pbleighton

A lot of people play 1m-2NT as invitational, balanced, no 4 card major, and 1m-3NT as min GF, balanced, no 4 card major. I think this is a better treatment. Peter

Any merit to including 22(54) hands in the 1C bid? Peter

"Suppose that you open 1M... How often is responder able to 2/1? Equally significant, how often is here required to respond with a forcing NT?" Richard, your point is well taken, and is the major (no pun intended) disadvantage, part from some bad NT results vul. I haven't done the math on frequencies, but we are one point away from the field (which in my area responds 2/1 with 12/strong 11), so we are responding with 1NT forcing with strong 11 - OK 12 when the field is making a 2/1 response. We have essentially split the difference between the level of our openings (decent 10s vs most 12s - a little less than 2 points) and the level of our 2/1 response (1 point). Using the mini NT to take the dead minimum balanced and semibalanced hands out of the 1M openings reduces the penalty for the increased overbidding caused by splitting the difference. In fact, we don't seem to get to too many underfunded 3NT games, and this is definitely helped by the mini. As to the frequency of responding 1NT forcing when the field is making a 2/1 response, they happen, but seemingly much less frequently than our opening hands the field would pass. We are therefore quite comfortable with our system vs Rule of 20/strong NT 2/1, which is the field in our area. As to an alternative response structure, for a while, we tried a relaxed Standard approach (forcing for one round but not guaranteeing a rebid). We didn't really give this much of a chance, as my pd had developed a fondness for 2/1 GF when we played The Science, and it didn't seem to hurt us there, so we went back to it. Now 2/1 GF is integral to The Science's system, and optional in ours. It is possible that a relaxed Standard approach is theoretically better, but the fact is that my pd bids 2/1 better than F1, so there you are :rolleyes: "Peter, IMO opening 5M422s 1NT is horrible, you will miss so many fits. How about playing 2D as a multi and 2H and 2S as Lucas, both fairly constructive, then your 1M openers will be sounder and you can make lighter 2/1 responses, which will improve your bidding accuracy greatly. Also you say the mini isn't great vul, why not bring it in half a point when vul then? Maybe bad 11-14 NV, good 11-14 vul." Thanks for the input, Mickey. 1) We only open 5M422s 1NT when they are dead minimum, for the reason explained above. Most of the field isn't opening most of these hands, so we don't miss much by missing the fits. 2) "2D as a multi and 2H and 2S as Lucas" - ACBL - nuff said :) 3) We are considering making the vul range start at 11+ rather than 10+. The tradeoff would be that we would probably also not open 1M quite so light (it would also make our NT bidding more accurate). We aren't quite ready to do that, but I am keeping note of the bad results at vul. This could be a halfway move to true variable NT, which we are definitely not willing to make at this point. Peter

"Playing mini NT all time is suitable only for bridge adventurers..." Well, yes, but so what? :D "i've played against some good pairs while using the mini, and from what i can see they pretty much *hate* playing against it... " Yup. And good pairs guess wrong and make plain stupid bids too. ;) "it seems to me that playing a mini nt solves almost all 2/1 problems..." An exaggeration, and it does create some problems of its own, but it certainly solves a lot of problems for me. I play 2/1 with light openers, and find the mini really helps. I play a 10+ to 14- NT, so the NT rebid is 15-17, 2NT 18-19. 15-19 count 4432 and 4333s are always opened 1C (12-21, 2+ clubs and forcing), along with all 4441s not short in clubs. NMF works with 8+ points, allowing us to rebid NT after 1C-1H with 4 spades, and mitigates the loss of a strong NT. I have 3 ~5 card openings, which work well for light (decent 10) openers. I open 10 and 11 count 5M422s not 54 in the majors 1NT, along with 10-13 5any332s and 10-13 5m422s. In the minors, the NT opening takes the balanced crap out of the openings. In the majors, we make a 2/1 GF with 13 points, but need 14 for GF with the NT opening. Opening two thirds of the dead minimum hands without 6 card suits 1NT mitigates the overbidding effect of the 13 point 2/1 GF. The wide NT range occasionally hurts, but not too often. Vulnerable isn't as nice as NV, but into every system a little pain must fall.. Is this a world class system? I highly doubt it! Does it work well against a reasonable field? Yes! Is it fun? Guess! Peter

