grizz: Hi all, and welcome grizz: Chat logs and hand records are stored in your computer for later review. grizz: For information on how to retrieve them, go the BIL homepage or email me. grizz: I teach private individual, pair, and small group lessons. If you would like to know more please email me at Grizz@GrizzBridge.com. grizz: And archives of old sessions are available at GrizzBridge.com, on the Lessons and Archives page located at: http://www.grizzbridge.com/Lessons_and_Archives.php grizz: There will be lots of questions. I want to address them all, but in a manner helpful to all, so please ask them in open chat. grizz: I encourage participation by all kibs grizz: So jump right in with a comment, question, or bid at any time, but please do it in open chat grizz: ... since I can't always respond to private chat grizz: We usually do random hands, and all areas of bidding, defense and declarer play are open for comment. grizz: I will try to remember to insert the board numbers in the Chat Log, so you can match up the log with the hands file in the future. grizz: grizz: the N hand looks like a garden-variety 1NT opener, does anybody disagree? does the small doubleton !d cause any headaches? guyb2: n wyoming33: no - hopefully grizz: not for me grizz: a small doubleton major would make me think twice grizz: but with a full 17 hcp and 5332 shape there is no other bid that describes this hand as well as 1NT grizz: so what do you all think about the E hand? is it worth sticking in a nuisance bid? wyoming33: n dae: is n bnanas: no meacan: n grizz: DONT players might bid 2!d, for a couple reasons grizz: it robs S of the 2!c stayman bid, and puts pressure on ops to deal with interference grizz: let's see how that works dae: no bids showing?? grizz: btw, DONT has a completely different rationale than Capp or most of the other interference bids bbo_iac: it does? grizz: DONT is explicitly designed to Disturb Opponents' NT auction grizz: and is geared to finding a playable fit at the 2 level, which is relatively safe grizz: and S is flying blind here, not knowing how long the suits are or which the higher one is grizz: and in DONT, 4-4 is plenty of length to compete wyoming33: does vulnerability have any effect on using DONT - grizz: probably best to have 10+ when V, but i have used it on as little as 6 grizz: so let's talk about how to defend against DONT grizz: or any other kind of interference grizz: Lebensohl is the most common defense grizz: any 2 level bid is natural and nonforcing grizz: any 3 level bid is natural and forcing except a cue, which is Stayman without a stopper in the overcalled suit grizz: and the keystone of Leb is that 2NT forces pard to bid 3!c, after which responder will drop dead, invite, or cue grizz: so if S had 5!ss here, a 2!s bid would be perfect grizz: on the 4-bagger you see here, it is less than perfect grizz: but S is an adventurous soul, and can't help messing with the ops a little :) grizz: N might compete to 3 if ops do with AQJ support and ruffing value in !D, but 2!s is drop-dead grizz: what if E had passed? grizz: i will save this one first wyoming33: 1NT PPP wyoming33: does one bid DONT in balancing seat? grizz: depends on partnership agreement, but the basic DONT system is used in both 2nd and 4th seat grizz: ok, this one makes 3 grizz: dae: would a double by S be for penalty? grizz: depends on partnership agreement, but most pairs play this as penalty grizz: it is NOT a negative double!!!!! dae: and NOT stolen bid wyoming33: !D is showing 2 suits grizz: though with some partners, mostly weak NT-ers, i play this as takeout, Stayman-ish but passable grizz: good question about Stolen Bid grizz: most players think they know what it means, but don't really grizz: if you play Stolen Bid, does this auction mean that E stole your 2!d bid? or your 2!c bid? bbo_iac: 2!d bid, to me dae: 2c?? must be D or suit above? grizz: if N thinks that E stole S's 2!d transfer bid, then NS are headed for a trainwreck wyoming33: dont play stolen bids if I can help it dae: me,either grizz: i HATE stolen bids, they are too ambiguous grizz: unless the the overcall is precisely 2!c wyoming33: right - grizz: and that limits the usefulness so much as to render it moot grizz: so X here would be penalty oriented grizz: and W would be in a pickle grizz: a 4-3 fit is considered playable for purposes of DONT grizz: so W would pass grizz: if N had a 4M he might be inclined to bid it grizz: but the X says something else grizz: the X suggests that NS do not have game, and that defending might pay better than competing grizz: that makes the decision easy for N grizz: looking at short !ds, and suspecting that pard has a stack guyb2: does the