Weak NT

[Badmonster]

I'm encountering it more and more. What are the benefits? What are you giving up?

[Double !]

DEB:

 

I am a STRONG supporter of weak NT's. Advantages include forcing the opps to start at the 2-level if they wish to compete, it allows you to "make a statement" regarding minimum balanced and semibalanced hands quickly, it is less pre-emptable than opening a minor playing 15-17 NT because responder often doesn't have a clue to what kind of hand you hold, it has pre-emptive value, it allows the partner to have some idea about how high the partnership can go in one bid, and i would suppose that it comes up more frequently than does 15-17NT.

 

Drawbacks: risk of NT range fix when the 15-17 opps open 1m and find a 4-4 major fit that you miss (more critical at mps), there are some off-shape minor oriented hands that can become more difficult to bid playing 12-14 NT (but this can usually be addressed), it precludes being able to open 1 minor in 3rd seat light, planning to pass anything that responder bids (1of a minor always shows extra values either in hcp or distribution), it requires agreements regarding how to handle competition by opps (I prefer playing negative dbls), and I'm too tired to think of anything else right now. You also need agreements about bids when partner opens 1minor and the opps compete, e.g. which bids shows the default 15-17 hcp balanced hand, with and without a stopper in the opp's suit. Others will talk about the big risk of a big penalty. I say damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead! (Plus, I really don't like playing strong NTs as you know. so boring at mps, everyone is doing the same thing.)

 

The key is to remember that, when partner opens 1 minor playing weak NT, partner does not have a balanced minimum hand.

 

gl

 

dhl

[awm]

Sometimes weak NT randomizes the partscore battle, because it's harder for both sides to find their best fit on non-game hands. Occasionally you can miss a game this way if you have a nice fit somewhere, and occasionally you can talk opponents out of game. This is probably a wash, although I think it's a bit more beneficial to the weak NT opener when opponents are red and a bit worse for the weak NT opener when he's red (because going down in the wrong partial becomes expensive, missing games is more expensive).

 

Sometimes when you open weak NT you wind up in a 3NT with no stopper in some suit or a wrong-sided 3NT. Then again, sometimes when you don't open a weak NT opponents get a lead directional bid in. Again this is probably a wash in the long run, but tends to randomize results.

 

Occasionally you get doubled for a big number when partner is broke and you don't have much of a fit. Occasionally opponents jump in and they get doubled for a big number. Again this is pretty much a wash, but works out better for the weak NT opening side when they are NV vs V and worse for them when they are V vs NV.

 

Considering only the above, I'd say weak NT is probably a small winner at NV vs V and a small loser at V vs NV. But the most important issues may be the next two...

 

(1) A lot of people don't know how to defend against the weak NT. They double on lousy hands or don't sit for a double when they should. They don't know which doubles are penalty or takeout, or which passes are forcing. They aren't on the same page about which bids show which values. They play some lousy defense like Capp. Against these people the weak NT will win huge regardless of technical merit. If you're trying to win consistently in an event filled with a large number of weak players, weak NT is great!

 

(2) Weak NT has serious repurcussions for the rest of your system. Things change in competitive auctions over 1m. Even the meaning of 1m-1M-2M unobstructed may change (opener can't have a weak NT, which is the expected hand in standard bidding). My feeling is that playing weak NT in an otherwise "normal" 2/1 or SAYC type system may not work out very well (in a strong field anyway) because of these issues. This in no way impacts the merits of weak NT if your basic system structure is different (strong club for example, or Fantoni-Nunes).

[jdonn]

Hi Badmonster. In my opinion the weak notrump can definitely be a long term winner, but I want to focus on what I consider the biggest downside, which is something that frequently gets overlooked. This applies only in the context of a relatively standard SA or 2/1 system.

 

If you are playing strong notrumps, then the balanced hands with which you open the bidding in a suit are either minimal openers or have relatively substantial extras. This makes things easy when you are faced with interference while holding a balanced hand. Lets take one of many example auctions.

 

1♣ p 1♠ 2♥ back to you. Say you do not have spade support as opener.

 

Assume first you are playing strong notrumps. Now if you are balanced you are either 12-14 or 18-19. In the first case you are clearly not worth a bid now and have an easy pass. In the second case you are clearly worth a bid and will act appropriately, with whatever your system and style calls for. Easy.

