What is your range

[gnasher]

The problem is that partner may well be 2-3 in your suits; after the takeout double, which tends to have the three other suits, this is more likely. The 1NT bidder has defined his hand more narrowly than in an uncontested auction, so will be reluctant to raise to the 3-level, and the 5-2 fit is unattractive after the takeout double, so false preference is dangerous.

The takeout double tells us that both suits are more likely than normal to break badly. Why is it more dangerous to play in a 5-2 fit that is breaking badly but onside than a 4-3 fit that is breaking badly and offside?

 

If all non-forcing 2m bids and all non-game-forcing invitational+ hands have to bid 2m and hope to get a response, then this represents too wide a range.

We seem to have moved on from the original question. I thought your objective was to find out what is normal, rather than to analyse and improve upon normal methods?

 

Not to mention the problems that occur when your LHO jumps in hearts and your hand is poorly defined.

It's not clear to me that splitting responder's range into 0-b7, g7-10, 11+ represents better definition than, say, 0-b6, g6-9, 10+.

 

g7-b10 would seem to be the range suggested by the poll

I don't think you can conclude that. The hands you chose to ask us about are all quite poor, with their scattered values, high proportion of minor honours, and empty suits. If, for example, the six count had been Jx xxx Q10xx K9xx it might well have got some more votes.

[phil_20686]

The problem is that partner may well be 2-3 in your suits; after the takeout double, which tends to have the three other suits, this is more likely. The 1NT bidder has defined his hand more narrowly than in an uncontested auction, so will be reluctant to raise to the 3-level, and the 5-2 fit is unattractive after the takeout double, so false preference is dangerous. If all non-forcing 2m bids and all non-game-forcing invitational+ hands have to bid 2m and hope to get a response, then this represents too wide a range. Not to mention the problems that occur when your LHO jumps in hearts and your hand is poorly defined.

 

I dont understand, this is a false preference situation, partner will put you back to spades whenever he has a doubleton.

[lamford]

I dont understand, this is a false preference situation, partner will put you back to spades whenever he has a doubleton.

This is the problem. This is likely to be a 5-2 fit, and may well break 5-1.

[lamford]

The takeout double tells us that both suits are more likely than normal to break badly. Why is it more dangerous to play in a 5-2 fit that is breaking badly but onside than a 4-3 fit that is breaking badly and offside?

 

 

We seem to have moved on from the original question. I thought your objective was to find out what is normal, rather than to analyse and improve upon normal methods?

 

 

It's not clear to me that splitting responder's range into 0-b7, g7-10, 11+ represents better definition than, say, 0-b6, g6-9, 10+.

 

 

I don't think you can conclude that. The hands you chose to ask us about are all quite poor, with their scattered values, high proportion of minor honours, and empty suits. If, for example, the six count had been Jx xxx Q10xx K9xx it might well have got some more votes.

 

The takeout doubler may well have only 3 clubs, or if they play same level correction as non-GOSH, only two. They will generally have short spades, except when they are strong balanced or too good for an overcall.

 

I was both trying to establish what was normal, and what was best. People gave reasons why they thought the range should be higher. I concurred with those. It is not about splitting the range. It is about not responding 1NT on garbage.

 

I was trying to give example hands. Perhaps I could have added a ten or two, but I would be surprised if that led to a different result. And aces are indeed better than minor honours, but some regard them as more than four points, anyway. The comments on the whole suggest that 6-9 is not normal, and it is either 7-10 or 8-10, perhaps dependent on the quality of honours, intermediates etc.

[phil_20686]

This is the problem. This is likely to be a 5-2 fit, and may well break 5-1.

 

in these situations the 5-2 fit basically always plays better than a 4-3 fit.

[lamford]

in these situations the 5-2 fit basically always plays better than a 4-3 fit.

It may, but it it will certainly play worse than the 5-3 fit, when partner has five clubs, which may well break 3-2, with the takeout doubler having something like 1-4-5-3 or 1-5-4-3, his most likely shapes, just on the theory of available places.

 

This has become far removed from the thread, which is what range to respond 1NT on! It is pertinent to what the opener should rebid 2C or 3C on, and I shall do another poll some time.