[sfi]

First topic - Lebensohl

Well, many of the bids after 1NT - (2H) aren't affected by Lebensohl. In particular, 2S, 3C and 3D are totally the same as if you weren't playing it - i.e. non-forcing at the 2-level and forcing at the 3-level.

Similarly, before Lebensohl was invented 3H would show 4 spades and 3NT would deny 4 spades, both with game-forcing values.

What Lebensohl did was give up the natural 2NT bid to allow the partnership 2 ways to get to the 3-level. So now you can show non-forcing hands in the minors and can distinguish between stoppers and no stoppers for 3H and 3NT. You also gain two ways to get to 3S and all the 4-level bids, but there are no standard meanings for those auctions, and partnerships have to agree on their meanings.

That's Lebensohl in a nutshell. Nothing to do with the double, and it's important to be able to separate the conventions you are playing (and, seemingly, teaching).

New topic - negative/takeout doubles

Back when Lebensohl was invented, pretty much everyone played double as penalty, so you could simply double the opposition with a hand like

xx
KQxx
xxxx
KTx

and all was good. The problem is people kept picking up hands like

KQxx
xx
xxxx
KTx

and you no longer have an easy bid when they interfere with 2H. Do you force to game? Lebensohl will help get you to the right strain and will avoid 3NT without a stopper, but this hand isn't really worth forcing to game. Do you bid 2S? Partner will expect five of them and you might wind up in a silly spot. Do you pass? You could easily lose out in the part-score battle.

Switching to takeout doubles on this auction solves the second hand but makes it harder to penalise them. This is a trade-off many partnerships are willing to make (all of mine included). The genuine penalty doubles don't come along that much, while having better ways to compete for the partscore is very valuable.

You don't entirely give up the chance to penalise them, since you can simply pass with the first one and hope partner holds a doubleton heart and makes a takeout double in balancing seat. If partner holds 3 of them, they are likely to find a better fit in one of the minors anyway, and then you can think about doubling them there.

Third topic - Lebensohl after (weak 2) - X - (P)

This is a separate situation to the one outlined above, and treating them as the same doesn't work all that well. But that discussion is for another time.

Other points

• Ron's last name is Andersen, not Anderson.
  
• Bidding has moved on enormously since Lebensohl was invented, and GIB reflects some of those advances. BBO and GIB don't lead the advances though.
  
• If you and your partner are forgetting this or any convention, you should probably think about not playing it.
  
• Lebensohl, in its various incarnations, is one of the better conventions. You gain a lot more than you give up, but you have to be prepared to put in the time and effort to learn it properly.
  
• There are better methods than Lebensohl, but mostly they give up the same thing - a natural 2NT - and gain the ability to better compete in partscore battles.

[Bermy]

Now for all those club players out there, if you sit down to play with a new partner, switch leb "on" or "off" with me. Default double is Penalty and double of 2 club is Staymen after 1NT openings. Then again you need agreements for the other leb. How much time have you got for partnership agreements? You have seen how the argument develops and continues, if you can even get your head around the convention. Is the reward worth the effort? No, get on with discussing more important and other lovely conventions out there,

[sfi]

Bermy, on 2017-September-08, 07:00, said:

Is the reward worth the effort?

Maybe not for you. But the better players even at club level will be discussing these things in new partnerships.

[Bermy]

sfi, on 2017-September-08, 06:30, said:

First topic - Lebensohl

Well, many of the bids after 1NT - (2H) aren't affected by Lebensohl. In particular, 2S, 3C and 3D are totally the same as if you weren't playing it - i.e. non-forcing at the 2-level and forcing at the 3-level.

Similarly, before Lebensohl was invented 3H would show 4 spades and 3NT would deny 4 spades, both with game-forcing values.

What Lebensohl did was give up the natural 2NT bid to allow the partnership 2 ways to get to the 3-level. So now you can show non-forcing hands in the minors and can distinguish between stoppers and no stoppers for 3H and 3NT. You also gain two ways to get to 3S and all the 4-level bids, but there are no standard meanings for those auctions, and partnerships have to agree on their meanings.

That's Lebensohl in a nutshell. Nothing to do with the double, and it's important to be able to separate the conventions you are playing (and, seemingly, teaching).

New topic - negative/takeout doubles

Back when Lebensohl was invented, pretty much everyone played double as penalty, so you could simply double the opposition with a hand like

xx
KQxx
xxxx
KTx

and all was good. The problem is people kept picking up hands like

KQxx
xx
xxxx
KTx

and you no longer have an easy bid when they interfere with 2H. Do you force to game? Lebensohl will help get you to the right strain and will avoid 3NT without a stopper, but this hand isn't really worth forcing to game. Do you bid 2S? Partner will expect five of them and you might wind up in a silly spot. Do you pass? You could easily lose out in the part-score battle.

