[bd71]

---

Matchpoints

Like it or not, you are playing Cappeletti over the weak NT. Your bid?

Does your answer change at IMPs?

[kuhchung]

pass at all forms of scoring no matter what gadgets we play

edit: oh sorry it's weak. i guess i double but this is a total minimum

[mikeh]

Relatively easy pass. Hate the methods: I think cappeletti is a terrible method and can only assume it's prevalence on BBO is due to it being very easy to remember.

I'd be doubling if partner wasn't passed, but with short majors and a passed hand, I don't see why I want to encourage either side to play in a major.

If LHO is 4=4 majors, then there is a good chance that he is going to have to pass if I pass, since he may be too weak to be able to bid over a 2♦ response to stayman, and he has to cater to that. In addition, he may have too much or be too balanced to use garbage stayman, or may not have it in his toolbox.

Meanwhile, if I double, most weak notrump players have a relatively easy way to show both majors and would do so with hands that would be passing otherwise.

If LHO holds a 5 card major, then nothing I do will keep him from bidding it, so I needn't worry about that.

Meanwhile, there is the risk that if I double partner will pull (presumably with a weak hand) into a 5-2 fit, getting us a minus score of at least 100 when the opps rate to do no better than +90 if I defend and diamonds behave. Alternatively LHO might run and partner might compete, say, in 2♠, again turning a small plus or minus into a slightly bigger one.

At imps, doubling is a little more attractive, since it is not impossible for us to collect 300 or even 500 if everything sits really well for us, and meantime turning -90 into -100 is immaterial, and other common poor outcomes only cost an imp or two.

However, I pass at all scoring because of my major holdings. I like double of a weak 1N to show 15+, and while the AKQxx suit is an upgradable defensive holding, having the other 5 hcp in my doubleton suits offsets that.

[whereagles]

Abstain.

I would never agree to play cappelletti Ok, maybe I would at gun point or with a hefty amount of cash involved (to be payed in an offshore LOL), in which case I would dbl or pass depending on table feel.

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

I dont play Capp, but it is not as bad, as the post up to now imply.
Basically you need to decide, if you need a Penalty Double / Strength Showing
Double or not, I was involved in a thread with JLall, he said yes, I said no,
but this is a strategic decision, you make upfront.

Given the agreement set, you have to pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mikeh]

P_Marlowe, on 2014-April-24, 14:20, said:

Pass.

I dont play Capp, but it is not as bad, as the post up to now imply.
Basically you need to decide, if you need a Penalty Double / Strength Showing
Double or not, I was involved in a thread with JLall, he said yes, I said no,
but this is a strategic decision, you make upfront.

Given the agreement set, you have to pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

what has the desirability of having a strength showing double (which imo one absolutely needs) got to do with whether capp is a good convention? I play at least 2 defences to weak nt that contain a strong double, and neither is capp, which I think is terrible: in that it offers no upside compared to other defences that are available and suffers a very bad downside (the 2♣ call is awful).

[the hog]

I don't play Cappeletti and "yes", it is as bad as the posts up to now maintain. This hand is a pass.

[mikestar13]

Borderline penalty double: I probably wouldn't do it, but also wouldn't criticize the bidding judgment of a player who did. No action other than double or pass need to be considered, regardless of your NT defense. CAPP is very simple and GCC legal, unlike many much superior methods; Multi-Landy, for example. This probably explains its popularity it North America: I don't understand why players from elsewhere would play it.

[P_Marlowe]

mikeh, on 2014-April-24, 17:00, said:

what has the desirability of having a strength showing double (which imo one absolutely needs) got to do with whether capp is a good convention? I play at least 2 defences to weak nt that contain a strong double, and neither is capp, which I think is terrible: in that it offers no upside compared to other defences that are available and suffers a very bad downside (the 2♣ call is awful).

Ok - first we have most likely to clarify what Capp means, I usually I get it wrong,
from your comment I assume, Capp 2♣ is the single suiter, not 44 in the majors.

For me Capp goes something like
- 2C - majors
- 2D - single suited major
- 2H / 2S - 2-suited with major
- X power

of course, this could be reverse Cappelletti, I know Multi Landy as a name for this convention, but also
Hamilton (or Reverse Hamilton).

Regarding the strength showing double, I disagree, at least partially (creating an upper limit for the other actions),
but that is besides the point.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

[Zelandakh]

P_Marlowe, on 2014-April-25, 05:15, said:

For me Capp goes something like

As you write further, this is Multi Landy. Capp (aka Pottage and Hamilton) is:

2♣ - any one suit
2♦ - both majors
2M - major bid + a minor
X - power/penalty

Reversing the 2♣ and 2♦ overcalls from this gives Reverse Capp/Hamilton/Pottage. Capp is bad because you lose the ability to differentiate between major lengths with 2♦ over 2♣, while the chance to show diamonds at the 2 level is insufficient compensation.

[Jinksy]

Double. If in doubt, see if I have a clear lead - I wonder if anything stands out here?

[blackshoe]

Zelandakh, on 2014-April-25, 06:18, said:

Capp (aka Pottage and Hamilton)

And Helms.

[jeffford76]

Zelandakh, on 2014-April-25, 06:18, said:

As you write further, this is Multi Landy. Capp (aka Pottage and Hamilton) is:

2♣ - any one suit
2♦ - both majors
2M - major bid + a minor
X - power/penalty

Reversing the 2♣ and 2♦ overcalls from this gives Reverse Capp/Hamilton/Pottage. Capp is bad because you lose the ability to differentiate between major lengths with 2♦ over 2♣, while the chance to show diamonds at the 2 level is insufficient compensation.

Depends on where you're from. In Seattle, Reverse Capp/Hamilton is understood to mean putting the M/m hands in the 2♣ bid, and making 2M natural.

[mycroft]

Odd. Around here, that's "Modified C/H".

[blackshoe]

Reverse Inside Out Upside Down C/H/P/H.

[Shugart23]

I love playing weak NT, non-vulnerable for down 1. Thanks for the top board