Another defense over weak NT: please comment

[Chamaco]

Hi all, I'd appreciate comments on the following defense vs weak NT.

 

I'd appreciate any comments specific to what does work and what does not work with this specific defense and possible improvements :D

 

Basically I modified Woolsey's defense, in order to:

 

1- include into double ONLY 1 specific hand type (balanced).

I hate to include in the double BOTH strong balanced and Raptor(*) hands or single suited minors.

 

(*) Raptor = hand with 4M and longer minor

 

The reason is that the ambiguity puts too much pressure on weak responders when they want to scramble for safety

 

2- allows to discriminate the hcp range type of strong balanced.

Double includes 15-17 or 21+; 18-20 are included in 2D = Multi.

 

One thing that is not great is the use of the 2C overcall.

It is used to show 2 types of hands:

- 54 or better in majors

- Raptor-type hand (4M + longer minor)

 

Weak advancer loses the ability to ask the longer major with 2D: 2D is simply a weak ask, and overcaller will have to bid 2H even with 4H and 5S, because higher ranking bids show the Raptor hand (2S = 4S + longer minor).

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE STRUCTURE

 

1NT(weak):?

 

Double = balanced hand, 15-17/21+, or (rare), a singlesuiter battleship.

Advancer bids as if pard had opened a 15-17 NT:

.....pass = for penalty

.....2C = Stayman, usually scrambling; overcaller responds 2NT/3 of a suit if he has the balanced or single suiter battleship

.....2D/H= xfers, weak/strong; overcaller responds 2NT/3 of a suit if he has the balanced or single suiter battleship

.....2S = requires overcaller to bid 2NT with a minimum 1NT, 3C with a max; can be a transfer to clubs

.....2NT = xfer to diamonds

In competition, Lebensohl applies

 

 

2C = 54 or better in majors or Raptor hand.Advancer bids:

.....2D= weak relay, overcaller rebids

............2H = hand with majors(even with 4H and 5S)

............2S = Raptor with spades

............3m =Raptor with hearts and the minor bid

.....2M/3m= to play, selfsufficient suit

.....2NT = positive relay, overcaller rebids

............3C = majors with uneven length, 3D asks longest

............3D = majors with equal

............3M = Raptor with the major bid

NO AGREEMENTS SO FAR IN COMPETION, ANY SUGGESTION IS WELCOME !

 

2D = Multi 18-20 bal or any singlesuiter with limited opener:

.....2M = Paradox responses

.....2NT = positive relay: in this scheme i find awkward to find a 44M fit if overcaller bids 3NT to show the strong balanced

 

2M = 5M + a minor, occasionally 5332: followup like in Capp

 

2NT = Minors

 

3 of a suit = natural single suiter, Reverse (16-18 or 5 losers hand). Stronger single suiters will double first and bid the suit at the 3 level if advancer bids.

[hotShot]

Do you know "Lionel" ?

 

-> send it as PM :D

[Echognome]

This seems fine and fairly complete. Here in England where we face lots of weak no trump hands, I find it easy to play our 2-level bids the same as if the opps didn't open 1NT (so we don't have to memorize an additional set of responses). I know this is more difficult in other places, because of the stricter licensing laws on two-suited preempts. Anyway, if you're interested, we play:

 

X = 15+ pen's

2♣ = Clubs + Major (2♦ asks, 2NT GF)

2♦ = Single-suited major (Paradox Reponses)

2♥ = Majors (2NT inquiry)

2♠ = Spades + Minor (2NT inquiry)

2NT = Minors

[hotShot]

I think it's a question of percentage.

If your opp opens e.g. 12-14 it get's less likely that your side will have a game. So you are figthing for a partscore here, this means limitted bidding space, and you should be able to play your fit at the 2 level, since your best fit might be 7 cards!

The fact that the 1NT is weak, does not mean that your side has the majoraty of points.

 

1NT - X - pass - ?

Stayman and transfer seem to be ok here, but you miss 4-4 fits in the minors and how strong can your partner be?

