DONT runout

[Liversidge]

We play that after openers 1nt is doubled, a suit bid by partner is the start of a scramble bidding 4 card suits up the line and treating a 4333 hand as a 2 suiter. How does opener treat a 5332 hand?

[apollo1201]

I would say similar to DONT: X is one-suited so XX should show a one-suited hand

[Liversidge]

I may not have worded the question correctly. Responder does not have a 5 card suit so bids his lowest ranking 4 card suit to start a scramble for a 7 card fit. If opener is 5332 does he then treat his hand as 4432?

[steve2005]

Situations depend on what responder 1st bid was as that will determine where their second suit is. It is also possible they have 3 suits if 4441 or 5440. If responder has 4333 you may end up in 3-3 but goal is to get at least a 4-3.

Easiest is if 2♥ was bid so responder has ♥&♠ so you bid 2♠ with longer ♠ or pass with equal or longer hearts.

 

 

If responder bid 2♦ they have 4♦ or a 4-card major. With 5♦ you pass. With 5-3 in majors I would bid 2♥. With 5♣ 3-2 in majors you should pass 2♦.

 

 

If responder bids 2♣ they will have 4♣ and another 4-card suit. This is the hardest and shows the weakness of DONT as rescue. With 3 or 5 ♣ pass. With 2♣ bid you cheapest 3 or 5-card suit.

[spotlight7]

You might want to try XX* forces 2C from partner to later

 

pass(with 5+Cs) or bid a 5+ suit next over the forced 2C bid.

 

 

Playing in the 5 card suit is likely better than most 3-3 contracts.

 

 

It should play better than most 4-3 fits as well. The 5 trumps will

 

provide entries to the weak hand to take finesses and lead towards honors.

 

 

You can still use your DONT structure to show 4333 and 4432 types

 

as well as showing a 5 card suit by bidding XX*

 

 

If you do not wish to give up the XX as penalty, you can

 

use Pass* as 'two meanings.' 1) I will pass the forced

 

XX for penalty when I hold the expected penalty type values.

 

 

If I am weak with a 5 card suit, I Pass* forcing a XX* and bid

 

a 5 card suit over the XX*

 

 

Playing against beginner/intermediate players, you

 

will find that some players that doubled you will

 

try to escape from what maybe is a penalty XX.

 

 

If their nerve fails, you can sometimes escape a poor penalty situatation.

[maartenxq]

I play xx and all suit bids responder are transfer ie. xx = ♣.

 

Pass forces xx opener then 2 ♣ RH looks for openers best suit.

 

Maarten Baltussen

[Vampyr]

Any runout system that does not allow you to play in 1NTX is seriously flawed.

[rmnka447]

Runouts of 1 NTx is something you have to be adept at playing weak NTs, which is what I've done for years with certain partners. The same principles apply though if you play strong NTs.

 

We originally played Pass as the strongest bid requiring a Redouble by opener. Over opener's forced Redouble after responder's pass, responder could pass with a hand willing to play 1 NTxx or bid cheapest 4 card suit. Opener can pass with 3 in that suit or bid his cheapest suit. All suit bid over the Double were 5+ cards to play.

 

But we've since transitioned to Redouble as a transfer to 2 ♣. Immediate 2 ♣, 2 ♦, 2 ♥ bids by responder are also transfers. Pass again potentially shows a hand willing to play 1 NT Doubled or a run out hand with no 5 card suit. Opener has the option to Pass, Redouble, or bid his/her 5 card suit. Redouble by opener suggests running. Then, responder passes with a hand willing to play 1 NTxx or starts bidding the cheapest 4 card suits. It's most normal for opener to Redouble after a responder Pass, but Pass allows opener to Pass with that unique hand where playing 1 NT doubled seems right opposite a partner potentially with zilch.

 

Both are workable, but we prefer the second because the strong hand is concealed when responder runs with a 5 card suit, and opener gets to bid his/her 5 card suit which is lost with the first method.

[neilkaz]

Runouts of 1 NTx is something you have to be adept at playing weak NTs, which is what I've done for years with certain partners. The same principles apply though if you play strong NTs.

 

We originally played Pass as the strongest bid requiring a Redouble by opener. Over opener's forced Redouble after responder's pass, responder could pass with a hand willing to play 1 NTxx or bid cheapest 4 card suit. Opener can pass with 3 in that suit or bid his cheapest suit. All suit bid over the Double were 5+ cards to play.

 

But we've since transitioned to Redouble as a transfer to 2 ♣. Immediate 2 ♣, 2 ♦, 2 ♥ bids by responder are also transfers. Pass again potentially shows a hand willing to play 1 NT Doubled or a run out hand with no 5 card suit. Opener has the option to Pass, Redouble, or bid his/her 5 card suit. Redouble by opener suggests running. Then, responder passes with a hand willing to play 1 NTxx or starts bidding the cheapest 4 card suits. It's most normal for opener to Redouble after a responder Pass, but Pass allows opener to Pass with that unique hand where playing 1 NT doubled seems right opposite a partner potentially with zilch.

 

Both are workable, but we prefer the second because the strong hand is concealed when responder runs with a 5 card suit, and opener gets to bid his/her 5 card suit which is lost with the first method.

 

I like this.

