the 2 level was lost. The same rules hold for transfers.
(b) Limited Systems On/Stolen Bid: In this modification, when opponents overcall 2 clubs or 2 diamonds, double is stolen bid. Any higher 2 level double is for penalty, including a double of 2NT overcall (usually minors).
(c) Red, Black and Blue: Double of the black suits is for penalty and double of the red suits is stolen bid (transfer). In this system 3 clubs would be Stayman.
(d) Systems Off: In the event of any overcall, all systems are off, doubles are penalty and all bids are natural showing 5+ card suits. Suit yourself, but I think all non- jump bids should be to play. This is the way they did it for years under the Goren System. With a good 7-8 points, they would simply “whack” the overcall, but remember the 1NT openers in those days were 16-18 hcps. Yes, you get the hand wrong sided, but one bridge authority claims that having the strong hand as declarer is only a 55-65% advantage. When we get to lebensohl, we will see the same problem.
(e) Jerry Helms: Systems on with stolen bid after 2 clubs overcalls only. Jerry sez: “Beyond this point, well…. I cease to understand any merit to stolen bid.” If the overcall is beyond 2 clubs, all responses are natural. He goes on to say that if the overcall is 2 diamonds or higher, he prefers “some form of lebensohl” but he doesn’t give any details as he knows it is a “bed of snakes” for his readers.
(f) Larry Cohen: Here is a guy that has his feet firmly planted and is not going to be trapped. He says that to deal with interference we need to do a “little studying and memorizing.” He goes on to say that: “It is impractical (unless you are a world class bridge pro) to try to memorize different schemes versus different methods [of interference] …. it would be too much memory drain.” He finesses his way around this by first offering what he calls a medium complicated scheme of Transfer Lebensohl which is, as you may have guessed, actually is extremely complicated and requires way too much memory drain for “us folks.” Realizing the impracticality of that, he offers a simple “for dummies” scheme that most of us would find useful.
(i) If opponents make a “conventional” double, just ignore it. Systems on.
(ii) If they make a penalty double (equal value bid), then play everything natural, no systems.
(iii) If the overcall is 2 clubs, systems on, double is Stayman.
(iv) If they bid 2 diamonds or higher, abandon transfers and bid naturally. In this auction if you double the overcall, the double is “negative!” Larry says “it would take too long to explain exactly what qualifies as negative. But here is a simple explanation. It is not penalty. It is not purely showing the other major(s). It just means partner I have values to bid, but no bid I can conveniently make.”
If you go to his website http://www.larryco.com/ and look at his 2 articles on interference over 1NT, you will find some examples of hands that he would make a negative double on. They clearly show no more than 2 cards in the bid suit, and strongly imply a major. If the bidding goes 1NT/2d/p/p/x, the double by opener is also negative. The example hands range from 6-8 hcps. This negative double stuff is hot and cutting edge, so give it some thought.
In is own evaluation, he says “this [less complicated] scheme [for dealing with interference] is not 100% complete but will help you cope with most situations with a minimal amount of memory drain."
OK, you have my ala carte offering of how to deal with interference. Actually you can mix and match these if you want. Next time we will deal with lebensohl. I will try to make my version slightly less complicated than Larry’s, but I will not have a perfect bid for each scenario. In the meantime, visit Larry’s website for so me good reading. It is in my favorites and I go there often.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Monday, February 18, 2008
"Combined Bergen Raises" - Nirvana at Last!
As back ground, when partner opens the bidding 1 of a major, Bergen Raises are used to show card 4 card support and 7-12 high card points. Marty Bergen in originally explaining the system stated that the jump raise to 3 diamonds showed 10-12 hcps and the jump raise to 3 clubs showed 7-9 hcps. This is called the Bergen Raise and always shows 4 card support at either level. Just when Bergen Raises gained popularity, Marty changed his mind and said that 3 clubs should show 10-12 hcps and 3 diamonds 7-9 hcps. Naturally this became the Reverse Bergen Raise. The Reverse Bergen Raise is almost universally used today. There are other Bergen modifications, including Bergen Splinter’s, but they never gained significant popularity.
