sandwich seat

[A2003]

I followed this method of bidding at sandwich seat.

Summary of Sandwich Seat Actions

1D Pass 1S ?

Dbl. 4-4 or better in the unbid suits, 12+ HCP (BPH : exactly 4-4)

1 NT 4-4 or better in the unbid suits, 0-11 HCP (BPH : 4 hearts, 5 clubs)

2C natural, 5+ (BPH : 5 hearts, 4 clubs)

2D 5-5 in the unbid suits, weak hand

2H natural, 5+

2S natural; 5+ spades, 8+ HCP

2 NT 6-5 in the unbid suits, weak hand

 

Is it a good system? Is it a good idea to bid at that seat?

 

Is there any pt requirement for bidding 1NT bid at ACBL tournaments?

ACBL TD says 5 pts.

[Apollo81]

"Sandwich" 1NT for takeout is frequently described as "the worst convention in bridge."

 

If you don't have a strong 1NT avaialable, those hands are going to be very difficult to show. Now days people respond and open lighter than ever, so you will frequently hold a strong balanced hand in "sandwich" position. If you pass such hands and then bid later, pard will never know your real strength. Additionally, coming into the auction, especially over 1♠, is not that great an idea with just 4-4 or 4-5 and no opening hand. You will frequently risk a number of letting your opponents know how to declare the hand when they might be guessing otherwise.

 

I suggest using a cuebid of opener's suit as takeout for those hands where double and 2NT are inappropriate. You might miss a natural 2♣ call (over opener's 1♣) once in a while, but you do get the ability to show 5-5 hands at the 2-level.

 

If you're bent on using the methods you outlined, I would at least suggest removing the PH requirement for 2♣. Sometimes you just have some clubs and need to get that lead director in....

 

-Noble

[P_Marlowe]

"Sandwich" 1NT for takeout is frequently described as "the worst convention in bridge."

 

If you don't have a strong 1NT avaialable, those hands are going to be very difficult to show.  Now days people respond and open lighter than ever, so you will frequently hold a strong balanced hand in "sandwich" position.  If you pass such hands and then bid later, pard will never know your real strength.  Additionally, coming into the auction, especially over 1♠, is not that great an idea with just 4-4 or 4-5 and no opening hand.  You will frequently risk a number of letting your opponents know how to declare the hand when they might be guessing otherwise.

Maybe, but overcalling a natural 1 NT in the sandwich

position is not risk free as well.

And the risk going for a number is a lot higher.

 

Even considering that the min. standard for an opening bid or

an response gets lowered all the time (and it maybe, that the

tide is turning, at least with regards to opening bids), I would

still bet, that on average your partner is broke, when you hold a

natural NT.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Free]

It has some positive and negative points imo. I like to be able to show some preference for my own suits, especially with 5-4 hands. This is what I prefer:

Dbl = other suits, equal length/strength

1NT = other suits, lower suit longer/better (here ♣)

2D = other suits, higher suit longer/better (here ♥)

I don't think it's useful to show your strength in HCP, they're garbage and you probably don't have game unless a distributional one...

 

Unbid suits are natural:

2♣ = natural

2♥ = natural

 

Highest cuebid is natural, to guard against psychs:

2♠ = natural

 

2NT = garbage with 55+ in the unbid suits

 

Imo it's good for partner to know your length in both suits. This way he can immediatly support to the 3-level if necessary. Length is the main difference, but poor 5 card suits are considered a 4 card (65432 is a 4 card suit for us).

 

Works great.

 

About the natural 1NT bid: it may be useful from time to time, but it's too rare, even in these 'light-opening-style days'. The chance of getting hammered is big as well...

[bid_em_up]

"Sandwich" 1NT for takeout is frequently described as "the worst convention in bridge."

Really? By who? Sorry, but I have never heard this, nor do I agree with it. To each their own.

 

I treat this as 1x-1y-?

 

X= minimum 4-4 in other two suits, decent hand (10+)

1N = minimum 5-5 in other two suits, can be garbage.

