Responding to 1NT

[S2000magic]

When 4-4 you start with the lower ranking suit, or more precisie the suit, that

can be bid cheapest. The different wording is relevant for responder.

 

After a heart opening, and if you have 4 spades and 4 clubs, you start with the

spades, not because spades is major, but because bidding spades is cheapest.

 

When 5-5 you start with the higher ranking, if you bid the lower ranking next,

partner will know, that you have at least 5 cards in the higher ranking suit,

because you started with the higher ranking first.

Partner wont know, that you are 5-5, but he will kno, that you are at least 5-4,

if your higher ranking suit would be longer, than you would start with the higher

ranking suit.

This principle is quite valuable when opening the bidding with one-of-a-suit, or responding to a one-of-a-suit opening, because there is the possibility that your partner will be short in one or both of your suits, and you want to make it as easy as possible to find a playable trump suit.

 

When partner has shown a balanced hand (as with a 1NT opening bid), this principle is much less valuable, because you are (essentially) assured of a fit for one of your suits.

 

Lesh's idea of responding 3♥ to a 1NT opener with a game-forcing 5-5 in the majors is sound. If opener has 3+ ♥, he will raise to 4♥. If opener has only 2 ♥, he can bid 2♠ with 3+ ♠, and responder can raise to 4♠ (or bid 3NT if he decides to). If opener is 2-2 in the majors (unlikely, but not impossible), he can rebid 3NT, whereupon responder can decide whether he wants to play in 3NT, or 4-of-a-major on a known 5-2 fit. If responder starts with 3♠, and opener bids 4♠, responder cannot choose to play in 3NT; if opener rebids 3NT, responder risks bidding 4♥ and finding opener with 2-2 in the majors. These are rare occurrences, but Lesh's approach can handle them at essentially no cost.

[pooltuna]

also see Smolen

[Vampyr]

If opener has only 2 ♥, he can bid 2♠ with 3+ ♠, and responder can raise to 4♠ (or bid 3NT if he decides to).

 

What is responder supposed to do with 4 spades and 5 hearts if opener's spades may be only 3 cards? Yes, he can start with Stayman, but the continuations are a bit more complicated.

[Vampyr]

also see Smolen

 

and splinters, transfers... can people please keep the discussion appropriate and stop introducing random conventions? The OP and others at his level (check forum name) are not looking for these.

 

I at first disagreed with JustaDummy; now I see that he was right.

[P_Marlowe]

This principle is quite valuable when opening the bidding with one-of-a-suit, or responding to a one-of-a-suit opening, because there is the possibility that your partner will be short in one or both of your suits, and you want to make it as easy as possible to find a playable trump suit.

 

When partner has shown a balanced hand (as with a 1NT opening bid), this principle is much less valuable, because you are (essentially) assured of a fit for one of your suits.

 

Lesh's idea of responding 3♥ to a 1NT opener with a game-forcing 5-5 in the majors is sound. If opener has 3+ ♥, he will raise to 4♥. If opener has only 2 ♥, he can bid 2♠ with 3+ ♠, and responder can raise to 4♠ (or bid 3NT if he decides to). If opener is 2-2 in the majors (unlikely, but not impossible), he can rebid 3NT, whereupon responder can decide whether he wants to play in 3NT, or 4-of-a-major on a known 5-2 fit. If responder starts with 3♠, and opener bids 4♠, responder cannot choose to play in 3NT; if opener rebids 3NT, responder risks bidding 4♥ and finding opener with 2-2 in the majors. These are rare occurrences, but Lesh's approach can handle them at essentially no cost.

Hi,

 

well it is a possible idea, but extremly nonstandard, to bid 3S on 3+ cards.

In fact, it is ...

Responder is not interested in spades, if he had interest, he would have bid

Stayman.

But the mentioned approach works here as well, you bid 3S, followed by 4H,

showing 5-5 - with 4 hearts you would bid Stayman, hence 4H cant be based on

a 54 hand, and opener will tell responder, what suit he prefers.

 

3H or 3S by responder showes a single suited hand, and opener should react on

this.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[phil_20686]

Right

 

a) I have 5 spades and 5 hearts. I force a game with 3♥, if my partner has 3 hearts, he bids 4♥, if he only has 3 or more spades, he bids 3♠. If I do not have 5 spades for a spade-fit, and as I know that there is not fit in hearts, I will sing off 3NT. 3NT is playing safe after investigating the fit in both major suits (which proves there is no fit).

 

b) You say that I should bid 3♠ with those cards. Now my partner does not have his 3 spades for a fit, so correctly bids 3NT. Now, having those 5 hearts, I might investigate for a heart fit, I bid 4 hearts. My partner does not have his 3 hearts for a fit, so is left to pass to keep the contract low. Now I do not even know if he passed due to hopelessness or due to the heart-fit (that would make those 4♥ too)

 

So, apparently, both strategies have investigated a major suit fit, but the first one ends up being more safe than the second one. So, intiutively, keeping the bidding low all the times, thus going for the lower-ranking suit should be a more successful strategy. Why is ACBL promoting going with higher-ranking suit? Does it have something to do with pre-empting?

 

Thanks

 

Its just to get you into good habits. There are lots of times in bridge where "automatically" responding the higher ranking of two five card suits is right. Therefore it makes sense to make a habit of it.

 

An extra consideration here, is that from time to time partner may choose to bid 3N despite three card support. Suppose he does this over 3H with a 2344 pattern, something like AQ xxx QJxx KJxx. Then if you bid 4S next you will be in the wrong spot, as he cannot go back to the hearts at the 4 level. If you can cater for partner having `misbid' for free - why not do so? Even if you consider that you would `always' raise with three card support. Sooner or later you will play with a partner who will not. Maybe he forgot what 1N-3H is. Maybe he thinks the hand plays better in NT. Maybe he wants to protect the lead. System that caters for partner bidding badly is a long term winner :). Especially for non experts. :)

 

 

 

[manudude03]

As others have said, the reason you show the higher of two 5 card suits over NT is to be consistent with the rest of the bidding. When it's a game only hand, the problem isn't too bad, but what if you had interest in playing in a slam? (AQxxx AKQxx xx x as an example). Suppose you start with 3H and partner bids 3NT, what are you bidding now? Suppose you bid 6S (slam should be a very good shot), what can partner do if he prefers hearts? (maybe the poster above is your partner and is sitting with Kx Jxx AQTx AQTx). I know there have been comments about about not mentioning possible offshape NT openers, but you will find times (rather quickly if you play often) where opening 1NT with a slightly unbalanced hand is a lot better than the alternatives.

 

In general bidding, an important aim for the majority of auctions is to search for a 8 card fit (combined holding) or better in a major. When you bid 4 card suits up the line, partner will show a higher ranked 4 card suit if he has it and so you won't miss a 4-4 fit. Partner will never introduce a new 3 card suit and so if you bid the lower of two 5 card suits, you may miss a 5-3 fit in your second suit- say you had 5 hearts and 5 spades and partner opens 1C: if you respond 1H, partner is likely to rebid 1NT. If you were to follow up with 2S, this would show 5 hearts and 4 spades (not 5), plus it is forcing meaning you may get too high with a weak hand. If you did happen to have a good hand and follow it up with 3S over 2NT (we're now at 1C-1H-1NT-2S-2NT-3S), you have now shown the 5th spade, but you've also shown 6 hearts now and partner will probably bid 4H preferring a 6-2 fit to a 5-3 fit (when the hand with more trumps is being forced to ruff, the more trumps you have, the better) and so you still don't land in your spades.