[sfi]

32519, on 2012-August-30, 14:09, said:

Then why have you gone to so much trouble to shoot it down? If it doesn’t interfere with YOUR MOSCITO system, you can just ignore it and play your regular system unhindered.

If I knew this is what you were playing against transfer openings, I would actually change my system to include them.

I would point out the reasons why but (a) others have done it and (b) you would then accuse me of trying to divert you from the One True Way. So good luck with it.

[aguahombre]

32519: There actually are a few posters on here who "shoot things down" because they have reasons to believe what they are saying is correct, and think it might be helpful information to the advocates and those who also employ a certain toy.

Sometimes they are mistaken ---not about their logic ---but about whether the advocate cares for input. That should be the nature of a forum. You are free to ignore the advice.

[hrothgar]

I’m going to address your contributions slightly out of order, dealing with the most egregious issues first:

1. You completely misunderstand competitive bidding. Playing MOSCITO, our goal is to reach a 2M contract ASAP to deprive from making an informed decision whether or not to compete to the 3 level.

The overcall structure that you are advocating makes this much much easier.

• You are severely overloading a direct seat pass.
  
• You are depriving yourself of natural 2m overcalls. (Trust me, if you have a real 2m overcall, the odds that you have bid opener’s 5+ card suit are pretty slim)
  
• You are forcing partner to bid at the three level opposite a normal takeout double. You’re going to be overbidding opposite a broke partner and forcing partner to jump to the four level to show values before strain has been identified.
  
• The point behind a takeout double is not to prevent the opponent’s from bidding to 2M, but rather to let partner make an informed decision about whether or not to compete to the three level, while still having options like Rubensohl or Lebensohl

2. You seem to believe that partner is going to be able to look at his hands, trust in our limited openings, and guess when it’s right to balance.

• By overloading your pass, you’re making life much too difficult for partner. There are too many hand types.
  
• Any kind of mandatory balancing strategy is extremely vulnerable to psyches. I’ve played against folks who advocate this type of strategy. Its fun making a natural, non forcing 1NT advance on a flat 20 count and watching them balance at the two level… (We used to describe this as the Binkley Oriented Trap Pass)

3. You are far too concerned with MOSCITO picking off your major. Repeat after me, if we open in a major
where you hold length

• There aren’t all than many cards available for partner to hold
  
• Even if you find an eight card fit, you’re facing a really bad break.

4. You completely misunderstand the minor suit preempt style and the nature of the 1S and 2C opening. True, this is not central to your argument, but it shows a fairly poor level of reading comprehension. FWIW, a classic 2N opening looks like

S x
H xxx
D KJT8xxx
C xx

While a classic 3C opening looks like

S x
H xxx
D AQT9xxx
C xx

I’m not sure whether I still have the suggested defense that I submitted to the ACBL’s convention’s committee. However, as I recall, the key elements of said defense were

• The direct seat double showed a balanced / semi-balanced hand with values. (Think of a Power double playing The Overcall Structure)
  
• Bidding opener’s “suit” showed a takeout double
  
• A 1NT overcall was raptor. 4 cards in the other major with a longer minor
  
• 2m overcalls were natural
  
• (1H) – 2H = Natural
  
• (1D) – 2H and (1H) – 2S were natural (Think of a natural auction like (1C) – P – (1H) – 2H)
  
• Jump overcalls = Roman

Last, but not least, you ask why I am bothering to stop you from employing methods that I feel are badly flawed:
My link

[Free]

I prefer something quite simple:
Dbl = takeout (like the auction would go natural 1M-Dbl)
1M (their suit) = natural, good suit
Rest = like they opened a natural 1M

In my experience showing the suit they bid with a Dbl is quite useless because the suit is lower than their actual suit. Like Richard says, the goal is to quickly get to 2M in maybe a 4-3 fit. This happens a lot, so what was your Dbl really worth? Just overcall at the 2-level (taking their relay away at the same time). I've also encountered several times that opps had the Major opener promised. Imo it's quite useful to be able to just bid opener's real suit. It's a bit like (1X)-p-(1Y)-2Y, where 1Y doesn't promise any values in the suit, just 4+ cards.

