1NT 12-14

[fred]

4) Playing strong NT, would you rebid 1NT over 1♠ with your 1435 13 count? Would you expect your peers to do so also?

That's how I would normally handle a such a hand (unless my clubs were exceptionally strong), but for sure there many many players who would usually rebid 2C with that pattern instead. As far as I can tell, rebidding 1NT with a singleton is becoming increasingly acceptable among experts in America, but most Europeans still prefer to rebid their 5-card minors with such hands.

Thanks Fred. I guess how often you rebid 1NT with a singleton in partner's suit should tie in quite strongly with how often you raise with a balanced hand with 3 card support, then partner knows whether to rebid their 5 bagger on a weakish hand. I quite liked a hand in the Master Solvers' Club - after 1♦:1♠, the majority decision with a 1453 minimum was to rebid 2♣.

Not as much as you might think. I do like to have the freedom to raise with 3 when I think it is right, but when my partner rebids 1NT I generally do not worry myself that he might have a singleton in my suit in deciding whether or not to rebid my 5-card major. In general I will pass with most 5332 hands and rebid my major with most other patterns.

 

Yes, sometimes I end up playing in 5-1 fits at the 2-level, but this doesn't happen very often in practice and sometimes when it does the 5-1 fit plays OK.

 

I consider your question analogous to situations in which partner opens 1 of a minor, the next hand bids something, and you have a "normal raise" of partner's minor with "only" 4-card support. Don't lose any sleep worrying that partner might have opened a 3-card suit - just make your normal bid. For sure it will be wrong sometimes, but more often it will be right regardless of how many cards partner has in his minor.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[bestguru]

What do you think about using canape openings with a weak 1nt.   That would seem to solve your rebid problems.  Your 1435  becomes a 1♥ with a 2♣ response

I'd be amazed if this didn't create more problems than it solves. 1354 after 1♣:1♠?

If you have a diamond stop and don't mind getting to 2nt that becomes 1♣ 1♠ 2♦ otherwise it is 1♣ 1♠ 1NT.

 

I don't see much of a problem there

[junyi_zhu]

4) Playing strong NT, would you rebid 1NT over 1♠ with your 1435 13 count? Would you expect your peers to do so also?

That's how I would normally handle a such a hand (unless my clubs were exceptionally strong), but for sure there many many players who would usually rebid 2C with that pattern instead. As far as I can tell, rebidding 1NT with a singleton is becoming increasingly acceptable among experts in America, but most Europeans still prefer to rebid their 5-card minors with such hands.

Thanks Fred. I guess how often you rebid 1NT with a singleton in partner's suit should tie in quite strongly with how often you raise with a balanced hand with 3 card support, then partner knows whether to rebid their 5 bagger on a weakish hand. I quite liked a hand in the Master Solvers' Club - after 1♦:1♠, the majority decision with a 1453 minimum was to rebid 2♣.

actually it's just an illusion that 2C is a good bid here. Suppose your partner holds a GF hand with good clubs, do you feel comfortable when partner gives you a gameforcing raise in clubs later?

The true killer for 1-4-5-3 shape is those hand that are about good 14 to bad 16 and bad diamonds.

1NT would be an underbid if you play it to show 12 to bad 14 or normal 14. 2D would be rather poor as well. Sx HAKQx DJxxxx CAJx, for such kind of hands, it's probably best to open 1H and rebid 2D later to treat it as 5-5. For SA HKJxx DQxxxx CAQx, it's probably best to open 1NT. For Sx HAQxx DAJxxx CAxx, it would be really tough, and you may claim that you can open 1D and rebid 2C, but it should not work very well as I said above, it just postponed your fatal moment. Facing a partner who holds: SAKQxx HKx DKx CKQxx, you may hear an 4D kickback RKC from partner over this 3C, which is really a kickback. I guess that's why so many great players would rather play 4 card major. For me, I'd probably just open 1D and rebid 2D if my partner doesn't allow me to open 1H.

