this is why we play strong NT

[aguahombre]

that does clarify Josh's statement that he would rather have split ranges, than one wide range. I got it, believe it or not, with the shorter version :)

[benlessard]

IMO this is exactly the type of sequence why i prefer weak NT.

 

Form responder point of view

 

1D----(2H)------???

 

you have a borderline hand (you are tempted to ..negative double,2Nt, 3D) ?

 

Do you prefer that partner may have an unbalanced hand or a balanced 12-14 or a unbalanced and a balanced 15-17 ?

 

It doesnt really matter if you prefer a neg that tend to show values or a neg that always show 4 in the other major, in both case opener has already take some of the pressure off responder by putting the most troublesome (12-14 bal) hand in 1Nt.

 

 

The intrinsic advantage of strong NT is that it's easier to distinguish the difference between 12-14 and 18-19 than to distinguish the difference between 15-17 and 18-19.

 

For me its advantageous to be able to upgrade a strong NT into a 18-19 is the opponent bidding indicate that honors a well placed.

[NickRW]

IMO this is exactly the type of sequence why i prefer weak NT.

 

Form responder point of view

 

1D----(2H)------???

 

you have a borderline hand (you are tempted to ..negative double,2Nt, 3D) ?

 

Do you prefer that partner may have an unbalanced hand or a balanced 12-14 or a unbalanced and a balanced 15-17 ?

Yeah, perhaps that sums up this weak vs strong NT thing quite well. With a weak NT responder is a little better placed in that he knows p doesn't have a flat hand with a few honours. Whereas a stronger range leaves opener knowing better whether he has the sort of hand where he'd probably wish to either pass or signoff (weak type) or say something interesting.

 

I think it mainly comes down to what you're used to as much as anything.

 

Nick

[dake50]

Rather like a 2NT Lebensohl-like as Fred suggests.

[fred]

Rather like a 2NT Lebensohl-like as Fred suggests.

I was suggesting no such thing - sorry if my post was not clear.

 

I was suggesting that opener's normal rebid with a strong notrump should be 2NT (even if opener has 4 spades and/or lacks a heart stopper).

 

This follows from my suggestion that the negative double in this auction should not be about spades. Any weak notrumpers out there who have not figured this out would benefit from thinking about this concept.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[gnasher]

Even playing double as a normal negative double, you can still play that opener bids 2NT on this sort of hand.

[CSGibson]

Even playing double as a normal negative double, you can still play that opener bids 2NT on this sort of hand.

Why would you want to? It seems as though we are giving the opponents a free lead through dummy's potential heart stopper by bidding 2N. 3♥ seems reasonable on these hand types.

[gnasher]

Why would you want to? It seems as though we are giving the opponents a free lead through dummy's potential heart stopper by bidding 2N. 3♥ seems reasonable on these hand types.

So that you don't have to bid a game-forcing 3♥ with inadequate values, and also so as to leave a bit more space for exploring the best game.

[straube]

I think Cascade has a point (though I think the odds are a little higher) in that this particular sequence is probably seldom a problem for the weak NT. I'm more afraid of auctions like 1C (1D) 1S (3D) ? in which opener doesn't have four spades. Here, responder has shown even less than in the posted auction and opener will frequently be shut out...or if he acts (support doubles?) it will often lead to silly contracts. Responder has to guess whether opener has a shapely minimum or a strong NT, not to mention the fit and stopper situations.

 

I like Meckwell's 1N=good 13 to bad 16 (not fav) in their Precision system. This is the sort of medium hand I like to tell partner about right away.

[fred]

I think Cascade has a point (though I think the odds are a little higher) in that this particular sequence is probably seldom a problem for the weak NT.

Of course Cascade is right that the odds of you having a strong notrump without a stopper when the bidding goes this way are not particularly high. However, the 2H overcall itself causes a serious and unsolvable problem for weak notrumpers.

 

2H forces you to end up in a ridiculous contract on "normal" hands regardless of what methods you play.