Just when you thought you finally could remember the difference between Bergen Raises and Reverse Bergen Raises, Combined Bergen Raises made an entrance. Although the origins of Combined Bergen Raises are not clear, the late Max Hardy sounded the first alarm 10 years ago when he wrote a book entitled Major Suit Raises – What’s Wrong with Them and How to Fix Them. He brutally attacked a cornerstone of bridge, Constructive Raises, and pointedly said they should be “thrown in the garbage.” He got the critique right, but may have missed the fix, Combined Bergen Raises. We don’t really know who was there when the light went on, but I credit Pat Peterson for popularizing the treatment in Central New York and for polishing the structure of the system.
Using combined Bergen Raises the sequence 1major/3clubs combines the Bergen bids of 3 clubs and 3 diamonds and shows 7-12 hcps and 4 card support for the major. Opener now bids three diamonds asking responder whether he has 7-9 or 10-12 hcps. If responder has the 7-9 raise, he bids 3 hearts and if he has the 10-12 raise he bids 3 spades.
If responder shows the 7-9 point raise, opener passes or corrects at the 3 level if he has no interest in game. If he wishes to play at game, he bids 4 hearts or 4 spades as the case may be. In this case, opener is the captain of the ship. If responder shows a 10-12 limit raise, opener bids game, or if slam is a prospect, can cue bid or ask for responder’s controls via 4NT. Once responder describes his hand, he simply takes his cue from opener, who is the only one who can put the two hands together.
The current accepted manner of showing 10-12 hcps and 3 card support (a 3 card limit raise) is to bid 1NT forcing and then jump in partner’s bid major. Under certain bidding sequences this sequence can be equivocal and has little preemptive value as opponents have no trouble coming into the bidding or raising the bidding over 1 NT responses. Forget they may not have anything; they still get in your hair, what else is new? Once they get a bid and then find a fit, it’s a struggle to bring any reason to the auction. Since using Combined Bergen we no longer use 1 major/3 diamonds to show the 7-9 hcp raise, we have the 3 diamond response that is not in use. We put it back to work as showing a 3 card limit raise. So 1spade/3 diamonds shows 3 card spade support and 10-12 hcps.
So, what do we have left? (i) The sequence 1major/2 major shows 3 card support and a good 5 to 9 hcps. No more using 1NT forcing if you have 3 trump and 5-6 hcps. Again we enjoy the advantage of hoisting the bidding making it difficult for opponents to come in even if they do have some decent cards. (ii) 1 major/3 major is a weak preemptive raise (iii) 1 major/4 major shows 5+ card support and very little in outside values or defense. (iv) 1 major/1NT forcing can be used with 5-11 and shows exactly 2 card support for the bid major.
There are players (not your blogger) who resist 1NT forcing over major suit openers and prefer a semi-forcing treatment. They complain about never getting the chance to play 1NT when opener has a balanced minimum hand. Here is an optional treatment if your partner is of that mind. If opener has a balanced hand and less than 14 hcps, he may choose to pass 1 NT and let responder play it. This must be a partnership understanding, must be announced as semi-forcing and must be fully explained if asked. Also, responder must be very careful not to bid 1NT forcing with more than 11 hcps. Personally, I think it is retro, but if it makes you happy, just get partner on the same track and go for it.
My thanks to Pat Peterson for describing this treatment for me. Pat’s 2 page summary has several examples. If you want a copy of her original memo, please contact me, not Pat.
Just when you thought you finally could remember the difference between Bergen Raises and Reverse Bergen Raises, Combined Bergen Raises made an entrance. Although the origins of Combined Bergen Raises are not clear, the late Max Hardy sounded the first alarm 10 years ago when he wrote a book entitled Major Suit Raises – What’s Wrong with Them and How to Fix Them. He brutally attacked a cornerstone of bridge, Constructive Raises, and pointedly said they should be “thrown in the garbage.” He got the critique right, but may have missed the fix, Combined Bergen Raises. We don’t really know who was there when the light went on, but I credit Pat Peterson for popularizing the treatment in Central New York and for polishing the structure of the system.
Using combined Bergen Raises the sequence 1major/3clubs combines the Bergen bids of 3 clubs and 3 diamonds and shows 7-12 hcps and 4 card support for the major. Opener now bids three diamonds asking responder whether he has 7-9 or 10-12 hcps. If responder has the 7-9 raise, he bids 3 hearts and if he has the 10-12 raise he bids 3 spades.