Also note that it's not necessary to disrupt the system. Bidding natural and constructive does a nice job, trying to interfere on trash doesn't.

If there's anything that I would change to this scheme, it's using 1M (their suit) as some kind of Raptor, showing 4OM and 5+m.

[32519]

hrothgar, on 2012-August-30, 18:01, said:

I’m not sure whether I still have the suggested defense that I submitted to the ACBL’s convention’s committee. However, as I recall, the key elements of said defense were:
[1]The direct seat double showed a balanced / semi-balanced hand with values. (Think of a Power double playing The Overcall Structure)
[2]Bidding opener’s “suit” showed a takeout double
[3]A 1NT overcall was raptor. 4 cards in the other major with a longer minor
[4]2m overcalls were natural
[5](1H) – 2H = Natural
[6](1D) – 2H and (1H) – 2S were natural (Think of a natural auction like (1C) – P – (1H) – 2H)
[7]Jump overcalls = Roman

This defense of yours doesn’t place enough pressure on your side jamming the bidding, especially when the opener is showing ♠, QUOTE: “Direct raises are powerful preemptive weapons designed to jam the opponent's constructive auctions.”

If the ACBL (or any other committee) asked me to submit a suggested defence to MOSCITO, I would have done the same. Submit a defence which on face value is both, credible and workable, yet will not hamper my side from jamming the auction. Having another look at the system notes, it is quite possible for your side to jam the auction in 3♠ on a combined 15 HCP count, 9 HCP with opener and 6 HCP with responder (or sacrifice if necessary at favourable vulnerability).

These are some extracts from the system notes:

Light /Limited Openings: The MOSCITO opening structure was designed to support a highly aggressive "quick-in / quick-out" auction style. There is a significant advantage to being able to place the partnership in an acceptable contract as quickly as possible. This bidding style consistently forces the opponents to guess whether or not to balance at the three-level. Furthermore, if the opponents are unable to exchange information during the bidding, they will often be poorly positioned when defending hands. MOSCITO achieves this design goal by using a descriptive and constructive opening structure that often allows responder to place the final contract with his first bid.
• The range of MOSCITO’s opening bids is limited to approximately 6 High Card Points. Tightly defining opener’s strength allows responder to apply judgment more accurately.
• The minimum strength of MOSCITO’s constructive opening bids is extremely aggressive. MOSCITO believes that our limited opening bids are powerful constructive tools. The system is designed to maximize the frequency of these openings without “overloading” the strong club opening.
MOSCITO’s “constructive” opening bids typically promise approximately 9-14 HCPs.

Major’s First Openings: MOSCITO uses a Major’s First bidding style. Opener is expected to show a four card major in preference to a longer minor. MOSCITO advocates a Major’s First style for several reasons:
1. The Major’s First bidding style facilitates quick and non-descriptive auctions to major suit contracts
2. Major’s First bidding is more preemptive and often prevents opponents from making “cheap” 1 level overcalls
3. Major’s First bidding improves system accuracy during competitive bidding sequences

MOSCITO’s designers believe a pressure bidding style yields enough positive results to outweigh the occasional disaster. Playing MOSCITO, you should expect to open:
1. Most unbalanced hands with 9+ HCP
2. Some unbalanced hands with 8 counts
3. Most balanced hands with 11+ HCP
4. With a 4333 hand pattern with a 4-card major, opener MUST open 1NT
5. Holding 4 Spades and a balanced hand:
...(a)Open 1NT with 13 – 14 HCP
...(b)Open 1♥ with 11 - 12 HCP
6. Holding Hearts, competitive bidding becomes a much more important consideration. Here, we face a very real danger that the opponents can outbid us at the two level in a Spade contract. Therefore holding 4 Hearts and a balanced hand (4333 or 4432 or 4423):
...(a)Open 1NT with 11 – 12 HCP
...(b)Open 1♦ with 13 – 14 HCP

Direct raises are powerful preemptive weapons designed to jam the opponent's constructive auctions. Our raise structure advocates that responder raise a 1♥ opening to 2♠ holding three-card trump support. Responder’s single raise is a constructive bid promising approximate 6 – 10 HCPs. If responder holds a weaker hand he is expected to pass the transfer opening bid. Responder's 3♠ raise promises four+ card trump support.

