Responding to 11-14 1NT

[dougbennion]

Extending the opening 1NT range to 11-14 from 12-14 increases by 40% or so, the frequency of the opener.

 

The problem with that wide range is that you will often get too high in invitational sequences. I've been using the following response system and I like it, but maybe someone here can suggest improvements.

 

The 2C bid is invitational or better, and cannot be used for garbage hands (intending to pass any response). With weak 54 MM hands we simply transfer. With weak 44 MM hands we pass and pray and trot out a rescue system if need be. Opponents don't like doubling 2M contracts ... Actually with a weak chunky 4-bagger maybe KJTx xxxx xxx xx I like to transfer because opps less likely to penalty double without a decent trump holding and they have no idea what's going on anyway.

 

We play 4-suit transfers as well, with 3C/D slammish and 3H/S showing GF shortness typically the likes of 3145.

 

The responses to a 2C query:

 

2D = 11 or 12, with one or two 4-card majors. If responder has one and wants to stop at the two-level he bids his major. If opener sees 2H and he has four spades but not four hearts he will bid 2S (responder might have both) and play there or in 2NT

 

2H/S = 11 or 12 with five M

2N = 11 or 12 no majors

3C = 13 or 14 with four hearts or both

3D = 13 or 14 with four spades

3H/S = 13 or 14 with five M

3N = 13 or 14 with no majors

 

It isn't perfect. You cannot garbage. It can quickly eat up a lot of bidding space when responder might want to investigate slam. But it works really well for the majority of hands, we rarely get too high, and we can open 1NT a LOT.

 

See any tweaks one could make?

[Phil]

I don't care for your 1N - 2♣ - 2N call. It achieves what you are trying to avoid: getting too high on invitational hands, and with 2N you likely do not have a trick source.

 

Use the search engine on here to look up "Keri" or "Revised Keri", which seems better than your structure.

[benlessard]

We play 10-14 nt (with all 5M332 openned 1NT) so inv and stop at 2 is my specialty.

 

i suggest readingn this first

 

 

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...0structure&st=0

 

ive improved a lot of the thing there so ill start a new post with my new ideas in 2 days

[OleBerg]

Just a quick comment, for what it is worth:

 

I have played 12-14 NT's with "no garbage stayman" for at least 6 years. I don't miss the garbage option.

 

Knowing 2♣ is at least invitational is also handy when the opponents compete.

[MFA]

Hmm, I like garbage stayman... Also this structure gobbles stayman then 3m.

[Siegmund]

Seems like you're finding hardly any of your partscore 4-4 major fits, and those are the hands that benefit from playing in a suit - even a 4-3 fit - rather than notrump, while the game strength hands are much more likely to survive being in 3NT instead of a suit.

 

I second the suggestion that Keri is worth a look, as well as a number of non-mainstream but intriguing approaches where 2C asks about hearts and 2D asks about spades - Stayman-split-in-half, or two-under transfers, depending on your viewpoint.

[Cyberyeti]

I used to play an 11-16 1N.

 

We used to play 4 card red suit transfers at least invitational with 2♣ as the bucket bid, it worked well, but took a lot of remembering.

[wclass___]

*1N-2N GF;,responses: 3♣=no 5M(stayman type rebids); 3♦;3♥ transfers

 

When 1N opener has to declarer NT, he will have given much less information to opponents about his hand.

Compare 1N-2♣-2N-3N vs. 1N-2N-3♣-3sth-3N

1N-2♣-3♣-eventually3N vs. 1N-2N-3♣-3♠-3N

1N-2♣-3♦-3N vs. 1N-2N-3♣-3♥-3N

 

But responder will be allowed to declare 4M, (relatively unknown hand)

 

IMO It is easy, frequent and very powerful method.

 

This forcing bid should also include some shapish GF++ hands, because there is a free space after 3N+.

 

*Add 5♠+ INV to your 2♣, and use 1N-2♣-2N+ to show both majors, rest go slowly.

[benlessard]

This is my favorite transfers setup.

 

2C all inv hands or diamonds to play & GF (no D+C hands)

2D H to play or 4H GF

2H S to play or 4S+ GF

2S GF balanced + some semi balanced hands

2NT + clubs GF, C+D, D+C GF

 

2C----2H (minimum with 4-5H)

 

pass = inv at least 3H

2S = inv with 4+S

2NT = inv bal

3C = inv

3D = to play

3H+ = GF with D

 

2C-----2D (not min with 4H)

 

2H inv with 5H

2S inv 4+S

2NT = inv bal

3C = inv

3D = inv

3H+ = GF with D

[kenrexford]

I used to play 10-14 and did not find too many problems. 11-14 is hardly worth panicking about.

[dougbennion]

Thanks for your suggestions.

 

Phil: Can't see how any system can stop short of 2NT, once you initiate the system and don't locate an M fit. I had looked into Kiri, but I'm too old to remember it all.

 

Oleberg: Agree Garbage Stayman not missed.

 

MFA: Yes gobbles Mm if opener has max.

