Aspro, Astro or Asptro

[Nick Hughes]

These are very similar methods over 1NT (or a strong club).
Which is better? Surely somebody has done some theoretical work comparing
them.
Astro is American, Aspro is the English version, Asptro is gaining ground in
England.

Astro: 2C = hearts & a minor, 2D = spades & another
Aspro: 2C = hearts & another, 2D = spades & a minor
Asptro: 2C = hearts & another, 2D = spades & another

They differ in the way they handle both majors:
1) With Astro, you bid 2D with both, then can pass partner's 2H "relay" with
4-5 majors but tend to bid 2S with 5-4. This risks missing a 4-4 heart fit.

2) With Aspro, you bid 2C with both then 2S over the likely 2D "relay" with
5-4, and 2H with 4-5. Over this, responder can continue with 2S "pass or
correct". This looks better, though responder with 5-2-4-2 or similar will
usually pass 2H rather than see the Aspronaut rebid 3C over a delayed 2S.

3) With Asptro, you show the shorter major first so bid 2C with 5-4 and 2D
with 4-5. This might be best though responder with 3-3-5-2 will tend to
choose 2S over your 2D, rather than hear you rebid 3C.
It's often tempting to try Asptro or similar with 4-4 majors.

Continuations are interesting. Taking Asptro as the base, this is the usual
Australian structure:

2C 2D "pass with 5 diamonds or bid your 5-carder"
2H often 3-card support (unless 4333 or something like 2-3-4-4 when
2D is better)
2S natural, not forcing
2NT "bid your other suit"
3C/D natural
3H limit 4-card raise (not pre-emptive)

2C 2D
2H 2S "pass or correct" could be 3-1-5-4 say
2NT natural invitation
3C/D no idea!
3H 3-card raise

Of course, 3rd hand often bids, perhaps tipping the scales towards one of
the older methods.

Hoping for some feedback (and minimal advice on the merits of Cappelletti,
DONT, Pottage, etc),

Nick

[David Collier]

Post by Nick Hughes
These are very similar methods over 1NT (or a strong club).
Which is better? Surely somebody has done some theoretical work comparing
them.

I played Asptro for a few years (until moving away from my partner),
and I can tell you it's one of the parts of the system we were most
happy with. The version described is almost exactly what we were
playing.

Post by Nick Hughes
2C 2D
2H 2S "pass or correct" could be 3-1-5-4 say
2NT natural invitation
3C/D no idea!
3H 3-card raise

I think 2H denies a spade suit (in order to bid 2C with spades, the
spades must be better than hearts, so you'd rebid 2S instead). So I
prefer to play 2S as natural and 3C as pass/correct. I think this is
better because it gets you to your contract quicker (less time for them
to double!)

Also, after 2C 2D or 2D 2H, opener rebids 2NT with a minimum hand if
his minor is longer than his major (Lebensohl-like). That means we can
use 3C and 3D here to show *good* 5-5 hands, ones with the strength to
double 1NT but too much distribution.

[Barry Rigal]

David Collier scribt

Post by David Collier
I played Asptro for a few years (until moving away from my partner),

We all do that eventually don't we?
(literally or metepahorically)

Barry Rigal -- who has done both.

[Chris Ryall]

Nick Hughes wrote on "Aspro, Astro or Asptro"

Post by Nick Hughes
These are very similar methods over 1NT (or a strong club).

A nice summary. Aspro has also been used as a pure weak 2 pre-empt.

As for which is best I'll defer to those who play it.
I see Asptro most commonly amongst better players in UK.

ref <http://www.cavendish.demon.co.uk/bridge/weak.two/exotica.htm#aspro>

[Bill Jacobs]