2N = minimum 5-5 in other two suits, good hand.

 

and I find that I really dont miss having a natural NT overcall available.

[Walddk]

I agree with those who want 1NT to be natural. I don't need more than 3 bids to show the unbid suits over 1x (pass) 1y.

 

Dbl = Unbid suits, at least 5-4.

1NT = Natural

2x = Unbid suits, weaker than double.

2y = Natural, goodish hand.

2NT = Unbid suits, at least 5-5.

 

Roland

[awm]

I've found that both the "weak takeout" hand and the "natural 2x" hand are more frequent than a strong notrump in sandwich seat. As for the times I have held a strong notrump, the times that I had trouble conveying values to partner without 1nt natural were substantially fewer than the times I was glad not to bid 1nt and get doubled for penalty. Even though people open and respond increasingly light, I suspect that when I hold a balanced 16 it's more likely that opponents have 22-23 high between them (and can take me for a number) than for partner to have 8+ points. Also keep in mind the opponents have already exchanged a lot of information and aren't likely to have trouble figuring out what to do over the 1NT call.

 

In any case I've been happy with sandwich NT (which has won me a lot of matchpoints over the years, pushing opponents up a level) and haven't really missed the natural NT call in sandwich seat at all.

 

These things are really a matter of frequency -- if you approach them saying "I don't want those frisky opponents to ever talk me out of a game" and replace a lot of useful competitive calls with bids that show sound values, then you may never get talked out of a game... but you'll lose so much on the partscore deals where you are not competing vigorously that you're probably worse off for the exchange.

[whereagles]

If you don't have a strong 1NT avaialable, those hands are going to be very difficult to show.

Two things:

 

1. That sort of natural 1NT overcall is one of the riskiest bids in bridge. Even if opps open/respond light.

 

2. You have a good bid for a 15-18 balanced hand anyway: PASS.

[hatchett]

I essentially agree with Walddk's suggested structure.

 

In regard to your structure I don't really think 1NT showing 0(?)-11 with 4/4 in the unbid suits is a very good idea.

[sathyab]

As for the suggestion that you already have a bid to show balanced 15-18, PASS, the problem is that it creates very difficult balancing situations. If you pass now, you may not be able to enter the auction at all. When it goes 1x-p-1y-p-1nt, partner has no idea yet that his unpassed LHO doesn't share some of your high cards even he's prepared to act based on shape and now when it comes back to you, you're again faced with a headache. Your RHO could be passing with as little as 5 HCP or as much as 11 HCP. Entering the auction now isn't any less hazardous than entering it right upfront.

 

BTW, if it did go 1x-p-1y-p-1nt-p-p, what does a double here mean ? If you're not playing a natural 1nt in the sandwich position, should it show that now ?

[Walddk]

Two things:

 

1. That sort of natural 1NT overcall is one of the riskiest bids in bridge. Even if opps open/respond light.

 

2. You have a good bid for a 15-18 balanced hand anyway: PASS.

I will try to remember your words of wisdom next time I score up and lose 11 IMPs. Incidentally, this hand came up over the weekend in the Danish Premier League:

 

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=s872hk2dq93ca10765&w=sk954hq54daj854c3&e=sqj6hj10873d62cj98&s=sa103ha96dk107ckq42]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

If I understand your second point correctly, NS have done nothing wrong when they sell out to 2♥ on this auction:

 

1♦ pass 1♥ pass

2♥ all pass

 

South's pass was actually a 'good bid' as you put it. It may not bother *you*, but I am not feeling comfortable about staying out of a virtually laydown vulnerable game. You even have the values for it, and yet pass is all you can come up with.

 

Everyone knows that in 2006 most partnerships don't require 12 hcp to open the bidding, and they don't need 6 hcp to respond. I really can't understand why one should be paralysed and surrender just because they open and respond.

 

For the record: at all 12 tables West opened and East responded, and at all 12 tables NS scored 600 or 630.

 

Roland

[pclayton]

When Opener promised 12, and responder promised 6, a sandwich NT made some sense.