If responder shows the 7-9 point raise, opener passes or corrects at the 3 level if he has no interest in game. If he wishes to play at game, he bids 4 hearts or 4 spades as the case may be. In this case, opener is the captain of the ship. If responder shows a 10-12 limit raise, opener bids game, or if slam is a prospect, can cue bid or ask for responder’s controls via 4NT. Once responder describes his hand, he simply takes his cue from opener, who is the only one who can put the two hands together.
The current accepted manner of showing 10-12 hcps and 3 card support (a 3 card limit raise) is to bid 1NT forcing and then jump in partner’s bid major. Under certain bidding sequences this sequence can be equivocal and has little preemptive value as opponents have no trouble coming into the bidding or raising the bidding over 1 NT responses. Forget they may not have anything; they still get in your hair, what else is new? Once they get a bid and then find a fit, it’s a struggle to bring any reason to the auction. Since using Combined Bergen we no longer use 1 major/3 diamonds to show the 7-9 hcp raise, we have the 3 diamond response that is not in use. We put it back to work as showing a 3 card limit raise. So 1spade/3 diamonds shows 3 card spade support and 10-12 hcps.
So, what do we have left? (i) The sequence 1major/2 major shows 3 card support and a good 5 to 9 hcps. No more using 1NT forcing if you have 3 trump and 5-6 hcps. Again we enjoy the advantage of hoisting the bidding making it difficult for opponents to come in even if they do have some decent cards. (ii) 1 major/3 major is a weak preemptive raise (iii) 1 major/4 major shows 5+ card support and very little in outside values or defense. (iv) 1 major/1NT forcing can be used with 5-11 and shows exactly 2 card support for the bid major.
There are players (not your blogger) who resist 1NT forcing over major suit openers and prefer a semi-forcing treatment. They complain about never getting the chance to play 1NT when opener has a balanced minimum hand. Here is an optional treatment if your partner is of that mind. If opener has a balanced hand and less than 14 hcps, he may choose to pass 1 NT and let responder play it. This must be a partnership understanding, must be announced as semi-forcing and must be fully explained if asked. Also, responder must be very careful not to bid 1NT forcing with more than 11 hcps. Personally, I think it is retro, but if it makes you happy, just get partner on the same track and go for it.
My thanks to Pat Peterson for describing this treatment for me. Pat’s 2 page summary has several examples. If you want a copy of her original memo, please contact me, not Pat.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Frank Stewart-- Do you Sometimes Wonder?
Within the last week I have been scratching my head as I ponder Frank Stewart’s bridge columns. I respect his playing record, but I find that his columns often seem like he assigned them to an assistant.
One of his favorite subjects is iron clad overcalls and the perils of new bridge, where at the one level, very little will often suffice for the risk takers in today’s game. To put a point on a recent column, he had West overcall a minor suit opening with a heart holding that most player’s would overcall on today. He then put all the cards in the wrong place to create a dangerous work place for West. I can accept that, writer’s privilege, but I thought he went a little far when he had north, holding 4 spades and 4 hearts, double the heart overcall and then had South convert the double for penalties holding a single heart and 4 spades. It would seem clearly that North’s double should have been understood to be negative and show 4 spades, and not a desire to defend.
Would any sane South leave the double in with a single heart and an 8 card spade fit? Did Frank even discuss north’s double or South’s pass of that double? Did he ever mention that North-South had a cold spade game? No, no and no!! It would seem if he wanted to teach a “I told you so” lesson about overcalls, he could have constructed a more appropriate hand and bidding sequence. There were probably a lot of novices and intermediates out there wondering “What the hell is going on?” and thinking perhaps they fell asleep during the lesson on negative doubles. That kind of mischief doesn’t help anybody.
In today’s column South starts off with a normal 1NT opener, a pass, a 2 heart transfer to spades, but instead of bidding 3 spades to “super-accept,” South bids three diamonds showing a super accept with diamond strength. North transferred again by bidding with 3 hearts, South now bid 3 spades accepting the transfer and North bids 4 spades. South held AKxx, A65,AQ9,876. North held Q98xxx,Qxxx,1052,void. It went down, but Frank shows how it could make on a difficult end play in the diamond suit and lauds the sophisticated bidding that encouraged North to bid 4 spades. Do you like this bidding sequence? Not me. It fails to pass one of my prime tests: it gives more critical information to the opponents than to partner.
