Small little idea

[whereagles]

Hi all,

 

Suppose you play 5-card majors and weak NT. Then define other openings as follows:

 

1♣ = 5+ clubs OR 15-17 balanced.

1♦ = 5+ diamonds OR 18-20 balanced.

1M = 5+ cards, unbalanced if 11-14.

1NT = 12-14, may have 5 card major.

2NT = 21-22, may have 5 card major. If opener has 5 major, then 20 hcp possible.

Other openings = usual stuff.

4441 shapes are defined as balanced hands and treated accordingly.

 

The chief idea is to enable responder to make a minor suit raise to 2m on just 3 cards. This possibility GREATLY helps in competitive auctions when opener has 5 cards in the minor. Plus, it releases the pressure off the negative double and NT bids. If opener holds the balanced hand instead of the 5+ minor hand, he simply rebids 2NT. This should be safe because there are usually enough points to play 2NT (this wouldn't be true playing a strong NT).

 

Since 1m-1x-1NT shows the balanced hand, one can define the spurious bid 1m-1x-2NT to show the balanced hand, but with support for responder's suit x.

[luke warm]

yes, i like this concept (guess cause i was thinking along same lines not long ago)

[vang]

sounds reasonable, with a few problems:

- 4441 (so, you might be unbalanced with only 4 card minor)

- 1C-2C-2NT=15-17 is not very safe

- when i tried such a system, it feels a little unconfortable to open with 1C when having

AKxx Qxx AKxx xx, but this is the price, when you are balanced, you cannot choose opening minor by strength

[luke warm]

after 1C : 2C

 

the 2C bid must either show strength or weakness, nothing in between... if strength, it's safe to bid on... if weakness, it's safe to pass... same for 1D:2D... this doesn't seem too hard to overcome

[Free]

Seems playable, but won't you lose a lot of 4-4 M fits? And are the 1m openings forcing or not? What's the response structure?

[luke warm]

no, i don't think you lose a lot of 4/4 fits.. here's a possible response structure, off top of head

 

1c-2c = 4-6 with 4+ clubs, denies 4 cd M... can be weaker with longer clubs

1c-1d=6+, bypass with 4 cd M if weak

1c-1h=6+, may have longer diamonds

1c-1s=6+, may have longer diamonds

1c-1nt=6-9, denies 4 cd M

1c-2nt=10-12, denies 4 cd M unless 4333

1c-3nt=13-15, denies 4 cd M unless 4333

 

1c-2d=5+ spades, 4+ hearts, 5-8

1c-2h=5 spades, 4 hearts, 9-11

 

1d opening follows same path as 1c

1d-2h=same as 1c-2d

1d-2s=same as 1c-2h

 

after 1c-1y-1nt or 1d-1y-1nt, 2 way checkback is on... 1c-1d-1h(s) shows unbalanced hand, same for 1d-1h-1s.. balanced hands by opener bypass major(s)

 

4441 hands are not opened 1nt but are treated as balanced for rebid purposes... open 4 card minor then bid nt or show support

[Blofeld]

That seems really quite a fun idea.

 

Have you had much experience of actually playing this?

 

What response structure do you use to 1nt to allow for the 4441 hands?

[Guest Jlall]

I don't like the idea of treating 4441 as balanced. 4441 is very suit oriented and also if pard has a weak hand with a 5 card major he cant safely transfer out. It causes too many problems.

[luke warm]

That seems really quite a fun idea.

 

Have you had much experience of actually playing this?

 

What response structure do you use to 1nt to allow for the 4441 hands?

i've never played this, but like the concept... ok, again this is just off the top of my head

 

4414 (same general strategy if 4441)

 

11/12-14: open 1C, bid 1H over 1D, raise 1H/S to 2, pass 1NT

15-17: open 1C, bid 1NT over 1D, raise 1H/S to 2, bid 2NT over 1NT

18-20: open 1D, raise 1H/S to 3, bid 3NT over 1NT

 

4144 (same general strategy if 1444)

 

11/12-14: open 1D, bid 1S over 1H, raise 1S to 2, bid 2C over 1NT

15-17: open 1C, bid 2D over 1D, bid 1NT over 1H, raise 1S to 2

18-20: open 1D, raise 2D to 3, bid 1NT over 1H, raise 1S to 3, bid 3C over 1NT

 

lots of room for improvement (and error) here

[Blofeld]

You say "same general strategy if 1444", but isn't the 1444 hand trickier to deal with than the 4144?

 

In particular, are you opening 1D with a 12-14 1444 and rebidding 2C over 1S?

 

One way to dodge the prolem some of the time is not to open 1444 hands on 11 or 12 counts.

[Echognome]

I think this is an interesting method. You could obviously vary the balanced ranges a bit. That is:

 

1♣ 5+ clubs or 11-14 balanced and

1NT = 15-17

 

Personally I prefer 3 point ranges on NT, so would play:

 

1♣ 5+ clubs or 14-16 bal

1♦ 5+ diamonds or 17-19 bal

1NT = 11-13 bal

2NT = 20-21 bal

 

Another point is that in competition, you will have to play the "strong NT double" that is 1♦ - (1♠) - P - (2♠) - ?