[mr1303]

A vaguely amusing story from Manchester Bridge Club

 

Newby beginner: What do you open with 16 HCP and 4 spades and 4 clubs, balancedd

 

Jason Hackett: 1NT

 

Newby beginner: What do you do if you play weak NT

 

Jason Hackett: I throw myself into a pit of gravel

[mila85]

1. Opening 1NT and using transfer and stayman is useful to let the strong hand play. This is less usefull when playing weak NT and therefor this is an disadvantage of weak NT?

I play 2c/2d as inv/gf stayman. 2m is sing off, 2nt and 3m nat. invits, 3M GF with 5cards.

I will try to campare it with standard mehods (stayman, transfers):

PROS:

1.Opener knows responeder's strength:

1nt-2♣ |1nt-2♦

2♥-3♥ |2♥-3♥

Nat inv.|Slam try.

 

1nt-2♣ |1nt-2♦

2♠-3♣ |2♠-3♣

5-4 inv.|GF with clubs

 

1nt-(p)-2♣-(2♠) |1nt-(p)-2♥-(2♠)

p - (p)- 3♥-....... |p - (p) -3♥-...

Invit                   |Competitive

 

2.Easy slam bidding after 2♦

 

3.

1nt-2♣

2♦ -2♥

pass

2♦....no major

2♥....5+heards

pass...minimum

With standard methods you would play 2nt or 3♥

 

4. 1nt-2M

Opps have only one turn to intervene.

 

CONS:

1. You must learn it.

2. You can give out too much information. (This is why I play 3M as GF with 5 cards)

3.1nt-2♣

2♠....You must bid 2nt with 5 heards.

4. 2M sing off can wrong side the contract. (not big problem after weak nt)

5. You don't know responder's suit after 2♣. e.g. 1nt-(p)-2♣-(5♦)...

 

With passed hand I play transfers.

 

3. Playing weak NT as described above what do you open with 12-14 and:

xxxx=xxxx=xxxx=x with a small ♣

Suppose you open 1♦: what do you bid after 1♦-2♣? 2NT would show 15+?

I rebid 2♦. It's not so big problem as it seems.

-Responder can have diamond support.

-He can have 4cards in major - would bid 1M, not 2♣.

-He can have balanced distribution - would bid 2nt, not 2♣.

-He can bid 2nt/3nt over 2d.

But there is another problem. I wrote about it in "ACOL" topic.

 

4. What do you bid after 1♣-1♥ with 4 card ♥ and 15 pts..16 pts?

2♠ and 3♦ are splinters.

3♥ shows 16+ and 5422

(I can't have 4♥ in balanced distribution because I open major first)

1♥-1♠

I can bid 1nt or 3♠ with strong nt and 4 spades

[bhtf]

hi all, very instructive one

 

when playing my own big 1♣ : 1NT IS NOT A BID IN THE SYS

then 1NT is THAT you want. Perhaps :

-- 11-13 HCP in first or second white

-- 14-16 HCP no !s by four in others.

 

no miracle in that :

1♣ is 15+ with MR. Medium responses about 6-10 Hcp + Shape.

and then 1♣-1♦ (light or strong) - 1NT 15-20 can "survive" easily.

1♣ 2+ keep 11-14 eventualy flat

2NT 21-22

2♦ Multi w 23-24

1♣-1♦-2NT 25+

 

medium responses to 1♣ is not very popular i agree.

 

your dear Alain (bhtf on BBO)

[kgr]

Thanks all for the many responses already on this topic... or was the interst not so much initiated by my post but by Fred's involvement ;)

 

- In order for a weak notrump system to be effective, it is necessary to make more agreements and more complicated agreements than you would have to make in building in an effective strong notrump system.

 

Not sure I still want to switch to weak NT after reading all this. But can anyone point me to a link with a description of the consequences.

Also:

If you play weak NT: Do you open 'natural' with a strong NT hand or do you always open 1♣ and rebid 1NT?

