[mich-b]

I am interested in simple and effective defense against moscito
(1♣ = 15+ ,
1♦ = 4+♥ 10-14 , denies 4♠
1♥ = 4+♠ 10-14 , denies 4♥
1♠ = both majors 10-14)

We can play our usual defense against the strong 1♣ so I am really looking for suggestions how to deal with the 1♦/1♥ openings , and in particular , how to use Double and 1♥/1♠.
Since I need this for one 16 board match , I really need something simple , but any advice is welcome.


Additionally , I am also interested in suggestions for a (simple!) defense to a system where generally :
1♣ = ♥
1♦ = ♠
1♥ = ♣ or balanced
1♠ = ♦

[sfi]

My standard approach (and what I recommend to opponents when I play this sort of system) is to use:

X = takeout of shown suit
bid of shown suit = natural
2 of shown suit = Michaels

Other stuff is like they opened one of the suit they have shown.

IMO it's important to have a natural overcall of their suit when it could be 4 cards, particularly if it can be canape.

[Zelandakh]

There are 2 generally standard meta defences to transfers. The first is

X = shows the suit they actually bid
min bid in T = take-out of T (where T is the opps' suit)
jump bid in T = Michaels

and the second is

X = take-out of T (where T is the opps' suit)
min bid in T = Michaels (where T is the opps' suit)

You might also like to look up Marvin French's defense to transfers, which has a more comprehensive approach and deals with both 1 under and 2 under transfer bids. While not the specific situations mentioned here, the methods are designed to be easily adaptable.

[gordontd]

Zelandakh, on 2012-July-31, 02:05, said:

There are 2 generally standard meta defences to transfers.

The one quoted by sfi above is fairly standard too.

[Zelandakh]

gordontd, on 2012-July-31, 02:07, said:

The one quoted by sfi above is fairly standard too.

As a defence to potentially 4 card suits, yes. As a meta defence to transfers, I would suggest not.

[kreivi68]

I would like to add one more defence. This is something I've been playing:

X= Take out of their shown suit
Their shown suit at one level= four cards in other major + longer minor (Raptor)
Their suit at two level= Michaels

T.

[sfi]

Zelandakh, on 2012-July-31, 03:01, said:

As a defence to potentially 4 card suits, yes. As a meta defence to transfers, I would suggest not.

That's true, but I have yet to encounter a system where opener transfers to a 5 card suit. When that happens, I'm sure we'll adopt one of the other defences.

[WellSpyder]

sfi, on 2012-July-31, 01:44, said:

IMO it's important to have a natural overcall of their suit when it could be 4 cards, particularly if it can be canape.

So do you also reserve 2 of oppo's suit as natural when you play against those using the perhaps more common natural 4-card majors (whether canape or not)?

[sfi]

WellSpyder, on 2012-July-31, 05:30, said:

So do you also reserve 2 of oppo's suit as natural when you play against those using the perhaps more common natural 4-card majors (whether canape or not)?

3 of the suit is natural there if it's potential canape. If not, we've given up the immediate natural overcall since it's more likely that opener has a 5+ card suit (at least in the partnerships where we have discussed this) and showing 2 suited hands has a fair bit of positive potential. We don't get to use the bid as often as at the one level or even if we had it available at the two level, but there are times we get to bid their suit naturally later in the auction.

If they play transfers against you, it is important to put the extra space to good use one way or another. And I dislike not having a bid with my good 6 card major when they show hearts on my right with K3 7542 A KQT832.

[gordontd]

Zelandakh, on 2012-July-31, 03:01, said:

As a defence to potentially 4 card suits, yes.

Well that covers Moscito-like openers, and transfer responses to 1C - two of the more common modern uses of transfer bids.

[nigel_k]

sfi, on 2012-July-31, 01:44, said:

My standard approach (and what I recommend to opponents when I play this sort of system) is to use:

X = takeout of shown suit
bid of shown suit = natural
2 of shown suit = Michaels

Other stuff is like they opened one of the suit they have shown.

IMO it's important to have a natural overcall of their suit when it could be 4 cards, particularly if it can be canape.

Agree 100% - just play that a direct overcall in their suit at the one level is natural and everything else as if they opened the suit they showed. Simple and close to optimal IMO.

You may also need an agreement over the responses. If they make a GF relay, you will be bidding obstructively so 1NT=minors etc. Probably the same if their relay is invit+. But if they have some kind of artificial response which may be invit/GF or responder may just pass whatever opener does next, then you will need to know what you are doing over that.

