[benlessard]

Ive already discussed the convention but ive made a comparison with Woolsey (Multi-Landy). Comments will be appreciated.


2M = natural, 6 cards suit

2D = 5+D and 4M

2C = 5+C & 4 Os (other suit). 5C+5D is possible if your vul and too afraid to bid 2Nt. In the original version 2C always show a 4M, but I think being able to bid 2C with clubs and 4D is better.

X = 5M + Os (other suit, it can be both M)

In short with 5M/5m or 5M/4m you start with a X and with 4M+5m or 4M+6m you bid the minor. With both minors you can bid 2C or 2nt & with both M you start with a X. IMO not being able to double with 44 in the M isnt a big deal.

minor single suiters have to be bid at the 3 level.

The name I choose come from the length showned, X=5, 2C=5, 2D =5, 2H=6 ,2S=6 but the original name was probably SOFA and the convention probably come from Canada.



The development are straightforward POC (pass or correct)



Over the X advancer can

2C = shortness in a M or (32)44. Tend to show at least 3 clubs except (16)42 pattern. (the doubler will POC)

2D = shortness in a M and less than 3C, always at least 5D. (15)52, (14)62 or more shape

2H = tolerance for both M (the doubler is going to correct or pick the best M when holding both)

2S = can be played as POC or natural (Im not sure wich one is better)



With a 22(54) & (32)(53) advancer proper bid is 2H to be sure to play in the best major. With a (32)44 he can afford to bid 2C to play 2m when the doubler hold 5M+4m Holding both M the doubler will bid 2H and advancer POC in the 3 cards Major.



Ill make a comparison of 55566 vs the two closest defense ; Woosley(Multi-Landy) and Vertigo

In this post ill do VS Woolsey



http://www.bridgeguy...NTOpenings.html



.--------Singlesuiters with M, in Woolsey you bid 2D in 55566 the M is bid directly. The differences are that in delayed auctions LHO has more options. He can bid 2H over your 2D (1nt)--2D--(2H) vs (1NT)--2S, he can make a very safe double of 2D & he can pass and bid 2S vs bidding 2S directly (one way to play, the other to invite).

These are very similar inconvenients of the multi 2D vs a direct weak two.

However bidding 2D has the advantage of putting the NT opener on lead fairly often and disclose declarer hand but it its still a good edge for 55566.



----------5M+m in Woolsey you bid 2M but in 55566 you start by double. Bidding 2M is more preemptive but its less safe. When advancer hold a singleton in the M you will have to play 3m or pass playing in a 5-1 fit. You also have no way to stop in 2D or 2H in advancer suit after a 2S overcall. In 55566 you avoid the 3 level and give you some extra chance to scramble into good contracts.



Here are some examples of scramble after a double (no interference after the 1nt opening)

(1nt)-

X--2C (5M+os, I have a stiff M)

2D--2H (5M+D, I also hate D and have at least 5H 1525,1624 or long hearts)



(1nt)-

X--2D (5M+os, I have a stiff M and less than 3C)

2H--pass (stiff D & at least 8 cards in the majors) EX 5314 vs 1462 or (1552)



If there is interference you will be able to make POC double. EX If opps bid 2S you can double and partner will pass with 5S bid 3m to show 5H+m or bid 2NT to show 15(43) shapes. This is a key idea of 55566, a 5M+4m is much safer in competitive bidding than a 5m+4M. Once the X show 5M putting both majors into the double make sense and it free up 2C. Another small benefit double will also rightside 2H contracts.

In the end being able to play 2m rather than 3m on misfit hands give a decent edge for 55566 even if bidding 2M is more preemptive.



----------5m+4M in Woolsey are in X but in 2m for 55566. Bidding the minor directly allow you to get raised more often than a POC bid in clubs. Holding 2542 vs 4153 you can compete in D more easily since responder will not think you have 5C+4S. Also when the NT opener will be dummy you will know what minor to lead. Good edge for 55566 here.



-----------Both majors in Woolsey are in 2C but under the double for 55566. In both methods you can play in the better major. When advancer hold both M in Woolsey he will know the double fit immediatly. In 55566 you will need to make a POC of 3H (its the doubler that is going to know the double fit). In Woolsey you can invite with

2C--2D (both M, pick your best M)

2H--2S (H are better, invite with spades)

You can get more disclosure in Woolsey.

EX 4531 vs a 31(54) in Woolsey it will go

2C--2S (Both M, often H shortness but 4S+2/3H is possible)

but in 55566 its

X--2C

2H--2S (both M , clearly showing a stiff H wich will help the defense lead trump)

But in general its very hard to find any significant advantage to Woolsey here other than rightsiding more hands. Im giving a small edge to Woolsey here.