Don’t count me out yet Boet. I have every intention of looking for something which transfers a lot of the pressure back onto the MOSCITO players, something with a higher frequency of occurrence than DOOM.

Watch this space for the next installment.

[32519]

Using BBOs deal generator with South as the dealer and the following constraints –
Hand Type 1: 4+ ♥, minor suits = 0-5 cards, 9-14 HCP
Hand Type 2: 4+ ♠, minor suits = 0-5 cards, 9-14 HCP
(No constraints were placed on the other 3 hands)
I then started dealing random hands to see what was spat out.

This is the defence to MOSCITO I came up with based on the hands that were dealt:

Over a 1♥ opening (unbalanced = 9-14 HCP, balanced = 11-12 HCP, 4+ ♠)
• X = 3-suited takeout of ♠, or single suited hand with values not fitting in anywhere else
• 1♠ = 4+♠/5+♥, 0-10 HCP, frequency = 2.06%
• 1NT = balanced, 15-18 HCP, frequency = 6.91%
• 2♣ = artificial, any balanced/semi-balanced hand, 11-14 HCP, frequency = 14.07%
• 2♦ = any 2-suited hand that can compete to the 3-level, the lower the HCP count then the more extreme the distribution, a 5+ card ♠ suit possible as 1 of the 2 suits, 0-31 HCP, frequency = 5.64%
• 2♥ = 4+♠/5+♥, 11-31 HCP (rule of 20), frequency = 1.61%
• 2♠ = 5+♠/5+♥, 10-31 HCP (rule of 20), frequency = 0.50%
• 2NT = 5/5 minors, 11-31 HCP, frequency = 0.41%
• 3♣ etc are all normal pre-empts, 7-card suit etc depending on level of preempt

Over a 1♦ opening (unbalanced = 9-14 HCP, balanced = 13-14 HCP, 4+ ♥)
• X = 3-suited takeout of ♥, or single suited hand with values not fitting in anywhere else
• 1♥ = 5+♠/4+♥, 0-10 HCP, frequency = 2.06%
• 1♠ = Natural, 5+ card suit, 9-14 HCP, frequency = 8.63%
• 1NT = balanced, 15-18 HCP, frequency = 6.91%
• 2♣ = artificial, any balanced/semi-balanced hand, 11-14 HCP, frequency = 14.07%
• 2♦ = any 2-suited hand that can compete to the 3-level, the lower the HCP count then the more extreme the distribution, a 5+ card ♥ suit possible as 1 of the 2 suits, 0-31 HCP, frequency = 5.64%
• 2♥ = 4+♥/5+♠, 11-31 HCP (rule of 20), frequency = 1.61%
• 2♠ = 5+♠/5+♥, 10-31 HCP (rule of 20), frequency = 0.50%
• 2NT = 5/5 minors, 11-31 HCP, frequency = 0.41%
• 3♣ etc are all normal pre-empts, 7-card suit etc depending on level of preempt

Here are some example hands and auctions which were dealt:

3-Suited Takeout

---

4♠-5♥ 0-10 HCP

---

Without being able to see all four hands, what does North do now?

5♠ 9-14 HCP (equivalent to MOSCITO's opening requirements)

---

Balanced / Semi-balanced, 11-14 HCP

---

South can bid on to 3♥ on a known 8-card fit. 3♥ fails by 1.

Any 2-Suited Hand

---

5♣X fails by 1, where 4♠ makes

5♠-4♥ 11+ HCP (Rule of 20)

---

Seeing all four hands, on the lie of the cards 3NT and 4S both make if East drops the ♠Q. The most likely contract will be 3NT.

5♠-5♥ 10+ HCP (Rule of 20)

---

These were some example hands and auctions which came up. For sure this bidding style has its downsides as well, most notably when the opponents have a fit and the balance of the HCP. It then becomes easy to pick off the overcaller. But that is bridge; you win some and you lose some. This defence is an attempt to "get-in-the-face" of MOSCITO players intent on jamming the auction.