[P_Marlowe]

I may not have worded the question correctly. Responder does not have a 5 card suit so bids his lowest ranking 4 card suit to start a scramble for a 7 card fit. If opener is 5332 does he then treat his hand as 4432?

Hi,

 

#1 If your partner hit a 3 carder, be happy, you have a ruffing feature, a side suit, that can be established.

 

#2 If your 5 carder is a minor, chances are, that responder already by passed your suit, do you want to play

at the 3 level in a 5-1 fit (the best you can expect is a 5-2), add to this the fact, that this will also tell

the opponents that you are in a missfit.

 

#3 If your 5 carder is a major, you can skip a suit, to say, that this is your suit. I dont ask, why you opened

1 NT.

 

In short: You opened 1NT, partner employs a runout seq., and he is suggesting the suits, he is not asking you

to introduce a suit of your own.

You want to get out as fast as possible from the auction.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[miamijd]

If any suit is the start of a 4-card runout, then I presume you XX with all single-suited hands, correct? So something like:

 

XX: forces 2C; you can pass with clubs or bid 2D or 2H to play there (this isn't as good as using transfers because the Xer isn't on lead, but to use a DONT structure it is necessary)

2C: RUNOUT: 4/4 or better clubs and a higher suit

2D: RUNOUT: 4/4 or better diamonds and a higher suit

2H: RUNOUT: 4/4 or better majors

2S: spades, I suppose (I guess XX and then spades shows a decent hand?)

 

That's playable, although I prefer

XX: forces 2C: single suited minor

2C: Stayman (if responder bids 2H over 2D, then it's both majors - garbage Stayman)

2D: hearts

2H; spades

Pass with a hand where you don't mind sitting or where you have no runout (4333 hands)

 

Cheers,

mike

[kuhchung]

I know this does not answer your question, but this is the runout scheme I prefer

 

Also, I presume this is when you get penalty doubled, not when their double is conventional showing blah and/or blah

 

1. all bids are TO PLAY

2. see #1

[Vampyr]

I know this does not answer your question, but this is the runout scheme I prefer

 

Also, I presume this is when you get penalty doubled, not when their double is conventional showing blah and/or blah

 

1. all bids are TO PLAY

2. see #1

 

This is what I prefer, and obviously you bid clubs or diamonds and redouble if doubled, showing three places to play/majors respectively.

 

However I have played 1NTXX once in my life, so I am wondering whether it might more usefully be put to another purpose.

 

When it is any other situation except 1NT-(X) (chiefly when the double is protective, but can be used if opener decides to XX in protective seat) we play that XX by either player is majors or minors.

[Zelandakh]

We play that after openers 1nt is doubled, a suit bid by partner is the start of a scramble bidding 4 card suits up the line and treating a 4333 hand as a 2 suiter. How does opener treat a 5332 hand?

The main point of runout systems is that you are looking for a playable spot (7+ card fit) at the two level. When Responder shows two 4 card suits, the assumption is that Opener is at least 3-2 meaning that at least one of them will be playable. So if Responder bid your doubleton you stick with the program and play for partner's second suit. There is no need to gamble on bypassing partner's second suit in favour of a suit where you might on a bad day even be 5-0.

 

Incidentally, I have an alternative suggestion for handling 4333 hands within your methods. If the 4 cards are in ♠, ♥ or ♦, bid 2♣, ostensibly showing clubs and a higher suit. If partner does not like clubs then bid your 4 card suit next. If partner passes and the opps double, a XX now conventionally shows the 4333 hand. Finally, if you have specifically 4♣333, you treat the hand as if it were 5(332), presumably that is XX followed by passing partner's 2♣. Once again, if the opps subsequently double 2♣, you can XX to show this exact hand.

 

Using this tweak allows you to avoid a 3-3 fit opposite Opener's 5332 where a 5-3 would also have been available. Of course the method is not free and you do give up something along the way. In this case you lose the ability to XX for SOS with a 3-suiter short in clubs. Luckily that hand is dealt with easily using your usual scrambling runouts so the loss is minimal.

[Vampyr]

On a related note, we play strong NT in 3rd at teams, This makes the need to run out considerably less likely.

[Zelandakh]

On a related note, we play strong NT in 3rd at teams, This makes the need to run out considerably less likely.

Against that you lose the weapon of an additional third seat preempt. There are certainly pros and cons of both approaches and a very reasonable argument can be put together for varying NT range by vulnerability in third.

[Vampyr]

Against that you lose the weapon of an additional third seat preempt. There are certainly pros and cons of both approaches and a very reasonable argument can be put together for varying NT range by vulnerability in third.

 

Don't get me wrong, one of the reasons I play weak NT is because of the pre-emptive effect.

 

But when partner is a passed hand and the only person at the table who might have a big hand is lefty, I am willing to give up a pre-empt lacking the safety of a long suit.

[Liversidge]

The main point of runout systems is that you are looking for a playable spot (7+ card fit) at the two level. When Responder shows two 4 card suits, the assumption is that Opener is at least 3-2 meaning that at least one of them will be playable. So if Responder bid your doubleton you stick with the program and play for partner's second suit. There is no need to gamble on bypassing partner's second suit in favour of a suit where you might on a bad day even be 5-0.

That is very helpful / logical and answers my question. Thanks