The only thing I have done in this regard is to play 10+-14 NT in the first 3 seats, and 15-17 in the 4th seat. We routinely open 1D/1H/1S with decent 5332s (1C is 2+ clubs, 12-21), so weak NT will fail too often in the 4th seat. This is a system hack, but it seems better to face reality B) We have noticed a significant difference in the performance of weak NT vul vs NV (especially in the third seat), but have thus far been unwilling to complicate our bidding by using true variable NT (since vul weak NT isn't not too bad, and still has a lot of benefits), but I can certainly see the point of doing so. The "death score" for weak NT vul isn't -800 or -1100, since it almost never happens, but -200... 1NT-All Pass and then down 2 to prevent the opponent's playing a part score. This is fairly frequent, and totally unavoidable. As far as light one-of-a-suit openings go, there seems to be a lot less difference vul vs NV than there is with NT - there are a lot fewer death scores to contend with. Missed games and slams due to less precise bidding (or interference over a strong club) do sting more when vul, however. If I was going to go to the trouble of playing a different system vul vs NV, the NV system would be extremely aggressive, and something I would be unwilling to play when vulnerable - which probably means I couldn't play it in the ACBL ;) Peter

What Convention Chart will the tournaments be played under? Peter

"....And for their definitions, opening a weak 2 in 3rd on a 5 card suit is considered a psyche..." Wow, I didn't think I psyched! Cool! :unsure: Peter

I recently played with a pickup partner (a pretty good player) at my club, who wanted me to play "top of nothing" against suit contracts. I had heard of this, but hadn't played it before, or since. What do you think of this approach, for opening leads and/or leads further on into the hand? Peter

"Thanks for the opinion. 3D definitely pass the message to your pd but it may also risk bypassing the only makeable contract, 2S. " And 2S risks missing a makeable game. Bidding a marginal invitational hand in response to pd's 1 level overcall (may be 7 points?) is tough. Make a game try. This hand is a good argument for light opening bids. Get in early and often, make the opps use overcalls and t/o doubles. No idea if opp's 1D was light, but if it was, he may have fixed you. Peter

I would open this 3D NV in the 1st seat (but not the 2nd) like a shot with my regular pd, but not with anyone else. I would open this in the 3rd seat with anyone. In ACBL land, we both pre-alert and alert our NV weak 2s and preempts. Online, we don't - the variability of bidding online is such that I don't feel natural bids need to be alerted. Peter

Cascade and EricK are correct as to the oringinal SAYC, but from my experience most people who play SAYC (including me, when I play it), play that the opener's rebid of either 1) 2NT, or 2) A simple raise of the responder's suit is not forcing. Original SAYC also has the 2/1 response promising 11 points, and was originated when 1 level bids required 13/good 12. Current practice of opening with 12/good 11 and responding with 10 is a different animal than the older approach, and has led to a softening of the responder's rebid requirement. The term "SAYC" has changed its meaning, from a very specific system, to "5 card majors, strong NT, and a few common conventions - I hope we play the same ones, partner". It deserves to die, but that's another thread :blink: Peter

Yes, it is a hole in the system. You don't have a bid. Rebid a mediocre 5 card suit, which is at least forcing, or bid a non forcing 3D. I would probably bid 3D, but it stinks. Peter

Let us remember, precious, the story of the Sloths, the most despised creatures of the fearful realm of Mordor. Long ago Sauron enslaved these miserable creatures for some slight offense (what it is we may not ask, precious, though it is rumored to be related to their smell). They proved to be lazy slaves, and as punishment The Great One decreed that they die the worst of deaths, in spite of the pleading of their groping warders, who had come to appreciate the Sloths peculiar skills (yes, precious, THOSE skills!). They were sentenced to eat of the droppings of The Lord's Thirty Pronged Anus, which whirls endlessly and productively in the lowest places of the Dark Tower. Those so sentenced die most painful deaths, writhing for months in the worst of agonies, until finally released to the waiting arms of blissful Death. But these creatures, precious, THEY LIKED IT! They ate all there was, and clamored for more, with the most hideous whinings. The Great One thereby appointed them the Holey Janitors, spending their days (such as they are, precious!) in the service of their Lord (and of their warders too, precious). Their nights are spent dreaming dreams of perfect things, of bondage, of bridge, of using long words (mayhap someday accurately, precious!), and finally of the day when their bodies lie in the shape of their dreams. Enough memories, precious, it's time to catch some fish! :lol:

