Ever played the kamikaze notrump?
Joe Ancrile
If you have tried this approach, any advice? Our results thus far have been
pretty good.
Thanks...
redspot
news:Bbrlc.510372$B81.9...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
Close. I've played 11-13 for many years with great results.
I've said on here before that I think the weak NT has the
same advantages as the weak-2 bids -- it accurately describes
your hand while getting in the way of the opponents describing
theirs, yet your partner has the tools for getting to the correct
part-score, game, or slam, and I've never heard any argument
to the contrary. The fact that in the U.S., the majority of people
play weak-2's but not weak NT's is just proof that you can't
always take what the majority do as proof of what's best.
One thing to consider is playing weak (2C) and strong (2D=14+)
Stayman. This means that you cannot play Jacoby transfers, but
one of the main reasons for transfers is to get the stronger hand
to be declarer, which does not apply with weak NT's. In fact,
responder is often the stronger hand, so transfers work against
you in that regard.
p.paulf...@comcast.net
news:Bbrlc.510372$B81.9...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
The biggest problem I have found with the mini (10-12) NT is the harm
it does to your NT ladder. For the sake of discussion, let me assume a
"standard" weak NT ladder; something like:
1N: 12-14
1m-1Z;1N: 15-17
1m-1Z;2N: 18-19
2N: 20-21
If you try to modify the above "standard" play the mini, it looks
something like:
1N: 10-12
1m-1Z,1N: 13-16
1m-1Z;2N: 17-18
2N: 19-21
Obviously there are all sorts of variations.Whatever youdo, you will
have to extend the ranges of some of the steps. There are several
approaches to improving (tightening) the ranges:
1) Play a strong club system:
1N: 10-12
1D-1M;1N: 13-15
1C-1D;1N: 16-18
1C-1D;1H(relay)-1S;1N: 19-21
2) Play 2D as Mexican or Multi with an included strong NT range:
1N: 10-12
1m-1Z;1N: 13-(bad)16
1m-1Z;2N: (good)16 - 18
2D: 19-20
2N: 21-22
3) do both 1 & 2
Another approach (which can be incorporated into any of the above) is
to add a Crowhurst-type 2C rebid by responder. This asks teh range of
the 1NT rebid. It allows, at least in theory, a fairly wide range 1NT
rebid
The mini itself will result in some good and some bad results. I think
the good will outweigh the bad. It WILL create swings which is a Good
Thing in Matchpoints (unless you are clearly one of the best
partnerships in the field and even then...)
Paul
Kent Feiler
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The place where 10-12 nt systems often have problems isn't the opening
1nt, it's bidding flat hands in the 13+ range. Those are the auctions
you and your pard have to work out.
Regards,
Kent Feiler
www.KentFeiler.com
Gerben Dirksen
"Joe Ancrile" <ANC...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Bbrlc.510372$B81.9...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
(10-12).
> If you have tried this approach, any advice?
Yes, and loving it :)
There have been very good responses to this thread so far. Let me suggest
another option which is to create more steps on your NT ladder. I for
example use this in many partnerships:
2C = weak D or strong
2D = weak H or strong
2H = both majors weak
2S = weak S
2NT = strong NT
Now you have a lot of steps, like 2C then 2NT and 2D then 2NT.
> Our results thus far have been
> pretty good.
So have mine, although some other people playing it were somewhat
disappointed after losing the Bermuda Bowl by 1 IMP. But this is obviously
still an improvement from other years where they didn't make the final or
the difference was larger.
<nitpickers note> I am not suggesting that the Italians have done well or
have lost because of or in spite of the mini NT. </note>
AND I think it's more fun playing this way.
Gerben
Sandy E. Barnes
news:Bbrlc.510372$B81.9...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
There are extended issues with that range, and, of course, some plusses.
You gain because it comes up more often than other ranges, providing the
opponents don't double you when you are in trouble or you are red and down 2
or more. You gain when the opponents either compete when it is wrong, or
don't compete when it is right.
You lose when you have to guess the level and guess wrong, or the axe falls,
because there is no field protection at Matchpoints. At IMP's, this
approach is much more likely to swing the match against your side than win
it for you. One disaster at IMP's, particularly in a short match, is enough
to loose a match, but a small gain on a single board is less likely to win
the match.
However, I play 11-14 when the opponents are red, no matter my color. This
is a wider range and almost as low as the 10 in your new range, but the
conditions favor the call since all mistakes by opponents lead to possible
large minus scores for them (-200 at Matchpoints, a real killer). At imp's,
it's more difficult for them to get a match winner through defense when they
are red .
Sandy Barnes
Sandy Barnes
BH
"Joe Ancrile" <ANC...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Bbrlc.510372$B81.9...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
I've played 10-12 before non-vul only in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd seat. 15-17
otherwise. And it has been very effective.
1N: 10-12
1m-1X,1N: 13-15
1m-1Z;2N: 16-18
2N: 19-21
Michael Clark
One of the pairs in the England v Wales Camrose match this year (and
unfortunately I forget which one) played that a 1NT rebid after a 1C
opening was 15-17 and a 1NT rebid after a 1D opening was 18-19 (or
something similar to this). This means that 1C and 1D are both 2+
cards. It seemed like a clever idea to me, although I'm not sure what
the 2NT rebid now shows.
Anyway, was just wondering if you could use this kind of idea in
improving the NT ladder when you play a mini-NT. Something like:
1NT - 10-12
1C-1z-1NT - 13-15
1D-1z-1NT - 17-19
2NT - 20-22
or you could keep the 2NT rebids and have even tighter ranges for some
of these.
Michael
Mike Bell
"Joe Ancrile" <ANC...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
It can work well, but it needs to bring in a lot to make up for the
losses. There are a lot of benefits to both the weak NT and the strong
NT, by playing a mini NT you give up on nearly all the benefits to both
of them. So I would suggest playing it only when it is clearly right to
- maybe only 1st NV and 2nd when NV against vul. The reason that I
suggest playing it more in 1st than in 2nd is that you have less reason
to preempt in 2nd, and the passed hand can balance with no risk of his
partner thinking he has serious values.
You've been given some suggestions so far, but all except the strong
club have been getting you to 2N with 17 (or worse, 16) opposite a
minimum 1 level response. Here are some more suggestions:
1N - 10-13
1N rebid 14-16/17
1N - 10-12
1C rebidding 1N 13-15
1D rebidding 1N 16-18
Or you can put all the balanced hands into the 1C opener, which makes
the 1D opener a big winner. You might be able to achieve split ranges by
having 1D as a negative (0-7) response to the 1C opener, something like:
1C:1D, 1N 13-17, responder will have no game interest.
1C:1M, 1N 13-15
1C:1M, 2N 16-19 game forcing.
Another way to do it, and my preference, is to play transfer responses,
but I don't think these are GCC legal.
1C:1D = 4+Hs, then 1H by opener =13-15, 1N=16-18
1C:1H = 4+Ss then 1S by opener =13-15, 1N=16-18
1C:1S = 5+Ds (won't have a 4 card major unless able to force to game,
similar to playing Walsh). 1C:1S, 1N = 13-17. This is the weak point but
a 1S response is much less common than a 1D or 1H response.
Mike
p.paulf...@comcast.net
news:rhtc90ddpgj5lnfm0...@4ax.com...
> One of the pairs in the England v Wales Camrose match this year (and
> unfortunately I forget which one) played that a 1NT rebid after a 1C
> opening was 15-17 and a 1NT rebid after a 1D opening was 18-19 (or
> something similar to this). This means that 1C and 1D are both 2+
> cards. It seemed like a clever idea to me, although I'm not sure
what
> the 2NT rebid now shows.
>
> Anyway, was just wondering if you could use this kind of idea in
> improving the NT ladder when you play a mini-NT. Something like:
>
> 1NT - 10-12
> 1C-1z-1NT - 13-15
> 1D-1z-1NT - 17-19
> 2NT - 20-22
>
> or you could keep the 2NT rebids and have even tighter ranges for
some
> of these.