This poster is requesting those who regularly play against MOSCITO to give this defence a shot and then come and post some of the hands in this thread. Not only your gains, but your losses as well. Together we can try and develop a more “in-your-face” defence.

Thanking you in advance.

[hrothgar]

32519, on 2012-August-31, 09:04, said:

If the ACBL (or any other committee) asked me to submit a suggested defence to MOSCITO, I would have done the same. Submit a defence which on face value is both, credible and workable, yet will not hamper my side from jamming the auction.

Don’t you dare project your own ethical failures onto me. When I submit defenses to the ACBL, I try my best to provide effective methods that I myself would use at the table. So excuse me that I am more than a little upset that some(one) whose own suggested defenses are laughably incompetent accuses me of

1. Developing a bad defense
2. Doing so in a deliberate attempt to gain an advantage at the table

There are plenty of grounds to critique the methods that I suggest (the primary one being that methods like Raptor and Power Doubles are unfamiliar to many players). However, I stand by my assertion that the methods that I am recommending are orders of magnitude more effective than the dreck that you are suggestion.

All of the experienced MOSCITO players posting in this thread consider your defense laughable. Perhaps you should use this opportunity to re-evaluate your qualifications as a system designer.

Here’s a bit of practical advice: Your defense seems to pre suppose that our major suit openings are somehow going to steal your 4M contracts. In particular, that we’re going to pick off your suit by opening in it. Practically speaking, this doesn’t happen. Most people are good at ferreting out their 4M contracts. MOSCITO sometimes finds a good sacrifice that the field doesn’t. Conversely, a 5 card major style sometimes finds a good sac or pressure bid that we don’t.

Where MOSCITO shines is part score contracts. Particularly situations where your side needs to decide between selling out to 2M or competing to the three level.

There are three ways that you can create problems for us if we want to play in 2M. I’d prioritize things as follows:

• You can provide your partner with information that will let partner make a better informed decision regarding whether to compete beyond 2M
• You can preempt the bidding by bidding past 2M (and hopefully rack up a better score)
• In theory, you can adopted competitive methods designed to deter us from bidding 2M (this one is pretty hard)

Your original defense fails on all three counts.

• • You devote so many bids trying to determine whether we’ve stolen your major that you cripple your competitive bidding
• • Your high level preempts are rare, and I’d argue that the methods aren’t conducive to a positive expected value
• • If anything, your methods make me more eager to bid 2M on a bad three bagger since I know that I don’t have to worry about a bunch of bad trump splits and I know that your initial pass is badly overloaded.

This post has been edited by inquiry: 2012-September-01, 11:54
Reason for edit: removed impolite reference

[hrothgar]

With respect to the hands that you provide:

Hands 1, 4, 6, and 7 aren't openers.
There are all systemic passes which suggests that your Monte Carlo simulation is biased.

At one point in time, I posted fairly complete Dealer scripts to simulate MOSCITO.
You might want to look for them rather than reinventing the wheel.

On hand two, North would probably start with a negative double, showing both minors. 1NT is also a reasonable call.

On hand three, East is sitting on a good 12 count with a stiff in the opponent's suit.
How can he possibly stop short of game?

[hrothgar]

For kicks and giggles I ran a Monte Carlo simulation to estimate the frequency of some of your recommended methods after a 1H opening

Here are the frequencies I arrived at

X = 1.8%
2H = 1.0%
2S = .2%

I am attaching the script

------------------

######### Definition - Opening Points

# 11 is the index for c13
# This function allows the user to define valuations for cacluating HCP
# Most hand evaluation is performed used a modified version of the
# 4 Aces Point Count.(Ace = 3, King = 2, ...)
# All values are multiplied by 100 to avoid fractions

#altcount 11 300 200 100 50 20

############## STRONG OPENINGS

one_club =

(
hcp(north)>=17
#or
#c13(north) >=1000
or
(hcp(north)>=15 and cccc(north)>=1600)
or
(hcp(north)==14 and cccc(north)>=1900)
or
(hcp(north)==13 and cccc(north)>=2000)
or