 

Now pretend you are playing weak notrumps, so if you are balanced you are 15-19. Things are very uncomfortable in part of that range. What does a random 15 or 16 count do? I'm not suggesting that there isn't a bid available, since for example you could easily define double as showing a strong notrump. I'm saying you are in the very difficult range where bidding is dangerous if partner is minimal, but passing risks missing game if partner has just a little more but can't reopen. You create all sorts of tough and unclear decisions for yourself in these auctions, and meanwhile have to lose your support doubles to even have any chance at all. It is frankly a stressful and exhausting way to play, since you eliminate lots of easy decisions and replace them with lots of hard decisions.

 

I don't mean to sound anti weak notrump, I have no problem with wanting to play it by any means. But the above is something that most people who play it don't consider fully enough. I have considered it and decided it doesn't really suit my style. But to each his own.

[jmc]

The problem jdonn highlights here can be somewhat solved by playing a 2d bid showing 18,19 balanced. This removes those hands from 1m and allows partner to assume you are 15-17 bal or unbalanced when opening 1m. I think this makes the weak nt in a 2/1 or standard system much more playable.

 

Many people who play weak nt's do not require extra values for 1M. These people still open 1M with 12+ and a 5-card major. One of the posters above implied that 1M in this context shows extras. Some players play 1h-1s-1nt shows a 15-17 nt but some play it just shows 12-15 ish or something sort of standard.

 

jmc

[cherdano]

The problem jdonn highlights here can be somewhat solved by playing a 2d bid showing 18,19 balanced. This removes those hands from 1m and allows partner to assume you are 15-17 bal or unbalanced when opening 1m. I think this makes the weak nt in a 2/1 or standard system much more playable.

I believe that it may help, but I don't think it changes anything about the main problem: Opener can still have 2 very different reasons to act, he could have an unbalanced hand, or he could have a strong NT. One of them will probably be dealt with by a double, but then the other remains uncomfortable.

[Free]

I prefer to pass with a strong NT hand after intervention without fit in partner's suit. Partner is expected to act like he should act over a strong NT in the first place, so what's the problem now?

 

Dbl is takeout from both sides, so not really much of a problem imo...

 

There are other sequences that really change however, and I like the weak NT. Many people just play weak NT like they would play the same system with a strong NT. That however is the wrong approach!

 

I'm not saying it's better or worse than strong NT, it just creates some action from time to time. Logically spoken, any opening now is either 15+ balanced or (11)12+ unbalanced. This way the entire opening structure automatically becomes more solid (but only if you open ALL weak balanced hands 1NT, including 5 card Majors). There are many forms in which you can play weak NT, but if you build your system around the weak NT opening you'll be able to make a good system imo.

 

What are the pros:

- the preemptive effect: opps have to bid constructive at 2-level, which may be dangerous

- 1NT-3NT auctions come up very frequently, and opps can easily make defensive errors when no suits are bid

- you sometimes get to better games or partscores

- not a real advantage, but many people just don't know how to handle a weak NT. This excludes top level obviously...

 

What are the cons:

- you have to change many of your sequences in function of the strong NT

- there's a lot more stuff to handle contested auctions when playing a strong NT than playing weak NT's.

- you sometimes get to inferior games or partscores

- sometimes you get hammered, especially when vulnerable against good opponents.

 

Conclusion: it doesn't matter much what you play, as long as your entire system is designed to make accurate bidding possible.

[hotShot]

Any Partnership should have good agreement how to handle the bidding after a 1NT opening.

If you are playing weak NT the main advantage is that it comes up more often. It think it's about 2 times as frequent.

The main advantages are:

-it is more frequent and you are well prepared

-opps loose the entire 1 level for bids

-partner should pass with almost any reasonable holding, to give opps a thought reopening decision

 

Defense methods against strong NT are usually destructive, because the opening side will usually have 24 HCP and need very little extras to make games in NT or a major.

Against weak NT you should use constructive methods. If opps don't have these methods, they will often overbid or miss their game or partscore.

 

The disadvantages are:

-you loose the entire 1 level (harder to find and play fits on 1 and 2 level)

-you loose the 1NT rebid (so many NT partscores and games will be played from the other side than the field)

 

Against well prepared good opps, you don't have much of an advantage or disadvantage using weak NT, but against unprepared opps you can gain a lot.

 

To defend against weak 1NT openings you should consider the Lionel konvention.

[glen]

Canadian expert Andy Stark wrote a book on the weak notrump, out in 2006:

 

The Weak Notrump: How to play it, how to play against it by Andy Stark

 

If you look at the Critics's Viewpoint, you will see a newspaper called "The Belleville Intelligencer" - it appears they missed a "you will find" near the end of the quote (and Critics's should be Critics').