>
> Michael
I've seen several similar approaches. They all work well (for NT) if
the opponents stay out of the auction. In competitive situations,
there is a fair amount of partnership work that needs to be done. Also
making 1m artificial (i.e., 2+ cards) makes sorting things out a bit
difficult even in non-competitive situations. I am not suggesting such
an approach is "bad" merely that there is lots of work to be done.
Arno did it quite successfully years ago so the idea is nothing new.
One possible approach (I actually used to play this):
1N: 10-12
1C-1Z;1N: 13-15
1D-1Z;1N: 16-17
1C-1Z;2N: 18-19
2D-2M;2N:20-21 (within a multi)
2C-2D;2N: 22-23
2NT: 24-25 OR 28-29 (GF and the latter was theoretical only
<grin>)
2C-2D;3N: 25-26
The reason for the tight range on 1D-1z;1N was to make handling both
competition and 1D-2C sequences easier. The reason for the extended
ranges starting with 2D was that the author of this stuff (an
ex-partner of mine) read too many of Rosenkranz's books and was too
anal. :) We played this scheme white in 1st and 2nd seat. In other
positions the 1NT opening was artificial and forcing (see Rosenkranz
comment above).
One side issue, if I may: well, maybe two ...
The tight ranges certainly help responder evaluate the potential
of the hands. This also helps the defense, of course. Also, if you
start treating semi-balanced hands as balanced, much of the help to
responder is lost -- now, it might well be worth this because it
solves lots of rebid problems and HURTS the defense.. there is no
perfect answer here. Another issue (not at all specific to the mini)
is the effect of regulation on valuation. I think, for example, that
QJx-QJx-KJxx-KJx is a "10-12" mini NT despite its 14 hcp. I also think
that T98-T9-KJT98-AJT is a "10-12" mini. The latte will certainly get
me into trouble and I've been harassed by directors on the first one,
too.
Paul
Frances Hinden
Oh yes, the mini is great fun. As others have noted, the problem is
what it does to your constructive bidding. Here are two other
approaches I play with different people:
1NT = 10-13
1NT rebid = 14-17
2NT = 18-19
1NT = 9-11 (in EBUland at least only allowed at Level 4)
1C - 1x - 1NT = 12-14
1D - 1x - 1NT = 15-17
Disadvantage that your 1D opener may not be natural.
We seem to be in a minority only playing the mini 1st NV.
I'm much less convinced of its merits in 2nd seat, particularly love
all.
Remember how it affects the rest of your bidding. If you usually play
strong NT then
1C - 1H
2H
is most often a weak NT, but if you were in a mini position then the
2H bidder is likely either to have a strong NT or extra distribution,
so you make game tries a bit lighter.
Alternatively, if you usually play weak NT then remember
1C - 1H
2H
is likely to be a weak NT and you need a bit more than you are used to
in order to make a game try.
Chris Ryall
>(10-12). If you have tried this approach, any advice?
Kamikaze? This is for wimps I'm afraid. We play 9-12 unless restricted
to 10+ by our S.O. Advice: treat it as the pre-empt it is.
More: www.cavendish.demon.co.uk/bridge/1nt-complex.htm
>Our results thus far have been pretty good. Thanks...
I have the same experience. Need to work on the rest of my game....
--
Chris Ryall Wirral-UK
("cut out" spamtrap to email me)
Chris Ryall
>I've played 10-12 before non-vul only in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd seat.
Why play 10-12 in 3rd seat? Partner has passed an if balanced is
maximum 9 points. 10-14 is perfectly safe and may give 4th seat a
headache.
(I play 3rd 9-16 when legal - same logic)
Eric Landau
Ancrile" <ANC...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
Not only will you continue to get pretty good results, but you'll have
more fun too.
You will, however, need to do more than simply continue to play your old
methods with the 10-12 NT grafted on.
You will need to adapt your bidding after a one-of-a-suit opening to
cover the "holes" left in your old methods by the fact that you can no
longer exclude some range of balanced hands from opener's possible
holdings (because when you open 1NT, you will usually hold less than a
minimum one-of-a-suit opener).
You may also want to modify your agreements for responding to 1NT. If,
for example, you have been using four-level transfers, you will want to
drop them. Their justification rests largely on the advantages of
keeping the stronger hand concealed as declarer, but playing 10-12 NT
they will have the opposite effect.
[Shameless plug alert...]
I would urge you to check out "Every Hand an Adventure" (available from
Baron Barclay for $4.95). It describes EHAA, a complete system (almost
entirely natural) built around the 10-12 NT opening. You might not want
to adopt the entire system, but you'll at least get some ideas as to
what you want to do to the methods you've been playing to better adapt
them to the 10-12 NT.
Eric Landau, APL Solutions, Inc.
"Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburger." - Abbie Hoffman
Douglas Newlands
:
:One of the pairs in the England v Wales Camrose match this year (and
:unfortunately I forget which one) played that a 1NT rebid after a 1C
:opening was 15-17 and a 1NT rebid after a 1D opening was 18-19 (or
:something similar to this). This means that 1C and 1D are both 2+
:cards. It seemed like a clever idea to me, although I'm not sure what
:the 2NT rebid now shows.
Yes I play
1C-any-1N = 11-13
1N = 14-16
1D-1M-1N =17-19
We use 1m-1M-2N as 6m, 3M and about 16-18 basically but you can overload it
with some other strong meanings e.g. 1m-1M-4M should be distributional so
you can put the very strong flat hand with 4 card support in the jump to 2N
and disambiguate it afterwards.
:Anyway, was just wondering if you could use this kind of idea in
:improving the NT ladder when you play a mini-NT. Something like:
:
:1NT - 10-12
:1C-1z-1NT - 13-15
:1D-1z-1NT - 17-19
:2NT - 20-22
Dougie
--
Douglas Newlands Ph.D., School of IT, Tel +61 3 5227 1165, Fax +61 3 5227 2028
Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria 3217, Australia, www.deakin.edu.au
Bill Jacobs
<0jjc909qhl2adhdp4...@4ax.com>:
Excellent point, that. It's easy to forget about that aspect.
Cheers ... Bill.
tys...@yahoo.com
> maximum 9 points. 10-14 is perfectly safe and may give 4th seat a
> headache.
Why stop there? I make my 3rd seat 8-15. Talk about a nice preempt.
Eric Leong
Whenever you open a 10-12 notrump you should expect good results
otherwise you would not be playing it. However, no bid comes free. To
assess whether opening 1NT is worthwhile you have have to judge the
cost of say not being to open 1NT with say 15-17. Further, you have to
judge the cost of bidding when partner opens with a preemptive notrump
and you have a good hand.
Eric Leong
Dwayne Hoffman
and I have had tremendous success especially against opponents that are not
used to handling the weaker NT ranges.
Case in point:
First hand in live tourney after my move from Tampa was a 9.5 NT in 2nd
seat. LHO doubled, pard passed (forces a redouble), 2C by RHO, pass, 2NT by
LHO, CRACK, swish for 500 a clean top.
A big thing of importance, have a good runout scheme. We use DONT runouts,
for sake of memory work. Moscow, Gupta, others are effective to a point.
Andrew Gumperz
I like the Kamikaze NT also. The other posters have pretty much
exhausted the topic of the NT ladder, so I thought I'd discuss another
aspect of mini-NT bidding: responding to the mini-NT both before and
after a double.
NT Responses
Getting the most from 10-12 NTs requires you to adopt a different
responding scheme than the usual Jacoby-transfer based approach. I
suggest the following:
2C = Stayman
2D = Forcing Stayman
2H/2S = to play
3C/3D = to play
3H/3S = to play
4C/4D = transfers to the majors
4H/4S = to play
When the NTer is 10-12, there is little justification for having the
lead come up to the weak hand. Also, transfers provide better
opportunities to the opponents to get back into the auction.