 

- If you play in an area in which the majority of the players use strong notrumps and if you think that you have better bridge skills than the majority of the field, you should not welcome the "random swings on normal hands" that your weak notrump system creates.

In my club I play in a strong NT field with mostly weak players (..weak 'strong NT' players). Most of the time we are 1st or 2nd. This would not be the reason to play weak NT :P . The main reason would to have some new challenge, hoping it would not get too much challenge for my parter.

To indicate it could be easily too difficult for my partner:

Last MP session we played, bidding was opened by my partner:

1S-(2H)-p-(p)

2S...

He had 13HCP and 5=1=4=3 distribution.

I had 13 HCP and 7-card Heart and was waiting for a DBL :(

 

- More frequent and more difficult "impossible rebid problems" (on 1435 13-count for example) than you have playing a strong notrump system.

It looks like reverse bids fits better with strong NT system.

[whereagles]

Hum... I kinda like Double's idea of a 13-16 NT. The NT structure would be

 

11-12: pass

13-16: open 1NT

17-19: open 1m, rebid 1NT

 

That would make 1m openings have a 5 card almost all of the time. Responder could raise freely on 3 cards, and make fit-bids on 5M-3m hands. Very high frequencies for these actions.

[Stephen Tu]

Not sure I still want to switch to weak NT after reading all this. But can anyone point me to a link with a description of the consequences.

 

There's an outline of a well structured weak NT system, K-S, here.

 

I don't think it's quite as bad as Fred makes it out to be. I think it's really more a problem of familiarity & experience, rather than actual complexity. The problems the weakies face are different, not necessarily more complicated. I think if you just go ahead and try it, you will find the tough auctions don't come up *that* often, and you & your regular partner (can't really try anti-field systems without a regular partner) can come up with some reasonable way to deal with them. And I think you'll pick up enough good boards just from the weak NT itself to offset those tough hands; those arise a lot more often than strong NT hands where the opponents interfere in some annoying way making you guess wrong. Just be prepared to occasionally go for 800 vs. nothing, or languish in 1nt +90 when the field is in 2S +110, a disaster at MP. These are the "random swings" Fred mentions he wants to avoid; I don't really think it's that bad unless you are playing in some very short qualification stage & you have some tremendous skill advantage over the opposition. Over the course of a full day the randomness should even out, & hopefully you have a net gain. I'd prefer the higher variance most of the time.

 

You might also browse old messages from the K-S mailing list run by Adam Wildavsky, a top flight US player & weak NT proponent. There are many threads on various special problems that crop up.

 

You can also mail Kokish directly; he was quite helpful with me sending his entire structure on dealing with 4th hand interference, + Martel/Stansby's alternative structure.

 

Also:

If you play weak NT: Do you open 'natural' with a strong NT hand or do you always open 1♣ and rebid 1NT?

Natural, if playing a natural system rather than strong club. You want to have partner be able to support your minor in competition.

 

- More frequent and more difficult "impossible rebid problems" (on 1435 13-count for example) than you have playing a strong notrump system.

 

I wouldn't describe it as "impossible rebid" but rather "flawed rebid". With this shape I sometimes open 1nt with honor in spades, rebid a decent club suit, open a strong heart suit. Occasional bad board but usually works out fine. It's not like the strong NT bidders are always winning these boards. My opponents bid a lot, you'll find that on a lot of these minimum flawed rebid hands the opponents are in there & you don't have to rebid.

[awm]

In a natural system (i.e. not forcing club) it seems like weak notrumps would work a lot better with four card majors than with five. To address some of the problems mentioned:

 

In competitive auctions, after say 1C-(2S), holding around 9 hcp without four hearts, it's usually possible to raise opener's minor. Since 1C guarantees four, it's perfectly safe to bid 3C on four cards here, expecting partner to bid 3NT with 15-17 balanced. It's also fairly safe to bid 3C on five cards with 7-8 points, as 3NT will often make via the big minor fit (which strong notrumpers are unlikely to find after 1NT-2S). Even with THREE card support, a 3C bid on 9-10 points can be a winner, since opener will have five clubs (or 15-17 balanced) virtually all the time (the exception being the rare 4441 hand). In fact, when partner has the weak shapely hand, you may well win here by being able to compete in a minor.