Granted, the hand might have been passed out in 3 hearts with a normal super acceptance, but that probably would have been an average plus board since most of the “folks” are not up to intricate end plays and would likely be down 1 in 4 spades. The part that I really don’t like is that opener has now advertised his strength in diamonds, virtually assuring that opponents will not oblige him with a lead up to his AQx in diamonds. With a diamond lead, even I could make the hand. I hope his readers didn’t take too much from this column. It would have been a good time to have spilled the coffee.
Even worse, he didn’t even discuss West’s silence after the 1NT bid. West held JT, T8, KJ76, AJTxx. Nine minor suit cards and only four major suit cards. Does it take a bridge savant to see where this hand is headed. If West were my partner and passed this hand, I would go to the partnership desk. How about a little DONT bid of 2 clubs showing clubs and one higher suit (in this case diamonds). As it turns out, East has a big club fit with West, plus values in hearts and would raise to at least 4 clubs after North's 2 heart transfer bid. Now let’s see them get to game? Four spades is only a guess. You have both West and East bidding and opener doesn’t know if North really had values or if he was intending to transfer and pass. What would you do on this bidding? There is a good play for 4 clubs as the cards sit. Again, I say, interfere over opening 1 NT bids! Occupy some bidding space – it belongs to everybody at the table.
If there is any real value to Frank’s column and the hands he showed, it is the two lessons I mentioned, and not how to make swishy end plays that become necessary only when you over inform the opponents about your hand. My suggestion is to take what you can from the hands and not listen too closely to the columnist. The reason I do not write a column is that I can’t stand bloggers getting on my butt all the time. Oh, also, I am not an expert, so consider that.
One of his favorite subjects is iron clad overcalls and the perils of new bridge, where at the one level, very little will often suffice for the risk takers in today’s game. To put a point on a recent column, he had West overcall a minor suit opening with a heart holding that most player’s would overcall on today. He then put all the cards in the wrong place to create a dangerous work place for West. I can accept that, writer’s privilege, but I thought he went a little far when he had north, holding 4 spades and 4 hearts, double the heart overcall and then had South convert the double for penalties holding a single heart and 4 spades. It would seem clearly that North’s double should have been understood to be negative and show 4 spades, and not a desire to defend.
Would any sane South leave the double in with a single heart and an 8 card spade fit? Did Frank even discuss north’s double or South’s pass of that double? Did he ever mention that North-South had a cold spade game? No, no and no!! It would seem if he wanted to teach a “I told you so” lesson about overcalls, he could have constructed a more appropriate hand and bidding sequence. There were probably a lot of novices and intermediates out there wondering “What the hell is going on?” and thinking perhaps they fell asleep during the lesson on negative doubles. That kind of mischief doesn’t help anybody.
In today’s column South starts off with a normal 1NT opener, a pass, a 2 heart transfer to spades, but instead of bidding 3 spades to “super-accept,” South bids three diamonds showing a super accept with diamond strength. North transferred again by bidding with 3 hearts, South now bid 3 spades accepting the transfer and North bids 4 spades. South held AKxx, A65,AQ9,876. North held Q98xxx,Qxxx,1052,void. It went down, but Frank shows how it could make on a difficult end play in the diamond suit and lauds the sophisticated bidding that encouraged North to bid 4 spades. Do you like this bidding sequence? Not me. It fails to pass one of my prime tests: it gives more critical information to the opponents than to partner.
Granted, the hand might have been passed out in 3 hearts with a normal super acceptance, but that probably would have been an average plus board since most of the “folks” are not up to intricate end plays and would likely be down 1 in 4 spades. The part that I really don’t like is that opener has now advertised his strength in diamonds, virtually assuring that opponents will not oblige him with a lead up to his AQx in diamonds. With a diamond lead, even I could make the hand. I hope his readers didn’t take too much from this column. It would have been a good time to have spilled the coffee.