NT Runouts
There are two basic philosophies to running from 1NT doubled. The more
common one is to use one of several methods that allow you to show
various two-suiters. The contrarian view is as follows. After 1NT-X
2C = 5+ clubs
2D = 5+ diamonds
2H = 5+ hearts
2S = 5+ spades
XX = you guys made a mistake
pass = to play
In addition to simplicity, this method allows you to run effectively
on your most common running hands--those with one 5+ card suit. It
also allows you to play 1NTX, if you think that is your smallest
minus. It denies the opponents extra opportunities to describe thier
hands. E.g., if you play that responder must redouble to show a
single-suited hand, then fourth hand will have two opportunities to
bid a suit (directly after the XX or as a balancing call) and hence
more ways to describe the various hands he can hold.
There are a couple of other wrinkles:
opener can and should run from 1NT doubled with a 5+ card suit.
with club shortness, responder is allowed to run to 2C planning to
redouble to demand that opener bid another suit if he is doubled in
2C.
Andrew
Chris Ryall
8+ no trumps are enough below average strength that our well prepared
run puts are illegal and only natural stuff permitted. EBU give a
little leeway for revaluation having long suits etc, but I understand
ABCL are pretty strict about A=4 K=3 Q=2 J=1 (is this Bridge?) and also
restrict the width of a no trump range. I'm not sure under what rule
they justify the latter - as its a natural bid. Not my problem :))
Chris Ryall
>To assess whether opening 1NT is worthwhile you have have to judge the
>cost of say not being to open 1NT with say 15-17.
I have to admit that my promise of 15-17 balanced does rather put
partner in charge, albeit it's rarely good for less than eight tricks.
>Further, you have to judge the cost of bidding when partner opens with
>a preemptive notrump and you have a good hand.
I can add 20 to 11 as easily as 15 to 16 thanks. wtp for 10-12?
OK playing 9-12 one loses a little bit of precision - half a point.
zog
good run-out. One I played after 1NT [X] is:-
(1) Redouble: - Forcing 2C from opener. This is for single suiters.
Opener passes or bids his suit at the 2-level.
(2) 2C, 2D, 2H: All these show a spade two suiter - C&S, D&S, H&S
respectively.
(3) Pass: Forces Redouble from opener. Responder then Passes to shoot it
out in 1NT redoubled, or bids 2C, 2D, 2H showing a heart two suiter - C&H,
D&H, S&H respectively.
Points to note:
(a) When opener has equal length in the two suits offered he should bid the
lower. [The reason for this is (i) to land in the better fit if responder
is 5-4. The corollary to this is that responder with 5-4 where the higher
ranking suit is the five-bagger should treat it as a single suiter, and (ii)
to help cope with 4333 hands.]
(b) There are two ways to show both majors. Obviously this can be used to
advantage where the suits are 5-4. Responder can show bid 2H direct when he
has better spades, and can bid pass followed by 2H when he has better
hearts.
(c) There is no run-out with both minors. 2NT should be reserved for good
distributional hands.
(d) With a 4333 hand you are in trouble. You have to take the best option
of passing, then passing the redouble from opener if you have some chance,
or you could pretend you have a two suiter. So with 3-3-4-3 you could bid
2D showing a Heart Diamond two-suiter and you are guaranteed a moysian
because opener with 3-3 will prefer Diamonds. (PS This is another reason for
preferring the lower suit - there is a slightly better chance of a fit -
opener might have 5!).
(One slight refinement was that if it goes 1NT [X] XX [No]; opener could
bid 2D (and not the 2C as directed) with precisely 3-3-5-2 shape.)
I used to play this at any vulnerability at pairs; we are all mad in
Newzilland. You get good results - and I venture to prophesy you will
continue to get good results - because you get to play more hands.
Cheers, and good luck from zog
"Joe Ancrile" <ANC...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Bbrlc.510372$B81.9...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
Bill Reich
I like the K1NT when it comes up but it lacks the important, to me,
feature of the 12-14. In the auctions when you DIDN'T open 1NT, your
NT rebids were conventionally stronger and your other rebids were
often INFERENTIALLY stronger. I already KNEW that my partner wasn't
opening a balanced ten-point hand, so the mini threw out the main
virtue of the Weak NT.
The solutions offered to the NT rebid ranges seem to be "Play a Strong
Club" or "Play different rebid ranges for 1C-any-1NT and 1D-any-1NT."
If I wanted to play a Big Club, I would certainly consider, probably
adopt, the mini.
What happens to the raise of partner's major after opening a minor in
the latter methods? In K-S it is inferentially fairly sound. In
"different ranges depending on what minor you open," is it any
different?
We do play 10-13 NV at matchpoints and it seems to work well and our
rebid ranges aren't affected much.
--
Will in New Haven
Greg Solomon
> A big thing of importance, have a good runout scheme. We use DONT runouts,
> for sake of memory work. Moscow, Gupta, others are effective to a point.
Yeah, is true. Also, while rumour has it that transfer structures
over a mini are fairly useless at expert level, at club level I find
that they can sometimes help protect most of your combined 12-count
from direct attack as opps attempt to take you for 800 to express
utter contempt for your methods. This is high variance behaviour
which just distorts the field, but sad to say it's more and more
common these days.
In addition, very important to consider the balancing double. Exact
meaning of pass by responder should be considered and discussed. You
can see that since responder can either bid immediately or wait for
the double, the escape/revenge mechanism should in theory be able to
be at least as complex as it is over an immediate double.
To give a highly simplified example, you could totally ignore the idea
of having constructive sequences at the two level and make rev Helvic
type responses to the mini, e.g.
Over 1NT:
2C C+M, weak
2D D+S, weak
2H to play
2S Some whizzbang game try
2NT Another whizzbang game try
3X Normal
After 1NT - Pass - Pass(!) - Dbl - Pass - Pass:
Rdbl - single suited, weak
2C C+D, weak
2D D+H, weak
2H H+S, weak
2S to play
It may make competitive sense to make the immediate 2S weak and
natural if you can get by with 2NT as your only game try, depends on a
wide variety of things.
N.B. If you do play immediate rev Helvic then I think that any
redouble by opener will always be a complete lemon. From a practical
point of view, it takes some heat off the opps when doubler becomes
the pass out seat. But more importantly from an info point of view it
deprives responder of the space to fully describe their hand. It's
like the coin weighing problem. But perhaps someone has other views ?
Or, playing a DONT variation alters the way you're using your space,
so that either party can redouble freely to show values, e.g.
Over 1NT:
2C C + a higher suit, weak
2D D + a higher suit, weak
2H H + a higher suit, weak
2S Some whizzbang game try
2NT Another whizzbang game try
3X Normal
After 1NT - Pass - Pass(!) - Dbl - Pass - Pass
Rdbl Penalties
Others to play
Anyway, that's just a couple of theoretical examples. If like
everyone else in the world you play something more normal in response
to your mini, I guess you should consider which weak hands responder
is unable to describe immediately (e.g. is your weak Stayman forcing,
or not ?) and agree your pass-out bids accordingly. But it is
important to consider ... 2C and 2D are very good contracts to find
correctly after your partner opens a mini - if 2C facing a balanced 12
count is a top, it will often be a very good one.
redspot
news:98f45892.0405...@posting.google.com...
> <SNIP>
>
> NT Responses
> Getting the most from 10-12 NTs requires you to adopt a different
> responding scheme than the usual Jacoby-transfer based approach. I
> suggest the following:
> 2C = Stayman
> 2D = Forcing Stayman
> 2H/2S = to play
> 3C/3D = to play
> 3H/3S = to play
> 4C/4D = transfers to the majors
> 4H/4S = to play
Are you sure that you meant both 2H/S to play *and*
3H/S to play? Normally, 3H/S would be a game force
with a 5-card suit.
With one partner, we play a similar system with a few quirks:
2C = Weak Stayman. Over 2D response by opener, 2H is pass or
correct to 2S when 3-2 in majors.
2D = Strong Stayman (not game-forcing; responder may pass 2H/S.)
Opener denies with 3C with a maximum; otherwise, 2NT.
Opener bids 3H/S with a maximum and 4-card suit.
