Showing both minors after 1NT

[eros2]

Hello,

 

I would just like to share an agreement between my partner and I for showing minors after a strong 1NT opening. I have no idea if it is already an established convention, but we worked it out and it has been very successful so far.

 

Our requirements for 1NT are:

 

1. 15-17 HCP (no quacky 15 counts though)

2. 4-3-3-3, 5-3-3-2, 4-4-3-2 shape (can include 5CM)

 

Responses to show minors:

 

3♥ = 5-4 in the minors 9+ HCP (+1 for 5 card suit at 3NT)

3♠ = 5-5 in the minors 8+ HCP

 

Opener's rebids after 3♥:

 

3♠ = minimum, 3-3 or 4-4 in the minors, asking for 5 card suit

3NT = to play*

4♣/4♦ = 4 cards, minimum or quacky/mismatched values

4♥/4♠ = maximum, premium values, 4-4 in the minors, ace cue**

4NT = maximum, 4-4 in the minors, asking for 5 card suit

 

Opener's rebids after 3♠:

 

3NT = to play*

4♣/4♦ = non forcing

5♣/5♦ = maximum, 4 cards

4♥/4♠ = maximum, premium values, undisclosed 4 card minor***, ace cue**

 

*With slam interest, responder continues with Gerber.

**With slam interest, responder continues with a 4♠ cue or Blackwood.

***Responder later bids 5♣/6♣/7♣ which opener can pass or correct to ♦.

 

We have regularly avoided failing 3NT contracts, making 4 level part scores or superior 5 minor games instead. We also found some excellent thin slams.

 

I hope you will consider this useful resource!

[TylerE]

Have you considered folding this into a 2♠ ♣ transfer? That would seem superior., since it frees up the 3♥/3♠ bids for something (IMO) more productive (Like showing major suits, or 3M1M5m4m type hands with specific shortness)

[eros2]

Well we have methods for showing just about any hand. The thing with our system is that responder only needs one bid and opener knows everything.

 

We have an agreement that:

 

2S is a club transfer 6+ cards 0+ HCP

3C is a diamond transfer 6+ cards 0+ HCP

 

We have Texas for 6+ card majors

 

1NT-2H-2S-3H would show 5-4 majors

1NT-2C-2D-2H would show 4-5 majors

1NT-2C-2D-3minor would show 4-5 shape etc.

 

We never had any use for 3H/3S because it is just not necessary. Responder will know if slam is on anyway, because opener has described his hand. It is up to responder to place the contract.

[TylerE]

How do you show:

 

5-5 Majors weak

5-5 Majors inv

5-5 Majors GF

[awm]

It seems like these methods are very much aimed towards playing in the minor suit. You have opener bypassing 3NT to show a four-card minor, or bidding 3♠ to ask for a five-card minor. Yet quite often 3NT will be the best contract even if there is an eight-card minor fit, especially given responder's point range of "nine plus" (which is enough for game but not really for slam).

 

I've found that in these cases it is often better to show shortness rather than trying to communicate minor suit length. If opener has a strong and slow holding opposite the shortness (something like KQJx is the extreme example) then you almost always want to play in 3NT unless responder has really serious extras. If opener has something like three-small opposite the shortness then 3NT is unplayable and you really don't need much in the way of extras for slam.

 

To give an example, take the following hands:

 

Opener:

 

♠KQJx

♥xxx

♦Ax

♣KQxx

 

Responder (1):

 

♠Axx

♥x

♦Kxxx

♣AJxxx

 

Responder (2):

 

♠x

♥Axx

♦Kxxx

♣AJxxx

 

Opposite the first responder hand, 6♣ is quite good (as is 6♠ actually). Opposite the second responder hand, you want to be in 3NT. Yet for you, both auctions will start 1NT-3♥-4♣. This illustrates the value of showing the short suit at a low level. For this reason, I'd much rather play something like:

 

3♥/3♠ = singleton or void in the bid suit, at least 5-4 in the minors

 

This lets opener bid 3NT when he has strength in the short suit and avoid it otherwise. There is plenty of space to negotiate for the best minor suit fit if/when we decide to go past 3NT.

[eros2]

We don't have anything for 5-5 weak (I suppose I would transfer to the stronger suit and pass), but major suit bids over interference are natural and non forcing.

 

5-5 invitational = 1NT-3D

Game force cue bids after a 3 level response etc.

 

I agree that 3NT is usually the best spot, that's why opener can just bid that and play there. With 1.5 stoppers in each major, that's clearly the best option. However, the gadgets do allow us to find a 5minor game if the major stoppers are shakey.

 

Thank you for your input, awm. I agree entirely with your points. However, we find it working well long term.

[mikeh]

Well we have methods for showing just about any hand. The thing with our system is that responder only needs one bid and opener knows everything.

 

We have an agreement that:

 

2S is a club transfer 6+ cards 0+ HCP

3C is a diamond transfer 6+ cards 0+ HCP

 

We have Texas for 6+ card majors

 

1NT-2H-2S-3H would show 5-4 majors

1NT-2C-2D-2H would show 4-5 majors

1NT-2C-2D-3minor would show 4-5 shape etc.

 

We never had any use for 3H/3S because it is just not necessary. Responder will know if slam is on anyway, because opener has described his hand. It is up to responder to place the contract.

Responder makes one bid and opener knows everything? I am sorry, but that is not and cannot possibly be true. If you think it is, get yourself a hand generator and set your constraints for responder as you have posted them here, and run 100 hands...

 

If responder will bid 3♥ on a minor 5-4 with 9+ hcp, then it seems to me that he would bid 3♥ with Axx x AKxxx Qxxx and with xx xx AQxxx Kxxx

 

And opener with KQx AJxx xx AJxx knows everything about responder's hand?

 

And so on.

 

Adam's concern that your 3M response propels the partnership beyond 3N is valid.

 

And there are more problems.

 

1N 3♥ 4N... maximum with 4-4 in the minors... just how you find out about controls at this point baffles me.

 

AKx Qx AJxx Kxxx... prime 17 with 4-4... 4N, I bid.

 

Responder shows a 5 card minor... with xxx x KQxxx AQxx...we'd like to be in 6♣, but with x xxx KQxxx AQxx, game is high enough. And with x Kxx KQxxx Qxxx, I'd like to be in 3N.

 

I suggest that you take a look at the myriad of systems already popular... there are a lot that solve the issues that caused you to come up with this, and they will, I think you will find, be more effective.

 

I may be wrong, but I suspect that you haven't actually tested this method very strenuously. Use a generator and print out hundreds of hands and then bid them with your partner, without looking at the other player's hand first.. and I think you will be disappointed if you can stay objective. And don't fiddle the constraints.

[peachy]

Hi,

 

Creating a minor-suit oriented response structure to 1NT opening before you have your major suit structures well covered [in your response to TylerE and awm, you explained they were not well covered], seems backward to me because with major suit fits, the contract ideally often is in the major suit while with minor suit fits [barring slam going hands] the best contract often is 3NT - which pays better at pairs when both 5m and 3N make 11 tricks, has fewer tricks to take so can make while 5m goes down, and if 3NT is unmakeable while 5m makes, 3N will still yield near average matchpoints because most people will be in 3NT.

 

Just my two cents. If it works for you, go for it.

[the hog]

I suggest you use splinetrs after 1NT. If you want a comprehensive structure look at Keri. It is far superior to what you are proposing.