Two ways to raise 1NT to game with a 5-card maj

[gnasher]

After a 1NT opening, my methods allow two different ways to show a raise to game with a five card major. As well as these, responder has a way to show a game-forcing major-minor two-suiter, implying some interest in playing a 5-2 major suit fit.

 

I can think of various ways to use the two routes to 3NT. For example, the two hand-types could be any of these pairs:

 

(1) Opener bids 4M with 3-card support / Opener passes with 4333 and bids 4M otherwise

(2) Opener bids 4M with 3-card support / Responder shows scattered values and opener uses his judgement

(3) Opener bids 4M with 3-card support / Responder shows fast tricks and opener uses his judgement

(4) Responder shows scattered values and opener uses his judgement / Responder shows fast tricks and opener uses his judgement

(5) Opener bids 4M with 3-card support / Responder shows a bad suit and opener uses his judgement

 

etc

 

How would you use the two sequences? And should it depend on the form of scoring?

[Guest Jlall]

I use A (except opener might pass some other rare times, like xxx and 5 solid on the side and softish stuff, ie a 3N hand).

[han]

Same for me. I would describe it as:

 

Opener bids 4M with 3-card support/Opener uses judgement with 3-card support.

[gnasher]

One of the questions I was trying to ask was this: when opener is supposed to use his judgement, what sort of hand should he expect opposite?

 

I can imagine responder wanting to offer 3NT on AQJxx Kx xxx xxx, where he hopes for 9 fast winners with 4♠ having four top losers, or on Jxxxx Kx KQx Qxx, where he thinks 3NT might make without setting up the spades.

[han]

We would bid the same way with most 5332 hands, and opener is expected to pass on most 4333 hands. So no, it doesn't look for fast or slow tricks, that's too subtle.

 

By the way, I'm pretty sure cherdano would bid Stayman on the second hand you gave, wanting to play 3NT whenever opener doesn't have 4 spades.

[Finch]

How come none of these clever people seem to have understood the question?

 

I assume you would usually show a two suiter with e.g. xx AK10xx KJxx xx, so responder is pretty much guaranteed to be one of balanced, have honours in his short suits, or have a solid suit.

 

That implies that one way to raise suggests the suit is running (up to you if that means AKQxx or if that just means 'might be running' e.g. AQJxx or any 2 or the top 3 honours). That implies a lack of high cards outside hearts.

 

The other way shows a random balanced/semi-balanced high card raise that happens to have five hearts. This could include a running suit if responder has a 14-count, of course, but it implies high cards in the side suits and a suggestion that the heart suit may not be necessary to make 3NT.

 

I think that is your option (4)

 

My second choice would be to have one of the options forces 4H with 3-card support, and the other allows opener to use his judgement. But I've just played a match where opener twice used his judgement on this type of auction, and twice got it wrong because opener had no way of knowing what type of judgement he was being asked to use (if you see what I mean).

 

In general, I would prefer for dummy to describe their hand and declarer to make a decision, so I might come to a different answer if the heart hand was going to be declarer.

[han]

How come none of these clever people seem to have understood the question?

If you don't like the answer, it doesn't mean it isn't an answer to the question.

 

I assume you would usually show a two suiter with e.g. xx AK10xx KJxx xx, so responder is pretty much guaranteed to be one of balanced, have honours in his short suits, or have a solid suit.

 

We often don't show the minor with a 5422 pattern. For us this is a typical shape for the auction that says "always bid 4M when you have 3-card support". We don't bid this way with 5332 hands so with all those hands we go through the other route, allowing opener to pass 3NT if it seems right.

 

So to repeat: the first route tells opener always to bid 4M with 3-card support. The second route shows a 5332 shape, that's it. In my experience opener will usually still be able to make a good decision. Sometimes opener would be able to do better with more information but we are not able to give that information.

 

And again, with a hand that cries out 3NT (like the second hand gnasher gave) we may bid stayman instead of transfer.

[han]

It would actually be easy for us to allow a third route, so maybe we should have (1) always bid 4M with 3-card support, (2) I'm hoping for 9 top tricks, pass if you think that's right and (3) I have slow values, pass unless you think 4M is better.

 

I don't see this as a priority though.

[Guest Jlall]

British people:

 

You want to define it by expectations of what responder is doing. I define it by expectations of what opener will do. Opener will pass wtih 4333, or some very NTy other hands. Responder can bid accordingly with this knowledge.

[gnasher]

British people:

 

You want to define it by expectations of what responder is doing. I define it by expectations of what opener will do. Opener will pass wtih 4333, or some very NTy other hands. Responder can bid accordingly with this knowledge.

I haven't actually said how I want to define it. In fact, the reason for my posting was that I don't know how to define it.

 

All I said was that if opener was expected to use his judgement, he would need to know what hand-types responder could have.

[nige1]

One of the questions I was trying to ask was this: when opener is supposed to use his judgement, what sort of hand should he expect opposite?

 

I can imagine responder wanting to offer 3NT on AQJxx Kx xxx xxx, where he hopes for 9 fast winners with 4♠ having four top losers, or on Jxxxx Kx KQx Qxx, where he thinks 3NT might make without setting up the spades.

Blitish officer! you build Bridge!

I agree :blink:

[cherdano]

How come none of these clever people seem to have understood the question?

 

I assume you would usually show a two suiter with e.g. xx AK10xx KJxx xx, so responder is pretty much guaranteed to be one of balanced, have honours in his short suits, or have a solid suit.

At matchpoints, I might not even show my minor with a 5431 hand if I would rather take my chances in 3N on a blind lead rather than play the double dummy contract of 5m.

[gnasher]

At matchpoints, I might not even show my minor with a 5431 hand if I would rather take my chances in 3N on a blind lead rather than play the double dummy contract of 5m.

The idea isn't just to find a minor-suit fit; in fact, I think that's decidedly a secondary objective. The main reason for bidding the minor is to find out whether to play a 5-2 major-suit fit. For instance, with Qxx Qx AQx AJxx opposite Frances's example, 4♥ is better than 3NT at any form of scoring.

 

I agree that with a less concentrated two-suiter you might well want to just show the major and bid 3NT, provided that opener will always convert to 4M with 3-card support., so I suppose that one of my two options has to be that.

[awm]

3NT is usually better than 4M (especially at IMPs) when you are 5332 opposite 4333. When is 4M better? This most often happens when the trump suit is quite strong (a weak trump suit often gives you too many top losers for 4M, or at the least puts you in danger when trumps are 4-1) but not solid (solid trumps score five tricks in NT too), and there is a weak side suit (i.e. stopped only once or not at all).

 

It is true that you can construct examples where the trump suit is very strong and yet you need to play 3NT for the nine cashers rather than 4M, but in my experience these examples don't come up all that much at the table.

 

Another interesting situation when you open 1NT with two doubletons (as some of us do on occasion) is deciding whether to play 4M in a 5-2 (with the possible ruffing value in opener's hand and the possible danger of opponents attacking opener's other doubleton in 3NT) versus playing 3NT. Again the quality of responder's trump suit can be very key to the decision here.

 

I'd recommend distinguishing "strong trump suit" (meaning KQTxx or better) from "weak trump suit." Note that on the hands where responder has a strong trump suit and a lot outside (i.e. substantial extras) it probably doesn't matter much where you play (at IMPs) and you might just blast 3NT (at MPs). So opener can assume that "strong trump suit" means not too many outside cards whereas "weak trump suit" promises some help in the side suits.