1NT response to 1C 8-10 HCPs - why?
Bud H
requiring a possible fake 1D bid on a 3-card suit with 7 HCPs or less?
(I play a 2/1 system with inverted minors such that 1m - Pass - 3m is
a hand which discourages partner from bidding 3NT with 18-19 HCPs when
non-vulnerable. And when vulnerable, the double raise is 5-7 HCPs and
therefore opener with 18-19 HCPs typically WILL bid 3NT. This
restriction, together with 1NT responses to 1C requiring 8-10 HCPs, is
forcing either a bid of a 2-card diamond suit or 3-card major more
than I would like. It also prevents opener from freely raising 1D to
2D with some balanced minimums with 4-4 in the minors with weak
diamonds.)
Bud H
ment...@googlemail.com
The idea is that partner can judge better than after a wide-ranging
(6-10) 1NT response. Although this may be true, the hands on which
this makes a difference are rare. The lost competetiveness in Diamonds
(if you do not play this style, 1D normally shows 5 cards or a strong
(10+) hand).
A point to your free raise: With 4-4 minors, you normally open 1D in
this style. But you might want to raise on 5-3 or 5-4 minors with an
unstopped major.
In Germany, this treatment has made it into Forum D+, a system meant
for B/I players and thus making it more complicated than it should be.
Gerben
Frances
> What is the reason many play 1NT responses to 1C as 8-10 HCPs,
> requiring a possible fake 1D bid on a 3-card suit with 7 HCPs or less?
>
In the original way I learnt Acol,
1C - 2C was about 6-8 (maybe 5-7) with four clubs,
1C - 1NT was about 8-10 with four clubs and no 4-card major
Thus no 'short' diamond response was ever required.
This approach was convenient because it made the 1NT response very
well-defined and also slightly more likely to be the right way up (as
responder is stronger). The 2C raise could then be rather weaker.
This approach does not work with inverted minors.
This approach does not work very well with a 5-card major system.
Eric Leong
If you are playing a weak no-trump with inverted minors and a 5-card
major system you have a systemic problem when partner responds 1NT to
1C which can show 6-10. If you open a strong notrump the bidding might
go 1NT - 3NT or 1NT - invitational sequence - game. But if you open 1C
with a balanced 15-17 and partner responds 1NT showing 6-10 then you
have a guess.
But say you open a strong notrump, how does partner convey a good
balanced 9-10 hcp?
The answer is he can't. Also, opener can start looking for game on
hands in the 15-16 range.
Say you have something like: S AKxx H x D xxx C AKJ10x. It is
far easier to start exploring for game when partner could have only
8-10 then when partner could have a 6-7 count. Opposite an 8-10 1NT
response 2S would not be an overbid. Also, after partner responds 1NT,
it is much more comforting to know our side has the balance of hcp
when the opponent's compete. You are in a much better position to make
sharper doubles especially at pairs.
Since the 1NT response to 1C by passes 3 other bids should the 1NT
bid show a wide 5 hcp range hand or the higher range of a minimum
response? One would think, whenever you can you should try to narrow
the range of a response rather than widen it.
Eric Leong
ment...@googlemail.com
> major system you have a systemic problem when partner responds 1NT to
> 1C which can show 6-10.
If you play 12-14 NT then 1m - 1NT should exclude all hands that would
bid 1NT - 3NT facing a strong NT. These can bid 1C - 1D, 1D - 2C or 1m
- 2m. 1m - 2NT can be reserved for GF hands.
> If you open a strong notrump the bidding might
> go 1NT - 3NT or 1NT - invitational sequence - game. But if you open 1C
> with a balanced 15-17 and partner responds 1NT showing 6-10 then you
> have a guess.
You are now better off on different hands, when you are minimum you
bid 1m - 1N - 2N - P where they bid 1N - 2N, but when they invite and
decline, partner will pass 1m - 1N.
> But say you open a strong notrump, how does partner convey a good
> balanced 9-10 hcp?