 

Another review is on page 16 of:

ABF Newsletter - November 2006

 

(warning: ignore pictures of the Norway Schools in this bulletin)

 

Even a confirmed strong notrumper will find many fine ideas in this excellent book. ... The book analyses every nook and cranny of 1NT and 2NT openings and notrump rebids, with many examples and quizzes. We highly recommend "The Weak Notrump" to both club players and experts.

When I saw Andy last week at the Toronto regional I asked him if he was playing the weak notrump that day. He said no, not everybody wants to play it. So you can't even get your partners to change by writing a whole book (or you can be Eric Kokish and coach teams where nobody plays the weak notrump, but they win a whole bunch of events).

 

In the recent Toronto regional swiss, against a top Canadian partnership, Karen and I were using a version of Maestro against notrump (see links just above "Older:" on Bridgematters - click to see ). They open 1NT 11-14, I double vulnerable with 13 and a minor, they pass as forcing opener to redouble, either two-suited run-out or big. It goes 2♣ by Karen (fewer than 10 points), pass, pass by me showing ♣s, and now back to responder, who has a monster with 4-3-2-4 exactly, including AKTx of ♣s! He doubles, alerted properly by opener for takeout, who bids 2♦ and they end in 3NT. Karen had 0 points, so 2♣ doubled was going to end the Swiss match. So the ABF newsletter review note of "Stark makes the point that after a weak notrump is doubled, the redouble should be for penalties" would have been key here (or see the complex ETM Rescues where passes forces redouble, but far less weak hands are put into the pass->redouble sequence, which means both opener and responder can double for penalty on the next round). The opponents will come in over the weak notrump on some very wrong times, and there are some large numbers available. These chances far outweigh the numbers one gives up in getting nailed in 1NT, or when escaping to two-of-a-suit.

 

The posters above have made many good points about the weak notrump. Note the discussion translates well to the mini-notrump of 10-12 or about that.

[pork rind]

B) like most i usually wind up playing cap against weak nt. what do you find is better defense.

[jmc]

Cherdano, your right of course that the 18,19 2D opener does not solve the problem. I do think that taking the 18,19 balanced out of the 1m openings makes it easier than otherwise. I usually play 10-13 NT's in a big club system. I prefer not to play weak NT's playing standard or 2/1 unless using the 2D gadget. Playing it I find I guess much less than otherwise.

 

jmc

[jdonn]

The problem jdonn highlights here can be somewhat solved by playing a 2d bid showing 18,19 balanced. This removes those hands from 1m and allows partner to assume you are 15-17 bal or unbalanced when opening 1m. I think this makes the weak nt in a 2/1 or standard system much more playable.

I don't think this solves much because the issue was never how you show 15-17 or what partner will assume you have. It was that acting with these hands is dangerous, and passing with them is dangerous as well, so your decisions of whether (not how) to act become difficult.

[jdonn]

I prefer to pass with a strong NT hand after intervention without fit in partner's suit.  Partner is expected to act like he should act over a strong NT in the first place, so what's the problem now?

 

Dbl is takeout from both sides, so not really much of a problem imo...

1♦ p 1♠ 2♥, p p dbl p, back to you. You are saying partner has to double back in with the right shape on the assumption you have a strong notrump. Ok if you have the strong notrump you are fine, but what if you don't? Lets say the opponents chose the wrong time to overcall and you are a 1453 12 count. Now what? Pass when you know partner could have 8 or 9 with a doubleton heart since he is playing you for a strong notrump? Seems really risky. Or do you bid 3♦ and find partner with 4225 or 4324 (or 4315? 5314?), and then you are playing a silly 5-2 fit in a minor on the 3 level with half the deck instead of defending vs. a non-fit.

 

Or what if partner is 5-5 in the black suits with a 9 count. Then he has to double, or bid 3♣? It's easy to see how either would work badly if you were fairly minimal opener with long diamonds, and meanwhile then he doesn't have a bid any more for a better hand with 5-5 in the black suits.

 

I think this kind of issue is a big problem when playing weak notrumps. It's a cost you have to weigh with the other costs against the benefits to decide whether you want to play it, but I disagree with you that this isn't much of a problem.

[pclayton]

I play a 12-14 NT in one partnership. A few additional comments, while echoing Josh's and Adam's:

 

Cons:

 

1. Our 4-4 major fit frequently gets buried.

2. You go for a large number a lot less than you'd think. What happens far more often is they let you play undoubled for -200 to -400.