2NT = natural, invitational.
2H/S = to play, 5+ card suit.
3H/S = game force with 5-card suit. Opener bids 4H/S or 3NT.
4H/S = to play, 6+ card suit.
3C/D = to play, poor 6-card suit in weak hand.
2C followed by 3C/D over any response = invitational,
semi-solid 6-card suit, no outside stoppers.
Opener bids 3NT with a suitable maximum.
2D followed by 3C/D over any 2-level response = invitational,
semi-solid 6-card suit, an outside stopper.
Opener bids 3NT unless a really awful minimum.
2D followed by 4-any over any response = slam interest, 6+ suit.
Starting these 6-card minor suit sequences with Stayman means
that Stayman doesn't promise a 4-card major.
> When the NTer is 10-12, there is little justification for having the
> lead come up to the weak hand. Also, transfers provide better
> opportunities to the opponents to get back into the auction.
True, but transfers also provide a much richer framework
for describing hands, such as transferring and bidding another
suit, or tranferring and raising.
With another partner, I play a much more complicated
11-13 NT which includes transfers:
2C = Stayman (but doesn't promise majors)
Over 2D response:
2H = weak, pass or correct to 2S.
2S = invitational, 5S+4H
2NT = invitational (may have 4S+5H)
3H/S = 5 in suit bid, 4 in the other major
3C/D = forcing
4C = Ace-asking, 1430 (4NT is quantitative)
4D = 4-6 in majors
4H = 6-4 in majors
Over 2H/S:
2S (over 2H) = 4S, <4H, invitational
2NT = invitational
3C/D = forcing
3 of other major = unspecified singleton (3NT asks)
4C = RKC 1430 (4NT is quantitative)
2D/H = Jacoby Transfers
After opener accepts transfer:
2NT = 5-card major, balanced, invitational.
3NT = 5-card major, pass or correct to 4H/S.
3C/D = natural (4+ cards) and game forcing.
3 of other major = at least 5-5 in majors.
New suit jump = splinter bid, slam interest, 6+ card suit.
After opener super-accepts (with 4+ cards and max HCPs):
2NT = max, 4-3-3-3
New suit = max, 4 trumps, 2 cards in new suit
(e.g.: 1NT-2H, 2S-3D = 4-3-2-4)
3 of major bid = sign-off
4C = RKC 1430
2S = Transfer to 3C and
2NT = Transfer to 3D:
If opener accepts the transfer, showing Ax, Kx, or Qxx:
Other minor = natural, forcing (1NT-2NT, 3D-4C = 6D+4C)
3H/S = 6+ minor, singleton in major suit bid, slam interest.
(e.g.: 1NT-1S, 2C-3H = 6+ clubs, singleton heart)
3NT = to play
4NT = RKCB 1430.
If opener bids one below the transfer target suit: (e.g.: 2S-2NT)
Other minor = natural (e.g.: 1NT-2NT, 3C-4C = 6D+4C)
Bidding target suit = invitational (e.g.: 1NT-2NT, 3C-3D)
3H/S = 6+ minor, singleton in major suit bid, slam interest.
(e.g.: 1NT-2S, 2NT-3H = 6+ clubs, singleton heart)
3NT = 20-21 HCPs
4NT = RKCB 1430.
3C = weak, minor 2-suiter; opener passes or corrects to 3D.
3D = invitational+, minor 2-suiter; forcing.
Opener responds 3H with game interest in Clubs, 3S for Diamonds.
3H = invitational, major 2-suiter; opener can pass, correct, or raise.
3S = game force, major 2-suiter
Opener responds 4C with slam interest in Hearts, 4D for Spades.
Over interference:
Systems on over artificial doubler and over 2C (double for Stayman)
Over 2D/H/S:
Double = neg.
2H/S = to play.
2NT = Lebensohl (opener responds 3C)
Over artificial bid showing majors:
(Obviously, these bids apply only when possible.)
2C/D = to play
X of 2C/D = lead-directing
2H or X of 2H = weak hand with minors.
3H = good hand with minors.
2S = 6 clubs
2NT = 6 diamonds
Over 3-bid:
Bids have same meaning as no interference.
Over penalty double:
Redouble = relay to clubs
2C = relay to Diamonds, etc. for 2D, 2H
Redouble; opener bids 2C, then 2D = 5-5 majors.
XX-2C, 2H/S or 2C-2D, 2H/S = 5-5 in major-minor.
(e.g.: 2C-2D, 2S = 5D + 5S)
Pass = opener must redouble, then
2C = any 4-3-3-3
2D = 4D's + 4H/S
2H = 4-4 majors
tys...@yahoo.com
Yes we can't use any conventions after the 8-15 (I live in the US) but
just having all of responder's bids natural and to play works fine.
The extra gain in frequency and pressure is worth the loss of showing
two-suiters and the like.
p.paulf...@comcast.net
news:a1bce703.04050...@posting.google.com...
The rule the North American fascist communist hippie Republicans (a k
a the ACBL) -- not that I have a problem with their rules -- uses is a
backhanded interpretation of the governing body's right to limit
conventions. You can use a 8 hcp 1NT opening -- they'd like to stop
you, but they can't. They argue that since they have a right to
legislate use of conventions, they have a right to forbid the use of
any conventions after you open a NT weaker than X or with a range
wider than Y.
Using this logic they have the right to forbid the use of Stayman (or
other subversive stuff) if your 1NT opening was other than 16-18 if
they so desired.
Paul
Julian Lighton
Chris Ryall <gro...@cutmeout.cavendish.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> wrote on "Ever played the kamikaze notrump?"
>>Why stop there? I make my 3rd seat 8-15. Talk about a nice preempt.
>
>8+ no trumps are enough below average strength that our well prepared
>run puts are illegal and only natural stuff permitted. EBU give a
>little leeway for revaluation having long suits etc, but I understand
>ABCL are pretty strict about A=4 K=3 Q=2 J=1 (is this Bridge?)
No, it's the ACBL.
AFAIK, mini NT is the only situation where they've outlawed judgement.
> and also
>restrict the width of a no trump range. I'm not sure under what rule
>they justify the latter - as its a natural bid.
The usual warped interpretation of 40D. They ban all conventions
afterward.
Eric Landau
"paulfr...@comcast.net" <p.paulf...@comcast.net> wrote:
>The rule the North American fascist communist hippie Republicans (a k
>a the ACBL) -- not that I have a problem with their rules -- uses is a
>backhanded interpretation of the governing body's right to limit
>conventions. You can use a 8 hcp 1NT opening -- they'd like to stop
>you, but they can't. They argue that since they have a right to
>legislate use of conventions, they have a right to forbid the use of
>any conventions after you open a NT weaker than X or with a range
>wider than Y.
>
>Using this logic they have the right to forbid the use of Stayman (or
>other subversive stuff) if your 1NT opening was other than 16-18 if
>they so desired.
Using this logic, they have the right to forbid the use of Stayman (or
other subversive stuff) if you are left-handed, or gay, or have ever
psyched against a member of the Board of Directors. Which they do.
The WBF Laws Commission, which is the official interpreter of the Laws
of Duplicate Bridge, has accepted the ACBL's logic as consistent with
the Laws. Since the predominating view of the WBFLC is that WBF member
zones should be given as much scope as possible to control what bidding
methods may be used in their contests, the problem Mr. Friedman has with
the rules in the ACBL is likely to get worse before it gets better.
Bruce Scott
"Julian Lighton" <jl...@fragment.com> wrote in message
news:109ia28...@corp.supernews.com...
> In article <haYZciKgyCmAFwvR@[127.0.0.1]>,
> Chris Ryall <gro...@cutmeout.cavendish.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > wrote on "Ever played the kamikaze notrump?"
> >>Why stop there? I make my 3rd seat 8-15. Talk about a nice preempt.
> >
> >8+ no trumps are enough below average strength that our well prepared
> >run puts are illegal and only natural stuff permitted. EBU give a
> >little leeway for revaluation having long suits etc, but I understand
> >ABCL are pretty strict about A=4 K=3 Q=2 J=1 (is this Bridge?)
