Bidding vs weak NT. Sample auction

[Chamaco]

Hi all, I have a question on some sequences when bidding vs weak NT.

 

I have read, both here and on rec.games.bridge, that several expert prefer - vs weak NT - the following defense rather than the Cappelletti-Hamilton:

 

X = penalty OR 4M+5/6m

2C = 54 or better in the majors

2D = single suited (usually a major)

2M = 5M + 4 or better in a minor

2NT = minors.

 

etc.

 

So my question is related to this scheme, not to others

 

Thanks !

 

Mauro

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------

 

HAND 1

 

Swiss Team, all vuln

You are sitting West and South opens a 12-14 NT:

 

x

AJxx

Kxx

AQxxx

 

I assume you should double, in the above mentioned scheme:

 

S W N E

1NT X p 2S

p ?

 

What should you bid ?

a) pass, to play in an unpleasant spade fit ? (pard could have Txxxx)

<_< 3C, risking a higher level misfit, vulnerable ?

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------

 

HAND 2

 

Swiss Team, all vuln

You are sitting West and South opens a 12-14 NT:

 

void

AJxx

Kxxx

AQxxx

 

Should you double with 544 shape and void in spades ?

If so, what do you bid when the auction proceeds as shown in hand 1 ?

 

S W N E

1NT X p 2S

p ?

 

a) pass, to play in an bad spade fit ? (pard could have Txxxx)

;) 3C, risking a higher level misfit, vulnerable ?

[inquiry]

The convention you are describing is "woolsey over NT". Just learning the first bid of any of these is not necessarily a good approach. Over 1NT X, the responses are:

• 2C = pass or correct to 2D
  
• 2D = tell me your major
  
• 2H/2S = both to play (pard may have a six, seven or 8 card suit of his own)
  
• 2NT = artificial, tell me about your minor (3C = min with C, 3D = min with D, 3H = max with C, 3S = max with D),
  
• 3C/3D = to play,
  
• other response also available... look up Woolsey over NT with Googgle
  

Thus on your two hands, on the first one, the correct bid over 2S is to pass. Your partner is well aware that Spades may not be your suit. He even could have bid 2D and then if you bid 2H pulled to 2S. This 2S is to play.

 

On the second hand, 2S may not play so well, given the void. It is a toss up as to whether you should pass and hope for the best or bid 2NT, and hope you land in a makable contract (either 2NT or whatever minor your partner bids). But your partner pretty much anticipated you passing when he bid 2S.

[Gerben47]

Hand 1:

 

x

AJxx

Kxx

AQxxx

 

S W N E

1NT X p 2S

p ?

 

It seems to me that your responses to this double are the trouble spot. Responder will not bid 2S on Txxxx in spades. Your sample hands show why.

 

Pass or correct responses are the way to go. The fact that there are two either-or situations in one complicates things.

 

I can recommend this set of responses:

 

2C : Pass with clubs, bid 2D with diamonds

2D : Asks for the major - normally game interest

(then 2NT asks for the minor after that)

2H : Pass with hearts, bid 2S with spades

2S : Pass with spades, positive for hearts

2NT: Bid your minor (3D over 3C asks the major for game interest)

 

So 2S strongly suggests something like 3-4 in the majors and constructive values.

 

I'll rebid 3C with hand 1 and 4H with hand 2. Slam is unlikely but game is virtually certain (2S was nonforcing!)

 

EDIT: I forgot to mention, the responses to the positive 2D are:

2H = I have spades

2S = I have hearts

 

So that gets your trouble hands with one long major and no interest in any other suit else out of the way.

[Chamaco]

I can recommend this set of responses:

 

2C : Pass with clubs, bid 2D with diamonds

2D : Asks for the major - normally game interest

(then 2NT asks for the minor after that)

2H : Pass with hearts, bid 2S with spades

2S : Pass with spades, positive for hearts

2NT: Bid your minor (3D over 3C asks the major for game interest)

I can understand that if my double GUARANTEES a 5m+4M shape.

 

But it may also be a balanced penalty hand.

I think pard's bidding should cater for this.

 

CASE 1

 

Say bidding goes

 

1NT-X-p-2H(pass or or correct in a major)

 

You had doubled with:

 

Ax-KJ-KJxx-AJxxx

 

This is 5422 but I treat these hands as balanced rather than 2 suited so I do not like bidding 2NT for the minors.

But you are in trouble in selecting a major now

 

---------------------------------------------------------

 

CASE 2

 

Say bidding goes

 

1NT-X-p-2C(pass or or correct in a minor)

 

You had doubled with:

 

AKxx-KQxx-xxx-Ax

 

Should you bid 2D (e.g. how many cards of your minor does your pd expect as a minimum?)

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Thanks !!

[irdoz]

I've played Woolsey versus weak no trump.

 

It's advantages are the ability to scramble to find a fit on the 2-level and its constructive sequences (both important versus weak nt).

 

The version I learnt did not include a penalty option as part of the dbl and I'd be interested to see a reference where all balanced 14hcp+(or some other hcp) hands are included in the x because this seems to undermine the whole structure.

 

Against strong nt we played:

 

X was 5m/4M (sometimes 6m/4M and sometimes 3-1-4-5 in balance)

or a hand with long diamonds intending to pass the 2d response.

We also doubled with big balanced hands (18+) and bid 2nt over the response (This was to expose comic 1nt bids which is a favorite trick of a couple of people we regularly play)

 

Against weak no trump we took the long diamond hand out of the double and X was the 5m/4M shape and promised 14+ hcp so advancer could convert to penalties.