Post by Nick Hughes
These are very similar methods over 1NT (or a strong club).
Which is better? Surely somebody has done some theoretical work
comparing them.
Astro is American, Aspro is the English version, Asptro is gaining
ground in England.
Astro: 2C = hearts & a minor, 2D = spades & another
Aspro: 2C = hearts & another, 2D = spades & a minor
Asptro: 2C = hearts & another, 2D = spades & another
1) With Astro, you bid 2D with both, then can pass partner's 2H "relay"
with 4-5 majors but tend to bid 2S with 5-4. This risks missing a 4-4
heart fit.
2) With Aspro, you bid 2C with both then 2S over the likely 2D "relay"
with 5-4, and 2H with 4-5. Over this, responder can continue with 2S
"pass or correct". This looks better, though responder with 5-2-4-2 or
similar will usually pass 2H rather than see the Aspronaut rebid 3C over
a delayed 2S.
3) With Asptro, you show the shorter major first so bid 2C with 5-4 and
2D with 4-5. This might be best though responder with 3-3-5-2 will tend
to choose 2S over your 2D, rather than hear you rebid 3C.
It's often tempting to try Asptro or similar with 4-4 majors.
Continuations are interesting. Taking Asptro as the base, this is the
2C 2D "pass with 5 diamonds or bid your 5-carder"
2H often 3-card support (unless 4333 or something like 2-3-4-4 when
2D is better)
2S natural, not forcing
2NT "bid your other suit"
3C/D natural
3H limit 4-card raise (not pre-emptive)
2C 2D
2H 2S "pass or correct" could be 3-1-5-4 say
2NT natural invitation
3C/D no idea!
3H 3-card raise
Of course, 3rd hand often bids, perhaps tipping the scales towards one
of the older methods.
Hoping for some feedback (and minimal advice on the merits of
Cappelletti, DONT, Pottage, etc),
Nick

I like Asptro because it allows me to make a distinction between the majors
when I have both of them.

And I won't give you feedback, minimal or otherwise, on the merits of
Cappelletti and DONT, because they don't have any merits.

Cheers ... Bill.

[DavJFlower]

Can anyone identify the quote:

'They opened 1NT and we had a disastro!'

Dave Flower

(Who once left partnher in a 2-1 diamond fit,l missing a 6-4 heart fit whan
playing Astro!)

[Mike Bell]

Post by Nick Hughes
These are very similar methods over 1NT (or a strong club).

Over a strong club? Eugh...Too many options for the defence.

Post by Nick Hughes
Which is better? Surely somebody has done some theoretical work comparing
them.

This is my attempt...will probably need some correcting!

Post by Nick Hughes
Astro: 2C = hearts & a minor, 2D = spades & another
Aspro: 2C = hearts & another, 2D = spades & a minor
Asptro: 2C = hearts & another, 2D = spades & another
1) With Astro, you bid 2D with both, then can pass partner's 2H "relay" with
4-5 majors but tend to bid 2S with 5-4. This risks missing a 4-4 heart fit.

As bidding 2D then 2S could be 5-4 majors, you will often play 2S
instead of in your fit - 54xx opposite 2434, 5x4x opposite 1345/2245,
54xx opposite 1345.

Post by Nick Hughes
2) With Aspro, you bid 2C with both then 2S over the likely 2D "relay" with
5-4, and 2H with 4-5. Over this, responder can continue with 2S "pass or
correct". This looks better, though responder with 5-2-4-2 or similar will
usually pass 2H rather than see the Aspronaut rebid 3C over a delayed 2S.

As bidding 2C then 2H could be 4-5 majors, you have problems with 45xx
opposite 4234, x54x opposite 2245. You cope much better with 5H4other
opposite 31(45) than Astro does with the corresponding hands with the
majors swapped. Is there anything else separating the two methods?

Post by Nick Hughes
3) With Asptro, you show the shorter major first so bid 2C with 5-4 and 2D
with 4-5. This might be best though responder with 3-3-5-2 will tend to
choose 2S over your 2D, rather than hear you rebid 3C.

The problems from bidding 2C then 2H or 2D then 2S no longer exist -
these now promise 5M4+m.

Both Aspro and Astro land in an inferior spot when they anchor to the
shorter major, responder has at least as much support for the
undisclosed major but cannot risk overcaller making a 3m rebid - for
example, 4315, 3316 have to bid 2H and 3352, 4342 are a risk whether you
bid 2D or 2H. As Asptro anchors to the shorter major twice as often,
these problems occur twice as frequently.

One of my partner's insists that the step bid deny 3 card support, which
seems distinctly sub-optimal to me - with 4333, 4324, 2344, 3325 or
23(35) I can see no reason not to bid 2D over 2C at IMPs. It has been
suggested on this forum that bidding the anchor suit should show either
4 card support or 3 cards and an outside singleton, an approach that I
think has merit.