double imply a diamond stop? grizz: imply, but not promise grizz: E has an easy pass here - W's pass showed a playable fit grizz: so W has 3+ grizz: and N has 2+ grizz: so S has 4-, not a huge stack grizz: so now we roll the dice wyoming33: and NS have half of the points - is that a good X? tcyk: this may prove a little difficult :) grizz: now we put some thought into a line of defense grizz: NS have 21-23 hcp guyb2: with only 2 diamonds what would west bid? grizz: with 2- !ds W would bid !h and hope grizz: and E would be unlikely to pass, with a doubleton grizz: and play in that awful 4-2 !s fit with no honors! grizz: one of the bad things that can happen when you interfere with ops' NT auctions' grizz: ok, what about a Line of Defense here? grizz: what looks good? grizz: 1. Forcing grizz: 2. Active grizz: 3. Passive grizz: 4. Reduce Ruffs grizz: 5. Create Trump Tricks tcyk: J of !ds grizz: choose a line of defense first, then choose a card wyoming33: make op trump wyoming33: but south has no idea if north has long suit sascha3: j!D grizz: when you know WHAT you want to do, it's easier to choose HOW to get it done grizz: !d as Passive, or Reduce Ruffs, that is a possibility tcyk: you don't want to trump you have a natural winner grizz: and good thinking too grizz: in competitive partscore hands, you want to prevent declarer from getting any extra tricks by ruffing losers in dummy grizz: the other possibility with the S hand is Forcing grizz: force declarer to ruff in the long trump hand, and lose control of his own trump suit wyoming33: could be we all have even distrib - I think just lead natural here - 4th !S grizz: ordinarily when you have 4+ trumps a Forcing defense works better than trying to score ruffs grizz: though i often see players leading a short suit from a hand like this dae: small H promises honor-be good? grizz: it may be counterintuitive, but generally you do not want to ruff with a hand like this grizz: so !h or !s grizz: it's a tossup really grizz: anybody see a reason not to continue the !S? sascha3: yes the spades are winners grizz: N rates to score the !CAQ eventually wyoming33: no other card to return grizz: and the !HK dae: return partner's lead tcyk: need to lead a trump grizz: and one of the !s, maybe - if it doesn't get ruffed! grizz: now E has a !s that he can't eat sascha3: :) grizz: and no place to park it either grizz: and he's stuck on the board without much of a plan! tcyk: yes grizz: now what? wyoming33: dump !S make south lead grizz: the !s is a loser bbo_iac: oops south danger hand grizz: diabolical defense here wyoming33: yes:( tcyk: partner must have !cA or wouldn't continue hearts grizz: yes ELIZA42: why the bid of 2 D grizz: not bad, making 300 on a hand that does not make game wyoming33: thats what you get for interfering grizz: y, interfering does not always pay off grizz: for newcomers, 2!d was a DONT bid, showing !d and a higher suit, at least 4-4 wyoming33: of course if not X would be good bid - grizz: sure ELIZA42: thought 5 5 or 5 4 grizz: no, absolutely not! grizz: yes for Capp or most other schemes ELIZA42: why grizz: but not for DONT ELIZA42: I play DONT tcyk->Club: some play for 3NT grizz: because DONT is not constructive, it is obstructive in nature ELIZA42: and 4 4 is fine wyoming33: usually dont expect to play the hand - just trying to mess up ops grizz: DONT was developed by Marty Bergen when he played with Larry Cohen, and was first written up in Better Bidding With Bergen, Vol. 2 ELIZA42: i know he is my neighbor grizz: lucky to have such a neighbor! emmee: constructive means? grizz: and 4-4 is fine, though one would like more beef in the second suit :) tcyk: with 4/4 shape there is about a 67% chance you will find at least a 7 card fit grizz: right grizz: constructive means finding a fit to compete and make a partscore grizz: or game ELIZA42: and Capp0 is not obstructv emmee: ty grizz: DONT is not designed to find game, but just to throw sand in the gears grizz: though there are bids in the DONT scheme where 4th hand can show a good hand grizz: anyway, for those of you who don't know DONT, now you do :) wyoming33: sort of :) grizz: without the interference, it probably goes 1NT-P-P-P tcyk: DONT is not for the faint of heart ELIZA42: at least not 4 4 grizz: no drama, making overtrick(s) grizz: "and Capp0 is not obstructv" - sure, Capp is obstructive too, but requires some shape grizz: since the auction is frequently forced to the 3 level grizz: so expect more points and more shape for a Capp bid grizz: with DONT, you might jump in with as little as 6 hcp grizz: and as little as 4-4 emmee: doesn't N/S score better with this bid, rather than 1NT making grizz: this time, yes - if