(
hcp(north)>=15 and shape(north, any 4333 + any 4432 + any 5332 + any 5422)
#and
#c13(north) >= 900
)

)

#####
#Opening strength defines the minimum strength for a limited opening bid
#####

opening_strength =
(
(
cccc(north) - 25 * shape(north, any 4441 + any 5440) >= 1050

or hcp(north) >= 11
)

# and
# c13(north) >= 600
)

and not

one_club

#MOSCITO Opening structure

#################### SINGLE SUITED PREEMPTS
#################### MAJORS

four_diamonds =

(
(
spades(north) >= 8 and
hascard(north, AS) + hascard(north, KS) == 2
)

or

(
spades(north) == 7 and
hascard(north, AS) + hascard(north, KS) + hascard(north,QS) == 3
)
)

and

hascard(north,AC) + hascard(north,KC) +
hascard(north,AD) + hascard(north,KD) +
hascard(north,AH) + hascard(north,KH) <=1

four_spades =

hcp(north) <= 9

and

(
(
spades(north) >= 7 and

hascard(north, AS) + hascard(north, KS) +
hascard(north,QS) + hascard(north, JS) >= 3
)

or

spades(north) >= 8
)

and not four_diamonds

three_spades =

spades(north) >= 6

and

(
hascard(north, AS) + hascard(north, KS) +
hascard(north, QS) + hascard(north, JS) >= 2
)

and

(
hearts(north) <=1 or
diamonds(north) <=1 or
clubs(north) <= 1
)

and

hcp(north) <= 9

and not four_diamonds

and not four_spades

four_clubs =

(
(
hearts(north) >= 8 and
hascard(north,AH) + hascard(north,KH) == 2
)
or

(
hearts(north) == 7 and
hascard(north,AH) + hascard(north,KH) + hascard(north,QH) == 3
)
)

and

hascard(north,AC) + hascard(north,KC) +
hascard(north,AD) + hascard(north,KD) +
hascard(north,AS) + hascard(north,KS) <=1

four_hearts =

hcp(north) <= 9

and

(
(
hearts(north) >= 7 and

hascard(north, AH) + hascard(north, KH) +
hascard(north,QH) + hascard(north, JH) >= 3
)

or

spades(north) >= 8
)

and not four_clubs

three_hearts =

hearts(north) >= 6

and

(
hascard(north, AH) + hascard(north, KH) +
hascard(north, QH) + hascard(north, JH) >= 2
)

and

(
spades(north) <=1 or
diamonds(north) <=1 or
clubs(north) <= 1
)

and

hcp(north) <= 9

and not four_clubs

and not four_hearts

############## MINORS

three_nt =

hcp(north) <= 9

and

(
(
clubs(north) >= 8
and
hascard(north,AS) + hascard(north,KS) +
hascard(north,AH) + hascard(north,KH) +
hascard(north,AD) + hascard(north,KD) <= 1
)

or

(
diamonds(north) >= 8
and
hascard(north,AS) + hascard(north,KS) +
hascard(north,AH) + hascard(north,KH) +
hascard(north,AC) + hascard(north,KC) <= 1
)
)

three_clubs =

clubs(north) >= 6

and

hascard(north, AC) + hascard(north, KC) + hascard(north, QC) == 2 and

hascard(north, AD) + hascard(north, KD) +
hascard(north, AH) + hascard(north, KH) +
hascard(north, AS) + hascard(north, KS) == 0 and

hcp(north) <=9

and not three_nt

three_diamonds =

diamonds(north) >= 6

and

hascard(north, AD) + hascard(north, KD) + hascard(north, QD) == 2 and

hascard(north, AC) + hascard(north, KC) +
hascard(north, AH) + hascard(north, KH) +
hascard(north, AS) + hascard(north, KS) == 0 and

hcp(north) <=9

and not three_nt

two_nt =

(clubs(north) >=6 and

hascard(north, AC) + hascard(north, KC) + hascard(north, QC) +
hascard(north, JC) == 2

and

hascard(north, AD) + hascard(north, KD) +
hascard(north, AH) + hascard(north, KH) +
hascard(north, AS) + hascard(north, KS) == 0