"however, word of advice, mon ami, i wouldnt go around wearing your briefs OUTSIDE your trousers...your cell-mate might find it quite provocative... " ...and Slothy dreams of being that cell-mate...

I play 11-14, which is very aggressive (and common), but which doesn't have the rebid problems you get with the mini. Assuming a 20-21 2NT, then 1x-P-1y-P-1NT shows 15-17, and 1x-P-1y-P-2NT still shows 18-19. You can also play it vulnerable, if you don't mind a spanking once in a while :) Peter

Tysen writes: "This is what I currently use for GCC matchpoint events. It's a modified version of matchpoints precision:" What do you use then at team events? How does this system work at teams? Peter

No more fighting? Eeeek! ;) OK, you want pluses and minuses: Strong NT pluses: it's a much safer bid, in that if you open it versus 1X, particularly 1 of a minor, you have a better chance of getting to the best contract. You may bury a part score fit, but not too often. You can also get the 3-5 part score fits via transfers. It is quite preemptive, in spite of the various defenses to it. Strong NT minuses: is relatively infrequent, and while it is preemptive, your side usually has the balance of power and would get to play the hand anyway. Weak NT minuses: it is riskier, versus 1X, compared to strong NT. You have a better chance of burying your 4-4 major suit part score fit, as Stayman requires 11 points instead of 8. You also have a chance of going down more than you would like. You won't play 1NT doubled much, but down two vulnerable is a nearly guaranteed bottom. If you play weak NT in a strong NT field, you will have a lot of bottoms that you can do nothing about. Weak NT pluses: it is much more frequent. It is preemptive, and unlike strong NT, you get to play a LOT of contracts you wouldn't play if you opened 1x. Most of the time that is a good thing, especially not vulnerable. You occasionally knock your opps out of game. Your opps have a lot of pressure on them when they have a hand which is neither a clear cut pass or bid, and frequently guess wrong, or just plain make a bad bid. Weak NT is significantly better when not vulnerable versus vulnerable, whereas strong NT is fairly vulnerabilty-neutral. Some people play strong NT when vulnerable, and weak NT when not. This may be the ideal way to play. However, it is somewhat memory-intensive since, as The Hog noted, NT range definitely has a significant effect on the rest of your system. Peter

"I wasn't having a go at you at all, Peter. " I hope you noticed my rant was somewhat tongue in cheek ;) "However to take a fundamental bid in isolation is not a good way of going about designing a system. Let me give you examples of what I mean. Weak NT and 5 card majors is fine; I have played it. However, you need to redefine the structure of your 1N/2N rebids totally and this has implications further down the track." As I said "If you switch from one range to another in such a system, there is a period of adjustment while a partnership learns the differences, as the possible hands in one of a suit changes, as well as the meaning of a NT rebid by opener.." So I would agree with you, though you put it better and more thoroughly (as usual). I guess that I see the change from strong to weak NT in the context of SA (the instance I'm familiar with) as being a major change in the system, as opposed to being an entirely new and different system. My pd and I took some time to get used to the 15-17 NT rebid and the implication that a minimum opener always has shape, but it wasn't too huge of an adjustment. Perhaps the fact that we don't play a lot of gadgets has something to do with it. On the 4cM, strong NT question, I defer to you on this of course, but I have read that a good number of British tournament players play strong NT. Do they mostly play 5cM or The Science when they do, or do many play ACOL with strong NT? Peter