Switching to takeout doubles on this auction solves the second hand but makes it harder to penalise them. This is a trade-off many partnerships are willing to make (all of mine included). The genuine penalty doubles don't come along that much, while having better ways to compete for the partscore is very valuable.

You don't entirely give up the chance to penalise them, since you can simply pass with the first one and hope partner holds a doubleton heart and makes a takeout double in balancing seat. If partner holds 3 of them, they are likely to find a better fit in one of the minors anyway, and then you can think about doubling them there.

Third topic - Lebensohl after (weak 2) - X - (P)

This is a separate situation to the one outlined above, and treating them as the same doesn't work all that well. But that discussion is for another time.

Other points

• Ron's last name is Andersen, not Anderson.
  
• Bidding has moved on enormously since Lebensohl was invented, and GIB reflects some of those advances. BBO and GIB don't lead the advances though.
  
• If you and your partner are forgetting this or any convention, you should probably think about not playing it.
  
• Lebensohl, in its various incarnations, is one of the better conventions. You gain a lot more than you give up, but you have to be prepared to put in the time and effort to learn it properly.
  
• There are better methods than Lebensohl, but mostly they give up the same thing - a natural 2NT - and gain the ability to better compete in partscore battles.

and on and on and on, really is the reward worth this effort? You agree that double should be take out? You sound as confused as the rest of them surely, come to my club you will get mulched. So you agree that double is not part of the convention when it is an important available bid? I have no words for you except..............drivel

[sfi]

Bermy, on 2017-September-08, 07:07, said:

I have no words for you except..............drivel

QFT.

[Bermy]

sfi, on 2017-September-08, 07:04, said:

Maybe not for you. But the better players even at club level will be discussing these things in new partnerships.

"better" ? I didnt win the Bermuda Bowl, honestly so there will ALWAYS be better players than me, are you? Bridge is a competitive game, is passing when one should double "better"?

As I see it, what club do you go to, If I am playing the above hand, and we get them down 2 double.......we get a fat top. And for all you leb players out there....learning from Gib and BBO and "trends"...good luck even if you find your game contract we win, enjoy your 3NT or part score or misbid. You are really missing your opportunity to take advantage of opps misfits, psyches and poor bids. I guess why does a straight beat 3 of a kind? reward vs effort?

[sfi]

Bermy, on 2017-September-08, 07:14, said:

"better" ? I didnt win the Bermuda Bowl, honestly so there will ALWAYS be better players than me, are you?

We have plenty of major tournaments here in Oz. You're welcome to enter one and we can compare notes. At least one international BBO contributor (who is better than me) is already doing so next year, and the more the merrier.

Quote

Bridge is a competitive game, is passing when one should double "better"?

Certainly understanding new concepts properly is a key component of becoming better. But you don't improve your credibility by continually refusing to understand or learn about common expert practice.

[Bermy]

sfi, on 2017-September-08, 07:36, said:

We have plenty of major tournaments here in Oz. You're welcome to enter one and we can compare notes. At least one international BBO contributor (who is better than me) is already doing so next year, and the more the merrier.



Certainly understanding new concepts properly is a key component of becoming better. But you don't improve your credibility by continually refusing to understand or learn about common expert practice.

lol I have been playing for over 50 years now.

1) I am not learning leb, that I did 49 years ago
2) I didnt like it then either
3) after 30 years of arguing this point.............

I still hate leb, so you go listen to your experts, I will just continue winning.

[Stephen Tu]

Hate Leb fine, but if you are hating it because of the double issue you are being idiotic and nonsensical. Plenty of people play it with penalty double.

The only result oriented reason that would be logical is if you are getting lots of good results bidding 2nt to play.

It's also reasonable to not play it if it is too complex for you or your partners to remember.

The rest of us, we don't find it particularly complex or hard to remember compared to other gadgets, don't argue with our partners over it, and rack up board win after win competing to minor partials, and avoiding getting to 3nt off the first 5-7 tricks. Less than one percent of my opps don't play some form of leb or xfer leb. Maybe we are just playing at vastly different level of competition.

[Bermy]

Stephen Tu, on 2017-September-08, 17:43, said:

Hate Leb fine, but if you are hating it because of the double issue you are being idiotic and nonsensical. Plenty of people play it with penalty double.

The only result oriented reason that would be logical is if you are getting lots of good results bidding 2nt to play.

It's also reasonable to not play it if it is too complex for you or your partners to remember.

The rest of us, we don't find it particularly complex or hard to remember compared to other gadgets, don't argue with our partners over it, and rack up board win after win competing to minor partials, and avoiding getting to 3nt off the first 5-7 tricks. Less than one percent of my opps don't play some form of leb or xfer leb. Maybe we are just playing at vastly different level of competition.