So which method is the best? If my analysis is correct, then my answer
is that Astro is not the best! But I'm not sure how to work out how well
Asptro works in comparison to the other two.

Post by Nick Hughes
It's often tempting to try Asptro or similar with 4-4 majors.

It is? What do you rebid over the relay?

Post by Nick Hughes
Continuations are interesting. Taking Asptro as the base, this is the usual
2C 2D "pass with 5 diamonds or bid your 5-carder"
2H often 3-card support (unless 4333 or something like 2-3-4-4 when
2D is better)
2S natural, not forcing
2NT "bid your other suit"

Not sure about this...What hand could make this bid? Just a strong
4144/40(45)? Also, a 3H continuation has no meaning but
3S does.

Post by Nick Hughes
3C/D natural

Natural and what strength?

Post by Nick Hughes
3H limit 4-card raise (not pre-emptive)
2C 2D
2H 2S "pass or correct" could be 3-1-5-4 say

As David has said, 2H promises 5H4+minor so 2S is not pass or correct.
The simplest way to continue is 2NT as 'bid your minor'; I quite like
Chris Ryall's responses to Dutch 2s, they fit in fine here too.

2S Nat NF
2N Bid the minor you HAVEN'T got
3C Pass or correct
3D Invite to 4M.

2NT is either a sign-off in responder's own minor suit or a strong
enquiry; I play 2S:2N, 3m:3H as forcing, and 2S:3H as NF.

Post by Nick Hughes
2NT natural invitation
3C/D no idea!
3H 3-card raise
Of course, 3rd hand often bids, perhaps tipping the scales towards one of
the older methods.

Eugh, I haven't considered that at all yet...Anchoring to the shorter
major can help, Advancer can make a takeout double of opps major more
happily knowing that partner won't have exactly four of it. Against
that, leading the wrong major could allow 3NT through.

Post by Nick Hughes
Hoping for some feedback (and minimal advice on the merits of Cappelletti,
DONT, Pottage, etc)

May I recommend Reverse Transfer Hamilton - There was an enthralling
thread on it recently.

[Keith Sheppard]

Post by Nick Hughes
These are very similar methods over 1NT (or a strong club).
Which is better? Surely somebody has done some theoretical work comparing
them.

I did a small amount of theoretical work comparing Astro and Aspro, and came
to the conclusion that Aspro has a miniscule advantage. See the last
paragraph at:

http://greathollands.bracknellbridge.com/astpro.htm

for my conclusions.

Note that this page is aimed at near beginners so please don't complain if
you think it patronising.

Keith

[Mike Bell]

Reading through the archives, I found a post by David Burn pointing out
that Astro variants were unpopular at the top levels of the game. Could
this be partly due to the dominance of Strong NT? What do Astroers use
passed hand doubles and doubles of strong NTs as? I've been wondering
about double showing diamonds or both majors, advancer bids 2C with
equal length in the majors or 2D with unequal length. This approach
makes doubling on 4-4 majors an option, and makes the 2C and 2D
overcalls much better defined.

[David Burn]

Post by Mike Bell
Reading through the archives, I found a post by David Burn pointing out
that Astro variants were unpopular at the top levels of the game. Could
this be partly due to the dominance of Strong NT? What do Astroers use
passed hand doubles and doubles of strong NTs as? I've been wondering
about double showing diamonds or both majors, advancer bids 2C with
equal length in the majors or 2D with unequal length. This approach
makes doubling on 4-4 majors an option, and makes the 2C and 2D
overcalls much better defined.

Astro, in whatever guise, is simply the worst convention in the world. That
is why no one with any sense plays it.

Much has been written about the advisability of "Disturbing Opponents' No
Trump", and much confusion has been generated thereby. It is more or less a
given that there are certain positions in which you are very poorly placed
if your opponents play in 1NT when they have opened it; at love all at
pairs, for example, it is very nearly always losing bridge to let them do
this. It is also not a bad idea to bid over 1NT at any form of scoring in
order to prevent the opponents from using their system; left to their own
devices, competent opponents are more likely to reach the correct contract
after a 1NT opening than any other.