"Like most systemic things, you cannot look at a NT range in isolation from the system as a whole. Lots of players seem to say "I like this " or "I like that" and cobble together a stystem which is not a unfied, cohesive entity. - Richard commented on this point in one of his posts. A MUCH better question would have been, "Do you prefer systems that employ a weak or a strong NT?" In answer to the above, I believe it makes little difference in the long run; it is how well you use what you have got that counts." Ron - I believe that you are being unnecessarily critical here. Both strong and weak NT are compatible with naturalish systems, with both 4 card majors and 5 card majors. If you switch from one range to another in such a system, there is a period of adjustment while a partnership learns the differences, as the possible hands in one of a suit changes, as well as the meaning of a NT rebid by opener, but Standard American (for example) works fine with a weak NT. I'm sure you're right about either range working equally well at top-level bridge (though I wouldn't know :D ). However, I think weak NT has some advantage at club level (or pickup online), due to the weak bidding judgement most players display under pressure. I believe the thread is reasonable. Perhaps you have read too many similar threads to feel it is of interest. Some of us feel differently, and like to thresh these things out. As to your reference to Richard's post (rant?), as the target of it, I will say that those of you who have been doing system development for years might want to consider cutting those of us who are still "cobbling away" some slack. <end rant> Peter ;)

Weak. Lots of stuff on this topic, but my bottom line is: 1NT is a great opening bid, whatever range you use. 12-14 NT is twice as frequent as 15-17, and 11-14 2.7 times as frequent. Nothing against a strong NT, but it doesn't happen often enough. Peter

I pretty much agree with Ben - no surprise - he recommended Robson-Segal's Partnership Bidding and I have never been the same since :D I will make some additional points: 1) The implication of what he says is that NV in the 3rd and 5th seats you can open a card short - 5 cards at the 2 level, 6 at the 3 level, etc. 2) I will also swing a bit more (4 down) NV vs NV in the 2nd seat 3) 3rd seat NV I will almost never pass if I have 5+ D/H/S or 6+ clubs - in fact at favorable I will open 3C with 5 clubs. 4) In the 3rd seat vul vs vul, 3 down. 5) The sort of hands to pass with are those with terrible suits and lots of defense. In your example, your suit is bad, but your hand is worse - a "good" hand to preempt with. OTOH: xxxxxxx-Ax-Axx-x should be passed IMO. 6) With a pickup partner, play fairly conservative -down 2 vul, down 3 NV in 1/2 (maybe stretch to 4 in 1st seat), and a bit crazy NV in the 3rd seat. If you don't, when you open very light he/she will raise you too aggressively, and blame you (rightly) for the consequences. Peter

Fluffy writes: "When deciding to overcall against opponents NT it is nothing to do with HCP, all about distribution, if you have balanced (liek here) pass, when you have a poor hand with a 6 card shoot, or a 5-5 bid, or maybe 5-4 on favourable vulnerability, just bid." Agree with this vulnerable. NV, I would overcall with this hand like a shot. With 11 hcp, and opener having (say) 16, the responder needs 8 out of the remaining 13 hcp to invite, and will therefore probably either pass, or maybe transfer to hearts. Better to grab the contract, if you can, for -50 or -100. I agree with Free that 3NT is probably down, but it probably won't be bid, either. Peter

Vulnerable, I would pass, although it is close. Not vulnerable, I would bid, whatever convention (or natural) I was using. Not vulnerable, you should jump in pretty aggressively against a strong NT. While most SAYC bidders will expect 11+ points to intervene, with an understanding partner I would bid with this hand NV even if the heart king was a 2. Peter

Do I read this right, as unfavorable vul for us? If so, Ben, then your 4C is courageous :lol: At unfavorable, 2S for me, in spite of the club suit. Peter

I disagree with those who think 5cM and weak NT are a bad combination. The weakness of 5cM is the badly defined 1m bids, and the weak NT minimizes them, and transforms what would otherwise be the worst bids in the system (highly susceptible to interference as opps can have juice, can be difficult/dangerous to rebid after interference) and turns them into an offensive weapon. It's true that opening strong balanced hands 1m can create rebid problems, too, which I think is the point of Dan's excellent post, but the 1m/balanced hands (not including 18-19) are only half as frequent as with strong NT, and they are a little less likely to be interfered with, due to the opps having less juice on average. I agree with those who open 5M332 1NT. Peter