>
> No, it's the ACBL.
>
> AFAIK, mini NT is the only situation where they've outlawed judgement.
At least some TDs will not permit you to exercise judgement regarding weak
two bids if you have a range that they think that old people don't like.
If you card 6-12 HCP weak two bids, you can open with AJTxxx and out.
If you card 3-9 HCP weak two bids (you have to stay within a 7 HCP
range to be allowed to play conventions), if you decide to open a two-bid
with 10 HCP that includes a stiff queen, you might get penalized. Same thing
with KT98xx and out in a 4-10 range.
Eric Leong
When you open 1NT (9-12) you start your side off at the two level to
begin explorations when much of the field is opening with a
descriptive bid at the one level. Constructive bidding is not an issue
of adding hcp but of finding suitable fits opposite distributional
patterns.
The weak notrump (12-14) has at least the advantage that when your
side doesn't open 1NT you at least know that partner has either a
balanced 15+ hand or a distributional hand. When your partner opens at
9-12 notrump, all you know is partner has a wider balanced hand range
which means one partner has to start climbing out to the two level
when most of the field can stay comfortably at the one level.
Eric Leong
Sandy E. Barnes
news:258ecf56.0405...@posting.google.com...
One major issue with a method I have under advisement, and this structure,
is the loss of a direct penalty sequence when it is the opponent who has
made the mistake by bidding over my 1NT. I consider this a serious flaw in
any structure.
Sandy Barnes
Andrew Gumperz
> "Andrew Gumperz" <agum...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:98f45892.0405...@posting.google.com...
> > <SNIP>
> >
> > NT Responses
> > Getting the most from 10-12 NTs requires you to adopt a different
> > responding scheme than the usual Jacoby-transfer based approach. I
> > suggest the following:
> > 2C = Stayman
> > 2D = Forcing Stayman
> > 2H/2S = to play
> > 3C/3D = to play
> > 3H/3S = to play
> > 4C/4D = transfers to the majors
> > 4H/4S = to play
>
> Are you sure that you meant both 2H/S to play *and*
> 3H/S to play? Normally, 3H/S would be a game force
> with a 5-card suit.
I play 3H/S as preemptive and use forcing Stayman instead with a GF
hand including a 5-card major suit.
> > When the NTer is 10-12, there is little justification for having the
> > lead come up to the weak hand. Also, transfers provide better
> > opportunities to the opponents to get back into the auction.
>
> True, but transfers also provide a much richer framework
> for describing hands, such as transferring and bidding another
> suit, or tranferring and raising.
But a framework that you can take advantage of very infrequently,
since you won't have often have the values to leverage its strong
points. Also, don't discount the competitive losses transfers can
generate. For example:
1NT-P-2S-? is a difficult auction to bid against.
1NT-P-2H*-? is easier since you have an extra cuebid and can double in
two ways(direct or balancing).
Your second responding scheme is very complete and offers good
constructive bidding methods, but at the cost of reduced effectiveness
of your preemptive bidding after a 1NT opening. Will the improved
constructive bidding outweight the competitve losses? very hard to
say, I certainly do not know. However, I can say for a fact that the
weaker the NT opening, the less value you will get from transer-based
constructive bidding methods.
Andrew
DavJFlower
>two bids if you have a range that they think that old people don't like.
>
>If you card 6-12 HCP weak two bids, you can open with AJTxxx and out.
>
>If you card 3-9 HCP weak two bids (you have to stay within a 7 HCP
>range to be allowed to play conventions), if you decide to open a two-bid
>with 10 HCP that includes a stiff queen, you might get penalized. Same thing
>with KT98xx and out in a 4-10 range.
Any such restriction on weak two bids is bad bridge.
Now HCP are a good evaluator of the strength of balanced hands, at least as far
as no-trump contracts are concerned, so the ACBL's restrictions do not
propagate bad bridge.
However, compare:
K Q 10 9 8 7
x
x x
x x x x
with
A x x x x x
J x
x x
x x x
Both hold 5HCP, but the first hand is much the stronger.
By giving a restricted point range for weak twos, the ACBL is guilty of
propagating bad bridge.
I would suggest an alternative definition of:
'Expect to make 4-6 tricks opposite a 4432 Yarborough'. The doubleton being in
the trump suit.
This is a necessary definition, not a sufficient one.
e.g.
A K Q J x x
x
x x x
x x x
is a weak 2 (at least for me) but
A x x x x x
A x x
A x
x x
is not (I'm sure everyone agrees)
Dave Flower
Mike Bell
agum...@hotmail.com (Andrew Gumperz) wrote:
After 1NT-P-2S, both opps can have a go at balancing.
Playing transfers, 2nd seat doesn't know whether you are about to pass
out 2S or make a slam-try.
Mike
b...@moscito.org
> ...[9-12] great and such a load of fun, What you need is a good run-out.
> [cut]
> (3) Pass: Forces Redouble from opener. Responder then Passes to shoot it
> out in 1NT redoubled, or bids 2C, 2D, 2H showing a heart two suiter - C&H,
> (d) With a 4333 hand you are in trouble. You have to take the best option
> of passing, then passing the redouble from opener if you have some chance,
> or you could pretend you have a two suiter.
As an 18-year-old playing a 12-14 1NT in the ACBL, I happily enjoyed the
good results from my complicated run-outs until one day my partner (hi!
David!) and I realized how often the 4333 should have gone for a number
but did not, because the opponents were not informed of the possibility.
So we asked some local friends (Hi, Glenn! Hi, Chandler!) who also used
run-outs over a mini to be our sparring partners. I wrote a rudimentary
hand generator to get a decent sample and we spent a saturday afternoon
doubling run-outs. The experiment resulted in our reverting to natural.
Our friends, brave souls, stuck to their guns. But they nobly disclosed
to their opponents how the 4333 busts are bid and took their lumps.
Since then I have made other simulations and the results as well as my
own experience have always been consistent with the following:
1. If you can't redouble 1N directly for business, you are playing what
I consider an inferior method, but it is close enough that I will be
willing to defer to your judgment, habits and familiarity.
2. If you can't play in 1Nx, you are playing a clearly inferior method.
3. If you can't play in 1Nx with 4333 (or other flat) busts, BUT don't
clearly spell out to your opponents how you bid them and with what
frequency, then you will win imps on what I consider bad ethics.
redspot
And also at the strain of the already suspect memory
of myself and fellow senior citizens. I personally
prefer the simpler methods, and even then, I had one
partner who was generally much better than average
(we won a lot of events), but who couldn't remember
stuff like 1NT-3H/S being game forcing. (One time I had
a 20+ HCP hand with 5 Hearts. I bid 3H over his 1NT,
intending to get to 6H if he bid 4H, or to 6NT if he
bid 3NT. He passed.)
> Will the improved constructive bidding outweight the competitve
> losses? Very hard to say, I certainly do not know.
Me either.
> However, I can say for a fact that the weaker the NT opening, the less
> value you will get from transer-based constructive bidding methods.
No argument with that.
J. Michael Hammond
> "Joe Ancrile" <ANC...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:Bbrlc.510372$B81.9...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
> > One of my partners and I have just begun playing a kamikaze notrump
> (10-12).
> > If you have tried this approach, any advice? Our results thus far
> have been
> > pretty good.
> >
> > Thanks...