 

Holding the awkward 1453 type hand, 1H can be opened if the hearts are strong. This would also be the typical opening with 1444. Occasionally you will be "preferenced" back into a 4-2 fit but this is rare (and at least the hearts are strong). With good diamonds, opening 1D and rebidding 2D should be fine.

 

It seems like the loss of the "preemptive" effect of the 1NT opening on strong hands is somewhat countered by opening 1-major (instead of 1-minor). You may end up playing some 4-3 fits at the two level, but this could be a good result as easily as a bad one, and again there is often a choice of openings, so the four-card major opens tend to be decent suits.

 

There's also an advantage to weak notrumps, in that the auction 1m-1M-2M becomes a "sound" raise. Typically this will be 15-16 balanced or an equivalent shapely hand (12 points with a singleton will be worth about the same). This solves a number of problems in standard bidding, like what to do with 3-card support and a hand "too good" for a single raise, and what to rebid with 13 hcp but 4441 shape (four card support for partner). Each of these hands is in some sense too strong for a single raise that could be a flat twelve, but not really good enough for a jump to the three-level.

 

I've played weak notrump for a number of years now, but mostly in the context of a strong club (or diamond) system. My general feeling is that the weak notrump opener is a winner at NV -- for every hand that we go for a "number" opposite no game (usually this number is 300) there are several where we go for 300 opposite a making game or make a partscore when the opponents had a making partscore their way. And the -50s in 1NT-1 instead of -90s and -110s (defending a partial by opponents) do tend to add up in our favor as well. At vulnerable, there just seem to be way too many -200s opposite no game, and the occasional -500 or -800 doubled can be hard to explain to teammates.

 

-- Adam

[arrows]

Very good points, Adam.

 

That's exactly some of the benefit of playing Acol.

[arrows]

There's an outline of a well structured weak NT system, K-S, here.

 

QUOTE 

1. Opening 1NT and using transfer and stayman is useful to let the strong hand play. This is less usefull when playing weak NT and therefor this is an disadvantage of weak NT?

 

I play 2c/2d as inv/gf stayman. 2m is sing off, 2nt and 3m nat. invits, 3M GF with 5cards.

I will try to campare it with standard mehods (stayman, transfers):

 

You don't have to give up transfers while playing inv/forcing stayman.

 

ETM Weak Notrump Version of 1NT Structure

 

This Weak notrump structure is "simply"(just ignore the relay part after 2♦

response) cool.

[fred]

I have zero experience playing 4-card majors, but I always thought that when you play weak notrumps and 4-card majors that it made no sense at all to open 1 of a major on a 4-card suit when you have a strong notrump.

 

The reason is that you won't know whether or not to pass when partner responds 1NT (as he will a lot of the time) and you will also have a problem if partner offers a single raise of your major (unless that call is specifically defined as being either forward going or not forward going facing a strong notrump).

 

I might be missing the point since I have seen some strong Acol players open with a 4-card major on strong notrump hands. How they survive I have no idea.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[Stephen Tu]

Acol is supposed to be played with extremely light 2/1s (8+ in old days, gradually getting stronger), so 1nt response is quite limited, strong NT can pass. But it's all rather flawed theoretically, very light 2/1s mean lack of ability to temporize later (more NF calls), adversely affecting game/slam bidding. Kokish wrote some articles on how he thinks it's best to pair weak nt & 5cM, strong NT & 4cM. With the latter combination you get a lot of the preemptive effect of the weak NT, opening min hands with 4cd majors, with more safety, and without the problem of needing really light 2/1 responses.

 

According to postings on other groups I think most top British players switched to 5cM and/or strong club and/or strong NT.

