Calling weak NTers

[MickyB]

Playing weak NT, what should opener's double mean on these auctions?

 

1. 1♦-(P)-1♥-(1♠)

2. 1♦-(P)-1♠-(2♣)

3. 1♦-(P)-1♥-(2♠)

4. 1♦-(1♠)-X-(2♠)

5. 1♦-(P)-1NT-(2♥)

6. 1♦-(P)-2♣-(2♠)

 

I think some of these should be showing 15+ balanced - on 2 and 3 at least, what else are you bidding otherwise on a balanced 15-16? If you do play "Strong NT doubles", what do NT bids now show? I've seen 2NT on the second and third defined as 18-19 with a stop but that seems fairly useless when you could just have doubled. Particularly on the third, there seems to be a good case for 2NT (Reverse) Lebensohl.

[jdonn]

Just glancing at this post reminds me of why Fred thinks it is too stressful and distracting to play weak notrumps...

[Cascade]

Basically we play double on all of these sequences as takeout.

 

1. 1♦-(P)-1♥-(1♠)

 

Typically four clubs and three hearts (which would normally mean five diamonds for us) but two good hearts and four bad clubs would be possible. Also some balanced hands without a stopper in spades.

 

We bid 1NT with a 15-17 balanced hand with a spade stopper.

 

2. 1♦-(P)-1♠-(2♣)

 

Similar to 1.

 

We can bid 2NT with 15-17 Balanced although this is not compulsory. We pass some of these hands if we are unwilling to stretch to 2NT.

 

3. 1♦-(P)-1♥-(2♠)

 

Pretty much the same as 2. Double here also includes some good hands with five clubs or six diamonds as 3♣/♦ now would be near minimum with five clubs and six diamonds respectively.

 

4. 1♦-(1♠)-X-(2♠)

 

Double is responsive. Partner's double guarantees four or more hearts for us so our double here would definitely deny four hearts. Again 2NT would be 15-17 balanced but we might judge to pass with some of those hands.

 

5. 1♦-(P)-1NT-(2H)

 

Double includes most strong hands as in 3. above and minimum takeout style hands (usually four clubs rather than spades since partner has denied spades). 2NT would be around good 16-18.

 

6. 1♦-(P)-2♣-(2♠)

 

Double is takeout - either a great hand or four hearts. 2NT here is pretty much any 15+ balanced or near balanced with a spade stopper. It is forcing.

[JanM]

Playing weak NT, what should opener's double mean on these auctions?

 

1. 1♦-(P)-1♥-(1♠)

2. 1♦-(P)-1♠-(2♣)

3. 1♦-(P)-1♥-(2♠)

4. 1♦-(1♠)-X-(2♠)

5. 1♦-(P)-1NT-(2H)

6. 1♦-(P)-2♣-(2♠)

I used to play "strong NT doubles" on most of those auctions. Now, shock, we play support doubles on numbers 1 & 2. Not for any very good reason, but mainly because it was what my partner was used to (coming from a strong NT style) and as is usually the case, which of the two methods is superior depends on what hands you happen to be dealt, so playing something you're comfortable with is a good thing.

3 & 4, which we treat identically (iow, we treat a negative DBL of 1♠ as if responder had responded 1♥), are too high for a support double as we play it, so those doubles show a strong NT without good stoppers; 2NT shows a strong NT with good stoppers.

5 is also a STR NT dbl, and there again, bidding NT shows better stoppers.

6 you've got me - I think I would assume DBL was a strong NT, but this is a somewhat different auction, since for us 1♦-(P)-2♣ creates a game force. So there's actually a good argument for DBL to be penalty - I'll have to see what my partners think about this one!

[Stephen Tu]

I asked Kokish about this once, basically he recommended:

 

x = 3cd support (if below 2 responder's M) or 18+ bal.

Lebensohl continuations.

pass = often strong NT, 2 cd support, responder expected to reopen with

double if game inv opposite strong NT, 2 level suit bids NF

2nt = good-bad (or I suppose bad-good if you prefer)

 

Just glancing at this post reminds me of why Fred thinks it is too stressful and distracting to play weak notrumps.

 

I think this feeling is just a matter of familiarity with the situations posed. If you are used to strong NT & switch to weak NT, you might feel stressed on certain sequences, but if you always played weak & switched to strong, I am certain that the same thing would happen on some other sequences.

[cherdano]

Just glancing at this post reminds me of why Fred thinks it is too stressful and distracting to play weak notrumps.

 

I think this feeling is just a matter of familiarity with the situations posed. If you are used to strong NT & switch to weak NT, you might feel stressed on certain sequences, but if you always played weak & switched to strong, I am certain that the same thing would happen on some other sequences.

Fred said the exact opposite. When he switched from weak NT to strong, it felt like a relieve to him (don't remember his exact words, s.th. like that).

 

I think it's easy to see why: With strong NT, when you have medium extra values, you are unbalanced, making it easier to act. In other words, you reason to act over interference at, say, the 2-level, will always be that you are unbalanced (yes I am neglecting the bal 18-19 hands for now). With a weak NT, you will sometimes want to act because of extra values, sometimes because you are unbalanced.

 

Arend

[Stephen Tu]

[deleted post because of error]

[MickyB]

Thanks for the responses so far.

 

Just glancing at this post reminds me of why Fred thinks it is too stressful and distracting to play weak notrumps...

 

Agreed, Josh, and that is without even mentioning direct seat WJOs :)

 

5. 1♦-(P)-1NT-(2♥)

6. 1♦-(P)-2♣-(2♠)

5 is also a STR NT dbl, and there again, bidding NT shows better stoppers.