[keylime]

I use the 10-12 NV NT. We've seen all sorts of defenses against it but the ones I recommend are as follows:

 

Capp

Hello

Landy

Natural

Xfer by 4th seat

 

Something with a pen double in it is very nice to have. I don't know if Woolsey is allowed under the GCC, if so, add that in there too.

 

An important thing to have too is handling the runouts over 1NT-X defending against it. That also warrants discussion. FTR, we use DONT or Sardine runouts.

[Gerben47]

Chamaco, with strong hands you will have to bid impossible rebids.

 

2C : Pass with clubs, bid 2D with diamonds

 

2H and higher is strong

 

2D : Asks for the major - normally game interest

2H : Pass with hearts, bid 2S with spades

 

2NT and higher is strong (so in your case you bid 2NT: balanced)

 

2S : Pass with spades, positive for hearts

 

2NT, and 3S or higher are strong.

 

2NT: Bid your minor (3D over 3C asks the major for game interest)

 

3H and higher are strong.

 

I like all this more against a strong NT, though.

After a Weak NT I either like Multi Landy or Lionel.

 

Muti Landy: (Woolsey with penalty double)

2C = both majors

2D = one major

2M = major + minor

 

Lionel: (At least when you double one suit is known and partner lacking spades can leave it in)

dbl = spades 2-suiter or strong

2m = minor + hearts

2M = natural

 

Gerben

[inquiry]

If you are going to play WOOLSEY'S Defense over 1NT, it would pay to at least look at the standard follow up auctions. The post above re-inventing the subsequent auctions are not an improvement upon the original system. So this time, I have provided a link to the entire scheme.

 

http://www.gg.caltech.edu/~jeff/system/woolsey.html

 

Things to note... most notably, 2H is NOT pass/correct over the dbl, as is suggested by a number of posters. To find out about the major, bid 2D. 2C is pass/correct, if partner bids 2D however, advancer can now bid 2H as pass/correct for the majors (showing diamond shortness obviously). If you are playing Woolsey type defense you owe it to yourself to at least read how the convention as origianlly to follow up your first bid without and without competition.

[Chamaco]

If you are going to play WOOLSEY'S Defense over 1NT, it would pay to at least look at the standard follow up auctions. The post above re-inventing the subsequent auctions are not an improvement upon the original system. So this time, I have provided a link to the entire scheme.

 

http://www.gg.caltech.edu/~jeff/system/woolsey.html

 

Things to note... most notably, 2H is NOT pass/correct over the dbl, as is suggested by a number of posters. To find out about the major, bid 2D. 2C is pass/correct, if partner bids 2D however, advancer can now bid 2H as pass/correct for the majors (showing diamond shortness obviously). If you are playing Woolsey type defense you owe it to yourself to at least read how the convention as origianlly to follow up your first bid without and without competition.

Thanks a lot.

I had found the link already (the whole Jeff Goldsmith sirte is interesting to me).

 

I need to know whether this works SPECIFICALLY vs weak NT (e.g. I need a penalty double).

 

Thanks ! :D

[Trpltrbl]

I play 10-12 NT NV and 12-14 VUL, biggest thing I noticed is that people really think they have to bid against weak NT, especially the weaker players, because they think we play weak NT so we can steal from them hehehe.

Against weak NT I play Capp or Multi-Landy in direct seat and Meckwell in pass out seat. As long as you have a way to X for penalty, any system that allows that is fine with me.

In passout seat we act more agressive, but in direct seat we do have what we are supposed to have.

 

Mike :D

[inquiry]

Mike,

 

Getting people out of 1NT, rather it is weak, or strong NT, is a part of the modern game Thus all the convention for doing just that. David Stevenson page list 63 conventional ways of getting people out of 1NT. ( http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/def_1nt0.htm ). So I would not read too much in people trying to jostle yours as anything other than the modern style.

 

Everyone needs to decide on conventions over notrump range, and I agree that if your opponents open weak notrumps, you have to include the possiblility of a penalty double, so no DONT etc over these weak things. I play Cansino against 10-12 NT, hamilton against 12-14 or 11-14, and Merkwell, Woolsey or DONT against any NT with 15 in its announced range.

[Trpltrbl]

Ben,

 

I agree with you to get people out of playing NT, but interfering with a 5-3-3-2

6 count in direct seat is just madness. You have a pd who can bid agressively in passout seat, if need to. B)

But please let people keep on bidding against me on hands like that, can't get enough of them 100%.

 

Mike :D

[irdoz]

Everyone has their favorite nt interference method. I have been playing WONT in the direct seat (written up on the ETM system site...http://www.bridgematters.com/overnt.htm).

 

This is designed for weak no trump and it has a couple of features I like...

 

1. The double is well defined as

i) 18+

ii) 14-18 with a 4M and a 4 card second suit

iii) 14-18 (or less depending on club suit quality) with clubs and an outside entry

 

This allows a penaltyish double on most 14-18 hands with easy sequences for places to play when advancer is bust.

 

2. The method in direct seat mostly transfers so that the advancer is more likely to be declarer. This means the weak no trump bidder is on opening lead into the strong hand.

[lenze]

For the last year or so, I have played against weak NTs that a double shows a hand I would open a strong (15-17) NT and our systems are on. So partner's 2C is Stayman, and 2D is a transfer, etc. Apart from that, we play 2C as Landy and all other bids as natural. Seems to work.