[MickyB]

Weak and 4 don't go together at all, although they have the benefit of simplicity(assuming you consider light 2/1s simpler than GF 2/1s). Much of the English elite plays Strong NT, often with 4 card majors - they go together well, the biggest downside is that a 1M opener promises less playing strength than in other systems.

 

In a natural system (i.e. not forcing club) it seems like weak notrumps would work a lot better with four card majors than with five. To address some of the problems mentioned:

 

In competitive auctions, after say 1C-(2S), holding around 9 hcp without four hearts, it's usually possible to raise opener's minor. Since 1C guarantees four, it's perfectly safe to bid 3C on four cards here, expecting partner to bid 3NT with 15-17 balanced. It's also fairly safe to bid 3C on five cards with 7-8 points, as 3NT will often make via the big minor fit (which strong notrumpers are unlikely to find after 1NT-2S). Even with THREE card support, a 3C bid on 9-10 points can be a winner, since opener will have five clubs (or 15-17 balanced) virtually all the time (the exception being the rare 4441 hand). In fact, when partner has the weak shapely hand, you may well win here by being able to compete in a minor.

 

Holding the awkward 1453 type hand, 1H can be opened if the hearts are strong. This would also be the typical opening with 1444. Occasionally you will be "preferenced" back into a 4-2 fit but this is rare (and at least the hearts are strong). With good diamonds, opening 1D and rebidding 2D should be fine.

 

It seems like the loss of the "preemptive" effect of the 1NT opening on strong hands is somewhat countered by opening 1-major (instead of 1-minor). You may end up playing some 4-3 fits at the two level, but this could be a good result as easily as a bad one, and again there is often a choice of openings, so the four-card major opens tend to be decent suits.

 

Sorry Adam, but I don't think your points have much merit. The first two apply just as much to weak+5 as they do to weak+4. The third is actually a disadvantage. With a strong NT, you want to be able to describe your hand, either by opening 1NT or by rebidding 1NT; Opening 1M on a flat 16 preempts yourself more than it does the opps.

[MickyB]

I have zero experience playing 4-card majors, but I always thought that when you play weak notrumps and 4-card majors that it made no sense at all to open 1 of a major on a 4-card suit when you have a strong notrump.

 

The reason is that you won't know whether or not to pass when partner responds 1NT (as he will a lot of the time) and you will also have a problem if partner offers a single raise of your major (unless that call is specifically defined as being either forward going or not forward going facing a strong notrump).

Opening 1M on strong NTs is a problem, as Stephen has said. The strength of your 2/1s has to be related to the strength of your hand opposite a flat 15, which isn't ideal, even if you prefer light 2/1s.

 

However, once you are opening 1♠ on 4333, you may as well do it on 4432s with 4♠4minor. Otherwise you start needing checkback, Walsh, etc, and it doesn't really gain you much to know that partner will probably have a 5 card major.

 

I believe that it is standard for 15- bad 16 bal to pass a single raise or a 1NT response, and for good 16+ to bid on.

[arrows]

Weak and 4 don't go together at all, although they have the benefit of simplicity(assuming you consider light 2/1s simpler than GF 2/1s). Much of the English elite plays Strong NT, often with 4 card majors - they go together well, the biggest downside is that a 1M opener promises less playing strength than in other systems.

 

I guess there's probably some valid argument on why weak NT works better

with 5 card major and strong NT works better with 4 card major...

But what I could see here is only some barren claims without any

reasoning or argumentation.

 

1♣-(2♠)-?

Playing 5 card major, here I couldn't see how you are able to bid 3♣ with only

4 cards support.

 

First, let me clarify the terminology, What I am talking about is 4 card SUIT open

(the way ACOL is), it's different from the term "4 card major". That is, with

4M & 4m, I open the minor.

 

For me, I play 4 card SUIT open with weak NT. When I open 1M, it's either 5 cards

or 15-18 HCP, promising more playing strength. also, as Adam pointed out, the

sequence 1m-1M-2M promise more playing strength, too. in 5M system, opener

may have a shape of 4432, 3 cards in the opened minor, But in 4 card suit open+

weak NT system, it's guaranteed 5-4 distribution, or 4-4 with side singlton.

