Defense to 2NT(minors)

[aguahombre]

The opponents use an opening 2NT to show the minors. My goal is to learn a good defense, not to propose one to poke holes in which. Questions:

 

Does their/our vulnerability matter? If so, how should the methods change?

 

What should direct bids or a double show or start?

 

Assuming the auction will get back to you, what should pass followed by a later call

show?

 

What are 4th Chair actions after a pass and a bid?

 

Have these question been asked and answered in another string?

 

Etc.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

A possibility is to use a similar defence as against a multi 2D, combined with unusual vs. unusual.

 

We play

 

X is either 12-14 bal. or +18, if you have 15-17 bal., you have to pass first,

that is basically the 2D multi part (Dixon double)

 

3C - good hand with hearts

3D - good hand with spades

3H - 10-14

3S - 10-14

 

Not sure how good it works in practice, since we dont encounter 2NT for the

minors too often, but we have an agreement, which reuses certain agreements,

so at least accidents due to memory lapses are low.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Cascade]

Hi,

 

A possibility is to use a similar defence as against a multi 2D, combined with unusual vs. unusual.

 

We play

 

X is either 12-14 bal. or +18, if you have 15-17 bal., you have to pass first,

that is basically the 2D multi part (Dixon double)

 

3C - good hand with hearts

3D - good hand with spades

3H - 10-14

3S - 10-14

 

Not sure how good it works in practice, since we dont encounter 2NT for the

minors too often, but we have an agreement, which reuses certain agreements,

so at least accidents due to memory lapses are low.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

Over 2NT I wouldn't like to force to the three-level with balanced 12 counts. So this part would need to be modified. Granted they will often bid 3minor but when they can XX we know we are in big trouble.

[skjaeran]

Usually plays:

x=strong balanced

3m=t/o with longer/stronger corresponding M

3M=natural

4m=55+M, 4♣ stronger than 4♦

[aguahombre]

Usually plays:

x=strong balanced

3m=t/o with longer/stronger corresponding M

3M=natural

4m=55+M, 4♣ stronger than 4♦

Sounds good. How about some suggestions for 4th chair after a minor has been selected? Also, I understand that pass originally and then coming back in must have some meaning, although dangerous because the opps might not have a real fit.

[gwnn]

I don't know about that.

 

What if it comes back 5♣-p-p-?

[the hog]

I play:

3C = 5+H and 4S

3D = 5+S and 4H

3M = s/s

4C = 5/5 strong. Now 4D asks

4D = 5/5 not as good as 4C

[dake50]

Meta-agree slam tries are ON. Just best guess M-game. 2NT preempt MAY scramble us into 4M, never into bad 6M.

I like X->C-A,KQ fragment; 3C ->D-frag; 3D ->H and 3H ->S with cue m-short next if 3M accepted. Mild slam interest if partner cooperates.

This frees 4m/4M for clear slam tries: immediate 4m m-single/void and slammy H. 4M slammy with C-control, missing D-control.

Slammy S starts 3S hoping m-cue.

5-5MM xfers one bids 2nd.

[guido]

The approach I have used in several partnerships:

 

X: bal/semi-bal. dual range. (something like 12-15 hcp or 19+ hcp)

pass then double: bal/semi-bal (something like 16-18)

3C: majors with better/longer Hearts

3D: majors with better/longer Spades

3H/3S: natural

3N: to play (e.g., Kx-AKQJxxx--Kx-Ax)

4m: void with majors

4M: natural

 

 

After (2N) - P - (3C):

3D: majors

3M/3N/4M: natural

X: strong NTish

4m: void with majors

 

After (2N) - P - (3D)

as above except double is majors

 

After (2N) - P - (3M/3N/4M)

X: penalty (anti-psyche)

others as expected

 

After (2N) - P - 4m

X: t/o

 

 

Note: The above is, I think, reasonable, if not ideal. However, it is part of our meta-agreements on handling the opponents' two-suiter calls. We prefer to know how we handle all such calls rather than design methods for each specific curcumstance.