and only if they don't forget to double! grizz: but see what pressure this puts on NS? grizz: first of all, what is the second suit? grizz: then what does the X mean? grizz: are NS rock solid in their partnership agreement? grizz: is there a "standard treatment" that even deals with this? grizz: does the X mean a !d stack, or is it Stayman? grizz: you see how many branches that one little bid adds to the decision tree? wyoming33: or transfer:) grizz: another possibility! grizz: the more often you make ops guess, the more often they will guess wrong grizz: i like DONT! a lot grizz: but as one of the kibs said, it's not for the faint of heart wyoming33: convinced me :) grizz: there will be bad results grizz: but many more good ones, where ops flounder and goof grizz: btw, there is a big downside to DONT grizz: since it works bottom-up, bidding the lower of two suits grizz: as opposed to Capp, which bids the higher of a M-m combination grizz: that is, you often play a lower suit in a 4-3 when a higher suit has a 4-4 or 5-3 fit grizz: since ANY playable fit is passable, as the 4-3 !d fit was here bbo_iac: what do you think of Brozel? grizz: but the smart guys of bridge already fixed it, with Revised Dont grizz: hold that thought grizz: Revised DONT works the same as regular DONT, but 2!h and 2!s are natural grizz: 5+ wyoming33: oh my :( thought this was going to be simple grizz: lol grizz: u r kidding, right? :) wyoming33: uhhhhhhhh grizz: the orignial DONT used X as a single-suited hand grizz: but with Revised, now the X is either a long minor or both majors grizz: in any case, X is a relay to 2!c if responder passes grizz: see? not so difficult after all :) grizz: and still most auctions end on the 2 level, unless the NT opener side bids higher grizz: it is very seldom that a DONT 2 bid will be doubled off for a huge number grizz: the -300 here was pretty ugly, but it doesn't get much worse than that grizz: and if it does, the ops usually have game that would score better grizz: ok gang, my fingers are on fire, so it's time to quit wyoming33: not sure I am brave enough to bid it vul with few pts grizz: no, you need some hcp when red emmee: GREAT lesson - TY ydannac: Thanks Grizz:)!H!H wyoming33: thanks much - grizz: but you can push ops around with almost nothing when white sascha3: great lesson ths Pete:) bbo_iac: thanks Pete :) grizz: OK then, our time is up now, thanks for coming and I'll see you next week. sascha3: what about the brozel? grizz: wait grizz: the Brozel question sascha3: :) ladygolf: thanks Pete bbo_iac: :) grizz: Brozel is an oldie, but a few folks still play it analisals: thanks Pete always learn something here tcyk: read Richard Willey's thing about Frelling 2 bids. They are like DONT except preemptive opening bids. Occur about 5 times more often than weak twos. ELIZA42: can we get the first part of the lesson if we missed it grizz: the scheme is that !hs is the anchor suit grizz: so 1NT-2!c shows !h and !c grizz: sure, it will be on my website later grizz: 1NT-2!d shows !d and !h grizz: 1NT-s!s shows both majors ELIZA42: whats ur website grizz: and 1NT-2!h shows just !hs grizz: i used to play it, before i converted to DONT sascha3: 4/4 or more? tcyk: oh I always play 2H as both majors and 2S as spades and a minor grizz: 5-4 at least sascha3: ths wyoming33: hmmmm - dont think my pards play it that way - have a couple f2f that play it grizz: that is another variant, there are several bbo_iac: I wonder if they have changed that too? that's not what I am told................. grizz: i might be wrong on a bid there, it's been 20+ years since i played it..... ELIZA42: website? wyoming33: :) sascha3: always makes it hard when there are a number of ways to bid something lol grizz: And archives of old sessions are available at GrizzBridge.com, on the Lessons and Archives page located at: http://www.grizzbridge.com/Lessons_and_Archives.php bbo_iac: !h= !hand!s 2nt = both minors and X one long suit grizz: y, and it seems like every convention has a Reverse, Modified, or Upside Down variant tcyk: there is also Becker which is just like Brozel except it hinges on spades sascha3: lol yes:) ->bbo_iac: what is !s then? grizz: anyway, if you have questions about a convention the first place to look is Bridge Guys tcyk: yes wyoming33: yes - good source sascha3: ths again Pete:) sascha3: byeeeeeee bbo_iac: yikes now I'm not sure! grizz: http://homepage.mac.com/bridgeguys//conventions.html analisals: www.bridgeguys.com? ->bbo_iac: lol me neither! analisals: ty bbo_iac: will look up notes asap1 grizz: Thanks for your interest and participation, and I hope to see you next week. bbo_iac: thanks Pete :) grizz: Grizz out. sascha3: yes :)