 

Suppose for example that the responder has something like 10 HCP with something like 3325 distribution with not much in hearts. If you cling to the notion that responder must have 4 spades to make a negative double then he has to Pass over 2H.

 

Now suppose that opener has a strong notrump with something like 2344 distribution. Reopening with either DBL or 2NT is ridiculous - he also has to Pass.

 

So you end up defending 2H undoubled when the rest of the world is playing 3NT. That doesn't have to be a disaster of course, but it is not the sort of position that one should want to be in (especially if the vul is any different from what it is in this particular problem and especially if you are playing IMPs instead of MPs).

 

You therefore (smartly) conclude that playing the negative DBL as promising 4 spades doesn't work. Now responder can make a negative DBL with his 3325 10-count, but this time opener has something like 4144 with 13 HCP - he has a comfortable 2S bid over the negative DBL.

 

Responder is now forced to Pass and you play your 4-3 spade fit instead of your 5-4 club fit that neither player is able to suggest. It is worse than just missing your best fit - if the hands mesh well 5C could easily be an attractive contract.

 

Responder's uncertaintly will be even greater if, over the negative DBL, it is normal for opener to bid 2S with a strong notrump containing 4 spades. Now responder has to worry about missing a good 3NT as well, but any attempt to improve the contract brings various other disaster scenarios into play.

 

Do I need to go on?

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[gnasher]

Suppose for example that the responder has something like 10 HCP with something like 3325 distribution with not much in hearts. If you cling to the notion that responder must have 4 spades to make a negative double then he has to Pass over 2H.

I think responder should overbid with 3♣ rather than underbidding with pass. That creates problems of its own, of course: you get to game on some partscore hands, and slam bidding will become more awkward because of responder's wider range.

[fred]

Suppose for example that the responder has something like 10 HCP with something like 3325 distribution with not much in hearts. If you cling to the notion that responder must have 4 spades to make a negative double then he has to Pass over 2H.

I think responder should overbid with 3♣ rather than underbidding with pass. That creates problems of its own, of course: you get to game on some partscore hands, and slam bidding will become more awkward because of responder's wider range.

Sure - you could do that.

 

But as you point out yourself, the statement I made in bold in my previous post remains true.

 

Besides that, you low will you go? What if responder has, say, a good 8 HCP? You won't bid 3C with that, right?

 

And what if he isn't lucky enough to have a 5-card suit to bid? Maybe is 3334 or similar. You won't bid 3C with that, right?

 

Anyway, I don't think it is necessary for me to ask you these questions - you seem to be one of the few who understands that there are no good answers. Hopefully some of the other posters are starting to see the point...

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[nigel_k]

Fred, I don't understand why you said "the 2H overcall itself causes a serious and unsolvable problem for weak notrumpers" when your 4441 example illustrates that it causes a problem for everyone.

 

Playing weak NT I might rebid 2♠ with 15 but not more and certainly we could miss a game. But playing strong NT you will rebid 2♠ holding any weak NT with four spades and will encounter similar problems if responder is a bit stronger, e.g. 11-12 HCP and the same 3325 shape. Responder can bid more but will get too high often. And I think this is higher frequency.

 

Overall, I still feel quite strongly that in close competitive decisions you are better off when responder knows that opener cannot have a weak balanced hand. You're also better off on the hands where open 1NT and obviously you do this more playing 12-14 than 15-17.

 

The 'split range' that results from a 15-17 NT is good when opener gets to pass before responder acts, e.g. 1♣-P-1♥-2♠-P. But a more common situation is that there is a direct jump overcall and responder acts before opener. In these situations, knowing that opener is either stronger or more distributional than a weak NT really helps.

[Cyberyeti]

I just bid 3♥ and accept I owe partner a point.

 

I think I'm in better shape than the strong no trumpers in this auction.

 

How can a strong no trumper's partner know what to do if he hears you rebid 3♣ and doesn't know whether you're 4-4, 5-4 or 5-5 in the minors with a minimum hand. (there may be some gadget in use, but if so I don't know it)

 

At least playing a weak no trump you can guarantee the 5th diamond or 15 points so you have some idea of a source of tricks if you have 11-12 for the double.