6 you've got me - I think I would assume DBL was a strong NT, but this is a somewhat different auction, since for us 1♦-(P)-2♣ creates a game force. So there's actually a good argument for DBL to be penalty - I'll have to see what my partners think about this one!

 

Jan, I am surprised to hear that you play 1♦-(P)-2♣ as GF - I think standard among weak NTers is for it to be GF opposite 15-16 balanced (this handtype would pass a 1NT response), forcing to 2♦ opposite an unbalanced hand. How else do you arrange to reach your 15 opposite 10 games? For this reason, I'm inclined to think that it is best to play that sequence 5 is not a STR NT dbl, because 15-16 flat was always intending to pass.

 

With strong NT, when you have medium extra values, you are unbalanced, making it easier to act. In other words, you reason to act over interference at, say, the 2-level, will always be that you are unbalanced (yes I am neglecting the bal 18-19 hands for now). With a weak NT, you will sometimes want to act because of extra values, sometimes because you are unbalanced.

 

The flip-side is that, playing weak NT, there are sequences where if you do not act, you must be unbalanced. I'm not quite sure quite how useful this is in practice.

[MickyB]

I asked Kokish about this once, basically he recommended:

 

x = 3cd support (if below 2 responder's M) or 18+ bal.

Lebensohl continuations.

pass = often strong NT, 2 cd support, responder expected to reopen with

double if game inv opposite strong NT, 2 level suit bids NF

2nt = good-bad (or I suppose bad-good if you prefer)

Given the source, it is unsurprising that this sounds reasonable! I'm not convinced though - the difference between an unbalanced 12 with 3 card support and a balanced 17 with 3 card support is massive, particularly if responder only has a 4 card suit. Also, how would the "pass and wait" strategy work if LHO puts in a raise?

[JanM]

6 you've got me - I think I would assume DBL was a strong NT, but this is a somewhat different auction, since for us 1?-(P)-2? creates a game force. So there's actually a good argument for DBL to be penalty - I'll have to see what my partners think about this one!

 

Jan, I am surprised to hear that you play 1♦-(P)-2♣ as GF - I think standard among weak NTers is for it to be GF opposite 15-16 balanced (this handtype would pass a 1NT response), forcing to 2♦ opposite an unbalanced hand. How else do you arrange to reach your 15 opposite 10 games? For this reason, I'm inclined to think that it is best to play that sequence 5 is not a STR NT dbl, because 15-16 flat was always intending to pass.

 

Well, as I said above, there will always be some hands that are good for some methods and others that aren't. We find the advantages from being in an unambiguous game force after 1♦-2♣ outweigh the disadvantages (4 of a minor is defined as "game" to avoid having to bid an 11 trick game where we don't have enough values for that). The downside, of course, is that 1♦-1NT is a bad auction for us. You can't have everything, and I have no idea what is "standard." :) As for the 10 opposite 15 games, well - if responder has 10 and a good 6 card club suit, s/he can bid either 3 invitational clubs or 2 game forcing clubs; if responder has 4 diamonds, s/he can make an inverted raise; if responder has a flat 10 with no 4 card major, maybe we'll be just as happy to stop in 1NT.

 

Oh, and my favorite partner agreed with my reaction that on auction 6 probably DBL should be penalty, and that we hadn't defined it before now, so thanks for bringing it up. :D

 

With strong NT, when you have medium extra values, you are unbalanced, making it easier to act. In other words, you reason to act over interference at, say, the 2-level, will always be that you are unbalanced (yes I am neglecting the bal 18-19 hands for now). With a weak NT, you will sometimes want to act because of extra values, sometimes because you are unbalanced.

The flip-side is that, playing weak NT, there are sequences where if you do not act, you must be unbalanced. I'm not quite sure quite how useful this is in practice.

There are a lot of hands where responder can compete after a 1m opening because opener can't have a weak NT. When I play strong NTs, I have trouble remembering that my instincts for when to compete are all wrong because so often partner has a weak NT for an opening 1m bid.

[foo]

Remember that WNT pairs have a real suit or 14+ HCP or both when they open 1m.

(Most WNTer's will routinely pass most 13- HCP =1444, (13)45, =1435, =3415, =1453, and =3451 hands)

That means the vast majority of the time Responder can assume Opener has ~14-19 points.

Thus diving into a disciplined WNT pair's 1m auctions is similar to diving into a Precision pair's Limited 1M openings... ...except the WNT pair's 1m openings are ~ a K stronger than Precision's 1M openings.

 

Don't believe the hype that it is easy to cause problems for an experienced WNT pair. Often the only "problem" you give them is figuring out whether penalizing or playing rates to score better!

 

1. 1D-(p)-1H-(1S)

X= 3 card Support, unlimited

1N= 15-17 w/ S's stopped

 

2. 1D-(p)-1S-(2C)

X= 3 card Support, unlimited

2N= 17-19 w/ C's Stopped

 

3. 1D-(p)-1H-(2S)

X= 3 card Support, unlimited

2N= 17-19 w/ S's Stopped

 

4. 1D-(1S)-X-(2S)

X= Responsive

2N= 17-19 w/ S's stopped

 

5. 1D-(p)-1N-(2H)

X= Cooperative. Convertable values good enough for 2N or hammering Them

2N= Maximum w/ H's stopped and ~7 expected tricks in hand.

3H= Maximum w/o H's stopped and ~7 expected tricks in hand.

 

6. 1D-(p)-2C-(2S)

Like JanM, 1D-2C; is a GF auction for Us (w/ one exceptional sequence).

1D-2C; sets a Forcing Pass.

X= 4 H's, not strong enough to Reverse (14- HCP)

2N= 15+ w/ S's stopped. Denies 4 H's.

3H= 4 H's and 15+ HCP.