 

1NT response are limited up to 9HCP usually, with 15-16 HCP, opener passes, with

17-18 HCP, opener invites.

 

Two over one can be light(8+HCP with fit), that means wider range and harder

to command, but it is not inferior. For example, After a 1M open,

a major-game invitation may start with 2 over 1, which gives the opener a good

chance to evaluate the fit in the side suits. It's definitely better than 1M-3M or

any type of artificial raise, or forcing 1NT then 3M raise. The later leaves less

room for judgement.

[fred]

This discussion about 4-card majors has reminded me of one of the truly awful things about weak notrumps:

 

There is no good way for responder to bid hands in the 6-10 point range that lack a 4-card major after a 1 diamond opener. Your bad choices are:

 

1) Respond in a 3-card major (this is Kokish's preferred "solution")

 

2) Play a wide-ranging 1NT response (and endplay opener when he has a strong notrump) not to mention often playing notrump from the wrong side.

 

3) Play 1D-2C and/or 1D-2D as potentially light and potentially not really natural thereby making it impossible (or at least extremely convoluted) to have a good auction after the auction starts this way and opener does not have a strong notrump.

 

4) Always open 1C (ie never open 1D) when you have a strong notrump.

 

I suspect 4) is the least bad choice, but if you do this you are not really playing a "natural system" anymore (yes the same argument could be made but not nearly as strongly to any system based on 5-card majors).

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[the hog]

"Weak and 4 don't go together at all, although they have the benefit of simplicity(assuming you consider light 2/1s simpler than GF 2/1s). Much of the English elite plays Strong NT, often with 4 card majors - they go together well, the biggest downside is that a 1M opener promises less playing strength than in other systems."

 

A very odd view. Weak and 4card Ms goes together fine and if you read "Partnership Bidding in Bridge", is actually a far more playable combination than strong and 4. If by "the English elite" you mean the Hackett's they actually play a 14-16 NT, not 15-17. Their whole system is predicated on opening 1M as often as possible and they frequently canape with weak hands. This is an advantage in my opinion, hardly a disadvantage.

[fred]

Hog,

 

I don't think the Hacketts' notrump range qualifies as "weak".

 

To me to say that a bidding system is a "weak notrump system" means that a 1NT opening is weaker than a 1NT rebid. The Hacketts' 1NT openings are 14-16, but their 1NT rebids are 11-13. So I would call their system a "strong notrump system" even though their notrump range is a little less than what is traditionally played in "strong notrump systems".

 

Not that this relevant to the current discussion, but my regular partners and I play a different defense to a weak notrump opening than we play to a strong notrump opening. For this purpose we define "weak notrump" as meaning "at most 15 HCP".

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[Stephen Tu]

1♣-(2♠)-?

Playing 5 card major, here I couldn't see how you are able to bid 3♣ with only

4 cards support.

- just on frequency partner will usually have 4+ clubs. The average length of a club opener playing 5 cd majors is well over 4. RHO having 5-6 spades also increases partner's expected club length.

- if he does have only 3, he can take a stab at 3nt with 15+ bal.

 

Personally, when playing wkNT/5cM, I am willing to bid 3♣ here on *3* card support & 8-9 pts, not having 4+ hearts, and will usually survive just fine.

 

First, let me clarify the terminology, What I am talking about is 4 card SUIT open(the way ACOL is), it's different from the term "4 card major". That is, with

4M & 4m, I open the minor.

Acol isn't capitalized; it's not an acronym but a street in London. Anyway, if you are opening the minor with 44s, the only time you are opening the 4 card major is with 4333 & I suppose some 4441 shapes. The frequency is cut down so much that really you might as well play 5cM and get the advantages of a 5cM system. Do you really feel you get to better contracts opening 1♠ on 4333 rather than 1♣? I doubt it.