 

LHO showed 12-14 you hold 15-17 together 27-31 HCP. So the other two share 13-9 hcp. So on the long run you can expect an average of 5.5 HCP from your partner. What is your target?

 

What do you do with 13-14 and some 4432 distribution?

 

I don't think you will hold 18-20 with a onesuited hand very often, so 2♦ might be arround one a year.

 

The 2♣ thing makes sence but you might have to play the minor on 3 level then.

[Chamaco]

 The fact that the 1NT is weak, does not mean that your side has the majoraty of points.

 

That's why I pass with 13-14 hcp balanced,and leave it up to balancer to reopen if he has an opening hand.

From this viewpoint, it seems more dangerous the Lionel scheme (doubling or bidding at the 2 level with a balanced 12).

 

In the scheme I chose you bid with unbalanced opening hands, and if you take some action with balanced hands in the direct seat, you guarantee a 15-17 notrump. Now, partner can decide to leave in the double if he has 8-9 hcp, or scramble for a 4-3 fit.

Scrambling here is no worse than scrambling in the Lionel scheme.

 

On the other hand, many times the 1NT 12-14 steals games: many examples from the last Matches played by Fantoni-Nunes (who use 12-14 1NT) were a proof for this.

 

The target is to:

1- be safe

2- keep open constructive bidding and not just concentrate on partscores. 12-14 NT does steal often.

 

In order to have this benefits I am will to play an occasional moysian fit.

 

What do you do with 13-14 and some 4432 distribution?

 

Pass.

In the balancing seat pard will double with a weak NT hand (hcp requirements are reduced in the bal seat)

 

I don't think you will hold 18-20 with a onesuited hand very often, so 2♦ might be arround one a year.

 

My 2D bid shows EITHER a 18-20 balanced OR a minimum single suiter (say 10-15).

A singlesuiter with 18 hcp wd double and rebid 3 of his suit.

[hotShot]

I hate those 2 letter words .... so 2♦ is ok.

The system seems to make sence, with 5-4 you have a bid, with 4-4 your partner will reopen.

 

So 1NT - pass - pass - ? will lead to a reopening exactly when?

Pass in the 3rd seat can be as strong as ... 10hcp opposit a 12-14 NT.

[Chamaco]

I hate those 2 letter words .... so 2♦ is ok.

The system seems to make sence, with 5-4 you have a bid, with 4-4 your partner will reopen.

 

So 1NT - pass - pass - ? will lead to a reopening exactly when?

Pass in the 3rd seat can be as strong as ... 10hcp opposit a 12-14 NT.

 

In the balancing seat the system is more or less the same except for the range of balanced hands.

 

X = a good 11-15/20+

2D = 16-19

 

This is the tentative range I came up with to protect from pard having a 13-14 balanced.

Obviously, there is the risk of playing 2NT with 16-19 vs a weak pard.

In the latter case I am thinking of using a Wolff signoff scheme.

 

All this (the balancing seat ranges and the Wolff signoff) are experimental, and I will be grateful for any suggestions :-)

[hotShot]

You put a lot of pressure on the reopener, second seat can hold anything from 0-14 if balanced.

It is a risk to enter the auction as it is done using Lionel, but you take the pressure for your partner, you offer him 2 suits for fit and almost the strength that the weak NT bidder promised. So in 4th seat partner can make right decisions.

Your partner will hold an average of 7-8 points usually and playing with fit at 2 level with 18hcp will not be too expencive.

 

Your way partner might feel he should not reopen with less than 11 hcp, otherwise the risk is to high, you have to play with a combined 16 hcp.

[cherdano]

Mauro, there is one thing I am wondering about: I would claim that missed game opportunities mostly arise when there is a good fit, and ond hand is unbalanced.

 

If that is true, then there is not so much reason to do anything with balanced hands. Just wait if your partner can reopen with shape, and take your plus against 1NT if he is balanced, too. In other words, take the "shape first, points later" approach.