Have it your way, and so the argument continues on and on. I didnt say I cant or wont play it, surely from what you have read, I do understand this convention and do play with it. What im saying is reward vs effort. Its simply not worth it if you cant get those doubles right. Take out simply doesnt work, so why do we have to play with them? Gib is a learning tool, kids play with it, and so when they are ready they go forward and find partners who play the same way. That is how trends are set, and Gib plays its role. I am not prepared to teach a novice for hours and hours of the merits of leb, when I can spend that time more constructivly. Lets teach them how to double the opps poor contract before we waste all this effort arguing the merits or demerits of leb.

[Bermy]

Bermy, on 2017-September-08, 19:40, said:

Have it your way, and so the argument continues on and on. I didnt say I cant or wont play it, surely from what you have read, I do understand this convention and do play with it. What im saying is reward vs effort. Its simply not worth it if you cant get those doubles right. Take out simply doesnt work (in this case), so why do we have to play with them? Gib is a learning tool, kids play with it, and so when they are ready they go forward and find partners who play the same way. That is how trends are set, and Gib plays its role. I am not prepared to teach a novice for hours and hours of the merits of leb, when I can spend that time more constructivly. Lets teach them how to double the opps poor contract before we waste all this effort arguing the merits or demerits of leb.

One has to learn to defend too. One needs to see the differences between 1 down or opps making contract, and how double effects everything. Like if U NV vs Vul forget the game contract, see if you can get -2 or more, but if you vul the game contract will probably be better. NT vs suit and all that sort of thing. One has to learn this, and learn to defend for that 2 down. Here on Gib double(pen) is not an option. What am I complaining about?

[Stephen Tu]

So are you saying you'd think it's fine if gib continued to play leb, but switched the double to penalties?

The huge problem is all this thread you only complain about not being able to double, and blaming this on leb, when this complaint has zero to do about leb itself. Why couldn't you just title the thread gib should play penalty doubles after 1nt interference instead of sidetracking the debate by inaccurately bringing leb into the discussion, which doesn't t prevent penalty doubles whatsoever?

Make a new thread, penalty vs neg del after 1nt interference, and leave any mention of leb out of it. By continuing to link unrelated issues, you just make yourself sound ridiculous.

Criticizing leb by talking about the double, which is not part of leb, is nonsense. Criticize it by talking about the actual 2nt sequences if you can. No penalty double has nothing to do with it.

[Bermy]

This subject of penalty doubles vs take outs is a huge one, and one that North Gib simply does not get right. At the low levels Gib does not understand the trap pass and how to reopen with a double. Gib does not understand (and neither do I when playing with Gib) when a double is penalty or take out, usually getting it almost 100% wrong. Then uses take outs at the 4 level, (after a neg bid) so that I can have nowhere to go to, and pass is not an option.

Each double has to be judged on its own merit (almost impossible) as there is no real differentiation, and most are treated as take outs. Sometimes to the point where it is simply ridiculous. It has got to the point where almost every time I want to double a contract, I live in fear Gib with take me out. I cannot play with a partner I cannot trust, can you?

I raised the issue of leb, because its should be clear that a double in this situation, 1NT after opps overcall (not 2Clubs of course) should most definitively be penalty, if one is to use this convention, and if one is not going to use it too. It should be penalty double because its "part of the convention" You of course proved that I am right and it is part of the convention, however it is such a bad convention and so badly written, that even you produced doubts.

[Stephen Tu]

No, I proved it is NOT part of the convention. You claim it is, even though the wiki you cede authoritative status to clearly contradicts that view. The wiki clearly says double is not part of leb. It goes on to say that generally double is played as penalty, which was probably true at the time the article was originally written. That is a general bridge comment in the opinion of the author, not a retraction of the earlier statement that double is not part of leb. He's talking about a sequence that is related to the general area, handling interference over 1nt, but clearly not part of leb itself. Furthermore, there is simple existence proof of a ton of top pairs with filed convention cards for the world championships listing both leb and negative doubles over 1nt that show pen double is not integral to the convention. Including your South African reps, by the way.


http://www.ecatsbrid...entioncards.asp


Gib undoubtedly has a ton of trouble with takeout vs penalty on a lot of auctions that need to be fixed. No one disputes that.

But it is really annoying when you claim to be discussing leb when you are really discussing doubles. It's like if I were to criticize your beloved Bergen raises, by only bringing up jacoby 2nt raise sequences. Objection, your honor, relevance. If you want to discuss doubles, title your thread doubles. Don't call doubles Lebensohl.

