Another question about 1NT-3M

[Wackojack]

A few months ago I made a post questioning the value the response of 3 major to 1NT to show a singleton in that suit, 3 in the other major and 5-4 in the minors. My reservation then was that it would occur so rarely and not really worth giving up the strong response. I will call this the "expert standard" for reference. The posted replies partly persuaded me that this method was one that I should adopt with those partners who liked it.

 

2nd thoughts now though. Why?:

 

1. If the opponents have a fit in the singleton suit, it is easy for them to find a sacrifice just by doubling the singleton bid.

 

2. When partnering GIB, I discovered that it shows the same hand by transferring to the 5 card minor and then bidding the a singleton major. e.g. 1NT-2S-3C-3H. Thus not wasting the 1NT-3H response. Maybe swings and roundabouts here as "expert standard" 1NT -3C and 1NT -3D bids to show 5-5 in the minors with less than and at least GF may be better definition than the GIB way.

 

What has occurred to me is that the seeming weakness with the "expert standard" could easily be cured by reversing the major suit responses. Thus 1NT-3S shows the fragment, not the singleton. Now if opps have a heart fit, a double of 3S to show hearts and suggest a sacrifice is very dangerous since it is not really an option for the partner of the doubler to to leave the double should he not have heart support.

 

Any comments?

[awm]

I do normally play these types of bids to show the fragment. The advantages are:

 

(1) Gives opener a call of the short suit to show a perfecto without driving past game. You don't have this in the auction 1NT-3♠ if 3♠ is the short suit.

 

(2) Reduces the opportunities for sacrifice-finding doubles.

 

The disadvantages are:

 

(1) Possibility that responder will declare the hand in four of the fragment suit. Perhaps this is not the most common strain, but it leaves the completely shape described hand as declarer. This is more of a problem when you play strong notrump also, since it exposes the bigger hand to the lead.

 

(2) Lead-directing doubles. The lead of the singleton isn't usually the lead you want to direct. If opener has a weak holding in the singleton suit, he doesn't bid 3NT anyway. But the fragment suit could easily be a place where opener is weak and most of the opening side's strength is in dummy...

[jdonn]

I do normally play these types of bids to show the fragment. The advantages are:

 

(1) Gives opener a call of the short suit to show a perfecto without driving past game. You don't have this in the auction 1NT-3♠ if 3♠ is the short suit.

 

(2) Reduces the opportunities for sacrifice-finding doubles.

 

The disadvantages are:

 

(1) Possibility that responder will declare the hand in four of the fragment suit. Perhaps this is not the most common strain, but it leaves the completely shape described hand as declarer. This is more of a problem when you play strong notrump also, since it exposes the bigger hand to the lead.

 

(2) Lead-directing doubles. The lead of the singleton isn't usually the lead you want to direct. If opener has a weak holding in the singleton suit, he doesn't bid 3NT anyway. But the fragment suit could easily be a place where opener is weak and most of the opening side's strength is in dummy...

3. You take away opener's call of the spade fragment to suggest a contract without bypassing 3NT.

[awm]

3. You take away opener's call of the spade fragment to suggest a contract without bypassing 3NT.

Sure, but I'm not exactly clear on why this would be useful and have never missed it. The decision of whether to play 4♠ or 3NT will be based on opener's holding in hearts (opposite the singleton) and the strength/length of opener's spade suit. Opener already has a pretty good description of responder's shape, which is usually enough for picking the best game (especially since opener himself is balanced). The issue is that responder's range of strength is quite wide, from hands that are barely a game force (responder might upgrade to show the shape and reach the best strain) to hands that are very much in the slam range.

 

The "nothing wasted" call of bidding the short suit has been useful for me on many occasions. It's nice to say "if you had a marginal slam try, I've got the right hand" without having to bid past game.

[jdonn]

The "nothing wasted" call of bidding the short suit has been useful for me on many occasions. It's nice to say "if you had a marginal slam try, I've got the right hand" without having to bid past game.

