[thepossum]

Dear all

Ive been trying to understand better the main interference conventions, DONT and Capelletti/Hamilton, mainly the latter with GiB. However I was uncertain what to do when RHO doubles partner's Capelletti. I considered a rebouble on this hand but want sure exactly on strength and distribution. It would have scored well since we would have found our Spades.

What is the advisable bid in this situation when opps interfere with your interference, and what sort of points and shape do you need

P

---

[Vampyr]

Approaches vary, but most common is: If there is one or more anchor suits, you can bid an anchor suit for takeout and/or use your normal Lebensohl with respect to the anchor suit. When there is no anchor suit, the usual method is to double to show the balance of points. One decision is whether doubling a suit that is not the anchor suit shows balance of points or to shows the suit bid. Doubling a natural bid (including whether another known or unknown suit is also shown) is normally take out, though some strong NT pairs may use the double as penalty instead. I don’t really know.

Doubling an artificial 2C bid for Stayman and playing system on, as above, is pretty normal. As far as North/South’s situation, any agreements are fine; there is not a lot in it. In any case your assumption that 4♠ would be a profitable sacrifice at unfavourable is incorrect.

You need the values to compete.

[thepossum]

 Vampyr, on 2019-February-01, 23:28, said:

Approaches vary, but most common is: If there is one or more anchor suits, you can bid an anchor suit for takeout and/or use your normal Lebensohl with respect to the anchor suit. When there is no anchor suit, the usual method is to double to show the balance of points. One decision is whether doubling a suit that is not the anchor suit shows balance of points or to shows the suit bid. Doubling a natural bid (including whether another known or unknown suit is also shown) is normally take out, though some strong NT pairs may use the double as penalty instead. I don’t really know.

Doubling an artificial 2C bid for Stayman and playing system on, as above, is pretty normal. As far as North/South’s situation, any agreements are fine; there is not a lot in it. In any case your assumption that 4♠ would be a profitable sacrifice at unfavourable is incorrect.

You need the values to compete.

Hi Vampyr

Regarding competing I didnt mean 4S. In the group I was in 3S-2 scored better than 3NT+1. I wouldnt have sacrificed to 4 obviously, probably not bidding at all. It was North that would possibly bid the 3S. However I appreciate that could be doubled or overcalled by 3NT anyway

Is it worth redoubling? And If so what kind of values?

Thanks for the advice

regards P

[hrothgar]

This very much depends on what type of response style you prefer...

Some people advocate what are called paradox responses. Their goal is to preempt the opponents as much as possible by forcing the bidding to the "lawful" resting place as quickly as possible.

In this case, the logic would goes as follows:

1. Partner has a six card suit. Worst case scenario is that partner has a club suit in which case, we should be playing 3!C. So, I'm going to bid 3!C immediately. If partner has Diamonds, or Hearts, or Spades, I am happy to see him/her correct to their suit at the three level.

2. If I had passed instead, this would typically show some hand that is very worried about playing a doubled contract. I am either showing

• Some hand with a singleton or void (where I am worried this is partner's suit)
  
• Some very flat balanced hand with "nothing" where playing 3 foo doubled looks deadily
  
• A hand with sufficient defense that I expect to set a NT contract
  
• A hand that would have an obvious balance if the opponents settle at the two level

Other people play a more normal advancing style In this case, the logic goes:

1. Partner has a six card suit. Once upon a time, I was forced to respond 2!D to give partner the opportunity to show their suit as cheaply as possible. However, the opponents double means that I no longer need to do so. So, I now have the opportunity to pass with any hand that has no idea what they should do

2. Conversely, if I decide to show a suit I am, to some extent, over riding partner and suggesting that playing in my suit might be the best course of action.
________________

IMHO, either stye is reasonable to play, but make sure that you and parter are on the same page.

With this particular hand, we're red on white. Its very important to recognize that 2(foo)X-1 or 3(foo)X-2 rate to be VERY bad contracts which is also going to shape out decisions.
Conversely, the opponents might be reticent to make low level doubles since 2MX= is going to score amazing well for us.

With this in mind:

Playing a paradox style, I think that my hand is barely good enough to bid 3!C, however, I wouldn't fault a pass.
I think that eating up the two level bidding space is sufficiently valuable that I am willing to risk a 3 level contract.
if we settle in 3M, I have a supporting honor for partner which will make it difficult for the opponents to make a penalty double stick.

Playing a more standard style, I am going to pass.
My diamonds are neither long enough nor strong enough that I think that they will play better than partner's suit, nor do I want a Diamond lead going into me if we are defending.

[thepossum]

Dear Hrothgar

Many thanks for all the advice

regards Possum

[pescetom]

 thepossum, on 2019-February-01, 21:49, said:

Ive been trying to understand better the main interference conventions, DONT and Capelletti/Hamilton, mainly the latter with GiB.

You should also take a look at Multilandy, which is similar to Capelletti but arguably better, and more common outside the USA. Essentially it inverts the first two calls, with 2♣ being a traditional Landy and 2♦ a weak-only Multi. Using 2♣ to show both majors is technically superior because partner can use 2♦ to ask preference. The fact that 2♦ is always a 6-card major (at least in the original convention) means you can use the usual pass/correct replies and makes handling counter-interference less painful.

[Vampyr]

 pescetom, on 2019-February-02, 08:22, said:

You should also take a look at Multilandy, which is similar to Capelletti but arguably better, and more common outside the USA. Essentially it inverts the first two calls, with 2♣ being a traditional Landy and 2♦ a weak-only Multi. Using 2♣ to show both majors is technically superior because partner can use 2♦ to ask preference. The fact that 2♦ is always a 6-card major (at least in the original convention) means you can use the usual pass/correct replies and makes handling counter-interference less painful.

