Notrump Systems Quick Poll

[awm]

Pretty simple question about priorities.

[newroad]

Hi Adam,

 

I've supplied my answer, but I wonder how much any result may be skewed by predilection to open 1NT with a 5 card M?

 

I know the direction of travel is to do so, but perhaps, somewhat Luddite-like, my preference remains not to. Further, the statistical research that I've seen by Richard Pavlicek suggests it is more effective with 5 hearts than 5 spades: which makes sense as it's likely to pre-empt some 1S overcalls.

 

Regards, Newroad

[rhm]

Some sort of puppet is popular over notrump openings e.g. 3♣ over 1NT.

But I know of no leading player recommending nowadays a treatment to detect xx opposite xx after a notrump openings?

 

What should have higher priority in my mind is responder being able showing shortage (singleton or void) and the balanced hand to decide on the strain.

In this case you might have slam while 3NT goes down or 3NT may be the only game.

 

Most play that with a long minor responder can transfer and then a new suit shows shortage.

 

But how does responder show shortage with

 

a) a 5 card major

b) a 4 card major

c) both majors 4-4 or 5-4?

 

Rainer Herrmann

[helene_t]

Playing against GIB (and other pairs that prefer passive leads) it is an easy choice because if we miss a 5-3 fit in a major there is a reasonable chance that they will lead that suit.

 

Otherwise I would be happy to investigate a 5-3 fit in a major if it could be done without too many side effects. Going through regular Stayman with a follow up query is quite terrible, though. PS 3♣ is not terrible but I tend to think that 3♣ can be put to better use. PS 2♣ may be reasonable, depending on the rest of the structure.

[awm]

My notrump methods are already focused around showing shortage, and I can identify shortage with all sorts of patterns. I'm basically trying to compare two parts of our methods. Currently we play the following:

 

3♣ transfer to diamonds (after which 3M shows shortage in the other major, usually three in the bid major)

2NT transfer to clubs (after which 3♦ shows 5-5 minors GF, 3M shows shortage in the other major, usually three in the bid major)

2♠ asking for strength or small doubleton; used with a balanced invite, or a one-suited minor invite, or a balanced GF afraid of xx opposite xx in a major, or a quantitative slam try

 

The alternate (more "standard") possibility is:

 

3♣ puppet stayman (really for balanced hands, hands with shortage already have other paths)

2NT transfer to diamonds (with 3♣ showing a bad hand for diamonds)

2♠ asking for strength or transfer to clubs (with 2NT showing min)

 

Our current set of responses has the advantage of right-siding any minor suit sign-off, lets us avoid 3NT with xx opposite xx, and gives us more precise auctions on a club invite. The disadvantages are lack of a good way to identify 5-3 fits with opener having five and responder balanced (we can actually do this via stayman and a relay, but it leaks way too much information), and the lack of opener's "pre-accept" information on marginal minor suit slam tries.

 

As for the hands with shortness, the ones with major suit shortness and no 4M go through minor suit transfer (we are fine bidding 3145 via a transfer to clubs and then showing heart shortage; usually shortage is more important than the exact club length). Our direct 3M bids show four-card major with shortage in the other major. Our direct 3D is shortage in clubs, including 4441, (34)51, 3361, etc and can look for 4-4 major fit by bidding up the line. With shortage in diamonds and no 5M we start with stayman and then bid 3D (which shows specifically short diamonds and no known major suit fit) or splinter in support of partner. With one five-card major we start with a transfer, then transfer to the four card minor, then isolate shortage (i.e. 1NT-2♥-2♠-2NT-3♣-3♥ shows 5+ spades and 4 clubs and heart shortage). With 5-4 majors we start with stayman and raise via a splinter if partner responds 2M. Otherwise we bid 2♥ over 2♦, which forces 2♠, then bid 3m to show shortage in the other minor with typically a (54)(13) type hand.

[Vampyr]

I think that your #1 and #2 go hand in hand, especially when playing a weak NT. I am far more likely to bid 5-card Stayman (not Puppet as others here seem to play) when I have xx or xxx in a suit.

[helene_t]

5-card Stayman (not Puppet as others here seem to play)

what's the difference?

[nullve]

But I know of no leading player recommending nowadays a treatment to detect xx opposite xx after a notrump openings?

I like all of the conventions I play, but to name a couple which are not that common I would say 1NT - 2NT as game forcing with a weak doubleton (to avoid 3NT with two weak doubletons opposite each other), something Tony Forrester taught me. (http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/in-the-well-boye-brogeland/)

A CC from 2016:

 

http://www.ecatsbridge.com/documents/files/BPinfo/OpenTeams/Norway/NOROT_Brogeland-Lindqvist.pdf

[Vampyr]

what's the difference?

 

In ordinary 5-card Stayman, say it is 3♣, 3♦ simply denies a five-card major. Responder, who may have started with 4-3 in the majors, now bids a four-card major if she has one.

[benlessard]

If the hand is good enough ot make 5m you should explore. If 5m is unlikely just blast. We are never bal when we open 1M so our 1NT is often 5332, we do use 3D as puppet but i seldom remember ending up in 4M where it was a lot better than 3NT, so I dont think its necessary, 5-3 when responder doenst have a singleton and opener is 5332 is overated.