and

hascard(north, QD) + hascard(north, QH) + hascard(north, QS) <= 1

and

not three_clubs)

or

(
diamonds(north) >=6 and

hascard(north, AD) + hascard(north, KD) + hascard(north, QD) +
hascard(north, JD) == 2

and

hascard(north, AC) + hascard(north, KC) +
hascard(north, AH) + hascard(north, KH) +
hascard(north, AS) + hascard(north, KS) == 0 and
hascard(north, QC) + hascard(north, QH) + hascard(north, QS) <= 1 and
not three_diamonds
)
and not three_nt

preempts =
four_spades or
four_clubs or
three_spades or
four_hearts or
four_clubs or
three_hearts or
three_diamonds or
three_clubs or
three_nt or
two_nt

###############################
## Weak Opening Bids
###############################

two_diamonds =

not opening_strength and
hcp(north) <= 12

#and c13(north) >= 325

and

shape(north, any 4432, any 54xx, any 55xx, any 65xx) and
clubs(north) <= 3 and
diamonds(north) >=4

two_hearts =

not opening_strength and
hcp(north) <= 12 and

#c13(north) >= 325 and

shape(north, any 4432, any 54xx, any 55xx, any 65xx) and
hearts(north) >= 4 and

(
spades(north) >= 4 or
clubs(north) >= 5
)

two_spades =

not opening_strength and
hcp(north) <= 12 and

#c13(north) >= 325

(
(
shape(north, any 6322, any 6331, any 7222) and
spades(north) >=6
)

or

(
spades(north) >=4 and clubs(north) >=5
and hascard(north, AS) + hascard(north, KS) + hascard(north, QS) >= 1
)
)

############## LIMITED OPENINGS

##### Pre-Definitions

bad_spades = hascard(north, AS) + hascard(north, KS) + hascard(north,QS) == 0
bad_hearts = hascard(north, AH) + hascard(north, KH) + hascard(north,QH) == 0
balanced = shape(north, any 4432, any 5332, any 4333)

########

two_clubs =
opening_strength
and not preempts

and

(

(
clubs(north) >= 6 and
spades(north) < 4 and
hearts(north) < 3
)

or

(
clubs(north) >= 6 and
spades(north) == 4 and
bad_spades
)

or

(
clubs(north) >= 6 and
hearts(north) == 4 and
bad_hearts
)

)

one_notrump =

opening_strength and

(

(
balanced and not
shape(north, 5xxx, x5xx, 44xx, 4x4x, 4xx4, x44x, x4x4)
)

or

(
hearts(north) == 4 and
balanced and
(hcp(north) == 11 or hcp(north) == 12)
)

or

(
spades(north) == 4 and
balanced and
hearts(north) <= 3 and
(hcp(north) == 13 or hcp(north) == 14)
)

)

one_spade =
opening_strength
and not preempts
and not one_notrump

and

diamonds(north) >= 4 and
not one_notrump and
hearts(north) <4 and
spades(north) <4

or

(

diamonds(north) >=6 and

(
(spades(north) == 4 and bad_spades) or
(hearts(north) == 4 and bad_hearts)
)

)

one_heart =

opening_strength and
not two_clubs and
not one_notrump and
not one_spade and

(

(
spades(north) == 4 and
spades(north) > hearts(north)
)

or

(
spades(north) >= 5 and
spades(north) >= hearts(north)
)

)

one_diamond =

opening_strength and
not two_clubs and
not one_notrump and
not one_spade and
not one_heart

and

hearts(north) >= 4

and not

(balanced and hcp(north) <= 11)


##########

condition

one_heart

action

average spades(east) >= 4 and hearts(east) >=5 and hcp(east) <= 10,
average spades(east) == 4 and hearts(east) >=5 and hcp(east) >= 11,
average spades(east) >=5 and hearts(east) >=5 and hcp(east) >= 11

[hrothgar]

Last but not least, your new improved defense means that you can't show clubs OR diamonds below the three level.

Instead, you gave gained the dubious advantage of overcalling 2♣ on a balanced 11-14 HCP.
Even halfway decent pairs are going to eat you alive...