> The answer is he can't. Also, opener can start looking for game on
> hands in the 15-16 range.
> Say you have something like: S AKxx H x D xxx C AKJ10x. It is
> far easier to start exploring for game when partner could have only
> 8-10 then when partner could have a 6-7 count. Opposite an 8-10 1NT
> response 2S would not be an overbid.
On the other hand, if partner has 6 - 8 (otherwise he would bid inv.
minor), you can simply bid 2C.
The real problem here is 5cM with strong NT.
Gerben
Co Wiersma
"Bud H" <budh...@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:154d2578-9abc-4ca2...@z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
well
I play Acol with 15-17 NT
and I would see a 1NT answer as 8-10 points as with 6-7 points , I rather
bid 2C
and so , when partner has 18/19 points ; 3NT is placed in a hand with points
It seems to me that if you wanna play like that in SA or 2/1 you must either
make more system adjustments
rhm
Maybe your agreement that you want to discourage 3NT opposite 18-19
HCP is wrong.
If you are that weak either pass or bid 4C (with a six-card suit and a
distributional hand).
These hands tend to be rare anyway.
Then you do not need to bid a 2-card diamond or a 3 card major.
I think a major reason why the treatment 1nt=8-10 HCP is sensible, is
because otherwise you wrongside notrump quite frequently.
There is not much benefit in forcing responder to bid 1NT with minimum
weak hands just because he does not have a 4 card suit in between
opener's bid suit and notrump. It is rather a less than ideal
solution. Bidding a cheap 1D over 1C as "I have either diamonds or I
have a weak balanced hand with at least 7 cards in the minors" is far
better in my opinion.
If opener raises diamonds he should be at least 4-4 in the minors and
unsuitable for a notrump rebid and why would he mind a correction back
to clubs in this case?
In Polish club (WJ2005, frequently a weak notrump or 18+) a 1NT
response shows 9-11 over 1C and even there I often bid 1D when it
looks notrump might play better from partner's side.
Rainer Herrmann
henry...@yahoo.com
The basic reason is that 1c 1nt chews up a lot of space, and should
therefore be narrowly defined. Even when not playing inverted raises,
you might not want to raise 1c to 2c with, say,
Qxx
xxx
KJx
xxxx
and so 1d might be preferable in spite of your club support.
Of course, 'more narrowly defined' could also mean 6-8 hcps, with
stronger hands bidding 1d. That would leave responder with the
problem of whether to invite game over a simple rebid by opener.
Better to show some values in a narrow range (8-10, or in the old Roth-
Stone style, 9-11) and make sure that responder only has to pass with
5-7 points, a diamond fragment, and a simple rebid by opener.
Henrysun909
Lorne
news:154d2578-9abc-4ca2...@z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
> What is the reason many play 1NT responses to 1C as 8-10 HCPs,
> requiring a possible fake 1D bid on a 3-card suit with 7 HCPs or less?
It only requires the fake D bid if you play inverted minors or 1C does not
promise 4 cards.
The original idea was that you bid 2C with a weak hand and 1N with a good
hand if your shape is 3334 but that assumes 1C promises 4+ clubs.
Adam Beneschan
> requiring a possible fake 1D bid on a 3-card suit with 7 HCPs or less?
In old-fashioned standard, you never *had* to bid 1D on a 3-card
suit---you could always bid a four-card suit or raise clubs with
four. I think that was part of the reason theorists decided to put a
narrower definition on the 1NT response, because you never *had* to
bid 1NT. If anyone still plays this way, I think it's just a holdover
from those old days. I don't recall ever seeing any writer
recommending 8-10 alongside more modern methods (including e.g.
inverted minor raises).
-- Adam
Nick France
In the 60's this rebid showed 9-11 and a 3334 distribution. The
concept was simple. You were bidding up the line so you had no reason
to rebid 1NT with a 4 card spade, heart or diamond suit. You would
raise clubs with 4 clubs. So you had a non-existing bid. The
definition handled a hand that at times was too good for 2C and not
good for 3C.