[32519]

I like the DOOM defence, an acronym for Deadly Overcall Obliterating Majors. Playing DOOM, then –
1. X = 5/4 in the majors, 5-cards in the suit shown by the opponents and a full opening hand (12+ HCP).
2. Bidding the major suit shown = 5/5 in the majors and a full opening hand (12+ HCP).
3. 1NT = Natural, 15-17 HCP with a double stop in the suit shown.
4. Irrespective of the major suit shown, 2♦ = 6-cards in the other major, 10 – 13 HCP (sort of Multi style)
5. 2 of the major shown = Michaels
6. 2 of the other major = natural and pre-emptive, 6-card suit and 5 – 9 HCP

DOOM has all sorts of continuations including –
1. Dealing with misfits (overcaller has majors, responder has minors)
2. Playing in NT contracts
3. Playing in the major suit shown by the opponents (finessing the suit for any missing cards becomes a no-brainer). This could be a part score battle on the 2-level, playing in a 5-2 fit and responder has a minor suit orientated hand, or, in game with a 5-3 fit and the hands dovetailing well or responder with enough tricks in the minor suits to land the contract.

[the hog]

32519, on 2012-August-30, 00:10, said:

I like the DOOM defence, an acronym for Deadly Overcall Obliterating Majors. Playing DOOM, then –
1. X = 5/4 in the majors, 5-cards in the suit shown by the opponents and a full opening hand (12+ HCP).
2. Bidding the major suit shown = 5/5 in the majors and a full opening hand (12+ HCP).
3. 1NT = Natural, 15-17 HCP with a double stop in the suit shown.
4. Irrespective of the major suit shown, 2♦ = 6-cards in the other major, 10 – 13 HCP (sort of Multi style)
5. 2 of the major shown = Michaels
6. 2 of the other major = natural and pre-emptive, 6-card suit and 5 – 9 HCP

DOOM has all sorts of continuations including –
1. Dealing with misfits (overcaller has majors, responder has minors)
2. Playing in NT contracts
3. Playing in the major suit shown by the opponents (finessing the suit for any missing cards becomes a no-brainer). This could be a part score battle on the 2-level, playing in a 5-2 fit and responder has a minor suit orientated hand, or, in game with a 5-3 fit and the hands dovetailing well or responder with enough tricks in the minor suits to land the contract.

As someone who has played Moscito for a long time, I can say I would love my opponents to use this "defence".

[hrothgar]

32519, on 2012-August-30, 00:10, said:

I like the DOOM defence, an acronym for Deadly Overcall Obliterating Majors. Playing DOOM, then –
1. X = 5/4 in the majors, 5-cards in the suit shown by the opponents and a full opening hand (12+ HCP).
2. Bidding the major suit shown = 5/5 in the majors and a full opening hand (12+ HCP).
3. 1NT = Natural, 15-17 HCP with a double stop in the suit shown.
4. Irrespective of the major suit shown, 2♦ = 6-cards in the other major, 10 – 13 HCP (sort of Multi style)
5. 2 of the major shown = Michaels
6. 2 of the other major = natural and pre-emptive, 6-card suit and 5 – 9 HCP

DOOM has all sorts of continuations including –
1. Dealing with misfits (overcaller has majors, responder has minors)
2. Playing in NT contracts
3. Playing in the major suit shown by the opponents (finessing the suit for any missing cards becomes a no-brainer). This could be a part score battle on the 2-level, playing in a 5-2 fit and responder has a minor suit orientated hand, or, in game with a 5-3 fit and the hands dovetailing well or responder with enough tricks in the minor suits to land the contract.

Stupidest defense ever

[hrothgar]

hrothgar, on 2012-August-30, 05:03, said:

Stupidest defense ever

It occurs to me that I should probably provide a bit more detail:
(With apologies to Browning)

How are thee stupid? Let me count the ways

1. Your two lowest level bids (pass and a cue bid) both promise

5+ cards in the suit shown by the opponents
4+ cards in the other major.
the identical point range

The bids are incredible rare, overlap almost completely, and aren't event that useful.

2. With the exception of your 1NT overcall (which requires a double stop in the opponent's 4 card suit) you have no way to show a balanced hand with values

3. You have no option to show a classic takeout double shape (4441, 5440, 5431 with shortness in the opponent's suit)

4. You can't show a diamond suit below the three level

You have neutered your ability to show many of the most common and useful hand patterns in exchange for hand types that are both rare and of dubious value.

The entire structure, start to finish, is one of the worst conceived pieces of crap that I have ever seen.

As a practical matter, if anyone ever offers you a handful of magic beans in exchange for a cow, don't do it!
(Its a scam)

[32519]

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.