 

I think it would take some persuading until I force us to play 2NT at least with 18 balanced points. Dummy will have 5 points on average, and I may only get to take one finesse against declarer. Seems like a sure way to trade +50/100 against -100/200.

[hotShot]

My impression is, that weak NT bidder pass strong in 3rd seat and bid suits if weak. Anyone playing weak NT here who can commend on this?

[Chamaco]

Mauro, there is one thing I am wondering about: I would claim that missed game opportunities mostly arise when there is a good fit, and ond hand is unbalanced.

 

Ty all folks for the suggestions ! :-)

 

On the specific issue, I think (but I might be too optimistic) that, when you know one defender has all the hcp (the weak NT opener), a lot of the times 3NT is on even with 23-24 hcp, because you know which finesse will work and there are plenty of throw-in and squeeze possibilities.

 

In order to keep open these possibilities, I think it is important to handle balanced hands without necessarily counting on shape.

 

But I understand the associated risks.

[luke warm]

My impression is, that weak NT bidder pass strong in 3rd seat and bid suits if weak. Anyone playing weak NT here who can commend on this?

are you talking about after a 2nd seat double? 1nt (x) then yes, 3rd seat bids any 5 card major with weakness... there are also various runout schemes, i use brozel:

 

2c=C and H

2d=D and H

2h=majors

p=forces xx when responder shows 2 suits without hearts (1nt (x) p (p) xx (p) 2c would show C and D or C and S, 2d shows D and S) OR i pass pard's xx to play

xx=forces 2C, pass/correct, for a one suited hand (quite often C or D)

[Chamaco]

My impression is, that weak NT bidder pass strong in 3rd seat and bid suits if weak. Anyone playing weak NT here who can commend on this?

are you talking about after a 2nd seat double?

I think he was referring to uncontested auction, and the inflkuence of responder's style to the risks associated to balancing: Hotshot's point is that if 3rd seat passes often with lots of hcp, then a balancing X with a balanced 12 can be dangerous.

[luke warm]

ahhh... yeah, i'll pass with up to 10 hcp in 3rd seat, depending on the hand (12-15 nt)

[Winstonm]

Only thing I would like to mention is the advice I received years ago from Ron Anderson in that a double of 1NT should be based on a hand that expects to beat 1NT if on lead. Ergo, xx, Axx, KQJ9xx, Ax would quality as a double of any type of NT opening and could be shaded even to xx, xxx, Kxx, KQJ9xx, Ax. Partner is expected to leave in this double with all but a virtual yarborough.

 

IMO, there are two important concepts to defending 1NT opening: position and position. In direct seat, the idea it would seem would be to interfere with their machinery (Jacoby, etc.) whenever safely possible and penalize them when they are going set; however, in pass out seat after 1N-p-p the object is to get involved as safely as possible. So for this reason and only IMO it is better to use two different systems depending on the seat - direct seat needs the penalty double in the system while pass out seat does not. DONT is useful in passout but I prefer another method in direct seat.

 

WinstonM

[junyi_zhu]

Hi all, I'd appreciate comments on the following defense vs weak NT.

 

I'd appreciate any comments specific to what does work and what does not work with this specific defense and possible improvements :P

 

Basically I modified Woolsey's defense, in order to:

 

1- include into double ONLY 1 specific hand type (balanced).

I hate to include in the double BOTH strong balanced and Raptor(*) hands or single suited minors.

 

(*) Raptor = hand with 4M and longer minor

 

The reason is that the ambiguity puts too much pressure on weak responders when they want to scramble for safety

 

2- allows to discriminate the hcp range type of strong balanced.

Double includes 15-17 or 21+; 18-20 are included in 2D = Multi.

 

One thing that is not great is the use of the 2C overcall.

It is used to show 2 types of hands:

- 54 or better in majors

- Raptor-type hand (4M + longer minor)

 

Weak advancer loses the ability to ask the longer major with 2D: 2D is simply a weak ask, and overcaller will have to bid 2H even with 4H and 5S, because higher ranking bids show the Raptor hand (2S = 4S + longer minor).