 

Siegmund: Any system, strong NT or weak NT, will lose M fits if responder is less than invitational and you don't play Garbage. I played for awhile what you called a 'split' Stayman, and found it had redundancies, but maybe I hadn't optimized it very well.

 

wclass__: Thanks I'll take a good look at that.

 

benlessard: Thanks ditto.

 

kenrexford: Not at all panicked. I think the system gets good results, just looking to improve if possible.

[Phil]

Doug: Keri allows you to stop in a 44, 43, 53 or even a 54 major fit with a dead minimum opposite an invite. That's the main purpose of the auction: 1N - 2♣ - 2♦ - 2M.

 

I do agree that if opener has a doubleton you can't play a 5-2 fit.

[dougbennion]

Phil: Right. You can stop at 2M in your 5=3 and 4=4 fits. The clunker I'm playing stops in 2M for the 4=4 fits but not the 5=3 fits. But if I understand Keri properly, you will also be playing your 4=3 rejected invitations in 2M and I'd rather be playing those in 2NT. I think.

 

Keri also lets you play in 2D, which in theory is nice, but playing a weak notrump the opps will rarely let you settle there.

 

Thanks.

[Mbodell]

Keri also lets you play in 2D, which in theory is nice, but playing a weak notrump the opps will rarely let you settle there.

You would be quite surprised how often you play there (both how often it comes up and how often that's the final place). I play keri over both weak and mini nt and play 2♦ quite a bit.

[wclass___]

Playing 4-3M fit in 2nd level is absolutely normal.

 

There are other problems with this method.

2M shows 4+ and opener isn't in a good position to evaluate his hand, because he doesn't really know how many ♠ partner has.

 

If opener has 4 card support, he still typically wants to keep bidding even with most minimums (at least i would), this game is about fits and not about if you have 24 to bid game.

 

If he has 3-card support and average+ hand, he wants to bid, but he will need to go past 2N(?! I am not familiar with responses, seems to me like there is quite small place left after 2N with many problematic hands.) And 4-3 in 3rd level isn't all that comfortable.

 

And yes, you cannot play 5-2 2M.

 

This method is too HCP based, like if you have points bid, if you don't have points, don't.

[Mbodell]

If he has 3-card support and average+ hand, he wants to bid, but he will need to go past 2N(?! I am not familiar with responses, seems to me like there is quite small place left after 2N with many problematic hands.) And 4-3 in 3rd level isn't all that comfortable.

The responses over 1nt-2♣-2♦-2M showing an invite with 4 or 5 cards in the major (and if 5 in the major, at most 3 in the other major, there are other ways to invite when 54 or better in the majors) are:

 

pass: with a minimum and any of 3 of M or 4 of major in a 4333 or a bad 4432

2♠/2♥: with a minimum and 2 hearts and 4+ spades

2nt: with a minimum and 2 of M (and <4 spades if M was hearts)

3♣: shows a minimum that looks good for M with 4 card support (ie a good 4432 minimum)

3♦: a maximum 4333 (4 or 3 cards in M - if responder cared which can rebid 3M to force 4M with 4 and 3nt with 3)

3M: a maximum with 3 card support and not 4333, if responder bids 3S/3H here he was 44 in majors.

3♥/2♠: with a maximum and 5 hearts and 2 spades

3♠/2♥: with a maximum and 2 hearts and 4+ spades

3nt: with a maximum and 2 of M (and <4 spades if M was hearts, <5 hearts if M was spades)

4M: a maximum with 4 card support not 4333 and also most hands (min or max) with 5 card M

 

That's enough to work it out whenever you are either a maximum or when ever you are a minimum with no fit or a good fit (and minimum versus maximum can be more than just points, hand evaluation is welcome). The place you get let down is when you are a minimum with a partial (3 card) fit you do play 2M in a 5-3 (fine) or 4-3 (not great) hand.

[dougbennion]

To satisfy my own curiosity, I did a quick and dirty analysis of two balanced hands each with 11 HCP, and a 4=3 spade fit. I played 2S for 5000 hands, then 2NT for 5000 hands.

 

The 2NT contract makes about 60% of the time, the 2S contract about 55%, on a 'normal' lead and a 12-trick double dummy analysis. For the times they both make, the 2NT contract will score higher in a matchpoint event.

 

That would confirm my judgment of the merits of the two contracts, so I've not become a big Keri fan.

 

Thanks all.

[Mbodell]

That would confirm my judgment of the merits of the two contracts, so I've not become a big Keri fan.

Hum, maybe next you'd want to study all the times you have KQJxxx of diamonds and out and are playing a non-weak 2 in diamonds? Or the merits of weak nt by just looking at hands when partner has a balanced hand with <2 HCP.

 

Seriously, if you focus on the worst of all possible outcomes (and one that is quite uncommon in practice) it isn't surprising if you find out that it isn't the best place to be.

 

Judging the whole system from that is unwise. Don't play it if you don't want to, but your expressed logic for why is very weak.

[awm]

As someone who used to play Keri, I will comment that one of the major reasons I stopped playing Keri was that the 4-3 major fits did not score particularly well. Being able to stop at 2M on declined invites is (supposedly) a big advantage, but it seemed that as often as not we'd have been better off playing stayman and landing in 2NT.