[the hog]

32519, on 2012-August-30, 07:56, said:

MOSCITO is an acronym for Major Oriented Strong Club - In Trouble Often

In its current incarnation, MOSCITO is defined by:
1. A strong club opening
2. Light and limited constructive opening bids
3. A "Majors First" opening style
4. Frequent use of relays with strong hands
5. Transfer openings

Light /Limited Openings: The MOSCITO opening structure was designed to support a highly aggressive "quick-in / quick-out" auction style.

MOSCITO's "constructive" opening bids typically promise approximately 9-14 HCPs

Major's First Openings: MOSCITO uses a Major's First bidding style. Opener is expected to show a four card major in preference to a longer minor. MOSCITO advocates a Major's First style for several reasons:
1. The Major's First bidding style facilitates quick and non-descriptive auctions to major suit contracts
2. Major's First bidding is more preemptive and often prevents opponents from making "cheap" 1 level overcalls
3. Major's First bidding improves system accuracy during competitive bidding sequences

With "Majors First Openings" in MOSCITO, the DOOM(ed) defense was designed to upset the Light/Limited Openings at the earliest option.

I suspect that Richard and I know what Moscito is. I was one of the first people to adopt it after Marston Burgess started playing it after Fp had been legislated out of existence. Richard has played it almost as long. I was more polit than Richard, but he is correct. You have no idea whatsoever and this defence is absolute crap.
Your bids are rare; they have the destructive effect of a rabid maggot. Anyway, there is a strong argument that defences against moscito should be constructive and not destructive.
Your suggestion that Richard is providing inadequate defences is insulting, however he is capable of speaking for himself.
However your pathetic defences of this defence show that you are clueless when it comes to bidding against LOBs and big Club. To quote Papa the Greek, Your example hands "show you have as much understanding as the man in the moon."

[32519]

hrothgar, on 2012-August-31, 18:09, said:

Last but not least, your new improved defense means that you can't show clubs OR diamonds below the three level.

Instead, you gave gained the dubious advantage of overcalling 2♣ on a balanced 11-14 HCP.
Even halfway decent pairs are going to eat you alive...

Seems like you never read my full post.

Quote

Over a 1♥ opening (unbalanced = 9-14 HCP, balanced = 11-12 HCP, 4+ ♠)
• X = 3-suited takeout of ♠, or single suited hand with values not fitting in anywhere else

Over a 1♦ opening (unbalanced = 9-14 HCP, balanced = 13-14 HCP, 4+ ♥)
• X = 3-suited takeout of ♥, or single suited hand with values not fitting in anywhere else

Quote:
So I set up BBO’s deal generator again with the constraints already mentioned. On the third deal the hand below came up which typically falls into the above definition.

Before considering what North may actually bid on the hand, partner is expected to reply similar to any t/o X –
1. Any non-jump bid showing 0-8 HCP
2. A jump bid showing 9-11 HCP
3. 1NT showing 6-10 HCP
4. A cue-bid of the oppositions suit as game forcing
5. etc

East would therefore respond 1♠ to the t/o X (0-8 HCP). Now West will show the single suited hand in ♣.

---

The t/o X in my scheme allows more hand types. I'm just waiting for Glen and some other posters to get involved here as well and before long MOSCITO's gain when the auction can be jammed will be eaten away.

[32519]

hrothgar, on 2012-August-31, 16:25, said:

Where MOSCITO shines is part score contracts. Particularly situations where your side needs to decide between selling out to 2M or competing to the three level.

There are three ways that you can create problems for us if we want to play in 2M. I’d prioritize things as follows:

• You can provide your partner with information that will let partner make a better informed decision regarding whether to compete beyond 2M
  
• You can preempt the bidding by bidding past 2M (and hopefully rack up a better score)
  
• In theory, you can adopted competitive methods designed to deter us from bidding 2M (this one is pretty hard)

Your original defense...

Quote: In theory, you can adopted [sic] competitive methods designed to deter us from bidding 2M (this one is pretty hard)

This is exactly what I’m trying to address; developing a more “in-your-face” defence transferring the pressure back onto the MOSCITO pair. My 2♥ and 2♠ bids showing a 5/4 or 5/5 hand plus values, not only tells my partner my hand pattern, it also enables an easy cross-ruff situation when partner has a fit with the 5-card suit and an appropriate hand. More often partner will be declarer. Partner’s RHO will most likely also be short in the suit opened. Any ruff can be over-ruffed.

