bidding balanced hands after a precision 1D opener

[rbforster]

I've thinking about how balanced hands responding to a "natural or balanced" precision 1D opener, trying to make the balanced responses a little tighter in terms of ranges. In my light opening version of precision,

 

1D 9-15 4+ diamonds unbalanced, or 13-15 balanced (2+)

 

Without a 4cM or a hand appropriate for an inverted minor raise, we bid balanced hands as follows:

 

1D-1N 6-10

1D-2N 11-13

1D-3N 14+

 

However, our wide ranging openings are giving us some trouble. In particular, after 1D-1N, opener with a balanced 14-15 count might be tempted to invite game (with 2N) in case responder had 9-10 points for his 1N response. Of course this will work out poorly if responder only had 6-7. Similarly, after 1D-2N we might be too high without a fit if opener only has ~9-11 points and a semibalanced hand. Even when responder has 14, he might not make 3N opposite opener's dead minimum.

 

What do you think about this?

 

1D-1N 5-9, no game interest (avoids tempting opener to stretch for 3N)

1D-2N 13-14, a little sounder invitation is safer in case opener is minimal

1D-3N 15+, if you can't game force with a 15 count you're opening too light! ;)

 

which leaves my suggestion of adding the extra 10-12 range to the otherwise natural 1M response:

 

1D-1M could be better major with 10-12 balanced, maybe only 3 cards

 

I've heard Meckwell bid 1M not infrequently on only 3 cards and that for a while in standard some problem hands were handled this way so this is not without precedent. If opener has the reasonably frequent 13-15 balanced hand and the auction starts 1D-1M-1N, we have good methods (2-way checkback) and handling the 10-12 balanced hand by bidding or invite game accurately should be easy.

 

The question is then whether we can handle the subsequent auctions if opener makes an inconvenient raise of our 3 card major after the 1D-1M. Ideally we'd like to avoid those unfortunate 3-3 fits when opener raises on 3 cards with a ruffing value, for example, although we also don't want opener insisting on game in the major (in the 4-3) just because he has 4 card support for our "suit". Of course since partner is limited to 15 points, he can't have a huge hand which helps somewhat. Typically our responses are:

 

1D-1M-2M some 3 card raises or a minimum-to-intermediate 4 card raise

1D-1M-3M strong 4 card raise

1D-1M-4M rare (and we hope partner won't bid this without 5 cards)

 

After a 2M raise, 2N is normally a natural invitation with 4 cards (catering to opener's 3 card raise). We might have to adjust this by playing artificial methods, something many advanced partnerships do already on this sequence. After a 3M raise, we'd need to use 3N as a more strong preference for NT than merely "choice of games". Probably with some rearrangements we could allow opener's normal "higher than 3N" bids (splinters, etc) into some sort of lower relay (jump reverse maybe?) that gives responder an out in 3N. All this is by way of saying it seems possible if a little complicated to restructure opener's typical rebids to avoid hanging us when we have only a 3 card major.

 

What do you think?

[dake50]

Is the top of 1D at 15hcp? Then why respond 1NT =no 4+M with 6-9? Game must be far off, so just begging for invite rebids to be muddled. Is there preempt 1-level intended on those 6-9? Start 1NT to 1D at 10.

[glen]

Is the top of 1D at 15hcp?  Then why respond 1NT =no 4+M with 6-9? Game must be far off, so just begging for invite rebids to be muddled. Is there preempt 1-level intended on those 6-9?   Start 1NT to 1D at 10.

because the field is bidding 15+10 to 3NT, and you want 13-15 to pass 1NT to avoid 15+6 at 2NT.

 

imo, it is better to have 1♥ and 2♣ as the 3+ bids (instead of 1M). After 1♦-1♥;-2♥ you can relay for hand type and range with 2♠, and still have room to stop at 2NT. If you just have 2♥s, start with 1♦-2♣, and now opener's 2♦ is unbal, no game interest opposite 10-12 flat, and that hand type passes 2♦, since will have 3+♦s.

[rbforster]

because the field is bidding 15+10 to 3NT, and you want 13-15 to pass 1NT to avoid 15+6 at 2NT.

Exactly. If we miss the occasional 15 vs 9 3NT, at least the field won't find it either playing 15-17.

 

imo, it is better to have 1♥ and 2♣ as the 3+ bids (instead of 1M).  After 1♦-1♥;-2♥ you can relay for hand type and range with 2♠, and still have room to stop at 2NT.  If you just have 2♥s, start with 1♦-2♣, and now opener's 2♦ is unbal, no game interest opposite 10-12 flat, and that hand type passes 2♦, since will have 3+♦s.

 

I like your suggestion to use 1♥ and 2♣ to cover the intermediate balanced range. With 23xx or 33xx balanced shapes, you can respond 1♥ and then over a 2♥ raise, use both 2N and 2♠ as invites. For example:

 

1♦-1♥* (could be 10-12 balanced with only 3 cards)

2♥-? (raise could also only be on 3 cards with a ruffing value)

 

2♠ invitational asking bid, with 3 or 5 trump

.........2N any min (responder can pass with 3 trump here)

..............3m natural game try with 5 trump

..............3H signoff with 5 trump

.........3X various max's with 4 trump

.........3N max with 3

 

2N natural, inviting with 4 trump

.........P minimum with 3 trumps

.........3m natural game tries with 4 trumps

.........3♥ minimum with 4 trump

.........3N max with 3 trump

 

This covers all the x3xx balanced shapes. With 32xx, it doesn't work so well to bid 1♠ since space is tighter after 1♦-1♠-2♠. However you can reasonably make an inverted raise of diamonds with 4+ cards (3244 or 3253 typically), which leaves only 3235 as a problem hand with less than the 6 clubs. It seems like including 3235 in a 2/1 not-quite-GF 1♦-2♣ should also work without too much trouble.