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE STRUCTURE

 

1NT(weak):?

 

Double = balanced hand, 15-17/21+, or (rare), a singlesuiter battleship.

Advancer bids as if pard had opened a 15-17 NT:

.....pass = for penalty

.....2C = Stayman, usually scrambling; overcaller responds 2NT/3 of a suit if he has the balanced or single suiter battleship

.....2D/H= xfers, weak/strong; overcaller responds 2NT/3 of a suit if he has the balanced or single suiter battleship

.....2S = requires overcaller to bid 2NT with a minimum 1NT, 3C with a max; can be a transfer to clubs

.....2NT = xfer to diamonds

In competition, Lebensohl applies

 

 

2C = 54 or better in majors or Raptor hand.Advancer bids:

.....2D= weak relay, overcaller rebids

............2H = hand with majors(even with 4H and 5S)

............2S = Raptor with spades

............3m =Raptor with hearts and the minor bid

.....2M/3m= to play, selfsufficient suit

.....2NT = positive relay, overcaller rebids

............3C = majors with uneven length, 3D asks longest

............3D = majors with equal

............3M = Raptor with the major bid

NO AGREEMENTS SO FAR IN COMPETION, ANY SUGGESTION IS WELCOME !

 

2D = Multi 18-20 bal or any singlesuiter with limited opener:

.....2M = Paradox responses

.....2NT = positive relay: in this scheme i find awkward to find a 44M fit if overcaller bids 3NT to show the strong balanced

 

2M = 5M + a minor, occasionally 5332: followup like in Capp

 

2NT = Minors

 

3 of a suit = natural single suiter, Reverse (16-18 or 5 losers hand). Stronger single suiters will double first and bid the suit at the 3 level if advancer bids.

I think 15+ is probably too high to make a penalty double, so it would give partner a lot of balancing pressure. I feel 14 or good 13 would be enough to double against 12-14 1NT. Against 13-15, one needs good 14 at least. Against 14-16, one needs 15+(some don't play penalty double against 14-16, which I believe is wrong, because many open 13 when playing 14-16 1NT and steal your game) Second issue is the raptor hands.

It looks you would push the level too high with raptor hands. Suppose you hold 4H+5C, you would force yourself to play at 3 level in a possible 7 card fit which is just too high for me. I'd just include 5-4-3-1 shape into penalty double hands if they fall into the range of penalty double. I rate 5-4-3-1 as semibalanced hands and it's not clear to act directly at 2 level against weak NT with them. Also, when opps run, I prefer a take out double(no matter it shows one suit or two suits as long as it shows the suit that's bid) to make my life easier. Also, another guideline for penalty double is whether you have a good lead against 1NT. Also, if you hold concerntrated two suiters, it's probably better to bid your suits than to double, for example, SKQJTxx HAKQx Dx CJx

[the hog]

" think 15+ is probably too high to make a penalty double, so it would give partner a lot of balancing pressure. I feel 14 or good 13 would be enough to double against 12-14 1NT. Against 13-15, one needs good 14 at least."

 

Don't follow this advice Mauro, as it is very poor advice and patently incorrect. We get huge results from thoose who double with "equal or better" points. Terrence Reese stated that the X of a 12-15 NT should start at a decent 15.

[pbleighton]

"Don't follow this advice Mauro, as it is very poor advice and patently incorrect. We get huge results from thoose who double with "equal or better" points. Terrence Reese stated that the X of a 12-15 NT should start at a decent 15. "

 

Ron -

 

What do your doubles in the balancing seat show?

 

Peter

[the hog]

Balancing doubles would be a minimum of 14 AND a decent lead, Peter. I would prefer to make a 2 suited or ss takeout if at all possible.