[hrothgar]

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.

How, pray tell, are you disrupting anything?

As far as I can tell, you're spending an awful lot of time passing...

You're passing with balanced hands with values, you're passing with unbalanced hands with shortness, you're passing with any hand with diamonds...

How the $#(*#& is your partner supposed to know what to do after an auction like

(1♥) - P - (2♠)
(P) - X - (P) - ?????

[gwnn]

[32519]

Suggested defences from others:
1. X = Takeout of the suit shown [this doesn’t stop the opponents playing in a 4-3 fit on level 2]
2. X = Shows the suit actually bid [same as 1]
3. Bid of shown suit = Natural [same as 1]
4. Bid of suit shown = 3-suited takeout [same as 1]
5. Bid of suit shown = 4-cards in the other major + longer minor (Raptor) [this has more potential]
6. Bid of suit shown = Michaels [interesting concept which could possibly be expanded upon e.g. 1 of suit shown = the other major and the higher ranking unbid suit. 2 of suit shown = other major and the lower ranking unbid suit]
7. 2 of shown suit = Michaels [standard for many systems]
8. 2 of shown suit = Natural, 6-card suit
9. Other bids = Natural

Other Quotes:
1. IMO it's important to have a natural overcall of their suit when it could be 4 cards, particularly if it can be canapé. [Someone else agreed with this: Agree 100% - just play that a direct overcall in their suit at the one level is natural and everything else as if they opened the suit they showed. Simple and close to optimal IMO.]
2. If they play transfers against you, it is important to put the extra space to good use one way or another.

Now let’s look at your gripes:
1. With the exception of your 1NT overcall (which requires a double stop in the opponent's 4 card suit) you have no way to show a balanced hand with values (OK, so remove the double stop! Most 2/1 or SAYC players bid 1NT as natural and 15-18 HCP over 1-level openings. I don’t see any need to change this).

2. You have no option to show a classic takeout double shape (4441, 5440, 5431 with shortness in the opponent's suit) (I use 2NT to show either, a) a 3-suited takeout with values, shortness in the suit opened, or b) a good 6+ card suit of my own with values. Without a hand prepared to compete to level-3, little is gained (see point 3 below).

3. You can't show a diamond suit below the three level (I have no desire to do this as it does not “get-in-face” of the MOSCITO players who typically have auctions which proceed like this: 1♥ (showing ♠, 9-14 HCP)-2♠. Responder's single raise shows three card spade support and ~8-9 losers. Additionally opener could easily be holding a canapé styled hand and now I fall into the trap of bidding openers minor on level 2. The situation has been reversed. As declarer now I’m dead).

Some info on MOSCITO’s minor suit openings:
2♣ = Natural, 6+ ♣, 9-14 HCP
2NT = Bad 3-level preempt in either minor. By bad I’m assuming 5-10 HCP and probably a 7-card suit.
Since you are advocating “assumed fit” with your 2♦/2♥/2♠ bids and 4-10 HCP, your 3-level constructive bids could easily be made on a 5-card suit and 11-14 HCP (see 2♣ above and 3♣/3♦ below).
3♣/3♦ = Natural and constructive, 2 of the top 3 honours. Here I am assuming 11-14 HCP (15 would be opened 1♣) and a maximum of 3-cards in either major.

4. The entire structure, start to finish, is one of the worst conceived pieces of crap that I have ever seen. (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.)

5. Major’s First bidding is more preemptive and often prevents opponents from making “cheap” 1 level overcalls.

6. How, pray tell, are you disrupting anything? (I don’t want MOSCITO to steal a major suit part score or game form my side. So if I don’t have anything to say, then I don’t say anything).

7. As far as I can tell, you're spending an awful lot of time passing...(Showing minor suits below the 3-level achieves little [see 2 & 3 above]. The opponents can still play in a 4-3 major suit fit and they have more info on the hand layout which will assist them. When the auction proceeds 1x-P-2y-? partner still has a bid. Both opponents have shown limited values. Partners hand strength/distribution will determine whether or not to enter the auction. Without a suitable hand, then hooray! Plus 1 for MOSCITO).

8. You're passing with balanced hands with values, you're passing with unbalanced hands with shortness, you're passing with any hand with diamonds...(Now this is an idea that needs some further consideration – a possible trap pass with a hand containing values that doesn’t conveniently fit in anywhere else. When both opener and responder have shown limited hands, partner should be able to work out what is going on and make some sort of balancing bid. Granted, entering the auction after 1♥-P-2♠-? will be tough. So you will possibly gain here).

[aguahombre]

A couple big organizations provide a very effective defense.