3. Your auctions with a 15-17 NT becomes more revealing on the way to 3N.

 

Pros:

 

1. They can't compete with 12 opposite 12

2. Their 4-4 major fit gets buried

3. Minor suit openings are much better defined; you have an unbalanced hand with length, or a big balanced hand.

 

I play support doubles at the one level only and they specifically promise 15-17. At the 2 level, double shows the 15-17 hand without great support and partner can convert.

 

I also like the Keri structure in response, especially the 2 major invites.

 

I skimmed Andy's book and I didn't like it that much. I thought much of it was pretty basic, and didn't like his response mechanism.

[ArcLight]

The weak NT can give you great results against pick ups who are unfamiliar how to play against it (that would include me too :ph34r:

 

Fred Gitelman has some good posts somewhere on the Forums about not using it.

 

 

Probably using anything other than the "normal" whatever can give you good results against intermediates and below because they are unfamiliar with it.

I'll bet you intermediate Acol players can do well against intermediates who use SAYC and are unfamiliar with 4 card majors.

 

I thought the Andy Stark book was ok as an overview. I didn't think there was enough coverage on how it would affect the other bids, and othe implications. Its worth reading, I just didn't think it was all that great a book.

 

There is another book titled "How I became a Life Master using the Weak NT" that I thought was dreadful.

[Gerben42]

What happens frequently is that the pace of the auction is different, leading to different good and bad results, example:

 

1 table opens 1NT as it is in range: 1NT 2♥ p p p.

The other table opens 1♣ as they are out of range: 1♣ 1♥ Dbl p 1NT p p p.

 

RHO and p got their hand off their chest earlier in the 1♣ case, and if this is good or bad depends a lot on the full deal.

 

When you play a weak NT, as others have said the minor openings become more defined. The advantages have not been discussed much though.

 

Example:

1♦ p 2♣. If this is invite or better playing strong NT you can only bid 2NT on hands that don't accept the invite, and bid 3NT on a 14-count or so. 15-17 is 1NT and with 18? Well you need to discuss this!

Playing weak NT, if you are balanced you are GF (15 - 19). Much easier.

 

1♣ p 2NT. This can be done on a hand that wants to bid game opposite a strong NT, so even a bad 10-count. If partner has a minimum he is unbalanced and can play 3♣. If you don't want to play 3♣ and have 10 HCP balanced, you'll have 4+♦ and can bid those.

 

Final warning

You will not become a better player by changing your system.

[whereagles]

When you play a weak NT, as others have said the minor openings become more defined. The advantages have not been discussed much though.

An advantage that is seldom mentioned is the fact that you can support opener's minor on THREE cards and 7+ hcp. That is especially nice when RHO overcalls, e.g.

 

1♣ (1♠) 2♣ = 3+ clubs 7-10 hcp, unfit for dbl or 1NT

 

The point is opener will either have 5 clubs or a 15-17 hand (which is strong enough to rebid 2NT over 2♣). Now opener will compete to 3♣ much more often than it would if 1♣ might have had a 12-14 bal hand.

 

Playing a strong NT responder could not bid 2♣ without a fit because a balanced 12-14 opener isn't strong enough to bid 2NT over 2♣.

[mycroft]

Played it for years, still feel more comfortable with it.

 

I played it in a very gadgety standard context; similar to old-school K-S but without the forcing NT.

 

1) You won't go for numbers. At least not often. My worst result was 500 into a partscore, and on the companion hand they went 800 into a partscore after our 1NT.

 

As far as numbers go, I am decidedly on the plus side. But I don't play pass forces redouble.

 

2) You *will* need a good runout system, and you will want to practice it, because it will come up, often. My preference pushes the preemptive value of a 1NT opener; almost everything (including pass and redouble) was natural, 2C was "scrambling" (and trust me, we had detailed agreements about auctions after 1NT-X-2C).

 

XX=blood picks up lots of numbers ending in 00. Including 400 and 600, sometimes 430/630 when they've told you where all the points and shape is.

 

P to play picks up a fair number of -100, -200, -300s. Frequently, the hand plays for one more trick if you're declaring, and as 1NT out is the hardest contract to defend, they frequently slip a trick. So frequently those -300s play against game.

 

In other words, weak NT in a strong NT world works better at IMPs, where your numbers tend to be -3 and -5 and your plusses tend to be +3, +5 and +11. -200 into a partscore isn't a disaster; +800 into a partscore is.