Bid the shortness on the 4 level if necessary. Or with no fit bid 3NT. Or with a fit for the minor bid 4m. I guess you are just having different experiences than I am, I like having responder's help to choose whether or not to play in the major. For example he might have singleton queen or jack of the short suit, or he might choose 3NT with Jxx x Jxxx AKQxx but choose the major with KQx x Qxxx Axxxx, etc.

[cherdanno]

The "nothing wasted" call of bidding the short suit has been useful for me on many occasions. It's nice to say "if you had a marginal slam try, I've got the right hand" without having to bid past game.

Bid the shortness on the 4 level if necessary. Or with no fit bid 3NT. Or with a fit for the minor bid 4m. I guess you are just having different experiences than I am, I like having responder's help to choose whether or not to play in the major. For example he might have singleton queen or jack of the short suit, or he might choose 3NT with Jxx x Jxxx AKQxx but choose the major with KQx x Qxxx Axxxx, etc.

Yeah I guess the only case where Adam has a point is when opener has 5 cards in the other major and a perfect hand. That does not sound like a frequent hand-type to me.

[gnasher]

(1) Gives opener a call of the short suit to show a perfecto without driving past game.

3. You take away opener's call of the spade fragment to suggest a contract without bypassing 3NT.

Neither of these is an advantage or a disadvantage of bidding fragments rather than shortages. You have two sequences that show a specific (31) shape. After 3♥, you have a 3♠ bid available for whatever purpose you think most useful. After 3♠, you don't.

 

If you swap the meanings of the two sequences, you still have one sequence where you can bid 3♠, and one where you can't.

[jdonn]

(1) Gives opener a call of the short suit to show a perfecto without driving past game.

3. You take away opener's call of the spade fragment to suggest a contract without bypassing 3NT.

Neither of these is an advantage or a disadvantage of bidding fragments rather than shortages. You have two sequences that show a specific (31) shape. After 3♥, you have a 3♠ bid available for whatever purpose you think most useful. After 3♠, you don't.

 

If you swap the meanings of the two sequences, you still have one sequence where you can bid 3♠, and one where you can't.

But my suggestion requires being below 3NT, whereas his doesn't. If you are saying I could play:

 

1NT - 3♥ [13(45)] -

3♠: Showing hearts

 

just as well then I suppose it's true, but impractical to remember for me when doing it the way I suggested is completely natural.

 

1NT - 3♥ [31(45)] -

3♠: Showing spades

 

Responding to below so I don't add another post: You and I have different definitions of "silly". I think playing 3♠ to show hearts is a lot sillier than playing 3♠ to show spades.

[kenrexford]

I do normally play these types of bids to show the fragment. The advantages are:

 

(1) Gives opener a call of the short suit to show a perfecto without driving past game. You don't have this in the auction 1NT-3♠ if 3♠ is the short suit.

 

(2) Reduces the opportunities for sacrifice-finding doubles.

 

The disadvantages are:

 

(1) Possibility that responder will declare the hand in four of the fragment suit. Perhaps this is not the most common strain, but it leaves the completely shape described hand as declarer. This is more of a problem when you play strong notrump also, since it exposes the bigger hand to the lead.

 

(2) Lead-directing doubles. The lead of the singleton isn't usually the lead you want to direct. If opener has a weak holding in the singleton suit, he doesn't bid 3NT anyway. But the fragment suit could easily be a place where opener is weak and most of the opening side's strength is in dummy...

3. You take away opener's call of the spade fragment to suggest a contract without bypassing 3NT.

That's kind of a silly objection. There is no functional difference between a 3♥ call showing shortness (and hence three spades) followed by Opener bidding 3♠ to suggest a contract (of 4♠?) without bypassing 3NT AND a 3♥ call showing a fragment (and hence three hearts) followed by Opener bidding 3♠ to artificially suggest a contract (of 4♥?) without bypassing 3NT.

 

You just do this maneuver in a different set of cases.

 

(Just read the other comments on this...)

[kennye]

For those who play 3C as puppet stayman, and 3D as both majors(5-5) GI+, along with 2S as both minors weak or strong, the natural outcrop is for 3H to show a single suited club slam try(7+ winners) and 3S as the same in diamonds.

 

Various responses may ensue, but strength and fit are easily found, and the NT opener gets to play the hand, protecting the strong hand.