[32519]

This article makes a compelling argument as to why everyone should include Drury / Reverse Drury into their bag of tricks. Yet I have seen on many expert CCs absolutely insisting: NO DRURY / REVERSE DRURY. What have these players discovered about Drury / Reverse Drury that less experienced players don’t know about? My guess is that it has something to do with “everything comes at a cost.”

What have these experts discovered about Drury / Reverse Drury that lesser players have yet to discover?

Thank you.

[gwnn]

Which expert CCs do you mean? I hope you aren't referring to some BBO expert profiles.

[32519]

gwnn, on 2012-March-19, 04:15, said:

Which expert CCs do you mean? I hope you aren't referring to some BBO expert profiles.

I’m not sure how to respond to this. It simply had to be on BBO where I saw this more than once (you just wouldn’t find it anywhere else). But if these guys were egotistical wannabe’s, passing themselves off as experts, surely they would be unmasking themselves as not being true experts if they never had a legitimate reason for saying “NO DRURY” in their profiles. Any pickup partner could easily ask them their reasons for not playing Drury. If their reason wasn’t convincing, the pickup partner would just tell them to bugger off and stop trying to pass themselves off as an expert when they clearly are not.

[Cthulhu D]

A profile designed for playing pickups with may not reflect actual expert practice. Got some established expert partnership convention cards without drury?

[gnasher]

32519, on 2012-March-19, 04:05, said:

This article makes a compelling argument as to why everyone should include Drury / Reverse Drury into their bag of tricks. Yet I have seen on many expert CCs absolutely insisting: NO DRURY / REVERSE DRURY. What have these players discovered about Drury / Reverse Drury that less experienced players don't know about? My guess is that it has something to do with "everything comes at a cost."

What have these experts discovered about Drury / Reverse Drury that lesser players have yet to discover?

Perhaps they've discovered that a single word isn't a sufficient definition, and that ill-defined artificial methods often cost more than their benefits.

That might not make them experts, but it does suggest a degree of understanding that many non-experts lack.

[billw55]

gnasher, on 2012-March-19, 06:05, said:

Perhaps they've discovered that a single word isn't a sufficient definition, and that ill-defined artificial methods often cost more than their benefits.

Agree. I always decline drury in pickup partnerships, because there are sooo many different versions and followups that I cannot be confident we are on the same page even when we "agree" on drury.

With my regular face to face partner, we play one such version, and I definitely know which one. Although I still am not sure what its proper name is.

[Zelandakh]

Most experts do play Drury in regular partnerships but there are a few who are (sometimes fairly violently) opposed to it. The biggest cost of Drury is not the loss of the 2m response so much as the ability for 6th hand to get in a double of the artificial call. One way around that is to play P - 1M - 2m as something akin to fit non-jumps while keeping your (semi-)forcing NT. Another option (which I play) is to use a 1NT response to 1♠ (or a 1♠ response to 1♥) for all stronger hands without 4 card support. Then a Responder's rebid of Opener's major acts pretty much exactly like Drury. Of course you have to design the entire system around this which is impractical for most people.

Since you are specifically talking about online profiles then Andy's point is probably the most relevant here. There are several versions of Drury around and without further discussion it is not unlikely that there will be a misunderstanding. Further, many players think Drury gives them carte blanche to open anything in 3rd seat. If skipping Drury avoids having partner make silly actions then it is well worth it.

[bluecalm]

Even Lauria-Versace who didn't play drury for long time have given up. You will struggle to find one good player who don't play it in standardish 1M openings context.

[mycroft]

As people have said, they may not be playing Drury for the same reason I don't (usually) play Gerber, especially with pickups: that way there won't be any confusion. Is it on after 4th seat opener? 1- or 2-way? if 2-way, which way? what does 2♦ by opener mean? Is it different if hearts are agreed or spades?

Also, everybody screws up Drury at least once, with a 10ish hand with clubs. Someone might think that partnering me is not the time for them to do it.