 

3) The worst, as has been discussed above, is fourth-hand interference and the missing 4-4 fit. It does tend to balance out, however, because sometimes the weak NTers get 1m-1M; 2M AP where the strong NT auction is 1NT AP. It does happen more often that the weak NT is on the wrong side of that, because the weak NT comes up more often.

 

4) You will have to change your thinking and your minor-suit rebid structure. But that goes without saying.

 

But how often have you had a minimum balanced hand, opened 1m, had partner respond in your two-card suit, the opponents get into the auction, and never get to tell your hand? How much more comfortable would it be to know you've got it off your chest in one bid? Sure, the converse applies (but less often; more weak NTs than strong NTs), but you might feel more comfortable knowing your partner knows "real minor or strong hand" than "probably flat 12-14, but possibly we have a good club fit".

 

On competing against the weak NT:

1) decide whether you're going after the partscore battle or going for games. If you're going for games, keep that strength up, and bid game freely (after all, you know where most of the points are). If you're fighting for the partscore, you have to get in with okay balanced hands, and while that will work, a lot, you'll get your head handed to you more often.

2) admit to yourself that you are going to be burned by it sometimes. Whether it's losing your fit and defending 1NT or getting in and getting hit, or them playing the hand the right way up by sheer chance, or having them not play transfers and playing 4H with the unknown hand declaring (remember when they have game, the points are about evenly spread), you'll be put to problems you can't get right all the time, that nobody else has. Accept it, and do your best to get everything you can when sheer chance is in your favour.

[Cascade]

2) You *will* need a good runout system, and you will want to practice it, because it will come up, often. My preference pushes the preemptive value of a 1NT opener; almost everything (including pass and redouble) was natural, 2C was "scrambling" (and trust me, we had detailed agreements about auctions after 1NT-X-2C).

What sort of agreements did you have over 2♣?

 

Was 2♣ forcing?

 

How did you run out to clubs? 2♣ then 3♣ or a direct 3♣?

 

Thanks

[JanM]

Final warning

You will not become a better player by changing your system.

I completely agree with this!! I've played a weak NT system for too long to count. My husband recently commented that if it weren't for the fact that he'd have to change his thinking so completely he thought he might want to go back to strong NTs because there has been so much good development of bidding ideas in a strong NT context - support doubles (as someone pointed out in this thread, if you play weak NTs, you have to give up either the support DBL or the STR NT DBL - I do one in one partnership, the other in the other one, but am always unhappy when the "wrong" hand comes up), good/bad 2NT, I've forgotten what else.

But the NT range really changes a lot and if you've become comfortable with the sorts of hands partner will have for a one of a suit opening, it's going to be very hard to "convert." It isn't the hands where you open 1NT that change - when we play STR NT (in 3rd seat VUL) we use the same structure as over a weak NT - it's all the other hands. When my partner opens 1 of a minor and the auction develops so I know s/he doesn't have a strong NT (and in competition you can almost always tell that), I know that s/he has an unbalanced hand and almost certainly a 5 card suit. That makes it easier to compete, and my competitive instincts are based on that knowledge - I don't consciously consider it. Sometimes I notice that when I'm trying to do bidding competitions in a strong NT context (BW MSC for instance). I'll think "xyz, what's the problem" only to realize that the problem is that partner might have a weak NT.

Just one other comment - it seems to me that no-one mentioned what I've always seen as the biggest "pro" and also the biggest "con" - the STR NT hands. When the opponents don't compete, we almost always can do better in the bidding than the opponents who opened 1NT - we have an extra round of bidding to describe our hands, after all. But when the opponents do compete, we're usually at a disadvantage compared to the opponents who shut them out.

Overall, I like playing weak NT's (with lots of gadgets - strange how things develop in parallel lines, when I kibitzed Fantoni-Nunes recently I noticed that they play a lot of the same things we do), but I know there are advantages to each approach and I very strongly believe it depends on what feels most comfortable to you.

[Cascade]

As long as your system is sound I do not believe there is a lot to choose from between alternative systems. There will always be swings and round-abouts to win and lose on. Further it may be that some method is superior to another method but we simply do not have the tools to measure this superiority accurately and the difference is probably minute any way.

