Responding to 1nt

[Zelandakh]

1axbycz1, are you a beginner or an intermediate? If you are a beginner then I would suggest first going through the instructional text on 1NT Openings within the BBO Software. You can find this on "Other bridge Activities" -> "Learn to Play Bridge". If you are a stronger intermediate and looking to become advanced then it becomes worthwhile to look at some of these conventional treatments that are being put forward. Otherwise I would suggest becoming completely comfortable with the basic set-up before moving onto something more complex.

[1axbycz1]

I have gone through the program, which teaches transfers and stayman with 5-4. However, it doesnt teach me how to bid minors.

[bluecalm]

Kxx, Kxx, AJxx, Axx (take away J♦ if you want a weak no trump) where you find your fit, and play in a bad 5♦ instead of a good 3N. They lead a heart most of the time even when the ace is wrong against 3N but not against 5♦, and this is a non trivial consideration. If you think you'd be in 3N with the hand I give then partner will have Axx, Q, Qxxxx, KQxx where 5♦ is near laydown and 3N requires the diamond finesse or a 3-3 club break if you have the J♦, and a 3-3 club break if you don't.

 

3M bids are not mandatory you know. Having stiff Q and weakish hand you can go to 3NT directly.

Anyway, it's always possible to construct hands where given treatment goes wrong. So what ? It's big winner in the long run. Instead of constructing examples to fit your view just deal 50-100 hands with given constraints using some free simulator and see for yourself. Or just trust 95% of elite players who play that way...

[hanp]

Didn't read the whole thread but I agree with bluecalm. Bidding 3H with a GF 3-1-5-4 shape is often good imo.

 

By the way, as far as I know the Garner-Weinstein partnership still exists. They beat us in the Spingold this summer. :rolleyes:

[bluecalm]

By the way, as far as I know the Garner-Weinstein partnership still exists. They beat us in the Spingold this summer. 

 

:rolleyes:

My sources are only vugraph and convention cards I drew wrong conclusions.

[Cyberyeti]

Kxx, Kxx, AJxx, Axx (take away J♦ if you want a weak no trump) where you find your fit, and play in a bad 5♦ instead of a good 3N. They lead a heart most of the time even when the ace is wrong against 3N but not against 5♦, and this is a non trivial consideration. If you think you'd be in 3N with the hand I give then partner will have Axx, Q, Qxxxx, KQxx where 5♦ is near laydown and 3N requires the diamond finesse or a 3-3 club break if you have the J♦, and a 3-3 club break if you don't.

 

3M bids are not mandatory you know. Having stiff Q and weakish hand you can go to 3NT directly.

Anyway, it's always possible to construct hands where given treatment goes wrong. So what ? It's big winner in the long run. Instead of constructing examples to fit your view just deal 50-100 hands with given constraints using some free simulator and see for yourself. Or just trust 95% of elite players who play that way...

95% hype much ?

 

Certainly in the UK it's nothing like that high although some do, with the numbers going up as the standard improves.

 

My experience of both indicated that at just below top class, playing it when most of the field wasn't generated some 95% scores when I would have got 45%, but generated some near zeroes when I would have had 55%, and in approximately equal numbers. So I gave it up as it played against the field and didn't seem to give a huge advantage.

 

It may well be that at top international level where most of the pairs play it, it is 10% better and not against the field so you should use it, but below that the advantages are pretty dubious, particularly if you think you're in the top part of the field anyway most of the time so don't want to randomise.

[hanp]

Axx

x

KQxxx

QTxx

 

 

 

after 1NT ?

3NT, WTP?

I encourage you to randomly deal some hands where partner opens 1NT and you hold this hand.

 

What you will see is that on many hands you get to a good 3NT anyway, and bidding 3H has no effect on the outcome.

 

What you will also see is that there are almost no hands where partner bids 3NT and our bidding significantly helps the opponents with the opening lead. If they have a different natural lead but decide to lead a heart instead, it is as often wrong as right.

 

Finally, you will see that there is a significant number of hands where 5m or 4S (when partner has a 5-card spade suit!) is cold, and 3NT has no chance.

