Easy bid?

[lexlogan]

Playing 15-17 NT's, partner has 12-14 balanced OR a hand which will bid again (18-19 balanced or any unbalanced hand.) If partner opened a 12-14 notrump, would you pass or raise? Based on double-dummy analysis, this should be a pass -- 25 hcp gives perhaps a 57% chance at game, not worth the risk of going down at 2NT when (as is more likely) partner has only 12 points.

 

If you believe real-world results make 25 hcp games well worth chasing, and 2NT on 23 (or even 22) not so risky, this hand should respond 2NT (looks like it should declare) and expect partner to bid game on 13+. If you buy the double-dummy results, 1NT is plenty with this collection. What you DONT want to happen is to bid or force to 2NT and have partner pass with 13 "because you might have only 11, partner."

[Gerben42]

2NT. Dare I say wtp??

 

Not unless you bid 2♦. WTP? At least you agree with Justin. I know partner declares badly, but let's give him the benefit of the doubt :)

[kenrexford]

Further arguments in favor of a 1NT response seem in order. I'm of the school, as will be my partner, that opening light is a good idea. Balanced 11-counts are often opened 1♦ when the range of the 1NT rebid is 11-14. However, to allow for this range, it is also a good idea to open 1NT with 14's that would accept an 11-count invite. Thus, you'd be consistent responding 1NT because of this analysis, especially if the 11-count looks like an 11-count.

 

This 11-count looks like an 11-count. I have an extra 10, but I don't love the position of it. It carries some weight where it is, but not as much weight as if in a longer suit. Even K10x is better than the K10 tight. I have a poverty of controls, such that, although I do not have cause to downgrade, I certainly do not have cause to upgrade, and I'm closer to downgrade than upgrade. Plus, by diamond contribution is not all that. Jxxx is better than xxxx, but it's not that impressive. So, this seems like a run-of-the-mill 11-count.

 

Plus, although 2NT-1 is a concern, I have other concerns as well.

 

First, 2NT with this hand will buy the contract for our side. 1NT may often get competition, and I like my defensive prospects. So, a 2NT call ruins any chance for an occasional lucrative hit.

 

Second, 2NT preempts partner. When partner does have the unbalanced hand with slight extras, he might bid 2♦ or 2♣ if I bid 1NT, but pass or WAG if I bid 2NT. If I do hear another bid after 1NT from partner, I think I will be better placed than had I bid 2NT. For that matter, I am also much better placed if partner reverses.

 

Third, 2NT may well hang partner. I want to encourage that occasional semi-frivolous 1♦ opening. If partner expects discretion in the 1min-P-2NT sequence, he will be more encouraged to step in early with that shady hand. If I am aggressive with 2NT calls, he will tend to be more conservative. My lack of Aces, as well as my lack of diamond honors above the Jack, suggests that partner may well have upgraded. Give partner AKxxx in diamonds and a side Ace, for instance, and he has an EASY 1♦ opening. I don't want to play 2NT opposite that hand; I may make, but I still don't want to play 2NT. Plus, I really don't even want to play 3♦. I like 1NT. AKxxx-A, BTW, is rich anyway. AQ10xx-A with a stray Jack is good enough, and that 10 may be fluff.

[pclayton]

My call depends on my methods. If I can make an inverted raise and a non-forcing 2N call, thats my choice. This gives us the option of retreating to diamonds or playing 2N. Usually 2N is forcing for though, so that isn't an option.

 

Odd, I think a direct 2N is a slight overbid but 1♦ - 2♦ - 2x - 2N isn't. Plus, we will never play 3♦ on a 4-4 fit after 2N, which is where we belong if partner has his usual trash. If pard has a 4432, NT is much better.

 

1N is really the smart call with this hand. Aceless, a doubleton honor and not a whole lot of intermediates. Can you really call this a decent 11?

[firmit]

If you play Invereted Minors, then what does 2NT show,  given the auction 1m - 2m?

 

This is more of a general question, not necessarily limited to just this hand.

 

When do you bid 2NT rather than 2m?

Well - this is actually the main reason for this post - to get some answers :)

 

We have an outline of a structure - but we have yet to agree fully on it.

The outline says that 1m-2m may also be based on a singelton mayor giving the count of 10+.

 

1m-2m-2NT to show 13-14hp NT hand. and 3m from responder is now NF.

1m-2m-3m to show 11-12hp any and NF

1m-2m-2suit GF

 

This gives some guidance to what 1m-2NT should be - it may be any 2344/3334 without 4c major 11-12hp. The idea that it may be bid when wanting to protect Kx Qxx in a NT-contract sounds reasonable, thus a 1m-2m may be based on a 10+ NT hand wanting opener to declare.

 

Added: also I like Ken's reasoning - my partner tends to open light - he keeps on pushing the limits - so maybe the 2NT should be 12-13hp NT and 1NT 6-11 bad hp?

[Finch]

Well yes, I was going to say that the right call here depends on the rest of your methods.

 

If you can bid 2D on this type of hand and still bid 2NT next round, then I would do so (I play 1D - 2D - 2H as 12-14 / 18-19 balanced, over which I can bid 2NT and the job is done).

 

If over 2D partner has to bid 2NT on all (or even many) 12-14 balanced hands then I would not bid 2D now because we've lost the opportunity to ask whether partner is max or min, and we've wrong sided it.

 

The problem with 1m - 2m - 3m as any minimum balanced NF is that if you open your better minor, you can be in a 4-3 fit at the 3-level with a balanced 11 opposite a balanced 11. So in that structure I would always bid NT on this hand.

 

The 1NT/2NT valuation is a different question. I'm sure you can fiddle the hand so it's a clear 2NT on values if you want.

 

Mind you, I use 1m - 2NT as conventional as well, so I don't have the option.

[NickRW]

I agree with Ken's argument in favour of 1N personally, but I also agree with other posters that it depends on exactly where you and partner put your limits for both the openings and the responses.

 

Nick