[fred]

Fred, I don't understand why you said "the 2H overcall itself causes a serious and unsolvable problem for weak notrumpers" when your 4441 example illustrates that it causes a problem for everyone.

 

Playing weak NT I might rebid 2♠ with 15  but not more and certainly we could miss a game. But playing strong NT you will rebid 2♠ holding any weak NT with four spades and will encounter similar problems if responder is a bit stronger, e.g. 11-12 HCP and the same 3325 shape. Responder can bid more but will get too high often. And I think this is higher frequency.

Playing weak notrump, the problems start when responder has enough to invite game opposite a strong notrump - say a good 8 HCP.

 

Playing strong notrump, you can comfortably Pass with a hand in this range that lacks 4 spades. If you have as much as 11 HCP, the chances of you having enough in hearts to bid 2NT increases. If you have any more than that, you can force to game by bidding 3C and your chances of surviving are good.

 

For sure there is still a gap when you play strong notrump, but it is a much smaller gap than the one that exists when you play weak notrump.

 

Also, when you play strong notrump you can effectively play the negative DBLer to always have 4 spades, even though he occasionally may be forced to DBL without 4 spades. Playing weak notrump this is not the case - it happens a lot more than occasionally.

 

I'm just about ready to give up trying to convince the unconvinced via what I consider to be crystal clear logic. For those of you who don't see it (and maybe it is my fault for not expressing myself well), I will try to convince you in another way:

 

I have played a lot of hands in high-level tournaments with excellent partners using both strong notrump and weak notrump systems. This experience strongly suggests that competitive bidding is significantly easier in strong notrump systems - it is not even close. If you think "maybe he is biased" then maybe you are right, but such bias (if any) would favor the weak notrump.

 

Forums regulars will not recall reading many claims like this from me: I know I am right about this one.

 

And, just to be clear, I am not claiming that strong notrump is "better". Obviously both approaches have their pluses and minuses. My point is that auctions like this one represent a clear minus for the weak notrump approach.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[straube]

An old Rodwell interview talking about getting the strong nt off your chest...

http://www.bridgematters.com/rodwell.htm

 

I get it now I think. I'm used to playing strong NTs so dbl there for me shows about 10+ and four spades and this meaning would seldom pose a problem for a strong NT hand. So if you're playing weak NTs, the dbl has to include a lot of 8-9 pt hands with or without spades.

 

I hear from weak Nters that they get a lot of good results simply because people don't know how to contend against it. Fred, do you think that strong NT on average is better against stronger players?

[fred]

I hear from weak Nters that they get a lot of good results simply because people don't know how to contend against it.  Fred, do you think that strong NT on average is better against stronger players?

I think that just about any approach, as long as it is not completely absurd, can be effective if the partnership puts in the necessary work and is comfortable playing it.

 

I do think that there is more "necessary work" if you play weak notrump.

 

I don't think it is really possible to answer questions like "which notrump range is best?". Even if it were possible, whatever is "best" in theory might not be best in practice (because the baggage that is necessary to make it work is too hard to remember or because its inherant volatility is too hard to deal with emotionally or...). If there is such a thing as a "best notrump range", I would be surprised if it didn't vary according to things like vulnerability, position, form of scoring, opponents' system, and who knows what else.

 

I think that any system will show gains when it is played against those who are not familiar with it. Such gains will be less frequent against stronger players, both because such players rate to be familiar with a wider variety of systems and also because such players rate to be better at figuring things out as they go along if it becomes necessary.

 

Bottom line is that I strongly suggest that you play whatever makes you most comfortable and happy. If you love the weak notrump, it would be crazy to stop playing it just because I am telling you it makes this auction more difficult than it would be if you played strong notrumps instead.

 

Sorry if that doesn't answer your question.

 

Sorry also that I may not be able to make any posts for a week or so - I am leaving for a vacation soon ;)

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com