 

In my mind bidding 3NT with this is is indeed a P.

[Zelandakh]

I have gone through the program, which teaches transfers and stayman with 5-4. However, it doesnt teach me how to bid minors.

I don't play SAYC but I will try to explain the standards there as I understand them.

 

With a weak hand and a long minor bid 2S. Opener is required to bid 3C which you pass or convert to 3D.

 

With an invitational hand with a good long minor bid 3 of the minor. Opener should re-evaluate their hand and generally choose between pass and 3NT. A top honour in partner's suit is s particularly useful card in this re-evaluation.

 

With a game-going hand and no slam interest Responder should usually ignore the minor and simply bid 3NT.

 

With slam interest Responder typically starts with 2C Stayman and rebids their minor. The auction then proceeds along natural lines.

 

An improvement on the above is to use 4-way transfers. In this method a response of 2S shows clubs (weak or strong) and a response of 2NT is diamonds (again weak/strong). Since you have lost your natural 2NT response you must use 2C Stayman on such hands. The method makes some hands simpler but the gain is not huge. It is worth looking into when you are ready though.

 

There are additional improvements that can be made to cover 4441 and (13)(54) hands but these are probably not worth your time and effort at present. It is this that the off-topic discussion in your thread is about. Again my recommendation would be to forget about this for now.

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

I want to ask this, because my current bidding system is pretty good for bidding slam in majors, but not the minors. Bidding 5c/5d is a very low priority especially when partner is balanced, but what about 6c/6d?

However, when coming to slams, I feel that I need a way to bid such hands, and the direct 6c/6d bids do not look good to me as i tried it when lacking 2 aces and got down. Gerber 4c may come into the rescue, but I cannot sign off in 5c! Then what about 5-4-4-0 hands? NT doesnt look good, but I cannot just insist on my 5-card suit, in case partner has only 2.

<snip>

Some general comments

 

#1 Bidding minor suit slams, is not the easiest thing, even after a NT opening bid,

and this happens to be even true for real experts.

#2 5440 hands are always tough to bid, I am not sure which shape is harder to

bid the 4441 shape or the 5440 shape, the good thing, they dont come up very

often, so it usually does not hurt to ignore the existence of those shapes.

 

The above does not answer your original question, but may help you to

evaluate, if it makes sense or not to spend time on this specific issue.

 

Slam bidding is fun, but the money usually gets burned not investing time in

more boring topics.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: To help you, with more than wise remarks, you may search the Forum

for response NT structres.

#1 Keri (my impression is, that Keri is usually played with a weak NT)

http://www.actuarialoutpost.com/actuarial_...ad.php?t=118240

 

There is a booke written by Ron Klinger "Bid Better, Much Better After Opening 1 No-Trump" , that explains Keri in detail, see

 

http://www.amazon.com/Better-Opening-No-Tr...e/dp/0304357766

 

#2 Henman (I believe Free did described the response structure on BBF), a simplified version of Keri.

 

The main issue with those and similar conventions is, that your response structure

after a 1NT and after a 2NT opening will be different.

From a theoretical point this makes sense, since you have more room after a 1NT

opening than after a 2NT opening, but from a practical point view - it adds to

memory load.

[1axbycz1]

More boring topics, like what?

[the hog]

#1 Keri (my impression is, that Keri is usually played with a weak NT)

No. It is actually more commonly played with a strong NT, but of course, can be played with both.

[Mbodell]

#1 Keri (my impression is, that Keri is usually played with a weak NT)

No. It is actually more commonly played with a strong NT, but of course, can be played with both.

And over a mini nt or a 18-19 nt or a 19-21 nt or really any range.

 

Just like stayman and transfers and natural quantitative can be played over any range. A transfer to a major and then 2nt playing standard means the same thing (5 card suit and invitational strength) even if the HCP associated with an invite is ~11 opposite a weak nt and ~8.5 opposite a strong nt.

[hanp]

What on earth is Keri doing in the B/I forum? Somebody who has only learned Stayman and transfers is asking what other bids mean, it's very poor advice to recommend an entirely different system of responses!