So in the end when I add it all up, I strongly believe that 55566 got a good edge over Woolsey.

[akhare]

benlessard, on 2013-January-11, 14:55, said:

2M = natural, 6 cards suit

2D = 5+D and 4M

2C = 5+C & 4 Os (other suit). 5C+5D is possible if your vul and too afraid to bid 2Nt. In the original version 2C always show a 4M, but I think being able to bid 2C with clubs and 4D is better.

X = 5M + Os (other suit, it can be both M)

We play a somewhat similar method (variation of Pagan):

2M = Natural
2m = Minor and 4+ Spades
X = H + another

We immediately establish 4+♠ or 4+♥ at the cost not being able to immediately distinguish the relative length of the suits.

In your methods, the tradeoff after the immediate 2m is that the major (if any) is unknown, but the X shows a 5 card major.

[mgoetze]

So the opponents having two bites of the cherry vs. Woolsey's 2♦ is a big deal but when it comes to the 5M4m hands you downplay this aspect a lot. Hardly seems like an unbiased review.

Playing 2♣ when overcaller has 5314 and advancer has 1642 seems pretty horrible.

Also, one of the nice things about Woolsey is that you can switch to Multi-Landy vs. Weak NT very easily.

[awm]

The hands with both majors are arguably the most important. There are some auctions where you will get into trouble by not showing those directly; for example:

(1) You Dbl, partner bids 2♣. Now how will you specify which major is longer? It seems you must either bid 2♥ with either 5/4, or bid 2♠ and wind up at the three-level if partner prefers hearts.
(2) You Dbl, LHO tries to sign off in 3m. Now you could miss a good major fit (if you are passing) or go for a number (if you bid on a minimum).

In general I think the usefulness of your pass/correct method over double is low. It's pretty rare that I don't want to play in opener's major when he has 5M and 4m (especially at MP, but even at IMPs really), and bidding this way also gives me the chance to miss a good major fit on occasion (i.e. say I have KJx xx Qxxx Kxxx and partner has AQxxx xxx x AQxx; I guess you double and I bid 2♣ and we play there, but 4♠ is actually decent; give me a stiff heart and another diamond and it's even more clear).

Perhaps a good comparable is Meyerson, which also has 2M natural but uses:

2♦ = natural (hey you have no way to bid this hand at the two-level at all!)
2♣ = majors (putting me well ahead on the major-oriented hands)
Dbl = major + minor two suiter (ambiguous about length, but eliminating the M+M hands can make things easier later)

Continuations to Dbl are: 2♣ = "bid your five-card suit", 2♦ = "bid your major", 2M = natural. Compared to what you play:

(1) When advancer has a long heart suit I can play there in preference to playing in one of overcaller's two suits. This is valuable and something you generally cannot do playing 2♥ as pass/correct in various sequences.
(2) When overcaller has 5+m and 4M, I will virtually always reach the same contract you will (except in the above case where advancer has a long major) and will sometimes manage to conceal overcaller's minor from the person on lead.
(3) When overcaller has 5M and 4m, you have the ability to play in 2m whereas I don't, but I suspect this is rarely useful given that advancer doesn't even know which major overcaller holds yet. In exchange I will often manage to hide overcaller's minor from the opening lead on these hands.
(4) I have a slightly easier time in competition because if responder signs off in a minor, at least one of overcaller's suits (the other minor) becomes known (well most of the time). In your similar auction overcaller could still have any two of the three remaining suits.

[benlessard]

Quote

but when it comes to the 5M4m hands you downplay this aspect a lot. Hardly seems like an unbiased review.

I dont downplay that bidding 2S is a lot more preemptive than X, but its the cost of not being able to bid with some 54 that is high. Vulnerable you have KQxxx,Ax,Axxx,xx do you feel safe when you bid 2S ? Double is just much safer, more safety equal the chance to bid on more hands. For me its a no brainer that the extra frequency and safety are major edges that eclipse most other considerations. Im in the minority but I prefer DONT to Cappelletti because I get more safety for my 54 and my borderline hands. When your goal is getting them out of 1NT, safety and frequency is a better deal than maximum preemption.

Quote

Playing 2♣ when overcaller has 5314 and advancer has 1642 seems pretty horrible.

And you think 2S possibly doubled is so much better ? At least im playing 2C when 5(21)5 while many will play in 2S in 5-1 (also possibly doubled.)

Quote

(1) You Dbl, partner bids 2♣. Now how will you specify which major is longer? It seems you must either bid 2♥ with either 5/4, or bid 2♠ and wind up at the three-level if partner prefers hearts.

Advancer will only bid 2C with a singleton in a major (or 3244,2344) and 99.8% of the times the stiff is going to be in the doubler major. So over 2C the doubler pass with clubs bid 2D with D+5M and bid 2H with both M, knowing wich M is longer isnt relevant here. That is why when advancer hold a 2245,3334 he must bid 2H to make sure to play in the better major because if he bid 2C he wont be able to know wich M is longer.