 

I suggest that those who advocate lighter takeout doubles like Junyi Zhu in the above post, have either never played a wnt or have not played against opponents who are quiick on the trigger. We pick up lots of penalties and 1NTxx from those who follow this philosophy. (Perhaps I shouldn't post this, because I really do want people to continue to play such methods).

[awm]

Some questions about this:

 

What do you bid with a decent hand (say 13-15 high) and a long minor suit? Competing for the partscore could be quite important here, but it seems like these hands have no bid.

 

Why are you playing "systems on" after the double? With a reasonable hand, shouldn't advancer simply pass? How does advancer get out of 1NTX with a bust and no major suit, if 2c and 2d are stayman and transfer respectively?

 

Is it important to be able to preempt over weak notrump? For example, say you have a normal 3s opening bid... do you feel the weak notrump makes that bid so ineffective that you'd rather not be able to bid it, and instead have yet another way to show a strong hand?

 

------------------------

 

I'm very unconvinced of the effectiveness of these methods. Everyone I have seen playing "systems on" over double has received poor results. My current methods are:

 

X = 15+ points, any hand... other bids are typically around 10-15 hcp

if opponents are in a forcing auction (i.e. Pass is forcing) then a suit bid is natural, 5+ cards, and shows a hand too weak to want to penalize

if opponents are NOT in a forcing auction (i.e. 1NTX or 1NTXX may be about to play) then 2♣ is artificial and starts a scramble, and anything else is 5+ cards (and weak)

note doubler can bid on if holding a distributional hand regardless of the subsequent auction -- the double is cards and does not strongly suggest a balanced hand or even a particular desire to defend 1NT (most opponents will run from 1NTX when holding a minority of the strength, nearly guaranteeing that doubler will have another chance to bid)

 

2♣ = stayman, 4cM plus longer minor, or both majors -- response scheme is somewhat different from what you describe in that advancer bids a 4cM (if any) unless holding game values (in which case 2NT is GF relay). The intent is to be able to get out at the two-level as often as possible when advancer has a poor hand with no great fit.

 

2♦-2♠ = natural, 5+ card suit, no side 4-major, 10-15 hcp (usually 10-11 only with 6-suit)

2NT = sound club bid, about 14-15 high and 6+ club

3♣ = about 11-13 and 6+ club

3♦+ natural preemptive

 

In balancing seats the basic meanings of most bids are the same, but double can be made on any sound balanced opener to protect against being talked out of game with 13 opposite 13 (especially dangerous when the opening is 10-12). This double is therefore somewhat more frequently pulled than the direct seat double, which also makes sense based on the location of values (behind/in front of the notrump bidder). Also note that when the partner in direct seat has absolute garbage, the notrump opening side will frequently manage an invite, so the "danger" of doubling with 12-13 hcp balanced in passout seat is somewhat less than the danger of doubling with the same hand in direct position.

[Chamaco]

What do you bid with a decent hand (say 13-15 high) and a long minor suit? Competing for the partscore could be quite important here, but it seems like these hands have no bid.

 

2D.

The 2 diamond bid shows either a 18-20 balanced or any single suiter equivalent to a minimum opener (say 10-15).

If you evaluate the 15 hcp single suiter as too strong for a minimum opener, you jump overcall to 3 of a suit, natural, showing the playing strength of a reverse.

 

Why are you playing "systems on" after the double? With a reasonable hand, shouldn't advancer simply pass? How does advancer get out of 1NTX with a bust and no major suit, if 2c and 2d are stayman and transfer respectively?

 

That was taken from Lawrence's book "Double": system on responding to pard's double vs weak NT.

I am not sure it is good.

My views about it:

- I could live without transfers responding to the double BUT

- I coould NOT live without a scrambling scheme if responder has a 4432 hand.

- a weakish responder (say 0-6) might leave the double in if opard doubled in the direct seat; BUT we ABSOLUTELY NEED a scrambling method when double comes from the balancing seat, when doubler can have a weak NT hand.