> >
>
> it does to your NT ladder. For the sake of discussion, let me assume a
> "standard" weak NT ladder; something like:
> 1N: 12-14
> 1m-1Z;1N: 15-17
> 1m-1Z;2N: 18-19
> 2N: 20-21
>
> If you try to modify the above "standard" play the mini, it looks
> something like:
> 1N: 10-12
> 1m-1Z,1N: 13-16
> 1m-1Z;2N: 17-18
> 2N: 19-21
>
> Obviously there are all sorts of variations.Whatever youdo, you will
> have to extend the ranges of some of the steps. There are several
> approaches to improving (tightening) the ranges:
>
> 1) Play a strong club system:
> 1N: 10-12
> 1D-1M;1N: 13-15
> 1C-1D;1N: 16-18
> 1C-1D;1H(relay)-1S;1N: 19-21
>
> 2) Play 2D as Mexican or Multi with an included strong NT range:
> 1N: 10-12
> 1m-1Z;1N: 13-(bad)16
> 1m-1Z;2N: (good)16 - 18
> 2D: 19-20
> 2N: 21-22
3) Play 1C and 1D as either natural or preparing a notrump rebid:
1N: 10-12
1C-1Z-1N: 13-14
1D-1Z-1N: 15-16
1C-1Z-2N: 17-18
1D-1Z-2N: 19-20
2N: 21-22
Previous discussion in r.g.b. suggests that this treatment is legal in
the ACBL.
This was a lot of fun to play.
Granted, opening one of a minor in this system results in bidding
complications when one or more of the inconsiderate other people at
the table don't dutifully play their "pass - 1Z - pass" roles, but so
be it.
I guess another problem is when the partner of the one-of-a-minor
bidder ends up on lead and has a smattering of information on which to
base the decision was the opening bid natural or a notrump range.
Guessing spectacularly correctly might bring unwanted ethics-based
attention.
It might also be too easy to (subconsciously or intentionally) open
natural 1m quickly and the notrump-range 1m a little more slowly (have
to count the points and remember the ranges).
But if you don't do something only because of the fear of it raising
delicate questions, you .. well, are probably a fairly considerate
person I suppose.
What are you doing playing competitive bridge? ;)
--JMike
Chris Ryall
>begin explorations when much of the field is opening with a descriptive
>bid at the one level. Constructive bidding is not an issue of adding
>hcp but of finding suitable fits opposite distributional patterns.
OK you may have to decide level and strain after a mini 1NT, but it is
not a constructive bid. It's a pre-empt. Same applies over 3C (where I
like a 3D enquiry ....)
Jon Levell
{SNIP}
>
> 1. If you can't redouble 1N directly for business, you are playing what
> I consider an inferior method, but it is close enough that I will be
> willing to defer to your judgment, habits and familiarity.
> 3. If you can't play in 1Nx with 4333 (or other flat) busts, BUT don't
> clearly spell out to your opponents how you bid them and with what
> frequency, then you will win imps on what I consider bad ethics.
I agree completely. Part of what makes the weak NT fun is full
disclosure/understanding of EVERYTHING that could happen during a
run-out.
> 2. If you can't play in 1Nx, you are playing a clearly inferior method.
This is the one I have a problem with. I respect simulations and the
many people who post on rgb and often run simulations, but I still
think this is a 50/50 choice at best and haven't seen enough evidence
that playing in 1NTx is a big deal. My feeling is that simulations
can't evaluate accurately how bad opponents defend against me and how
unwilling most opps are to try for 1NTxx-1 knowing that it might be
1NTxx making 1. I would hate to lose this redouble - it's one of my
favorite parts about superweak NT's.
Jon
Andrew Gumperz
Excellent post. I agree completely.
Andrew
Andrew Gumperz
> This is the one I have a problem with. I respect simulations and the
> many people who post on rgb and often run simulations, but I still
> think this is a 50/50 choice at best and haven't seen enough evidence
> that playing in 1NTx is a big deal. My feeling is that simulations
> can't evaluate accurately how bad opponents defend against me and how
> unwilling most opps are to try for 1NTxx-1 knowing that it might be
> 1NTxx making 1. I would hate to lose this redouble - it's one of my
> favorite parts about superweak NT's.
Why not try a method where you can play either 1NTx or 1NTxx such as
all natural runouts? Life without 2-suited runouts has its rewards...
Andrew
James Dow Allen
> "Joe Ancrile" <ANC...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:Bbrlc.510372$B81.9...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
> > One of my partners and I have just begun playing a kamikaze notrump
> > (10-12).
> ...Whatever youdo, you will
> have to extend the ranges of some of the steps.
I played a 9-12 NT (good 9, please!) 30-odd years ago, with fair
success. One way we got narrow ranges was to PASS with 16-18.
In 3rd or 4th seat the 1NT opener becomes a little broader because
of the need to "balance."
Probably wildly unsound, but it was fun, and we did win events with it.
James
Larry Lowell
[snip]
>
> Another way to do it, and my preference, is to play transfer responses,
> but I don't think these are GCC legal.
>
> 1C:1D = 4+Hs, then 1H by opener =13-15, 1N=16-18
> 1C:1H = 4+Ss then 1S by opener =13-15, 1N=16-18
> 1C:1S = 5+Ds (won't have a 4 card major unless able to force to game,
> similar to playing Walsh). 1C:1S, 1N = 13-17. This is the weak point but
> a 1S response is much less common than a 1D or 1H response.
>
> Mike
Yes, these are GCC legal and I have been playing them as has Lyle Poe
with his Millennium Club. The responses are 0+ hcp for 1D & 1H. 1S is
0-8 and NO 4M. 1NT response is 9-11. However, the rebid of 1NT by the
club opener is 15-18, and the 2NT rebid is 19-21. Interesting system.
Larry Lowell
Knoxville, TN, USA
Eric Leong
> Eric Leong wrote on "Ever played the kamikaze notrump?"
> >When you open 1NT (9-12) you start your side off at the two level to
> >begin explorations when much of the field is opening with a descriptive
> >bid at the one level. Constructive bidding is not an issue of adding
> >hcp but of finding suitable fits opposite distributional patterns.
>
> OK you may have to decide level and strain after a mini 1NT, but it is
> not a constructive bid. It's a pre-empt. Same applies over 3C (where I
> like a 3D enquiry ....)
Other situations where you might pay off with a 10-12 notrump is in
competitive auctions when you don't open with 1NT because you have a
balanced 13-19 hcp hand. For instance, you open with 1C and the
bidding proceeds:
1C 3D Dble (negative) Pass
?
1C 2S 3D Pass
?
Those who open a weak notrump or a strong notrump have less of a
disadvantage of getting their hand across than the mini notrumpers.
Eric Leong
David Stevenson
>"Joe Ancrile" <ANC...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:<Bbrlc.510372$B81.9...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
>> One of my partners and I have just begun playing a kamikaze notrump (10-12).
>> pretty good.
>>
>> Thanks...
>
>what it does to your constructive bidding. Here are two other
>approaches I play with different people:
>
>1NT = 10-13
>1NT rebid = 14-17
>2NT = 18-19
>
>1NT = 9-11 (in EBUland at least only allowed at Level 4)
>1C - 1x - 1NT = 12-14
>1D - 1x - 1NT = 15-17
>
>Disadvantage that your 1D opener may not be natural.
Personally at L4 my preferred approach is
1NT = 9-12 [1st/2nd hand] 15-18 [3rd/4th hand]
1X - 1Y - 1NT = 13-17 & Crowhurst
1X - 1Y - 2NT = 18+ FG
1Y - 2X - 2NT = 15+ FG
--
David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways /\ /\
Liverpool, England, UK Fax: +44 870 055 7697 @ @
<bri...@blakjak.com> ICQ 20039682 bluejak on OKB =( + )=
Bridgepage: http://blakjak.com/brg_menu.htm ~
David Stevenson
>[Shameless plug alert...]
>
>I would urge you to check out "Every Hand an Adventure" (available from
>Baron Barclay for $4.95). It describes EHAA, a complete system (almost
>entirely natural) built around the 10-12 NT opening. You might not want
>to adopt the entire system, but you'll at least get some ideas as to
>what you want to do to the methods you've been playing to better adapt
>them to the 10-12 NT.
Have a little look at the summary to whet your appetite, and then you
*really* must but the book!
http://blakjak.com/ehaa_faq.htm
David Stevenson
>"Joe Ancrile" <ANC...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:<Bbrlc.510372$B81.9...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
>> One of my partners and I have just begun playing a kamikaze notrump (10-12).