 

The ability to sign off in 2♦ is nice obviously, but in exchange you lose garbage stayman which is actually surprisingly useful. I think this is roughly break even.

 

Another problem with Keri is that it's not so good for finding 4-4 and 5-4 minor fits when you have a pair of balanced hands. This is somewhat masked by the fact that a lot of other notrump systems aren't great at this either, but it's certainly possible to use some sort of relay and solve the problem. This is also less of an issue opposite a weak notrump (where slam hands are rare) than a strong notrump.

 

The one part of Keri that's produced some incredibly good results for me is the direct splinters at the three level. I've incorporated those into my later notrump systems as well.

[benlessard]

The trouble with Keri is that since invite is 4 or 5 opener with 3 trumps and no ruffing power will be tempted to pass fear of partner having 5/6bad trumps. If you removed all 4333, 2M will score slightly better than 2Nt.

 

The diamond signoff is worth more than garbage stayman (not close imo). Opponents lets us play 2D fairly often.

 

These kind of system are really better with a large range NT wich is of course ont everybody cup of tea.

 

If you want a system without transfers let me know

[Gerben42]

If you want a system without transfers let me know

 

One that is not called condensed transfers?

[awm]

In comparing the diamond signoff versus stayman on weak hands, there are the following factors:

 

(1) Stayman helps you when you have 4441, (43)51 to find your best fit.

(2) Stayman helps you when you have (45)xx, 55xx to play in a better major fit.

(3) At MP scoring, 1NT often scores better than 2♦ anyway.

(4) Opponents are likely to balance over 2♦ more than over 1NT or 2M.

 

With all that said, I have gotten occasional good results from the 2-level diamond signoff. I just don't think it's clearly better than having garbage/crawling stayman.

[wclass___]

On what hands do people actually try to sign off in 2♦?

 

On what hands do they expect to get reasonable advantage comparing to standard methods?

 

1N-2♣-[2♥]- ? (When) Is opener allowed to bid something?

[Mbodell]

As someone who used to play Keri, I will comment that one of the major reasons I stopped playing Keri was that the 4-3 major fits did not score particularly well. Being able to stop at 2M on declined invites is (supposedly) a big advantage, but it seemed that as often as not we'd have been better off playing stayman and landing in 2NT.

 

The ability to sign off in 2♦ is nice obviously, but in exchange you lose garbage stayman which is actually surprisingly useful. I think this is roughly break even.

 

Another problem with Keri is that it's not so good for finding 4-4 and 5-4 minor fits when you have a pair of balanced hands. This is somewhat masked by the fact that a lot of other notrump systems aren't great at this either, but it's certainly possible to use some sort of relay and solve the problem. This is also less of an issue opposite a weak notrump (where slam hands are rare) than a strong notrump.

 

The one part of Keri that's produced some incredibly good results for me is the direct splinters at the three level. I've incorporated those into my later notrump systems as well.

Were you playing Keri over a strong nt or a weak nt? (I do weak/mini, although sort of like parts of strong over strong 1♣-1♦...1nt with and without kokish).

 

I've found the opposite that the 3-level splinters are one of the riskiest parts of Keri as the danger is that we avoid 3nt when it scores best when either they wouldn't have found the lead (without us telling them) or when we actually have it stopped enough but chickened out, JTxx in opener versus stiff Q with splinterer. More of a MP problem when we play 5m= versus 3nt+1, but I have noticed it is a not-uncommon occurrence.

[awm]

Were you playing Keri over a strong nt or a weak nt? (I do weak/mini, although sort of like parts of strong over strong 1♣-1♦...1nt with and without kokish).

 

I've found the opposite that the 3-level splinters are one of the riskiest parts of Keri as the danger is that we avoid 3nt when it scores best when either they wouldn't have found the lead (without us telling them) or when we actually have it stopped enough but chickened out, JTxx in opener versus stiff Q with splinterer. More of a MP problem when we play 5m= versus 3nt+1, but I have noticed it is a not-uncommon occurrence.

Well I've played Keri in three different partnerships (still play it in two of them). The notrump ranges for these partnerships are:

 

(1) 10-12 when NV and 19-21 when V

(2) 10-12 in 1st/2nd NV and otherwise 14-16

(3) 13+ to 16- in all seats

 

For consistency we also use Keri in some follow-up auctions after an artificial opening and a 1NT rebid, so effectively I've also used it with the ranges 13-15 and 16-18.

 

You have to use a bit of judgment on the splinters; for example I usually do not splinter when I hold a stiff honor. Several times I've avoided a 4-4 major fit to play in 3NT when opener has a really strong holding opposite the splinter, I've found a few super-light slams opposite no wastage, and I've avoided a few bad 3NTs.

 

In my experience the "they might not lead the suit" idea is a bit overrated. People like to lead from their five-card suits and their strong four-card suits against 3NT, especially when the auction has indicated that at least one opponent doesn't have length there. So the odds that "they don't lead" the suit where we have xxx opposite x are quite slim.