Even worse, he didn’t even discuss West’s silence after the 1NT bid. West held JT, T8, KJ76, AJTxx. Nine minor suit cards and only four major suit cards. Does it take a bridge savant to see where this hand is headed. If West were my partner and passed this hand, I would go to the partnership desk. How about a little DONT bid of 2 clubs showing clubs and one higher suit (in this case diamonds). As it turns out, East has a big club fit with West, plus values in hearts and would raise to at least 4 clubs after North's 2 heart transfer bid. Now let’s see them get to game? Four spades is only a guess. You have both West and East bidding and opener doesn’t know if North really had values or if he was intending to transfer and pass. What would you do on this bidding? There is a good play for 4 clubs as the cards sit. Again, I say, interfere over opening 1 NT bids! Occupy some bidding space – it belongs to everybody at the table.
If there is any real value to Frank’s column and the hands he showed, it is the two lessons I mentioned, and not how to make swishy end plays that become necessary only when you over inform the opponents about your hand. My suggestion is to take what you can from the hands and not listen too closely to the columnist. The reason I do not write a column is that I can’t stand bloggers getting on my butt all the time. Oh, also, I am not an expert, so consider that.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Interfering Over 1 NT Opening Bids
In my last blog I demonstrated the important role of interfering after opponents open 1 NT. You pay a price if you permit opponents to systematically pitty-pat their way to their best game. I promised you I would demonstrate how to become a “pain in the ass.” I suggest that on any level that is something that I am well qualified to do.
If your current practice when opponents open 1 NT is to use Cappelletti, Hamilton, Brozel or similar systems, you need to rethink your options. If your current practice is to bid only when you have a 6 card suit or are two suited with 5-5, you probably noticed you are just not much of a factor at all. Those hands at all hcp ranges occur about 20% of the time, but if you only open them when you have 15+ hcps (equal value), you reduce your frequency of occurrence to about 2%. Everybody can ignore the “2 percenters.”
You need to get into the game. Did you hear Marty Bergen’s call when he said it is a bidder’s game? He said it so long ago you may have forgotten. It is fine to bid when you have the cards, but it is critical to do so when you do not have the cards – that’s what “getting into the bidder’s game” is all about.
You need a system that in the direct seat permits you and partner to find all your possible fits at the two level. Often you will find an 8 card fit with partner, but having 8 cards in any suit suit do not support a three level contract. This is just the law of total tricks, something else that is not new. None of the systems mentioned permit you to find all of your potential fits at the 2 level. The one system that meets that requirement is also a Marty Bergen creation, DONT (Disturb Opponents No Trump). It is a system that is based solely on interference, not constructive bidding or even competitive bidding. What you are doing its getting in the face of your opponents.
The system is simple. You double to show a single suited hand, the relay is 2 clubs. Suit overcalls in clubs, diamonds or hearts show the bid suit and one undisclosed higher suit. The relay to get the second suit is bidding the next higher ranking suit. A spade overcall actually shows spades (can you believe that!). You will note that there are two ways to show a spade suit double and bid spades on the relay or simply overcall 2 spades. You can assign any distinguishing features you want to the spade hands. Since I like to overcall 2 spades anytime I have 5 spades to maximize the interference problem, I likely will have 6 spades if I double and bid spades. That may not be for you. Keep some “Pepto-Bismol” on hand and take liberal doses!
You do not have a penalty double! That is a blessing in disguise. Larry Cohen says the only thing worse than having to play 1NT doubledis to have to defend 1NT doubled. In those cases, usually the hcps are about equally divided and declarer has all the advantages of control, timing, seeing 26 cards and being able to develop his line of play. In addition, the lead is coming up to the strength of the one no trump hand and is coming right through your partner. When you lead 4th best, you very likely kill an honor in your partner’s hand. You may want to play a system that preserves the double against weak no trump openers, but I don’t think that is necessary either. Weak no trumpers are never going to sit for 1NT doubled, they always bail out and seemingly run to a safe 2 level contract. House of pain!
When playing DONT, how many points do you need to bid? That’s another wrong headed idea. What you do not need is points, they can become a liability when you are interfering since if we have too many, opponents may only have a part score or may get set. What you do need is some distribution, and the more the better.