 

All you are gaining here is an assurance that partner's minor is 4+. I personally don't think that's worth much. I just assume partner is 4+, and if he isn't it doesn't matter usually. Either we end up in NT or the opponents outbid us in a major.

 

may have a shape of 4432, 3 cards in the opened minor, But in 4 card suit open+ weak NT system, it's guaranteed 5-4 distribution, or 4-4 with side singlton.

Huh? I thought you said you opened the minor with 4-4 major/minor. So 5-4 distribution or singleton isn't guaranteed, it could be 4342 or similar.

 

Two over one can be light(8+HCP with fit), that means wider range and harderto command, but it is not inferior. For example, After a 1M open,

a major-game invitation may start with 2 over 1, which gives the opener a good

chance to evaluate the fit in the side suits. It's definitely better than 1M-3M or

any type of artificial raise, or forcing 1NT then 3M raise. The later leaves less

room for judgement.

You may get better hand eval on some light invitational hands, but on stronger hands by either opener or responder, you will have more difficulty because of the need to jump to create a GF. You don't have as many bids available to temporize to hear more from partner, since you may get dropped there. British slam bidding in international competition using these older type of methods was always considered notoriously poor.

[Stephen Tu]

There is no good way for responder to bid hands in the 6-10 point range that lack a 4-card major after a 1 diamond opener. Your bad choices are:

 

3) Play 1D-2C and/or 1D-2D as potentially light and potentially not really natural thereby making it impossible (or at least extremely convoluted) to have a good auction after the auction starts this way and opener does not have a strong notrump.

 

I use (3), and it's not that bad! For one thing, the auction hardly ever comes up. 99% of the time, responder has a 4 cd major, or the opponents bid something. Then if responder does make the 9+ 2c/2d response, some very large portion of that time opener does have the strong NT. (If both opener & responder are min, the opponents are usually in there).

 

One of my regular partnerships adopted Kokish artificial rebids after 1d-2c, we've played them for 4 years, and I can't remember ever bidding anything other than 2d or 2nt.

[Stephen Tu]

Weak and 4card Ms goes together fine and if you read "Partnership Bidding in Bridge", is actually a far more playable combination than strong and 4

 

?? That book is all about competitive bidding. I think there is little doubt that from a constructive bidding standpoint, weak + frequently opening 4cM is somewhat unsound.

 

The main point of that book re system style is that weak + 4cM leaves you better placed in competition than strong + 4cM, when partner opens a major and the opponents intervene. But that's offset by being able to open a major more frequently in the first place.

 

Weak + 4 is a more preemptive opening style. But I question whether it makes sense to preempt when you have the 4cM strong NT hand. I think these are your side's hands, and you harm your own side more than theirs.

 

Strong + 4 you'd get to open the 4cM quite aggressively with greater frequency, and with some of the constructive bidding disadvantages mitigated.

[the hog]

"I don't think the Hacketts' notrump range qualifies as "weak".

 

Granted; I would regard that range as intermediate. However I still think that a 12-14 range together with 4 card Ms is quite easy to play. Most of us here have been brought up playing this and no doubt familiarity plays a role.

 

"I think there is little doubt that from a constructive bidding standpoint, weak + frequently opening 4cM is somewhat unsound."

 

This contention still has not been proved as far as I am concerned. Most Acolites will open a 4333 15-17 count with 1C, not 1M. These days a lot also open 5332 shapes with 1N if in the appropriate range. There are thus many inferences when you DO open 1M.

[MickyB]

To me to say that a bidding system is a "weak notrump system" means that a 1NT opening is weaker than a 1NT rebid. The Hacketts' 1NT openings are 14-16, but their 1NT rebids are 11-13. So I would call their system a "strong notrump system" even though their notrump range is a little less than what is traditionally played in "strong notrump systems".

I use the same definitions. However... If I was to play a 13-16 NT throughout, passing 11-12 bal in 1st+2nd and opening it with a suit in 3rd+4th, am I playing a variable NT?!