[Bermy]

Stephen Tu, on 2017-September-08, 21:08, said:

No, I proved it is NOT part of the convention. You claim it is, even though the wiki you cede authoritative status to clearly contradicts that view. The wiki clearly says double is not part of leb. It goes on to say that generally double is played as penalty, which was probably true at the time the article was originally written. That is a general bridge comment in the opinion of the author, not a retraction of the earlier statement that double is not part of leb. He's talking about a sequence that is related to the general area, handling interference over 1nt, but clearly not part of leb itself. Furthermore, there is simple existence proof of a ton of top pairs with filed convention cards for the world championships listing both leb and negative doubles over 1nt that show pen double is not integral to the convention. Including your South African reps, by the way.


http://www.ecatsbrid...entioncards.asp


Gib undoubtedly has a ton of trouble with takeout vs penalty on a lot of auctions that need to be fixed. No one disputes that.

But it is really annoying when you claim to be discussing leb when you are really discussing doubles. It's like if I were to criticize your beloved Bergen raises, by only bringing up jacoby 2nt raise sequences. Objection, your honor, relevance. If you want to discuss doubles, title your thread doubles. Don't call doubles Lebensohl.

"
"Generally, a Double is for penalty"

Really?? Perhaps you should go read the convention again. and again and again and again. Read it, you are so stubborn. And very very slow indeed. Read the word "generally" it does not apply to the majority of people it applies to the meaning of the double...It means for example that of opps overcall say 2 club, the double is take out...slow? Secondly all notes say "default double is penalty. Thirdly, TAKE OUTS SIMPLY DONT WORK HERE. Geee you are slow and stubborn.......carry on arguing, and on and on and on its because of players like you that we have to endure such drivel.

[Bermy]

You sound like that partner I refuse to play with, You guys should get together. ha, he wishes he could have me back as a partner.

You see, the time to discuss conventions is on the way to the club, and the time to argue is on the way home. When at the club playing, get on with playing, not arguing.

And if you miss a simple penalty double, because of this......

Find a new partner. This convention is such a waste of productive time.

[Stephen Tu]

Bermy, on 2017-September-09, 00:53, said:

"
"Generally, a Double is for penalty"

Really?? Perhaps you should go read the convention again. and again and again and again.

You are the one who quoted the critical sentence in bold above:
"A Double by responder is not part of Lebensohl. " why don't you read your own quote again and again?

The sentence in the article about double is NOT about the convention. It is about a related area of bridge.

Quote

Read it, you are so stubborn.

How about you read your own quote, you are the one with reading comprehension difficulties. In no way does the article say double is part of Lebensohl. It does say that usually it is played as penalties, but it does not logically follow from that statement that double is part of lebensohl. Especially when a few sentences earlier it explicitly says directly it isn't, and is subject to partnership agreement. Explain this sentence in the article if it is part of the convention.

Quote

Thirdly, TAKE OUTS SIMPLY DONT WORK HERE.

I'll choose to take my advice from the many world champ level pairs who think you are wrong about this. And my own experiences since I switched. Why again am I supposed to follow your advice over multiple world and U.S. national champs?

[Bermy]

Stephen Tu, on 2017-September-09, 10:30, said:

You are the one who quoted the critical sentence in bold above:
"A Double by responder is not part of Lebensohl. " why don't you read your own quote again and again?

The sentence in the article about double is NOT about the convention. It is about a related area of bridge.


How about you read your own quote, you are the one with reading comprehension difficulties. In no way does the article say double is part of Lebensohl. It does say that usually it is played as penalties, but it does not logically follow from that statement that double is part of lebensohl. Especially when a few sentences earlier it explicitly says directly it isn't, and is subject to partnership agreement. Explain this sentence in the article if it is part of the convention.



I'll choose to take my advice from the many world champ level pairs who think you are wrong about this. And my own experiences since I switched. Why again am I supposed to follow your advice over multiple world and U.S. national champs?

lol and on and on and on.......

[hrothgar]

Bermy, on 2017-September-09, 02:04, said:

You sound like that partner I refuse to play with, You guys should get together. ha, he wishes he could have me back as a partner.

Out of curiosity, was said partner 32516?

Cause I can really picture the two of you playing together...

[Bermy]

hrothgar, on 2017-September-10, 02:52, said:

Out of curiosity, was said partner 32516?

Cause I can really picture the two of you playing together...

Oh no, the only partner I ever play with these days is (and not for the reasons you may attempt to give)
Gib, oh and how nice are non bidding tourneys, At least everybody plays the same howlers.

Is that planned bidding and planned hands or natural Gib? I don't mind novelty bridge is novelty bridge and its fun, I think it may be worth $0.25 too {prediction).

How about a tourney where we are defending with partner?

But really, the bidding there is shocking too.