What I can say with certainty is that you should always pass with 4333. Beyond that, use your imagination and watch the vulnerability carefully. If you are non-vulnerable and have some distribution, it is almost impossible to make a mistake by overcalling. If you hold 5-4, it is a “no brainer” -- just make a 2 suited overcall in your lowest ranking suit. If I am 5-5, even without a point, it is hard for me to stay in tempo. That card just rips out of the bidding box.
While I am not necessarily suggesting that you do so, when non-vulnerable, I often overcall when I am two suited 4-4, and recently did so with 2 jacks. The opponents reached their small slam anyway, but went down when they finessed me for the missing honor. House of Pain.
How about the risk of being doubled? Well, since 90% of the club pairs play stolen bid (a terrible choice), they do not have any way to double me other than to pass and hope that partner will double. Will partner actually double back in if you pass? How does he know that you don’t have a blow out. Defenses to overcalls will be the subject of the next post, but let me leave you with the thought that I seldom have been doubled, and I have made some egregious overcalls. Larry Cohen, arguably the best matchpoint player in bridge, recently said “Even experts with well oiled mechanisms (lebensohl, negative doubles) have a difficult time coping with interference.”
You must be sure that partner is in on this charade. He will not know whether you have a good hand or a bad hand, but hopefully he will have enough sense to look for a fit and not look for game. I like to keep this a secret from my partners, but if you must look for game, bid 2NT, it is the only forcing response. My advice is DONT!
Finding your best fit is the quest. If partner bids 2 clubs and you have 3 cards in the club suit, pass. You are not likely to improve on that and further bids may put you in a 6 card fit. Remember the suits in which you have length are most likely to be partner’s shortness. If you have a tolerable fit stay there, and don’t go jumping from the frying pan into the fire. Effective scrambling is what this is all about and our job is to play a suit at the 2 level, undoubled if we can. If responder bids, a double by partner is asking for the second suit. Note that we off the hook and it may be time for us to duck. If responder doubles, a redouble asks for the second suit. Pass shows a 3 card fit, redouble shows trouble. You cant win them all, but disasters are simply one board in matchpoints.
How about bidding when the auction goes 1NT/p/p/? Well, if your partner won’t bid, almost anything is justified. It is hard for me to think of a hand that I wouldn’t take some action in the 3rd seat unless I am 4333. Mel Colchamiro in his recent book says that in the pass out seat you make a DONT bid if you have two shortness points, even with no high card points. The point is do not pass out 1NT. We probably have half the points and they are favorites to make 7, and very likely 8 tricks. If they do, its limbo time, “how low can you go?”
Is this point of view aggressive? Yes. Is it foolish or radical? Not if you are to believe the best bridge players in the world. For authoritative reading on this subject, see Larry Cohen’s Following the Law (1994) at page 197 and Appendix C. It was the bridge book of the year so there should be some available. Also visit Larry’s web site www.larryco.com .
OK, they read the blog and they overcalled. Time to D.S.I.P. Stay tuned.
If your current practice when opponents open 1 NT is to use Cappelletti, Hamilton, Brozel or similar systems, you need to rethink your options. If your current practice is to bid only when you have a 6 card suit or are two suited with 5-5, you probably noticed you are just not much of a factor at all. Those hands at all hcp ranges occur about 20% of the time, but if you only open them when you have 15+ hcps (equal value), you reduce your frequency of occurrence to about 2%. Everybody can ignore the “2 percenters.”
You need to get into the game. Did you hear Marty Bergen’s call when he said it is a bidder’s game? He said it so long ago you may have forgotten. It is fine to bid when you have the cards, but it is critical to do so when you do not have the cards – that’s what “getting into the bidder’s game” is all about.
You need a system that in the direct seat permits you and partner to find all your possible fits at the two level. Often you will find an 8 card fit with partner, but having 8 cards in any suit suit do not support a three level contract. This is just the law of total tricks, something else that is not new. None of the systems mentioned permit you to find all of your potential fits at the 2 level. The one system that meets that requirement is also a Marty Bergen creation, DONT (Disturb Opponents No Trump). It is a system that is based solely on interference, not constructive bidding or even competitive bidding. What you are doing its getting in the face of your opponents.