Also, if you're playing a lighter-than-standard opening system in 1st and 2nd, it may be impossible to have a limit raise in your major - because you would have opened it. Frequently this goes along with "you don't have to worry about me opening light in 3rd seat - I'm going to be *stronger* than my 1st and 2nd openers, not weaker."

[rmnka447]

Using a variant of Drury/Reverse Drury or not is more a matter of bidding style.

Some players may choose to opt for sound openers in all positions. Then Drury variants are redundant.

Well, you might ask, what do these players do these players do with hands that Drury would normally be used on? Most likely they are opening most of these hands with a major suit weak 2 bid in third seat often with only 5 cards in the suit.

[bluecalm]

As a related point: in my country most people play drury in competition too:
1D - 1S - p - 2C = drury

which has advantage of being able to cope with very light style of bidding (you have 2D for more or less normal 10-13 1S and 2s for total junk) but has disadvantage of burrying clubs. I don't like it, but somehow it's standard here and I play it with everybody.

[gwnn]

bluecalm, on 2012-March-19, 12:39, said:

As a related point: in my country most people play drury in competition too:
1D - 1S - p - 2C = drury

which has advantage of being able to cope with very light style of bidding (you have 2D for more or less normal 10-13 1S and 2s for total junk) but has disadvantage of burrying clubs. I don't like it, but somehow it's standard here and I play it with everybody.

There is also a Bergen idea to play 1M-x-2♣ as a raise. I actually played that one. It goes without saying that it is not a dramatically huge issue which way you play them, as long as you remember.

[bluecalm]

Quote

There is also a Bergen idea to play 1M-x-2♣ as a raise

In Poland the standard was 1M - x - 1NT = good raise but nowadays "everybody" plays transfers so:
1N = clubs
2C = diamonds
2D = hearts
2M-1 = good raise
2M= pre raise

[awm]

I suspect "drury in competition" is part of the issue. A lot of people have interesting ideas about this, and further believe their ideas are a standard part of the drury convention. It may be easier to avoid it than to play it without real discussion.

[sfi]

rmnka447, on 2012-March-19, 12:27, said:

Some players may choose to opt for sound openers in all positions. Then Drury variants are redundant.

Similarly, if you open light in all positions you don't really need Drury. More precisely, you probably need something like it in 1st and 2nd seats as well.

I gave it up quickly in a partnership that had a 10-12 NT range because there were so few hands that wanted to bid Drury after passing initially.

[Vampyr]

bluecalm, on 2012-March-19, 12:39, said:

As a related point: in my country most people play drury in competition too:
1D - 1S - p - 2C = drury

THe 2♣ bidder is a passed hand?

[Cthulhu D]

I've seen a few people around here playing 1M - 2C as GF clubs or 3 card limit raise in all seats.

It's a classic for a billion options all being called 'drury' so it needs pretty extensive discussion.

[Quantumcat]

Cthulhu D, on 2012-March-19, 18:25, said:

I've seen a few people around here playing 1M - 2C as GF clubs or 3 card limit raise in all seats.

It's a classic for a billion options all being called 'drury' so it needs pretty extensive discussion.

This is a great convention. It is not the same as drury though.

It means you never need to be at the 3-level on only an 8-card fit (Bergen 1♥-2♠ or 1♠-3♥ showing invite at 3-card support), you also don't have loads of room taken up by the Bergen 1M - 3NT showing 13-15 3-card raise. You also get plenty of room when responder has a gameforce balanced hand, and you need never respond at the 2-level with only a four-card suit again. It basically has no downsides whatsoever. Does it have a name, does anyone know?

[32519]

In this thread “Drury for GIB please!” someone else is making a passionate plea to have some or other form of Drury made part of GIB. So I dug up this thread again to see what the forum posters thought of the idea.

Yah well no fine?

[gwnn]

WTF? Why not let the forum posters express their opinions on that idea in the thread itself? If you want to feel important and advertise your own threads, you can always just post links to them, bumping them over and over again is not the answer.