For this reason, a proliferation of devices have been created to compete
against 1NT. But it is important to remember that your objectives vary
considerably depending on whether 1NT is weak (less than, say, 15) or strong
(15-17 or thereabouts). Very much of the time indeed, when an opponent opens
a strong no trump your side will not make game, and the objective should
simply be to get in cheaply and get out safely. Astro is rotten at doing
this, chiefly because you have to start some hands with 2D, which leaves you
seriously short of room to scramble safely if the opponents start doubling
you (an overcaller who has spades and clubs facing a partner who also has
clubs will need to play at the three level; other aspects are also far from
desirable). Non-penalty doubles and conventions based around them are very
much better against a strong no trump, which is why they are not allowed in
England.

But against a weak no trump, except perhaps in the positions I have alluded
to above - love all at matchpoints, et cetera - it is imperative not to lose
focus on bidding game if your side can make it. My experience in the weak no
trump world has been considerable, and I am firmly convinced that: you
should use double for penalty, and you should use it more frequently than
you actually do; your overcalls (whether conventional or natural) should be
reasonably sound in second position; and in response to a natural overcall,
you should play 2NT as a kind of "unassuming cue bid" - in effect, a try for
game. Whether you should play transfer responses to natural overcalls, or
change of suit forcing or change of suit constructive, I do not have enough
data to say; my preference has been for the first of these combined (if
transfers do not apply) with the second, but I am not sure.

Of course, the first time you try this you will concede 380 and conclude
that I have no idea what I am talking about. But that's bridge, and as in
other walks of life, as long as it's my lot of blind doing the leading, I am
not all that bothered. I will mention in passing that if the opponents
overcall 1NT with 2C, then you should play double as Stayman and eveything
else as what it would have been without the overcall (including a transfer
into any suit the overcall may have shown). If they "overcall" with a
non-penalty double, you should redouble with a strongish balanced hand, and
use 2C and upwards as whatever they would have been over 1NT.

And, as Michael Rosenberg once memorably remarked, that's as low as I go.

David Burn
London, England

[Ian Payn]

Post by David Burn
Astro, in whatever guise, is simply the worst convention in the world. That
is why no one with any sense plays it.

++++ You're forgetting the Unusual No Trump.

<SNIP

Post by David Burn
Of course, the first time you try this [Double 1NT more often] you will

concede 380 and conclude

Post by David Burn
that I have no idea what I am talking about.

++++ I didn't mind the first time. It was the second, third, fourth and
fifth...

[Bill Jacobs]

Post by David Burn

Post by Mike Bell
Reading through the archives, I found a post by David Burn pointing
out that Astro variants were unpopular at the top levels of the game.
Could this be partly due to the dominance of Strong NT? What do
Astroers use passed hand doubles and doubles of strong NTs as? I've
been wondering about double showing diamonds or both majors, advancer
bids 2C with equal length in the majors or 2D with unequal length.
This approach makes doubling on 4-4 majors an option, and makes the 2C
and 2D overcalls much better defined.

Astro, in whatever guise, is simply the worst convention in the world.
That is why no one with any sense plays it.
Much has been written about the advisability of "Disturbing Opponents'
No Trump", and much confusion has been generated thereby. It is more or
less a given that there are certain positions in which you are very
poorly placed if your opponents play in 1NT when they have opened it; at
love all at pairs, for example, it is very nearly always losing bridge
to let them do this. It is also not a bad idea to bid over 1NT at any
form of scoring in order to prevent the opponents from using their
system; left to their own devices, competent opponents are more likely
to reach the correct contract after a 1NT opening than any other.
For this reason, a proliferation of devices have been created to compete
against 1NT. But it is important to remember that your objectives vary
considerably depending on whether 1NT is weak (less than, say, 15) or
strong (15-17 or thereabouts). Very much of the time indeed, when an
opponent opens a strong no trump your side will not make game, and the
objective should simply be to get in cheaply and get out safely. Astro
is rotten at doing this, chiefly because you have to start some hands
with 2D, which leaves you seriously short of room to scramble safely if
the opponents start doubling you (an overcaller who has spades and clubs
facing a partner who also has clubs will need to play at the three
level; other aspects are also far from desirable). Non-penalty doubles
and conventions based around them are very much better against a strong
no trump, which is why they are not allowed in England.
But against a weak no trump, except perhaps in the positions I have
alluded to above - love all at matchpoints, et cetera - it is imperative
not to lose focus on bidding game if your side can make it. My
experience in the weak no trump world has been considerable, and I am
firmly convinced that: you should use double for penalty, and you should
use it more frequently than you actually do; your overcalls (whether
conventional or natural) should be reasonably sound in second position;
and in response to a natural overcall, you should play 2NT as a kind of
"unassuming cue bid" - in effect, a try for game. Whether you should
play transfer responses to natural overcalls, or change of suit forcing
or change of suit constructive, I do not have enough data to say; my
preference has been for the first of these combined (if transfers do not
apply) with the second, but I am not sure.
Of course, the first time you try this you will concede 380 and conclude
that I have no idea what I am talking about. But that's bridge, and as
in other walks of life, as long as it's my lot of blind doing the
leading, I am not all that bothered. I will mention in passing that if
the opponents overcall 1NT with 2C, then you should play double as
Stayman and eveything else as what it would have been without the
overcall (including a transfer into any suit the overcall may have
shown). If they "overcall" with a non-penalty double, you should
redouble with a strongish balanced hand, and use 2C and upwards as
whatever they would have been over 1NT.
And, as Michael Rosenberg once memorably remarked, that's as low as I go.
David Burn
London, England

