Weak NT Defense

[jmc]

This thread has been somewhat hijacked by run out system discussions.

 

What I am more curious about is...

 

What agreements or system and agreements do you use when playing against a weak nt?

 

jmc

[Guest Jlall]

I think any system is fine as long as it has a card showing X and a way to show the majors. Heck, I'd be happy to play landy and that's it.

 

The card showing X isn't even that important in terms of penalizing the opponents, you just need some way to get in with a strong balanced hand where you may get stolen from, and also you need more than one way to overcall 2M (ie, X then 2M or a direct bid).

 

Similarly I think after 1N p 2C X needs to show cards, and if they play transfers then also a X of a transfer showing cards.

 

I think bidding over weak NT should have a more constructive goal, so with AQxxx xx Qxxxx x you would have to pass (even though you would bid over a strong NT).

 

You also need agreements as to how high, if at all, the initial X forces you, and what subsequent Xs and 2N bids mean.

[awm]

Over weak NT, I generally prefer to play landy; 2♣ is both majors (with 2♦ by advancer to ask preference) and double is 15+, with other bids natural and generally around 10-14.

 

Recently I've been experimenting with using 2♣ as "stayman" instead of majors -- this would show either of both majors or a 4-card major and longer minor, and partner responds by bidding a four-card major if any, or 2♦ with none, or 2NT with a game-forcing hand (since in principle overcaller can pass 2♦ or 2M). This usually works well if opponents are passing but has some disadvantages if responder bids on (since advancer has less of an idea what to do).

 

The more important question is probably what happens after 1NT-X. If the auction starts with 1NT-X and a pass or redouble, then bids by advancer are natural and normally weak. Jumps to the three-level show good hands. Note that there is no implication that doubler has a balanced hand, and usually good hands for advancer (other than hands with a strong single suit and out) will pass the double; these facts make "notrump systems on" a somewhat silly treatment as far as I can tell. If the auction is not forcing on opener (so 1NT-X-Pass is suggesting to play 1NTX or 1NT-X-XX is business) then a 2♣ bid by advancer is potentially artificial, just starting a scramble for a good place to play. Advancer's 2♦-2♠ bids guarantee a five-card suit, as does 2♣ in an auction that's forcing on opener. Note that a pass by advancer over 1NT-X-Pass or 1NT-X-XX does not promise values; sometimes doubler has extras or opponents run when they shouldn't, and sometimes defending 1NT-X is better than being doubled at the two-level.

 

If the opponents run from 1NT-X, any double of an artificial suit bid by advancer simply shows values and creates a force. So for example 1NT-X-2♦(transfer)-X says nothing about any suit, just says "hey partner this is our hand" and requires our side to either defend doubled or declare the final contract. If opponents bid a suit naturally (showing that suit, or that suit plus another) then the first double is takeout. This is nice because it removes any necessity that the initial double create a unilateral force. In principle we can be "tricked" if responder decides to psych a natural bid and the suit breaks fairly evenly (i.e. opponents are in a 3-2 fit breaking 4-4 for example), but this requires some ingenuity and a great deal of luck on the part of the opponents (not to mention that going down a lot in a bad fit undoubled has to be a good score). We do make somewhat "off-shape" doubles in this auction fairly frequently.