Quote

(2) You Dbl, LHO tries to sign off in 3m. Now you could miss a good major fit (if you are passing) or go for a number (if you bid on a minimum).

The risk is the same the vast majority of the times. Ex if im 4243 there is no difference between 2C showing both M and X showing 5M+ other suit ? The risk of bidding and getting in a 44 fit or not competing and missing a 54 fit is the same. If they bid to 3D and I have 4225 the dilemma is about the same. If I hold a more balanced hand like 4234 passing isnt that much costly anyway. Whatever I lose when its M+M, I almost gain double when its m+M.

Quote

(1) When advancer has a long heart suit I can play there in preference to playing in one of overcaller's two suits. This is valuable and something you generally cannot do playing 2♥ as pass/correct in various sequences.

I agree but i do the same for 2D instead (X---2D show 5) and sometimes Ill be able to stop in 2H (when the doubler has S+D and advancer has 5 or 6H) so small edge for 55566 here.
I think you could do the same to what im doing .. over the X(M+m) 2H is pick your major and 2D is natural. So sometimes it can go. 2C-2D-2H (pass or bid your 5 card suit, ive got 5D, I have vgood hearts). This way you can play in advancer D and sometimes in advancer H, while if you play 2D as pick your major and 2H as natural your able to stop only in the advancer Hearts. But for bidding games 2D as show your major allow more flexibility (raising to 3 vs H but passing vs spades). I agree with you that being able to scramble into advancer suits is a decent plus.

Quote

(2) When overcaller has 5+m and 4M, I will virtually always reach the same contract you will (except in the above case where advancer has a long major) and will sometimes manage to conceal overcaller's minor from the person on lead.

Except in what I consider the important cases .. when you have a stiff for partner 5 card Major. EX 1453 vs 5??4 or 5??5 (2C can easily be your last plus or they can easily double 3C).

Quote

(i.e. say I have KJx xx Qxxx Kxxx and partner has AQxxx xxx x AQxx

Very few pairs will be in game no matter what system they play. At imps there is nothing wrong in being in 2C here. At MP If advancer has extras values and a (32)44 he can of course bid 2H to aim for 2M making more than a minor contract (but I dont think its a smart strategy since 3m will often make 2 more tricks). Also if I have a 3244 and partner has 5S+4m it mean they have a 8 or 9 H fit and are unlikely to sell in 2m, so in the end ill its likely ill be able to compete in S anyway.

Quote

(4) I have a slightly easier time in competition because if responder signs off in a minor, at least one of overcaller's suits (the other minor) becomes known (well most of the time). In your similar auction overcaller could still have any two of the three remaining suits.

Im sure I follow you here, could you find an example ? However Im sure that my advancer is going to raise on more hands that you because the 5 card is exposed much more often and more directly in 55566.

I must admit that I much prefer a setup like Meyerson where you have at least 3 bids that show suits naturally than a setup where 2M show 2 suiters. Its superior for safety and for competitive bidding. I also agree that losing 2D natural is a major loss.

[awm]

Here are a few examples:

---

If north had shown both majors immediately there would be no problem reaching the spade fit.

---

If north's original double showed a major and a minor, south could figure out the diamond fit (obviously north won't have clubs considering the auction).

Also, I don't really understand what you bid with say 2443 when partner doubles. If you bid 2♣ you can play a 4-3 club fit instead of a 5-2 major fit, which seems less than ideal. You say 2♦ shows five, so I guess that is out. And 2♥ shows equal length in the majors and will be removed to 2♠ when partner has 5♠/4♥ which is also not ideal. Another more extreme example is 2542; bidding 2♣ is simply ridiculous, but 2♦ shows five and 2♥ will again be corrected to spades when partner has 5♠/4♥ (which you can't pull back to hearts even at the three-level because you'll expect a spade-club two suiter).

[benlessard]

But for every 5M+4M there is twice the amount of 5m+4M. Hands with majors are of course more important but less vulnerable to preemption (its more likely they are able to compete in 2M than into 3m like in your examples) so my guess its that its about 3 to 1 (at least 2 to 1 for sure) in my favor in hands where ill be able to compete and you wont vs the opposite, also hands when I fail to compete are often hands where they have a M fit anyway like your 2nd example.

Hands like 2443,2542 all bids 2H to play in the 5M, in short over the X we bid 2H the majority of the times the same way people pass 2M the majority of the times.

[wank]

your 2m bids suffer the same problem as precisionesque 2m openers - the responding hand doesn't know whether it should move or not.