This is a curious post, because David slams Astro ("worst convention in the world"), but doesn't really say why.

As far as I can tell, David makes two points:

1. Astro gets you in too high.
2. You need to play penalty doubles of weak NTs.

I don't understand his logic behind 1. Certainly, Astro gets you in lower than Cappelletti. With a major-minor two suiter, Capalletti starts
at 2 of a major, forcing you to 3 of a minor if necessary. Astro gives you chances of getting to a minor at the 2 level, not to mention giving
overcaller some options on 5-4 hands.

As for 2, well penalty double is a part of Astro, so what's the problem?

I can see a logic behind playing DONT against a strong NT. You give up the penalty double, but your entry is relatively safe, as you are
bidding a minor naturally at the 2 level. However, there is a clear downside to not having penalty doubles even against strong NTs, and that is
that the penalty double adds strength definition to the non-double bids. So it's really not clearcut whether to play penalty (i.e. generic
strength showing) doubles of a strong NT. And as strong NTs often slide into weak territory (14 points, even playing a 15-17 NT), it is
dangerous not to think about game.

All in all, David's statement about Astro being the worst convention in the world is a bit undignified.

Cheers ... Bill.

[Bill Jacobs]

Post by Mike Bell
Reading through the archives, I found a post by David Burn pointing out
that Astro variants were unpopular at the top levels of the game. Could
this be partly due to the dominance of Strong NT? What do Astroers use
passed hand doubles and doubles of strong NTs as? I've been wondering
about double showing diamonds or both majors, advancer bids 2C with
equal length in the majors or 2D with unequal length. This approach
makes doubling on 4-4 majors an option, and makes the 2C and 2D
overcalls much better defined.

As an un-repentant Astroer (and I have Jeff Rubens with me here as regarding
Astro as the best general approach available), I play double of a strong NT
as penalties.

3 reasons, in priority order:

1. Provides limits and definition when I don't double. So a natural 2S
overcall for example is limited by the failure to double. This is crucial.

2. Strong NT can and have gone for numbers in the past.

3. One day I might play against Michael Rosenberg, who psyched 1NT in a
World Championship final, knowing that his opponents couldn't double it.

I play passed hand doubles of 1NT as minors.

Cheers ... Bill.

[Nick Hughes]

Post by Bill Jacobs

Post by Mike Bell
Reading through the archives, I found a post by David Burn pointing out
that Astro variants were unpopular at the top levels of the game. Could
this be partly due to the dominance of Strong NT? What do Astroers use
passed hand doubles and doubles of strong NTs as? I've been wondering
about double showing diamonds or both majors, advancer bids 2C with
equal length in the majors or 2D with unequal length. This approach
makes doubling on 4-4 majors an option, and makes the 2C and 2D
overcalls much better defined.

As an un-repentant Astroer (and I have Jeff Rubens with me here as regarding
Astro as the best general approach available), I play double of a strong NT
as penalties.
1. Provides limits and definition when I don't double. So a natural 2S
overcall for example is limited by the failure to double. This is crucial.
2. Strong NT can and have gone for numbers in the past.
3. One day I might play against Michael Rosenberg, who psyched 1NT in a
World Championship final, knowing that his opponents couldn't double it.
I play passed hand doubles of 1NT as minors.
Cheers ... Bill.