 

Double will show the big balanced hand.

[MickyB]

Two problems -

 

How will you bid as responder when you have five card support? I forsee auctions where you lose your five-five fit because you are both worried that pard only has three of them.

 

Obviously you still have problems with high level interference.

 

For these reasons, I'd rather put both bal ranges into 1♣ and play transfer responses to sort out the ranges.

 

A flat 14 shouldn't be bidding again after 1♣:2♣, in fact a flat 15 probably shouldn't be either. For the same reason, it wouldn't work to play this with a strong NT Matt.

[hrothgar]

I've seen similar methods proposed several times in the past

Never liked them much for a simple reason...

Partner is terribly placed when the bidding becomes competitive

 

I'll note in passing that almost none of the discussion regarding response strucutres touches on crucial bread-and-butter auctions like

 

1♣ - (2♥) - ???

 

or

 

1♦ - (1♠) - ???

 

Consider the following hand

 

♠ 853

♥ 42

♦ K752

♣ Q542

 

Partner opens 1♦ and RHO overcalls 1♥

Playing standard methods, I have an easy jump raise to 3♦

Here any raise is extremely risky

[pigpenz]

I played for yearts 1NT 10-13hcp

5 card majors

mini Roman 10-13 (4414 or 445)

 

and in my own experiences opening 1nt with crappy 5 card majors or even better yet playing weak notrump with 4 card majors is even better.

[luke warm]

I've seen similar methods proposed several times in the past

Never liked them much for a simple reason...

Partner is terribly placed when the bidding becomes competitive

 

I'll note in passing that almost none of the discussion regarding response strucutres touches on crucial bread-and-butter auctions like

 

1♣ - (2♥) - ???

 

or

 

1♦ - (1♠) - ???

 

Consider the following hand

 

♠ 853

♥ 42

♦ K752

♣ Q542

 

Partner opens 1♦ and RHO overcalls 1♥

Playing standard methods, I have an easy jump raise to 3♦

Here any raise is extremely risky

you're right, richard... there are problems in almost any system... but since i like nfb, after 1c (2h) i can bid 2s, 3c/d, pass or double

 

after your problem hand, 1d (1s) just bid 2d.. course this isn't probably optimum

[whereagles]

Vang: 4441s are always a source of problems. My way to solve it is as follows: if singleton is AKQ, consider it a balanced hand. If singleon is J or worse, consider it a 5-4 hand, with the "5" card suit the strongest of the 4441.

 

1C-2C-2NT = 15-17 isn't very safe, I agree. But that's the price to pay for being able to support pard with 3 cards on a regular basis...

-----

 

Luke Warm: 1C-2C as weak or strong doesn't really appeal much to me. But that's something that can be worked if it proves to be relevant.

-----

 

Free:

- Missing 44 fits: why? If it's because of the 1NT rebid bypassing majors, that's not a problem if you play, say, checkback or keri.

 

- 1m openings are not forcing. The response structure works best with Walsh after 1C, but natural is also ok.

-----

 

Blofeld: I haven't played this scheme yet. But that's mostly because I like to play a 9-11 1NT. For people that don't play the bikini 1NT this can be a great scheme, especially if they don't like to bid NT without stoppers in opps suit (just support pard on 3 cards instead of bidding NT).

-----

 

Echognome: playing 1C as 11-14 or 5+ clubs doesn't work so well. Pard would be unable to support on 3 cards because opener's 2NT rebid on 11-14 would be very unsafe. As for lowering the NT scale to 11-13, 14-16, 17-19, that's playable, but not as safe as the original scheme.

-----

 

MickyB: bidding with 5 card support. Indeed that might be a problem. I'd have to think about it.. Another problem is how to establish a forcing raise, but that seems easier.

-----

 

Hrothgar: after

 

1C (2H)

1D (1S)

 

responder can raise on 3 cards if he doesn't like dbl or 1NT. That's what this system is meant for ;)

 

As for the hand you showed, after 1D (1H), I can bid 2D. If pard has the 18-20 hand, he'll bid 2NT and all is well.

-----

[david_c]

playing 1C as 11-14 or 5+ clubs doesn't work so well. Pard would be unable to support on 3 cards because opener's 2NT rebid on 11-14 would be very unsafe.

The second sentence is certainly true - responder can't support on 3 cards if opener might have a minimum balanced hand. However, the weak NT does badly in other respects which you ought to be aware of. In my opinion the main one is this:

 

If they overcall 2♦ or higher over your 1♣ opening, then either you have to insist that responder does not pass with any normal 9-10HCP hand, or you have to insist that opener does not pass with a balanced 15-16HCP hand.

 

Or you can do neither, but then you will obviously be missing a lot of good games. This is a well-known problem for natural-based weak NT systems, and it's made worse by playing a short club.