 

If you have any suggestions for scrambling methods other than a "scrambling stayman", I'll be happy to hear about them :-)

 

Is it important to be able to preempt over weak notrump? For example, say you have a normal 3s opening bid... do you feel the weak notrump makes that bid so ineffective that you'd rather not be able to bid it, and instead have yet another way to show a strong hand?

 

My priorities vs the weak NT hand are:

- constructive bidding

- safety

 

Because of this, I am willing to adopt vs the weak NT the same tactics than vs a weak 2 opener: because I consider the weak NT a "semi-preempt", I won't preempt over a preempt.

 

So, accordoing to vulnerability, I might upgrade a 3S opener to the playing strength of an opening bid, and treat it like a single suiter, bidding 2D, or simply bid 4S at favoirable vulnerability or simply pass when the options are too risky.

 

  if opponents are NOT in a forcing auction (i.e. 1NTX or 1NTXX may be about to play) then 2♣ is artificial and starts a scramble, and anything else is 5+ cards (and weak)

 

Alright so that answers my previous question.

Basically your scheme saves the 2 diamond bid for a 5 bagger.

 

QUESTIONS:

 

What are doubler's priorities in response to a double ?

What does he bid with a 5332 ?

How does advancer know whether the suit bid by opener is 5 or 4 cards long (so that he does not run from a 52 fit to a 43 fit) ?

How do you find slam hands with a 44 fit if not using stayman ?

(yes I know slam vs a weak NT hand are rare, and usually it pays off more to penalty pass with those, nevertheless, at red vs white, it pays off more to use constructive bidding even with good hands rather than simply pass: so there is a need also for a strong relay looking for 44 fits, and not only for scrambling realays)

----------------------------------------------------

 

Finally:

I like the extra preemption in the defense you use, but I really prefer to have 2 suiter bids available right away.

The use of 2-suiters is both safer (offers 2 places to play) and helps bidding tight games.

Bidding simply 2D/2M when I have a 2-suiter is not appealing to me.

 

One more thing:

I have seen people using defenses that show simply 44 in suits, even with balanced hands: I think it is important to discriminate whether the hand is a REAL 2suiter (at least 54) or simply a balanced 4432.

Balanced 4432 has a much weaker playing strength, and I think it should be shown with a bid that specifically shows a balanced hand.

 

I really appreciated the comments on doubling sequences, look forward to further insight (e.g. the questions above) !

 

Thanks !

[whereagles]

At the risk of being repetitive, here's my opinion on this..

 

People give too much attention to 2-suited overcalls over 1NT. The idea is sound: it is relatively safe to do it, and those are the hands you want to compete with anyway. However, hands suitable for a 2-suited overcall come up very rarely.

 

So I think one should gear one's overcalls over 1NT on hands that do come up fairly frequently, e.g, the balanced hands.

 

Another hand type you can live without having a bid for is the 1-suiter. That hand can pass 1NT and set it. If opps pull out of 1NT via, say, a transfer, then you might want to bid your suit in the 2nd round. That's obviously riskier, but should still be fairly safe. Still, there's nothing wrong with bidding over 1NT with 1-suiters, especially in the majors. Just that if you have to give up something, this is an ok thing to give up.

[luke warm]

i tend to have the complete opposite view from yours, whereagles... i think pass is right with the balanced hands, bid with the one and two suiters (or at least gear your system toward finding those bids)

[whereagles]

Yeah, I know my style isn't in-line with common lore :)

 

Just that 1NT is a contract which hard to defend, so it is preferable to try and buy the hand yourself as often as possible ;)

[flytoox]

Balancing doubles would be a minimum of 14 AND a decent lead, Peter. I would prefer to make a 2 suited or ss takeout if at all possible.

How can you guarantee a decent lead with double in balancing seat? Playing against weak NT, balancing double should be more sound than dbl of RHO's nt opening. This is because responder to weak NT opener will usually run with a weak hand.

 

Junyi's suggestion is certainly not bad as you suggest. Playing against weak NT, it is certainly ok to dbl with good 14.