The system is simple. You double to show a single suited hand, the relay is 2 clubs. Suit overcalls in clubs, diamonds or hearts show the bid suit and one undisclosed higher suit. The relay to get the second suit is bidding the next higher ranking suit. A spade overcall actually shows spades (can you believe that!). You will note that there are two ways to show a spade suit double and bid spades on the relay or simply overcall 2 spades. You can assign any distinguishing features you want to the spade hands. Since I like to overcall 2 spades anytime I have 5 spades to maximize the interference problem, I likely will have 6 spades if I double and bid spades. That may not be for you. Keep some “Pepto-Bismol” on hand and take liberal doses!
You do not have a penalty double! That is a blessing in disguise. Larry Cohen says the only thing worse than having to play 1NT doubledis to have to defend 1NT doubled. In those cases, usually the hcps are about equally divided and declarer has all the advantages of control, timing, seeing 26 cards and being able to develop his line of play. In addition, the lead is coming up to the strength of the one no trump hand and is coming right through your partner. When you lead 4th best, you very likely kill an honor in your partner’s hand. You may want to play a system that preserves the double against weak no trump openers, but I don’t think that is necessary either. Weak no trumpers are never going to sit for 1NT doubled, they always bail out and seemingly run to a safe 2 level contract. House of pain!
When playing DONT, how many points do you need to bid? That’s another wrong headed idea. What you do not need is points, they can become a liability when you are interfering since if we have too many, opponents may only have a part score or may get set. What you do need is some distribution, and the more the better.
What I can say with certainty is that you should always pass with 4333. Beyond that, use your imagination and watch the vulnerability carefully. If you are non-vulnerable and have some distribution, it is almost impossible to make a mistake by overcalling. If you hold 5-4, it is a “no brainer” -- just make a 2 suited overcall in your lowest ranking suit. If I am 5-5, even without a point, it is hard for me to stay in tempo. That card just rips out of the bidding box.
While I am not necessarily suggesting that you do so, when non-vulnerable, I often overcall when I am two suited 4-4, and recently did so with 2 jacks. The opponents reached their small slam anyway, but went down when they finessed me for the missing honor. House of Pain.
How about the risk of being doubled? Well, since 90% of the club pairs play stolen bid (a terrible choice), they do not have any way to double me other than to pass and hope that partner will double. Will partner actually double back in if you pass? How does he know that you don’t have a blow out. Defenses to overcalls will be the subject of the next post, but let me leave you with the thought that I seldom have been doubled, and I have made some egregious overcalls. Larry Cohen, arguably the best matchpoint player in bridge, recently said “Even experts with well oiled mechanisms (lebensohl, negative doubles) have a difficult time coping with interference.”
You must be sure that partner is in on this charade. He will not know whether you have a good hand or a bad hand, but hopefully he will have enough sense to look for a fit and not look for game. I like to keep this a secret from my partners, but if you must look for game, bid 2NT, it is the only forcing response. My advice is DONT!
Finding your best fit is the quest. If partner bids 2 clubs and you have 3 cards in the club suit, pass. You are not likely to improve on that and further bids may put you in a 6 card fit. Remember the suits in which you have length are most likely to be partner’s shortness. If you have a tolerable fit stay there, and don’t go jumping from the frying pan into the fire. Effective scrambling is what this is all about and our job is to play a suit at the 2 level, undoubled if we can. If responder bids, a double by partner is asking for the second suit. Note that we off the hook and it may be time for us to duck. If responder doubles, a redouble asks for the second suit. Pass shows a 3 card fit, redouble shows trouble. You cant win them all, but disasters are simply one board in matchpoints.
How about bidding when the auction goes 1NT/p/p/? Well, if your partner won’t bid, almost anything is justified. It is hard for me to think of a hand that I wouldn’t take some action in the 3rd seat unless I am 4333. Mel Colchamiro in his recent book says that in the pass out seat you make a DONT bid if you have two shortness points, even with no high card points. The point is do not pass out 1NT. We probably have half the points and they are favorites to make 7, and very likely 8 tricks. If they do, its limbo time, “how low can you go?”
Is this point of view aggressive? Yes. Is it foolish or radical? Not if you are to believe the best bridge players in the world. For authoritative reading on this subject, see Larry Cohen’s Following the Law (1994) at page 197 and Appendix C. It was the bridge book of the year so there should be some available. Also visit Larry’s web site www.larryco.com .
OK, they read the blog and they overcalled. Time to D.S.I.P. Stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
