Extras?

[Bbradley62]

1♦-(P)-1♥-(Dbl)

1NT

 

Redouble would have been a support redouble. Does the NT bid show extras, or possibly a minimum with values concentrated in black suits?

[jdonn]

Some good players have told me 1NT should (or does!) show extras. I don't buy it and it's certainly not standard. But of course you can pass if you are very minimum or your black suits don't look right for 1NT.

 

Also scoring and vul and tactical considerations matter. The typical one is W/W at mps, how can your system prevent you from getting to 1NT before they do?

[mikeh]

Some good players have told me 1NT should (or does!) show extras. I don't buy it and it's certainly not standard. But of course you can pass if you are very minimum or your black suits don't look right for 1NT.

 

Also scoring and vul and tactical considerations matter. The typical one is W/W at mps, how can your system prevent you from getting to 1NT before they do?

agree

[ArtK78]

I agree entirely with Josh's post. Clearly, nonvul v. nonvul, it is important to grab 1NT first.

 

Pardon the hijack of this thread, but I ran across a variation on this theme recently and since Bradley brought it up, I thought I would present it.

 

What do you think the 1NT bid shows in this sequence which was perpetrated upon me by my RHO, a professional player with over 15000 MPs:

 

(1♦) - x - (xx) - P

(1NT)

 

And before you jump to the conclusion that the pro was just grabbing the declaration, he was playing with his usual client, and he usually allows this client to declare.

 

This was at IMPs and both sides were vul.

[jjbrr]

(1♦) - x - (xx) - P

(1NT)

I would guess 4432 minimum or something similar.

[Bbradley62]

(1♦) - x - (xx) - P

(1NT)

I would guess 4432 minimum or something similar.

Somewhere on another thread, Fred said "when opps want to defend doubled at the 1 level, they're usually right". That probably applies here, especially if "redouble implies no fit". With 4432, pro might try to play in a major, so I think it's more likely that he's 3343 with a minimum. But I'd call that normal, not perpetrating something on you.

[ArtK78]

(1♦) - x - (xx) - P

(1NT)

I would guess 4432 minimum or something similar.

Somewhere on another thread, Fred said "when opps want to defend doubled at the 1 level, they're usually right". That probably applies here, especially if "redouble implies no fit". With 4432, pro might try to play in a major, so I think it's more likely that he's 3343 with a minimum. But I'd call that normal, not perpetrating something on you.

Isn't it normal to pass the redouble with nothing to say?

 

And, if 1NT is saying something, what is it?

 

Normally, when opener acts directly over partner's redouble it is a sign of an unwillingness to defend an opponent's doubled contract at a low level. How can this be true if the opener pulls to 1NT?

[jjbrr]

Since we weren't told what Pass was, I assumed it was unclear, hence my explanation.

[aguahombre]

I vote for relatively weak hand with 6-4 in minors. Sort of like delay unusual.

 

Oops, am talking about Art's hijack hand, not the original post

[Bbradley62]

Some good players have told me 1NT should (or does!) show extras. I don't buy it and it's certainly not standard. But of course you can pass if you are very minimum or your black suits don't look right for 1NT.

 

Also scoring and vul and tactical considerations matter. The typical one is W/W at mps, how can your system prevent you from getting to 1NT before they do?

agree

trying to hijack the thread back to the original question...

 

I like the style that 1NT should say "I'd rather play 1NT than defend 1NT", so it shows a balanced less-than-1NT opener (without 3♥, if we're being completely cooperative with partner) and <pass> is some sort of sub-minimum without 3♥ or rebiddable ♦ or sufficient black stoppers.

 

Then, what do you do with a 1.5NT opener, bid 2NT like you would have done without RHO's double?

 

Alternatively, are there others out there who say that the weak NT opener should pass here and the 1.5NT opener should rebid 1NT?

[aguahombre]

Given the conditions, 2NT with the biggie seems the only choice. JD has covered quite well the importance of winning the race to 1NT with the <NT opener, so a 1NT rebid with 18+ is out, IMO.

 

Without the conditions, redouble could be the biggie --with or without 3-card support. Not bad-mouthing support doubles and redoubles, just stating that those who don't use them have different options on this hand.

[rogerclee]

What is a 1.5 NT opener?

[aguahombre]

What is a 1.5 NT opener?

Somewhere between one and two? 18-19?

[Bbradley62]

What is a 1.5 NT opener?

Somewhere between one and two? 18-19?

yup. too much to open 1NT, not enough to open 2NT.

[aguahombre]

My next guess would have been 22 1/2 to 25 1/2.

[rogerclee]

Ah ok, in my head I was thinking what he meant by a 1.5 NT rebid, not a 1.5 NT opener.

 

Anyway here are some pros to playing 1N is 18-19

 

1) You get to stop in 1N or 2m or 2M opposite a bad hand. The lighter you respond the more useful this is.

2) You have more room to determine if 3N is the best game (or even if you have slam).

3) It's not clear that you should even be bidding 1N with a 12-14 bal hand with no support. If partner has a good hand and you have no fit, it could be very profitable to just double them. If partner has nothing you probably don't want to play 1N anyway.

 

Here are some cons:

 

1) You can't show a "good 1N" bid or a "bad 1N" pass. Occasionally you will miss game or get too high due to this.

2) LHO has extra space. He can show spades cheaply and has more options to show values. Also an auction like

 

1D P 1H X

P 1S P P

1N X

 

is bad for you.

[Fluffy]

nice analysis from roger, as he said the sicker you respond 1x the more you will want 1NT to be strong. Since I never bid 1x with less than 6 HCP, but 2x instead I will almost never have 18-19 balanced so it has no use to play it now.

[jdonn]

There are several other cons to 1NT with the stronger hand.

 

- The weak hand is much more common, especially when an opponent is acting constructively.

- It's an inefficient use of space to have a 2 point range bid 1NT, ie you really have no need for invites.

- You are changing your system to something counterintuitive and risking forgets (only a possible disadvantage).

 

But I can also think of one more pro.

 

- You get to use the 2NT rebid in some other useful fashion.

[cherdanno]

I like to play 1N as 17-19 when playing 14-16 1NT. Obviously it is more useful with that range, both because the range is wider, so invites are more useful, and because stopping in 1NT with 17 opposite 6 is really useful.

I would add to Roger's list that it is usually better to put doubler on lead when we play 1NT. To me, his point 2) is a substantial downside, though.