[wclass___]

I play 1♦-1♥ as natural or GF relay [iMO prec 1♦ is perfect for relay auctions. 1st it is limited and 2nd a lot of space]

2♣ as ART INV+; 2♦ = 5♦+ constructive, but NF.. ~9-11 points

 

Works fine.

[helene_t]

Agree with Dake. 1NT=10-11.

 

With 12+ I think 2♣ is better than 2NT since with 12 points you don't want to force to game opposite a minimum unbalanced, so if 2NT is 12+ there would be a dilemma as to whether openers 3m rebid is forcing or not. Maybe a 3m rebid could be played as NF and then you could stuff the non-minimal hands into 3M, but I am afraid that would be muddy, especially if you open 1♦ with 5M6♦.

 

With less than 10 I would either pass or bid a 3-card major. Maybe it makes sense to play 1♥ as 3+ and 1♠ as 4+.

[JavaBean]

I generally play the same thing I would with a 2/1 weak-notrump style:

• 1NT: Pass if you are balanced
  
• 2NT: Bid game if you are balanced
  
• 3NT: Some artificial meaning, because the natural 3NT is such a space hog
  

That way I don't have to define ranges ahead of time, but both partners can easily derive them at the table. So if your balanced range is 13-15, then your 1NT response ought to be 6-10, and your 2NT response can be 11-13 or so.

 

But, you say, this is exactly what I'm already playing. Yes, but if you define it my way, opener won't be tempted to invite game when he shouldn't, because 1NT specifically asks him to pass if he is balanced. And if he is unbalanced, then he can go to the bother of figuring out what responder's range is before deciding how aggressively to bid.

 

You'll notice I don't have any "Bid game if you are balanced and maximum". I'm basically advocating a pass-or-blast strategy here: since your notrump range is anti-field, you want to be in 1 or 3, never 2. That is, the last thing you want to do is be in 2 when the field is in 1(15/7, 13/11) or 3(15/9). My strategy has you in 1NT with the field on the first hand, 3NT rather than 2NT on the second, and 1NT rather than 3NT with the third. It's not perfect, but at least when you miss the field contract there will be a reasonable chance yours is better, whereas ending in 2NT will very rarely win you matchpoints.

[jullman]

Alan, your suggestion basically makes sense, and if our opening standard for unbalanced hands were at all reasonable, I would agree with you. The issue is that since our unbalanced hands can be as crappy as Kxxx xxx KQJxx x, and the like, we would rather eschew having the auction 1D - 2N (bid game if you're balanced) - P (sorry pard). On my example opening hand, maybe the solution is to always scramble over 2N when unbalanced and minimum. I think Rob's proposal to frequently bid 1H (or potentially 2C, as someone else suggested) on 3 is an OK approach, although it would be nice to know if there is a more "natural" solution.

[awm]

How about something like:

 

1♦ - 2♦ = promises 3+♦ and 10-12 points; no 4M, not forcing

1♦ - 1NT = to play opposite 13-15 balanced; opener normally rebids 2♦ with 5+♦ unbal

1♦ - 2♣ = could be artificial if holding a GF (14+ point) diamond raise; else 11+ hcp and ♣

1♦ - 3♣ = constructive/mild invite; 8-10 and 6+♣

1♦ - 2NT = 13-14 balanced

 

The idea is that after 1♦-2♦, you can play there when opener holds a shapely minimum, but the balanced hand rebids 2NT (minimum) or 3NT (maximum). Other rebids show reasonably good shapely hands.

[glen]

1♦ - 2♦ = promises 3+♦ and 10-12 points; no 4M, not forcing

I like this and the rest of the proposed structure. There is the question of bal 10-12 and exactly 2♦s and no 4cM - 2♣ or 1♥ could work - I prefer 2♣ with the 10-12 3-3-2-5.

[rbforster]

I eventually decided on a slightly different solution than the one I originally proposed, along Glen's suggestion that 2♣ be a natural option. I worked out some detailed followups, but roughly

 

1♦-3♣ light invite with long clubs (10-12ish)

1♦-2♦ (inverted) inv+ with 4+ diamonds (10+)

1♦-2♣ 10+ and 4+ clubs, forcing 1 round (but no rebid)

 

where 2♣ includes those 10-12 balanced hands with 4+ clubs and fewer than 4 of any other suit (3334, (332)5 typically). Also included are stronger 1-suited club invites and all game forcing club hands.

 

1♦-2♣

 

2♦ any unbal min without club support (D or D+M)

2♥ extras and an unspecified 4cM (13-15 bal or unbal with D+M)

2♠ extras unbal no major (max diamonds, or inv+ club raise)

2N min balanced no 4cM (13-14)

3♣ min unbal club raise (4+), showing both minors (usually 45 or 54 minors)

3♦ invite with long diamonds

3N max balanced no 4cM (14-15)

 

In order to stay low opposite a minimum 2♦ rebid by opener, responder with 10-12 balanced will pass. This will often be an 8 card fit, since 2♦ will almost always have 5 (typically (4x)5x or 6+ when opener is unable to raise clubs) and responder will often have 3 diamonds. Of course there are some misfits (4441 vs 3325) or hands where a club fit is available but missed ((41)53 vs 3325), but these are pretty rare. Perhaps in light of these, hands with 3325 shape specifically might want to downgrade a little and consider a 1N response on the lower end of 10-12.