>> If you have tried this approach, any advice? Our results thus far have been
>> pretty good.
>>
>> Thanks...
>
>otherwise you would not be playing it. However, no bid comes free. To
>assess whether opening 1NT is worthwhile you have have to judge the
>judge the cost of bidding when partner opens with a preemptive notrump
>and you have a good hand.
You mean like a strong no-trump?
Seriously, the response to 1NT tend for many pairs to be better worked
out than the rest of their system. One of the advantages of the mini
1NT is that it is more frequent than the strong 1NT, thus making bidding
*more* accurate on *more* hands.
Chris Ryall
> Seriously, the response to 1NT tend for many pairs to be better
>worked out than the rest of their system. One of the advantages of the
>mini 1NT is that it is more frequent than the strong 1NT, thus making
>bidding *more* accurate on *more* hands.
I cannot find the post on Google but I recall weak being about 50% more
common, mini about twice as common and a 9-16 wide range 3rd hander
being almost worth bidding 'hand unseen'.
DavJFlower
>1NT is that it is more frequent than the strong 1NT, thus making bidding
>*more* accurate on *more* hands.
>
>--
>David Stevenson
This illustrates a fallacy frequently propounded by advocates of people's pet
systems or conventions.
A convention cannot be evaluated in isolation. In this case, the problem is not
hands that open 1NT, but rather the problem of assigning sequences to show
stronger balanced hands. If you open a 10-12 NT, inevitably your bidding of
stronger balanced hands will be less efficient.
A similar position pertains to the current craze for 2/1 game forcing. This is
obviously more efficient when responder has game-going values, but it loses out
when responder is weaker.
Dave Flower
Michal Rosa
>>One of the advantages of the mini
>>1NT is that it is more frequent than the strong 1NT, thus making bidding
>>*more* accurate on *more* hands.
> This illustrates a fallacy frequently propounded by advocates of people's pet
> systems or conventions.
>
> A convention cannot be evaluated in isolation. In this case, the problem is not
> hands that open 1NT, but rather the problem of assigning sequences to show
> stronger balanced hands. If you open a 10-12 NT, inevitably your bidding of
> stronger balanced hands will be less efficient.
Not so. You can easily work around it by, for example, using 1C bid to
show balanced hands with 13-14 or 17-18 and 1D to show 15-16 or 19-20.
What will slightly suffer is your ability to show minor-orientated hands
but accuracy of showing stronger balanced hands will actually improve.
--
Windows Media Player is inactive...
Michal Rosa - GG 1081218
Chris Ryall
>>One of the advantages of the mini 1NT is that it is more frequent than
>>the strong 1NT, thus making bidding *more* accurate on *more* hands.
>
>This illustrates a fallacy frequently propounded by advocates of
>people's pet systems or conventions. A convention cannot be evaluated
>in isolation. In this case, the problem is not hands that open 1NT, but
>rather the problem of assigning sequences to show stronger balanced
>hands. If you open a 10-12 NT, inevitably your bidding of stronger
>balanced hands will be less efficient.
While I agree that a trade off is in operation there is no fallacy
surely? More efficiency on more common hands and less on rarer hands. We
have a net gain there unless the rarer hands are worth more to us. While
a 16 point balanced hand is more useful than an 11 this is well offset
by frequency, and the preemptive advantages of the mini
>
>A similar position pertains to the current craze for 2/1 game forcing.
>This is obviously more efficient when responder has game-going values,
>but it loses out when responder is weaker. Dave Flower
It doesn't stop there though. those weaker hand auctions are also
clarified by the failure to 2/1. Therein the whole efficiency of limit
bids etc.
I use a Byzantine asking bid method for strong 4441's that partner finds
hard to remember. Nor is it common. And we lose out if anyone forgets.
But there is big payoff elsewhere in that 1x 1y jump new suit can be non
forcing, and a jump new suit is always 5-4. And that latter sequence
*is* common. /chris
Larry Lowell
[snip]
>
> I cannot find the post on Google but I recall weak being about 50% more
> common, mini about twice as common and a 9-16 wide range 3rd hander
> being almost worth bidding 'hand unseen'.
Would you believe twice as common for the weak and 2.6 more common for the mini!
From my spreadsheet on Probabilities for NT (No 5M):
10-12 10.5 % 2.625 1.28
12-14 8.2 % 2.05 1.00 Reference
15-17 4.0 % 1.00 Standard 0.49
16-18 2.9 %
17-20 2.3 % Roman & Power Range (4 pt spread)
9-16 22.3 %
The old K-S weak NT of 11-14 (where 11 was AK + A) = 8.6%
If you include a major xxxxx in the NT, increase values 4% (relative).
I am switching to the mini ASAP nV!
Adam Beneschan
> >A similar position pertains to the current craze for 2/1 game forcing.
> >This is obviously more efficient when responder has game-going values,
> >but it loses out when responder is weaker. Dave Flower
>
> It doesn't stop there though. those weaker hand auctions are also
> clarified by the failure to 2/1. Therein the whole efficiency of limit
> bids etc.
When you have only one way to describe the limit hand, though, you do
lose some descriptive value. You can invite partner to go to game,
but you don't tell him a whole lot. Playing "standard" methods with
1NT forcing, for instance, if partner opens 1S, you can show a limit
raise and also show something in clubs by starting with 2C and then
3S. Partner can then look not just at his general strength but also
at his clubs to decide whether to go to game. (This doesn't work as
well if 1NT isn't forcing, because then responder may be systemically
forced to bid 2C on something like Jxxx.) Playing 2/1 with the
"usual" gadgets, you can't do this.
Anyway, this is one objection I've heard to 2/1 GF, and it makes some
sense.
Whether you make up for it by being better able to find the correct
game on game-going hands, or explore more efficiently for slam, I
don't know. My intuition is that it should be possible to use 2/1 on
invitational-strength hands and still have the room to do what you
need to do on stronger hands; but it might be more difficult. I've
heard some experts say that the main advantage of 2/1 GF is that it's
easier to play. My regular partner said, when we first started
playing together, that he likes 2/1 because he knows what's forcing
and what isn't---while playing 2/1 not game forcing requires more
discussion so that the partnership knows which below-game sequences
are forcing and which should be passed. Not terribly difficult, I
would think, but some people are not as good at memorizing bidding
systems and need to keep things simpler.
-- Adam
Robert Lipton
Adam Beneschan wrote:
> Chris Ryall <groups2@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message news:<i1opXiAbRfoAFwsx@[127.0.0.1]>...
>
>
>>>A similar position pertains to the current craze for 2/1 game forcing.
>>>This is obviously more efficient when responder has game-going values,
>>>but it loses out when responder is weaker. Dave Flower
>>
>>It doesn't stop there though. those weaker hand auctions are also
>>clarified by the failure to 2/1. Therein the whole efficiency of limit
>>bids etc.
>
>
> When you have only one way to describe the limit hand, though, you do
> lose some descriptive value. You can invite partner to go to game,
> but you don't tell him a whole lot. Playing "standard" methods with
> 1NT forcing, for instance, if partner opens 1S, you can show a limit
> raise and also show something in clubs by starting with 2C and then
> 3S. Partner can then look not just at his general strength but also
> at his clubs to decide whether to go to game. (This doesn't work as
> well if 1NT isn't forcing, because then responder may be systemically
> forced to bid 2C on something like Jxxx.) Playing 2/1 with the
> "usual" gadgets, you can't do this.
>
> Anyway, this is one objection I've heard to 2/1 GF, and it makes some
> sense.
>
Eh? 2/1 chops major suit raises into much finer sheafs that SA: the
'courtesty raise' is 5-7, the straight raise is 8-9 and the limit raise
can show either three or four cards. As 2/1 is meant to ease the
question of 'go to game or not?' it is, I think, clearly better for IMPs
that SA; and the finer gradations solve some issues at MPs too.
"Standard with 1NT forcing" is an often inappropriate gadget for the
reason you mention. Gadgets should match the systems.