In Istanbul, we had a pleasing +1100 against a 15-17 notrump. Partner had 16
flat, I had the rest.
16 opposite 2 plays worse that 12 opposite 6.

Had this in Canberra (searches for hand records):
W/EW 982
KT32
63
9875
KT43 J76
AJ4 875
T9 K754
AK63 QT2
AQ5
Q96
AQJ82
J4

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH
1NT no no dbl
end

As North I was expecting -180 but declarer chose to win the first heart and
went for -500. Don't be too critical, their team went on to win this 200+
team event.

Nick

[g***@hotmail.com]

Post by Nick Hughes
In Istanbul, we had a pleasing +1100 against a 15-17 notrump. Partner had 16
flat, I had the rest.
16 opposite 2 plays worse that 12 opposite 6.

Well you don't need to play penalty doubles for that. I have gotten
1100 out of a 16 - 19 (!) NT not playing penalty doubles but Woolsey
instead.

North: 1NT (I am very strong)
East: Pass (would have made a penalty double)
South: Pass (completely broke and happy that opponents do not play
penalty double)
West: Double (4M + longer minor)
North: Pass (unaware)
East: Pass (happy)
South: Pass (extremely unhappy)
16 vs 2 plays bad, 17 vs 0 is even worse!

Gerben

[David Stevenson]

Post by Nick Hughes
These are very similar methods over 1NT (or a strong club).
Which is better? Surely somebody has done some theoretical work comparing
them.
Astro is American, Aspro is the English version, Asptro is gaining ground in
England.
Astro: 2C = hearts & a minor, 2D = spades & another
Aspro: 2C = hearts & another, 2D = spades & a minor
Asptro: 2C = hearts & another, 2D = spades & another
1) With Astro, you bid 2D with both, then can pass partner's 2H "relay" with
4-5 majors but tend to bid 2S with 5-4. This risks missing a 4-4 heart fit.
2) With Aspro, you bid 2C with both then 2S over the likely 2D "relay" with
5-4, and 2H with 4-5. Over this, responder can continue with 2S "pass or
correct". This looks better, though responder with 5-2-4-2 or similar will
usually pass 2H rather than see the Aspronaut rebid 3C over a delayed 2S.
3) With Asptro, you show the shorter major first so bid 2C with 5-4 and 2D
with 4-5. This might be best though responder with 3-3-5-2 will tend to
choose 2S over your 2D, rather than hear you rebid 3C.
It's often tempting to try Asptro or similar with 4-4 majors.

Alternatively, you can decide *not* to bid 2S on such a hand. Now
Asptro handles both majors *perfectly*.

Of course, you must play the odds. Playing Asptro you should bid 2S
over 2D with four+ spades, and also with three spades and a singleton
void somewhere.

------------------------------------------------------------------

You have also forgotten the fourth method: Asptro showing the longer
suit with both majors. This combines the disadvantages of the first two
methods but is still played a fair amount.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Post by Nick Hughes
Continuations are interesting. Taking Asptro as the base, this is the usual
2C 2D "pass with 5 diamonds or bid your 5-carder"

Effectively shows 2+ Ds

Post by Nick Hughes
2H often 3-card support (unless 4333 or something like 2-3-4-4 when
2D is better)

4+, or 3 with sing/void

Post by Nick Hughes
2S natural, not forcing
2NT "bid your other suit"

Game try+ without four card support

Post by Nick Hughes
3C/D natural
3H limit 4-card raise (not pre-emptive)
2C 2D
2H 2S "pass or correct" could be 3-1-5-4 say

In case partner wishes ot play the 3-3 fit? A strange idea! Remember
the 2H rebid denies 4 spades.

Post by Nick Hughes
2NT natural invitation

Bid your minor. The 2H rebid showed 5+Hs, shorter minor.

Post by Nick Hughes
3C/D no idea!
3H 3-card raise
Of course, 3rd hand often bids, perhaps tipping the scales towards one of
the older methods.
Hoping for some feedback (and minimal advice on the merits of Cappelletti,
DONT, Pottage, etc),

Yeah, we know what you mean.

Q: Which is better, Asptro or Aspro?
A1: Cappelletti.
A2: Is Aspro a form of Cappelletti?