[Kungsgeten]

A CC from 2016:

 

http://www.ecatsbridge.com/documents/files/BPinfo/OpenTeams/Norway/NOROT_Brogeland-Lindqvist.pdf

In "Notrump bidding - the Scanian way" (Lindqvist, Nilsland, Wirgren, 1990) they include a 2NT response which asks opener for weak doubleton. The bid is made with:

 

a) Invitational hands with a 6 card minor (pass or bid 3D if opener is weak in your minor)

b) GF with a balanced hand

 

If opener bids 3X (weak doubleton) responder's 3M call is natural GF with 4+ suit, while 4m/5m is to play and 4NT shows both minors. If opener responds 3NT (no weak doubleton) a four level rebid by responder is slam invitational with five card suit.

 

The basic response structure:

 

1NT--

2C = Stayman (not invitational with four card suit). They use 2NT/3C rebids as transfers (weak or GF) after Stayman.

2red = Transfer, may be invitational with four card suit.

2S = Range ask. Normally NT invite but may be sign off with both minors, sign off with diamonds or GF with 5-4 minors.

2NT = Asking weak doubleton.

3C = To play.

3D = Three-suited with short minor.

3M = Three-suited with short major.

[rhm]

I like all of the conventions I play, but to name a couple which are not that common I would say 1NT - 2NT as game forcing with a weak doubleton (to avoid 3NT with two weak doubletons opposite each other), something Tony Forrester taught me. (http://bridgewinners...boye-brogeland/)

A CC from 2016:

 

http://www.ecatsbridge.com/documents/files/BPinfo/OpenTeams/Norway/NOROT_Brogeland-Lindqvist.pdf

Interesting.

Of course Brogeland and Forrester are top level players.

But that does not mean I am as enthusiastic as Brogeland seems to be.

 

Presumably opener indicates his low doubleton and then responder bids 3NT or not.

 

There are many problems with this.

First even if opener has a low doubleton chances are it will not be in the suit where responder holds a doubleton, not only because there are 4 suits where opener can have a doubleton.

If opener shows a low doubleton somewhere else this gives defender useful information what to lead when responder bids 3NT next and just because responder has a game force does not necessarily mean game will be unbeatable.

 

We tend to get deeply impressed when we have close to 30 HCP in 3 suits and the defenders cash 5 or 6 trick in the fourth suit. But how often does this happen?

I tried to check how likely it will be you will need this convention to get a great result.

 

For this to work

 

a) no 8 card major suit fit, where I assume anyone would find that strain anyway

b) responder has no 5 card major, because he would not respond with 2NT

c) responder being balanced or semibalanced

 

I assumed opener to be 15-17. For the game force I assumed the combined HCP to be between 25 and 30

I allowed both opener or responder to be 5422 or 6322 with a six card minor and I defined small doubleton means only absence of king or ace. So either could hold the queen or jack.

If you insist xx versus xx chances for this to occur are of course even less.

 

Result: You will have to wait on average for more than 500 deals, where opener opens 1NT before opener and responder will hold a small doubleton in the same suit and the above conditions are met.

Is it really worthwhile to cater for this condition and reserve a bid for this?

 

Rainer Herrmann

[PhantomSac]

I think Brink-Drijver have some method to show a worthless doubleton and a 3N bid also (I don't know if they still do but 99 % sure they had it come up vs me once).

[Siegmund]

But I know of no leading player recommending nowadays a treatment to detect xx opposite xx after a notrump openings?

It's not specifically xx-xx, but when responder is 3-1-5-4, the single biggest benefit of showing the pattern is avoiding 3NT when opener is afraid of hearts. Finding minor-suit slams is the second-biggest benefit. Finding a spade fit is a distant, very distant, third -- and some of those are 4-3s when opener has xxx(x) or Axx(x) hearts, not 5-3s.

With some partners I use 3H for 3154/3145/3055 and 3S for 1354/1345/0355; with others we use 3C in a vaguely Puppet-like way, in that opener bids 3M with 5 and 3D without - but after 1NT-3C-3D all of the followups are aimed at minor suit slams. Keeping 1NT-3C-3D-3H just to show 4-3 in the majors feels incredibly wasteful.(If I am 4315, my plan is 2C, then show clubs, then show my singleton. An easier plan to achieve with Martens style transfers, which I have yet to talk partners into.)

[SteveMoe]

Finding a 5-3 fit in opener's major is more important and I expect more frequent than finding 2-2 opposite with no stop.

Any sim data to help understand relative frequency?

I suspect that 2-2 will make some sizeable pct of the time as the opening lead has to be right.

[Vampyr]

[/size][/color]

It's not specifically xx-xx, but when responder is 3-1-5-4, the single biggest benefit of showing the pattern is avoiding 3NT when opener is afraid of hearts. Finding minor-suit slams is the second-biggest benefit. Finding a spade fit is a distant, very distant, third -- and some of those are 4-3s when opener has xxx(x) or Axx(x) hearts, not 5-3s.

 

Yes, but here, as you mention in the snipped text, responder will bid either the shortage or the fragment. So this is not directly relevant to the OP.