Bob
Bob
Ron Johnson
>In article <6P2mc.701$XI4....@news.xtra.co.nz>, zog <no...@at.all> wrote:
>> ...[9-12] great and such a load of fun, What you need is a good run-out.
>> [cut]
>> (3) Pass: Forces Redouble from opener. Responder then Passes to shoot it
>> out in 1NT redoubled, or bids 2C, 2D, 2H showing a heart two suiter - C&H,
>> D&H, S&H respectively. [...] (c) There is no run-out with both minors.
>> 2NT should be reserved for good distributional hands.
>> (d) With a 4333 hand you are in trouble. You have to take the best option
>> of passing, then passing the redouble from opener if you have some chance,
>> or you could pretend you have a two suiter.
>
>As an 18-year-old playing a 12-14 1NT in the ACBL, I happily enjoyed the
>good results from my complicated run-outs until one day my partner (hi!
>David!) and I realized how often the 4333 should have gone for a number
>but did not, because the opponents were not informed of the possibility.
My experience is that a significant percentage of the field simply isn't
interested in playing for penalty (and that those who are, are more or
less aware of the possibility of the death hand)
Still, you are absolutely correct. Disclosure in run-outs needs to be
improved across the board.
--
RNJ
Chris Ryall
notrump)"
>> It doesn't stop there though. those weaker hand auctions are also
>> clarified by the failure to 2/1. Therein the whole efficiency of limit
>> bids etc.
>
>When you have only one way to describe the limit hand, though, you do
>lose some descriptive value.
I agree - and don't play 1H -3H as a limit raise - but many do.
Charles Leong
> Playing "standard" methods with
> 1NT forcing, for instance, if partner opens 1S, you can show a limit
> raise and also show something in clubs by starting with 2C and then
> 3S. Partner can then look not just at his general strength but also
> at his clubs to decide whether to go to game. (This doesn't work as
> well if 1NT isn't forcing, because then responder may be systemically
> forced to bid 2C on something like Jxxx.) Playing 2/1 with the
> "usual" gadgets, you can't do this.
>
> Anyway, this is one objection I've heard to 2/1 GF, and it makes some
> sense.
i don't quite agree with this. any properly discussed 2/1 system should be
able to differentiate between 3, and 4 card raises, courtesy, constructive,
invitational, preemptive, game forcing strength. the most underrated thing
in the game is the power of the 9th trump in a 5-4 fit. my current structure
to 1S is:
1N forcing followed by 2S - courtesy raise or preference, to keep partner
from getting excited
1N forcing followed by 3S - invitational 3-card raise
2S - constructive with 3 trumps
2N - game forcing with 4+ trumps
3C - constructive 4-card raise with side singleton
3D - invitational 4-card raise
3H - constructive 4-card raise, no side shortage
3S - pre-emptive
3N - flat 3 or 4 card raise to game (4333)
4C - 15-16 3-card raise to game
4D - 17-18 3-card raise to game
4S - more preemptive.
2/1 followed by support - descriptive usually only 3 trumps
opener immediately knows how many trumps the partnership holds and will bid
to the correct level in competition.
Charles
Kieran Dyke
"Charles Leong" <cl...@pacific.net.sg.nospam> wrote in message
news:_Qzoc.486$8D5.122@newsfe1-win...
response. Enemy bidding could obscure the fit or the specific message.
3NT showing 3 or 4 trumps is terrible. The fourth trump is often worth two
tricks opposite a shapely hand. And 4C and 4D are far more effective
preempts than anything the opponents can throw at you.
Tiggrr
DavJFlower
However, all these sequences are preceded by the (I have 13 cards) nearly
meaningless 1NT bid.
Knowledge of the location of responders outside values is at least as important
as the information detailed above.
For example, opener holds:
A K x x x
K x x
x
A Q x x
Responder halds:
Q x x
Q x x
K J x x
x x x
This is a poor 4S contract; interchange either hand's minors and it becomes a
superb one.
Dave Flower
Kieran Dyke
"DavJFlower" <davjf...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040513040201...@mb-m02.aol.com...
I'm not at all concerned about whether the major suit games (or 3NTs) I
reach are great contracts - I'll let them lead badly and hand it to me
anyway, but the big leaps to show three card raises absolutely KILL slam
investigation.
Tiggrr
Adam Beneschan
>
> > Playing "standard" methods with
> > 1NT forcing, for instance, if partner opens 1S, you can show a limit
> > raise and also show something in clubs by starting with 2C and then
> > 3S. Partner can then look not just at his general strength but also
> > at his clubs to decide whether to go to game. (This doesn't work as
> > well if 1NT isn't forcing, because then responder may be systemically
> > forced to bid 2C on something like Jxxx.) Playing 2/1 with the
> > "usual" gadgets, you can't do this.
> >
> > Anyway, this is one objection I've heard to 2/1 GF, and it makes some
> > sense.
>
> i don't quite agree with this. any properly discussed 2/1 system should be
> able to differentiate between 3, and 4 card raises, courtesy, constructive,
> invitational, preemptive, game forcing strength. the most underrated thing
> in the game is the power of the 9th trump in a 5-4 fit.
I agree, knowing how many trumps responder has in support is useful.
What you're missing in the above paragraph is being able to show where
your values are when you make a raise, which is important on some
hands. Of course, there's not enough room to show everything---OK,
maybe with a relay structure there would be---but other than that,
there's a trade-off. I'm not claiming that the inability to show
where your side values are outweighs other considerations.
Actually, one of the more interesting ideas I've read about lately is
just doing away with invitational bids. I think one of the top
Italian pairs does this, but I don't remember which one. I don't know
exactly how they do things, but I suspect that with invitational hands
they just bid game and hope for luck or an ineffective opening lead.
This frees up a lot of sequences they can use for other things.
-- Adam
Bill Reich
>
> > Playing "standard" methods with
> > 1NT forcing, for instance, if partner opens 1S, you can show a limit
> > raise and also show something in clubs by starting with 2C and then
> > 3S. Partner can then look not just at his general strength but also
> > at his clubs to decide whether to go to game. (This doesn't work as
> > well if 1NT isn't forcing, because then responder may be systemically
> > forced to bid 2C on something like Jxxx.) Playing 2/1 with the
> > "usual" gadgets, you can't do this.
> >
> > Anyway, this is one objection I've heard to 2/1 GF, and it makes some
> > sense.
>
> i don't quite agree with this. any properly discussed 2/1 system should be
> able to differentiate between 3, and 4 card raises, courtesy, constructive,
> invitational, preemptive, game forcing strength. the most underrated thing
> in the game is the power of the 9th trump in a 5-4 fit. my current structure
> to 1S is:
>
> 1N forcing followed by 2S - courtesy raise or preference, to keep partner
> from getting excited
And don't forget, to let the opponents find their fit before you let
partner know about yours. Very nice courtesy to the opponents. It's
bad enough when they find their fit without your help but starting the
courtesy raise sequence with QXX-XXX-XX-KJXXX and hearing LHO bid two
of a red suit and partner pass and LHO raise to three is so much fun.
I would rather trust my partner to bid sensibly opposite a
wide-ranging single raise than I would trust the opponents to keep
passing.
> 1N forcing followed by 3S - invitational 3-card raise
> 2S - constructive with 3 trumps
> 2N - game forcing with 4+ trumps
> 3C - constructive 4-card raise with side singleton
> 3D - invitational 4-card raise
> 3H - constructive 4-card raise, no side shortage
> 3S - pre-emptive
> 3N - flat 3 or 4 card raise to game (4333)
> 4C - 15-16 3-card raise to game
> 4D - 17-18 3-card raise to game
> 4S - more preemptive.
> 2/1 followed by support - descriptive usually only 3 trumps
>
> opener immediately knows how many trumps the partnership holds and will bid
> to the correct level in competition.
>
> Charles
Except when you start off with 1NT and he doesn't know yet and it gets
back to you. If you guess to compete, does partner play you for the
limit raise or the courtesy raise? If you pass with the latter, will
it be right?
Will in New Haven