Quote: “Your original defence...”

The original defence has already been canned (although some of the ideas were borrowed on and reinvented), so going there gains nothing.

If a more aggressive “in-your-face” defence to MOSCITO is developed which sees more and more of your gains from jamming the auction whittled away, I’m pretty confident that you will dump MOSCITO altogether.

[hrothgar]

the hog, on 2012-August-31, 20:22, said:

I suspect that Richard and I know what Moscito is.

Here's the really amusing part...

He's quoting system notes that I wrote.

[hrothgar]

32519, on 2012-September-01, 02:01, said:

Quote: In theory, you can adopted [sic] competitive methods designed to deter us from bidding 2M (this one is pretty hard)

This is exactly what I’m trying to address; developing a more “in-your-face” defence transferring the pressure back onto the MOSCITO pair. My 2♥ and 2♠ bids showing a 5/4 or 5/5 hand plus values, not only tells my partner my hand pattern, it also enables an easy cross-ruff situation when partner has a fit with the 5-card suit and an appropriate hand.

Let's assume that I open 1H, showing 4+ spades and ~9-14 HCP.

You have no bids that shows hearts that doesn't also show 5+ Spades.

Your 2S overcall shows hearts but promises 5+ Spades
Your 2H overcall shows hearts but promises 4+ Spades
Your 1S overcall shows hearts but promises 4+ Spades

Any single suited hand with hearts needs to double
Any two suited hand with 5+ hearts and a 4 card minor needs to double
(And god knows how many hand types)

In addition to crippling your ability to show Hearts, you've also deprived yourself of natural overcalls in Clubs and Diamonds. I'm not even going to start trying to understand how you hope to have a constructive auction after that double.

These are the stupidest methods that I have ever seen.

Your optimizing to show either extremely rare hand types or hands where probably don't want to be in the auction.

[32519]

What has happened to all the other MOSCITO posters? I found 49 MOSCITO threads in the Forums. Or are you fearful of seeing your gains from jamming the auction vaporise?
I think I will retain the acronym DOOM for my suggested defence, but now standing for this “Deadly Overcall Obliterating MOSCITO.”

[sfi]

hrothgar, on 2012-September-01, 06:06, said:

3. MOSCITO has never been a particular popular system. I don't know many people who play it these days.

As I mentioned before, if this becomes the standard defence then that trend would change.

[hrothgar]

sfi, on 2012-September-01, 06:12, said:

As I mentioned before, if this becomes the standard defence then that trend would change.

In the ACBL, the "standard defense" is to ban it outright...

[32519]

hrothgar, on 2012-September-01, 04:34, said:

Any two suited hand with 5+ hearts and a 4 card minor needs to double
(And god knows how many hand types)

Who decided that my 2♦ bid needs to be 5/5? The definition says “a hand willing to bid to level 3.” What is stopping me from setting a trap for the MOSCITO players?

Back to BBO’s deal generator, this interesting hand was dealt:

West has a 7-card ♦ suit and openers ♠ suit covered from every conceivable angle. Out comes the 2♦ bid from West over Souths 1♥ bid, alerted as a 2-suited hand willing to compete to level 3. Whatever North does N/S are DOOM(ed). Count how many tricks you are down. West is going to X a possible 4♠ contract for penalties (pulling 4♠ to 4NT would show a hand looking to sacrifice). East sitting with a singleton ♠ may be the only person who knows what is going on.

---

[sfi]

Over 2D the bidding continues with 2S from North, P - P back to you. Now you nowhere near as well off as standard bidders since your partner has no idea which two suits you have. You don't even get the chance to pass a responsive double for penalties. If North bids 3S instead of 2, you can't double that for penalties either and now you're struggling to find your best spot.

Getting the chance to double 4S is pure fantasy land.

But if you want to throw your own constructive bidding out of the window just because they've opened a 4 card major in front of you, be my guest.