[awm]

benlessard, on 2013-January-13, 07:54, said:

But for every 5M+4M there is twice the amount of 5m+4M. Hands with majors are of course more important but less vulnerable to preemption (its more likely they are able to compete in 2M than into 3m like in your examples) so my guess its that its about 3 to 1 (at least 2 to 1 for sure) in my favor in hands where ill be able to compete and you wont vs the opposite, also hands when I fail to compete are often hands where they have a M fit anyway like your 2nd example.

Hands like 2443,2542 all bids 2H to play in the 5M, in short over the X we bid 2H the majority of the times the same way people pass 2M the majority of the times.

This isn't quite right, because the problem isn't limited to when overcaller has majors. There are the following cases:

(1) They bid a minor. I will know overcaller's minor (if he has M+m) or both overcaller's suits (if he has M+M). You know none of overcaller's suits (if he started with a double, showing M+M or 5M+4m) or just overcaller's minor (if he has 4M+5m). So I am very substantially ahead here.
(2) They bid a major. I will know overcaller's major (presumably the other major). You know overcaller's major also (if he has 5M+4m) or both overcaller's suits (if he has 5m+4M). This gives you an advantage when you want to compete in the minor on these hands, but I get some of it back because when their suit is hearts they will typically bid 2♦ (transfer) which I can double to show a fit for diamonds (allowing me to compete in diamonds). Also, I think the difference between knowing zero suits to knowing one suit is bigger than the difference between knowing one suit and two suits.. and knowing overcaller's major is typically more useful than knowing his minor (because you can bid 2/2 or 3/3 instead of needing to bid 3/2).

I think landing in the 5-2 major fit instead of the 5-4 major fit when overcaller has 5422 and advancer has 2542 is pretty awful, don't you? In fact it seems like you reach the "wrong" major in a number of cases here. And the "both majors" hands are the ones where you are most likely to win the auction, and also most likely to have a game:

---

Isn't this kind of embarrassing? Those of us who show both majors right away will never have this problem. It's true that you can construct a hand where overcaller has a major and a minor and you miss a game like the above also, but your method (where you show minor first) won't help with that either.

[WesleyC]

A couple of months back, I was interested in finding out what 1NT defence is most popular among the top players so I hunted down the Convention Cards of 6 top international teams from a recent major event.

I discovered that of the 18 pairs playing for USA, Italy, Monaco, Netherlands, China and Sweden, 17 of them played 2C as showing both majors. I'm going to stick with them!

WesleyC

[MickyB]

OT, but -

2D/H/S all natural or 2D as a good 2M overcall? Which is better?

[gnasher]

MickyB, on 2013-January-13, 10:44, said:

OT, but -

2D/H/S all natural or 2D as a good 2M overcall? Which is better?

Answering a different question, 2♦ as a bad 2M overcall is better than 2♦ as a good 2M overcall. Opposite a good 2M overcall you're more likely to want to compete or bid game, so more likely to be inconvenienced by the ambiguity in a sequence like (1NT) 2♦ (2NT). Similarly, any problems caused for the opponents by the ambiguity in 2♦ are more likely to benefit us when we have a bad 2M overcall.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2013-January-13, 15:01

[MickyB]

gnasher, on 2013-January-13, 14:59, said:

Answering a different question, 2♦ as a bad 2M overcall is better than 2♦ as a good 2M overcall. Opposite a good 2M overcall you're more likely to want to compete or bid game, so more likely to be inconvenienced by the ambiguity in a sequence like (1NT) 2♦ (2NT). Similarly, any problems caused for the opponents by the ambiguity in 2♦ are more likely to benefit us when we have a bad 2M overcall.

I know this is the normal logic for good weak 2s and bad multi, but I am not sure it applies here. I think we rate to do better having overcalled 2M natural than 2D multi, regardless of the range of the bid. Unless your definition of "good overcall" differs greatly from mine, it will be much less frequent than the "bad overcall".

[han]

I agree with what mickyb wrote. Biddng 2D is not only worse if we want to compete, but it also gives the opponents an easier time. For example they can more easily penalize us. I would prefer to bid 2D with the stronger major suit hands, and bid 2M directly with the weaker hands. As mickyb I'd expect the weaker 2M to be more common.

[Zelandakh]

benlessard, on 2013-January-11, 14:55, said:

Over the X advancer can

2C = shortness in a M or (32)44. Tend to show at least 3 clubs except (16)42 pattern. (the doubler will POC)

Of all the parts of the defence, this one struck me as strange. Say Doubler has 5314 and Advancer 6142. Is the bidding really going to go (1NT) - X - 2♣; P? This seems more than embarassing. MLers will overcall 2♠ and find the huge fit immediately. It is not a high frequency thing....but you do not even mention this sort of thing which will happen far more often using more method since the suits are rarely known.