 

Now with Opener promising 9 and responder promising 3, its very possible the deal could be ours.

 

Like the old song says, "Everything old is new again". I like 1N to be natural. If I get nailed, I get nailed.

 

As far as 1x - p - 1y - 2x/2y, a useful agreement is if 1x promises 4 (or fewer) than 2x is natural. If 2x is 5+ (5 card majors), then 2x is takeout for the unbids. 2y is always natural.

 

2N is always takeout for the unbids.

[hatchett]

I like 1N to be natural. If I get nailed, I get nailed.

 

Whiich they can't often do because, as you say, opener might have a 9 count and responder a 3 count!

[whereagles]

Roland, while not everybody opens/responds with the usual 12/5, most of the time they will have those 12/5 and possibly *much* more. By butting-in a 16-18 1NT you'll be up against opps with usually 17+. The leftover hcps are 6-8, of which opps will statistically have 2/3rds of, bar some conditioned probability paradox. Opps are likely to dbl you and won't even have a game most of the time.

 

As for your hand... well, I guess I could ask Ben to run a bridgebrowser study of this sort of overcall.

 

Oh, and if I wanted to be cynical, I could say that South misbid ;)

 

1♦ pass 1♥ pass

2♥ pass pass DBL

[awm]

Of course, we could change Roland's example hand just slightly:

 

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=sj872hj2dq43ct765&w=sk954hq54daj85ca3&e=sq6hkt873d962cj98&s=sat3ha96dkt7ckq42]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Now the points are divided 20-20. Surely we all open the west hand and respond 1♥ on the east hand.... and 1NT is likely two or three down. If opener finds a double this is 500 or 800 opposite not even a game, and even if he doesn't it will be 200 or 300 opposite a partial. This is all a matter of the odds -- which is more likely after opening and response with me holding 16 hcp: partner has 9 or RHO has 9? Assuming opponents do sometimes pass an opening bid, odds have to be in favor of RHO having 9 and I'm taking my life in my hands.

 

On the actual hand I would double. This is potentially safer than 1NT, since we more easily get to 1♠ or 2♣ (both harder to penalize and defeat than 1NT). On the actual cards partner will show me a good hand (say 1♦-P-1♥-X; 2♥-3♣ or 1♦-P-1♥-X; XX-3♣) and I can easily bid game.

[Walddk]

As for your hand... well, I guess I could ask Ben to run a bridgebrowser study of this sort of overcall.

 

Oh, and if I wanted to be cynical, I could say that South misbid ;)

 

1♦ pass 1♥ pass

2♥ pass pass DBL

That simulation would be useless because you assume that opener has 12+ hcp and responder 5+. This is not the case in real life as I'm sure you have experienced on a number of occasions.

 

As to your double in the balancing set, I must confess that I am lost. It's not at all safer (to the contrary) to get in now. Opener could have 15, responder 9, leaving your partner with a bust.

 

They are much more likely to double you now when you're at the 2 or 3-level than they were when you could get in at the 1-level.

 

Roland

[Stephen Tu]

I don't think it's so clear that sandwich NT should be natural just because opener/responder could be light. Sure, not having a natural NT will lead

to some missed games opposite some constructions. But RHO is much more likely to be close to 10 hcp than close to 3 HCP. On average opponents will be close to half the deck or more; only when both opponents are bare min will your side have game on power alone. & if they are bidding up to a misfit 1nt on 12 opposite 4 it may be more

profitable to saw them off than declaring yourself.

 

Lose 10 imps on a missed game occasionally is OK if you are winning 2 6 imp partial swings to compensate playing the alternate treatment.

 

Sure, there are no guarantees that you won't get in trouble after

1x-p-1y-p;

1nt-p-p-x

but there were no guarantees in overcalling 1nt either, and at least you have

eliminated some of the hands where LHO/RHO have near game values;

they have no particular reason to believe you are likely to back in so they can't

conceal game inv values.