When 1NT dropped to 15-17 (from 16-18) this bid dropped to 8-10). In
2/1 with inverted minors it makes little sense. If you are also
playing Walsh type responses it makes no sense.
Nick France
Frances
> On Nov 10, 1:25 am, Frances <franceshin...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 10, 7:14 am, Bud H <budh9...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > What is the reason many play 1NT responses to 1C as 8-10 HCPs,
> > > requiring a possible fake 1D bid on a 3-card suit with 7 HCPs or less?
>
> > In the original way I learnt Acol,
> > 1C - 2C was about 6-8 (maybe 5-7) with four clubs,
> > 1C - 1NT was about 8-10 with four clubs and no 4-card major
>
> > Thus no 'short' diamond response was ever required.
> > This approach was convenient because it made the 1NT response very
> > well-defined and also slightly more likely to be the right way up (as
> > responder is stronger). The 2C raise could then be rather weaker.
>
> > This approach does not work with inverted minors.
> > This approach does not work very well with a 5-card major system.
>
> If you are playing a weak no-trump with inverted minors and a 5-card
> major system you have a systemic problem when partner responds 1NT to
> 1C which can show 6-10. If you open a strong notrump the bidding might
> go 1NT - 3NT or 1NT - invitational sequence - game. But if you open 1C
> with a balanced 15-17 and partner responds 1NT showing 6-10 then you
> have a guess.
>
> But say you open a strong notrump, how does partner convey a good
> balanced 9-10 hcp?
> The answer is he can't.
Playing weak NT, you make your inverted raises slightly lighter. That
is, if you want to be in game opposite a strong NT that would pass a
1NT response, you bid 2C. A 10-count will usually make an inverted
raise. A 1C opening is either unbalanced (in which case you have a 9-
card fit and are quite happy forcing to 3C) or 15+ balanced (when a
good 9-count wants to be in game).
The 1NT response is best played as more like 6-8 rather than 6-10.
You still don't need to invent a 3-card 1D response.
> Also, opener can start looking for game on
> hands in the 15-16 range.
> Say you have something like: S AKxx H x D xxx C AKJ10x. It is
> far easier to start exploring for game when partner could have only
> 8-10 then when partner could have a 6-7 count.
This seems a strange example to use. Why would I not be happy to force
the 3-level opposite a hand with no four card major and 4+ club
support? It's quite hard to construct hands where neither 2H nor 3C
is making.
>Opposite an 8-10 1NT
> response 2S would not be an overbid. Also, after partner responds 1NT,
> it is much more comforting to know our side has the balance of hcp
> when the opponent's compete. You are in a much better position to make
> sharper doubles especially at pairs.
>
> Since the 1NT response to 1C by passes 3 other bids should the 1NT
> bid show a wide 5 hcp range hand or the higher range of a minimum
> response? One would think, whenever you can you should try to narrow
> the range of a response rather than widen it.
>
I agree with the principle. In fact, although you replied to my
posting, I can't see where I said anything different.
> Eric Leong- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Andrew
> requiring a possible fake 1D bid on a 3-card suit with 7 HCPs or less?
For those who like a constructive 1NT response to 1C, a better range
is 9-11. When combined with 2NT showing 12-15, this range means
responder never bids 2NT to invite a game. Playing this range,
--when opener has a balanced 14, he can raise 1NT to 2NT to invite.
--when opener has 12-13 opener can pass 1NT.
It keeps you lower more often with invitational values opposite a min
opener.
Andrew
rhm
> On Nov 10, 2:14 am, Bud H <budh9...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > What is the reason many play 1NT responses to 1C as 8-10 HCPs,
> > requiring a possible fake 1D bid on a 3-card suit with 7 HCPs or less?