I wouldn’t use any of these against a strong NT. I have found double=majors or minors or diamonds to be very effective.

[steve2005]

 thepossum, on 2019-February-01, 21:49, said:

Dear all
I considered a rebouble on this hand but want sure exactly on strength and distribution. It would have scored well since we would have found our Spades.

What is the advisable bid in this situation when opps interfere with your interference, and what sort of points and shape do you need

Redouble is unrealistic in this situation as partner has a long suit. It is hard to determine the strength of your hand when you dont know if you fit your partner

[kenberg]

Here is a basic view. It's how I play Capp and DONT, and I think that it is pretty common.

Suppose partner overcalls 1NT with 2C, either DONT or Capp, and your RHO doubles and not surprisingly, you don't have much.

Capp: Without the double, you were going to bid 2D to let partner bid his suit. But after the double, you pass to let partner bid his suit. A bid of 2D over the double shows diamonds and warns partner off of bidding his suit. I doubt that I would ever redouble but I guess it would show a basketfull of clubs. .


DONT: Without the double, you would pass if you had clubs, you would bid 2D if you wanted partner to show his other suit. But after the double, you pass to play in clubs and you redouble to ask partner for his other suit. A bid of 2D, over the X, shows diamonds and warns partner off of bidding his other suit.
It's the same idea if the auction begins 1NT-2D(DONT)-X. Without the double, bidding 2H would ask partner to pass if he has hearts, correct to spades if he has spades. But after the X, 2H shows hearts, XX asks partner to bid his major.

It's important that you and partner are on the same page about the meaning of 2D, whatever meaning you choose, after 1NT-2C-X. I have often seen this go very wrong.

In theory, you could vary some of this to adjust to their methods. For example: After 1NT-2D(DONT)-X, it could be that the opponents are playing Stolen so that the X shows five hearts. I wouldn't recommend that they do this over DONT, but some do. Then obviously you do not want to play in hearts so I guess you could vary your system.The thing is, the opponents themselves may not be on the same page about what their bids mean. I just keep to the basic agreement that over 1NT-2D(DONT)- X a bid of 2H shows hearts and XX asks for partner's other suit. Presumably it's spades. Fine.

[akwoo]

 thepossum, on 2019-February-01, 23:55, said:

Regarding competing I didnt mean 4S. In the group I was in 3S-2 scored better than 3NT+1.

I don't think a good human West would let you play in 3S undoubled here. You can pick up a bunch of bad habits playing against GiB.

[pescetom]

 Vampyr, on 2019-February-02, 10:44, said:

I wouldn’t use any of these against a strong NT.

Can I ask why? They are pretty standard, and probably for a good reason.

 Vampyr, on 2019-February-02, 10:44, said:

I have found double=majors or minors or diamonds to be very effective.

I do agree that the important thing is that double shows anything except penalty, if that's what you are saying.

[thepossum]

 kenberg, on 2019-February-04, 10:12, said:

Here is a basic view. It's how I play Capp and DONT, and I think that it is pretty common.

Suppose partner overcalls 1NT with 2C, either DONT or Capp, and your RHO doubles and not surprisingly, you don't have much.

Capp: Without the double, you were going to bid 2D to let partner bid his suit. But after the double, you pass to let partner bid his suit. A bid of 2D over the double shows diamonds and warns partner off of bidding his suit. I doubt that I would ever redouble but I guess it would show a basketfull of clubs. .


DONT: Without the double, you would pass if you had clubs, you would bid 2D if you wanted partner to show his other suit. But after the double, you pass to play in clubs and you redouble to ask partner for his other suit. A bid of 2D, over the X, shows diamonds and warns partner off of bidding his other suit.
It's the same idea if the auction begins 1NT-2D(DONT)-X. Without the double, bidding 2H would ask partner to pass if he has hearts, correct to spades if he has spades. But after the X, 2H shows hearts, XX asks partner to bid his major.

It's important that you and partner are on the same page about the meaning of 2D, whatever meaning you choose, after 1NT-2C-X. I have often seen this go very wrong.

In theory, you could vary some of this to adjust to their methods. For example: After 1NT-2D(DONT)-X, it could be that the opponents are playing Stolen so that the X shows five hearts. I wouldn't recommend that they do this over DONT, but some do. Then obviously you do not want to play in hearts so I guess you could vary your system.The thing is, the opponents themselves may not be on the same page about what their bids mean. I just keep to the basic agreement that over 1NT-2D(DONT)- X a bid of 2H shows hearts and XX asks for partner's other suit. Presumably it's spades. Fine.

Thanks very much for the detailed explanation Ken

The descriptions on all the suit bids with GiB were natural long suits and rebouble seemed fairly undefined which is why I ended up passing.
North didn't feel strong enough to bid

Those who did redouble (maybe incorrectly) showed enough strength for North to bid, but they bid 3S over a Stayman 2S response.

I think the prudent bid was as you and others suggest that passing was the best bid on this hand.

I was surprised that West didn't double

Regards P

[Vampyr]

 pescetom, on 2019-February-04, 16:07, said:

Can I ask why? They are pretty standard, and probably for a good reason.


I do agree that the important thing is that double shows anything except penalty, if that's what you are saying.

Not only that; now 2♣ and 2♦ are that suit plus a major, and can be passed. Plus after a double you can play in either minor at the 2-level.