[Walddk]

If opener finds a double this is 500 or 800 opposite not even a game

Not in a million years would West double on a flat 14 count opposite what might be 3 or 4 hcp, remember! 1NT is much less dangerous that some think. The dangerous part is to surrender.

 

Roland

[mikeh]

Reading the posts here, especially those advocating a takeout meaning for 1N, it seems that many posters are of the view that the only upside to the natural 1N is the chance to reach a good game, with the opps opening and responding on minimal values. It is obvious that the 1N overcall will sometimes be punished severely, and the question seems to be presented as if the issue were the relarive frequency of reaching game compared to getting pounded.

 

But this is nonsense.

 

There will be a substantial subset of hands on which partner (advancer) will be light but on which he will have some shape.

 

Thus if the bidding is 1♦ on my left and 1♠ on my right, and I hold Axx Axx Kxx KQxx, and bid 1N..... let's give LHO 13 and RHO 10.... but if partner's 1 count looks like xxxxxx xx xx Jxx, they are going to be reluctant to double me in 2♠... which will almost certainly make on a 2-2 trump break.

 

So the strong 1N bid wins on many, many hands on which a pass would either fail or afford so many bidding space and tempo to the opps that later action (whereagles' balancing double) becomes far riskier than the initial 1N alternative.

 

I used to play takeout, but was convinced by a very good player to switch, about 10 years ago. I have never regretted the change in approach.

[Walddk]

I am prepared to give you one of Hans Ø's bright Danish seagulls as a playmate for your excellent post, Mike. You couldn't ask for a better compliment! ;)

 

Roland

[pclayton]

Of course, we could change Roland's example hand just slightly:

 

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=sj872hj2dq43ct765&w=sk954hq54daj85ca3&e=sq6hkt873d962cj98&s=sat3ha96dkt7ckq42]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Now the points are divided 20-20. Surely we all open the west hand and respond 1♥ on the east hand.... and 1NT is likely two or three down. If opener finds a double this is 500 or 800 opposite not even a game, and even if he doesn't it will be 200 or 300 opposite a partial. This is all a matter of the odds -- which is more likely after opening and response with me holding 16 hcp: partner has 9 or RHO has 9? Assuming opponents do sometimes pass an opening bid, odds have to be in favor of RHO having 9 and I'm taking my life in my hands.

 

On the actual hand I would double. This is potentially safer than 1NT, since we more easily get to 1♠ or 2♣ (both harder to penalize and defeat than 1NT). On the actual cards partner will show me a good hand (say 1♦-P-1♥-X; 2♥-3♣ or 1♦-P-1♥-X; XX-3♣) and I can easily bid game.

I would assume North would run from 1N x'd with 4-4 in the unbid suits, and I'm guessing NS would end up in 2♣ hammered.

 

The play and defense to 2♣ is rather interesting. Its far from clear that 2♣ is going down.

[whereagles]

1. That simulation would be useless because you assume that opener has 12+ hcp and responder 5+. This is not the case in real life as I'm sure you have experienced on a number of occasions.

 

2. As to your double in the balancing set, I must confess that I am lost. It's not at all safer (to the contrary) to get in now. Opener could have 15, responder 9, leaving your partner with a bust.

1. It's not a simulation, it's a statistical sample study. "Every hand where LHO opened 1x, RHO responded 1y and we overcalled 1NT, natural." Has nothing to do with lower bounds 12/5.

 

 

2. It's more like 14/9, but let's not get picky. There are two reasons why balancing is relatively safe here:

 

a. opps found a fit, so we should have one as well.

b. opps have no more than those 12/5 and already said they're at best 14/9

 

Items a & b plus a bit of conditioned probability will tell you pard will have some scraps with a high chance of a fit.

 

Anyway, the reason opps can catch me speeding isn't because they MIGHT be 14/9. It's because they already exchanged a lot of info. But don't forget they're also in the dark as to what the other has.

 

Conclusion: yes, there's a real risk to balance with dbl, but I don't see why the immediate butt-in would be safer.