 

jdonn highlighted some competitive auctions where the weak NTers are at a disadvantage but I am sure that there are similar situations where the strong NTers are behind. Having almost exclusively played a weak NT - although I now often play a variable NT - i have always found it difficult to contemplate some competitive auctions in a strong NT system when opener has a minimum balanced hand and the opponent makes a jump overcall and partner makes a negative double or some other forcing bid and opener has no additional feature to show. In contrast on the same auction (although it would be a different hand) the weak NTer always has either extra distribution or extra strength or alternatively on the same hand the weak NTer has shown for certain the nature of his hand with a 1NT opening and responder can 'force' with his eyes wide open. And sometimes the overcaller cannot even create a problem e.g. compare

 

Strong NT: 1♦ (2♠) X?

 

Weak NT: 1NT (Pass) ?

 

The weak 2♠ bidder may not even be able to overcall since he is restricted by style and the prospect that his side has game to make his overcalls more constructive.

 

Jan has mentioned another area where the weak NT is better than a strong NT - slam bidding or even choice of game auctions where we belong in 5minor. Since slam is more likely in response to a strong NT it is better at least in theory that those hands are opened at a lower level.

 

None of this suggests that a weak NT is better than a strong NT just that there are advantages on some hands. Most or at least many of the world's best players play a strong NT so there must be something to it.

 

For me it is just a matter of comfort and familiarity - I like playing a weak NT and for the main part it works well for me even if occasionally I have to give up a few hundreds in overtricks or miss our major suit (or even minor suit) part-score.

 

Curiously I detest support doubles and from reading others opinions perhaps this is because I have never seen how they work with a weak NT. Although we also do not use a double by opener to show the strong NT hand - we use it simply as takeout showing either extra strength or support for the other suits (including partner's).

[helene_t]

Theoretically, I think weak notrump should be better. The negative inference that opener cannot have a 12-14 balanced hand must be more useful to partner than that he can't have a 15-17 balanced.

 

But it seems difficult to design a system that takes full advantage of this. I'm not sure if this is because most mainstream bidding theory has evolved in 15-17 cultures, or whether it's because of more inherent complexity in 12-14 systems. Maybe a combination of both.

 

It's well-known that responder can make negative doubles as well as forcing two-level freebids in a suit below opener's suit more freely in a weak-notrump context. But the constructive bidding causes problems.

 

One such problem is opener's rebid with some awkward 5431-pattern and minimal values. Rebiding 1NT with a singleton in partner's suit would show 15-17 points. Supporting partner's suit on a 3-card would suggest extras in terms of either HCPs or distribution and therefore encourage partner to bid on when he shouldn't.

 

Another problem relates to 2-over-1 auctions, especially if opener's suit does not promise 5. You cannot respond 1NT with 10 points if you also do it with 6, since opener will be fixed with a balanced 15 points. This means that a lot of sequences starting with a 2/1 response will not be forcing although you would like them to be so.

 

I have a vague feeling that some radical system changes are necesary to deal with those problems effectively, as well as to deal with sandwhich overcalls. Playing the 1NT rebid as 15-17 balanced may not be the best use of that bid. A two-way 1NT rebid, allowing responder to enquire with a non-forcing relay of 2m if he has invitational values opposite the 15-17 balanced might help.

 

Then there's the question of how to handle 3rd and 4th seat openings. 12-14 does not make much sense here as it is meant constructively opposite a maximum of 11 by partner only if you have 14. 14-16 would be more logical. But you would like sometimes to open with less than that just to compete, to suggest a lead or to keep the board alive when you have spades length. So you open in a suit with 12-13 balanced. This means that you play a different system in 3rd/4th hand.

 

If I were to design a weak-notrump based system myself, I would look into a relay response that requires a 10+ HCPs and some tolerance for any pattern opener might show with his rebid.

[whereagles]

Curiously I detest support doubles and from reading others opinions perhaps this is because I have never seen how they work with a weak NT.

Support dbls + weak NT do not mix well. That's a rather obvious fact, regardless of what some (like Andy Stark) say.

[blackshoe]

Heh. Ron Klinger, in "The Power System", said "all notrump ranges are wrong," and then proceeded to give us 17-20. George Rosenkranz tells us "how to survive without a strong notrump, or indeed any notrump at all". Danny Kleinman wrote a whole book on the faults with just about any notrump range you can think of - and gives a number of fairly complicated possible solutions.

 

You pays your money, and you takes your chances, I guess.

[glen]

Ron Klinger, in "The Power System", said "all notrump ranges are wrong," and then proceeded to give us 17-20....

Is this the same Ron Klinger who was playing this cc in 2005?

 

Ecats: 2005 Australia Klinger-Neill pdf

 

"1NT Openings: 15-17 (maybe 14, 5 card suit). Maybe 5/6M, 6m, 5422."