>
> > (I play a 2/1 system with inverted minors such that 1m - Pass - 3m is
> > a hand which discourages partner from bidding 3NT with 18-19 HCPs when
> > non-vulnerable. And when vulnerable, the double raise is 5-7 HCPs and
> > therefore opener with 18-19 HCPs typically WILL bid 3NT. This
> > restriction, together with 1NT responses to 1C requiring 8-10 HCPs, is
> > forcing either a bid of a 2-card diamond suit or 3-card major more
> > than I would like. It also prevents opener from freely raising 1D to
> > 2D with some balanced minimums with 4-4 in the minors with weak
> > diamonds.)
>
> > Bud H
>
> In the 60's this rebid showed 9-11 and a 3334 distribution. The
> concept was simple. You were bidding up the line so you had no reason
> to rebid 1NT with a 4 card spade, heart or diamond suit. You would
> raise clubs with 4 clubs. So you had a non-existing bid. The
> definition handled a hand that at times was too good for 2C and not
> good for 3C.
>
Quote
> When 1NT dropped to 15-17 (from 16-18) this bid dropped to 8-10). In
> 2/1 with inverted minors it makes little sense. If you are also
> playing Walsh type responses it makes no sense.
>
end-quote
Why?
What is so clever bidding 1NT with a minimum hand and telegraphing
your likely distribution (3=3=3=4) so that opponents can defend almost
double dummy?
As Andrew suggested it makes a lot of sense to play a 1NT response
even 9-11.
With less you bid 1D with no majors and give opener a chance to rebid
notrump when 1NT is right and the right hand plays 1NT. This is even
more obvious should opener intent to jump rebid in notrump.
This is not senseless but a superior method, irrespective of whether
you play inverted minors and works even better with Walsh, because
opener may hide the majors for his 1NT (or 2NT) rebid, leaving
defenders in the dark.
Rainer Herrmann
Frances
>
> - Show quoted text -
Fine, but now you are playing a new system, where a 1D response is
either natural, or a minimum hand with four clubs.
You'd better alert it, as a start.
You'd also better think about your rebids as opener. What do you do
with a 2=2=4=5 strong hand? What did you open with a minimum hand
with 4-4 in the minors? What about a 3=1=4=5 or 2=1=4=6 good hand? How
do you sort out which minor you want to play in?
I think you'd want to play some artificial methods after 1C - 1D now,
perahps playing 1H as forcing for a round and 2H as an artificial
relay.
All well and good, but don't pretend you can just make a 1D response
artificial and not change the rest of your system.
Nick France
>
> - Show quoted text -
As another has pointed out you have made enough changes to make 1D
response to 1C as purely artificial. Another advantage of responding
1NT to 1C is it takes away the ability of the opponents to bid one of
a major. This advantage should not be underestimated. As for you
suggestion that it adds to the advantage of Walsh of opener not
showing any 4 card major I am lost. Doesn't 1C-1NT and pass by opener
also hide any 4 card majors and does so by forcing the opponents to
come in on the two level.
I stand by my remarks. To me the use of 1NT to show 8-10 (or 9-11)
makes little sense when using inverted minors and Walsh type
responses. Maybe I should have said in a relatively natural type
auction. If you want to introduce a series of artificial type bids,
that is your style. I just think it complicates a situation that
works perfectly well the way it is.
Nick France
Andrew
Not really. Simply combine this method with a standard single raise to
2C to show 6-9 HCP and most of the problems are removed. 1C-2D can
show the LR+ in clubs.
> Another advantage of responding 1NT to 1C is it takes away the ability of the opponents to bid one of
> a major. This advantage should not be underestimated.
It should not be overestimated if it causes you to respond 1NT on many
hands that wrong side the NT. When responder holds hands in the 5-7
range, he rarely has a hand that is ideal for NT declaration.
Andrew
Nick France
>
> - Show quoted text -
Using 2C to show a hand of 6-9 is a good reason to give a special
meaning to 1C-1NT. Here you're way makes a lot of sense to me. I
guess my objection to its use is when 1C-2C isn't an old fashion
simple raise.
Nick France