Fantunes 2-level openings

[Chamaco]

Hi all,

I would like to have feedback from the BB Forum friends on the following issue raised by 2-level Fantunes openings.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

I will skip the 2C opening, which has more room for exchanging info, and will rater focus on 2D/2M openings.

 

The 2-level FN scheme to respond to such openings uses:

 

1. 2NT as positive relay (lately they have switched to 2S as positive relay over 2H opener)

 

2. new suit at the 2 level, as a NF bid guaranteeing ONLY a 4 CARD SUIT, offering a better contract. The 4 card suit can also be canapè.

Opener, in turn is expected to act differently according to the support in the suit offered by responder.

.......2a. with 0-2 card support, rebid naturally (either the long suit, or second suit)

.......2b. with 3 card support, pass if minimum, bid 2NT if max

.......2c with 4+ card support, raise to 3 if min, raise to 4 if max

 

3. new NON_JUMP suit at the 3 level is forcing, so cannot be used as NF bid

 

 

------

THE PROBLEM

 

My new partner proposed that over a NF bid, opener should rebid 2NT with a misfit hand that is not sure of the safe spot (instead of using it to show a max 3-card raise).

He suggested that with a max hand worth a raise, opener could simply raise at the 3 level with 3 or 4 cards.

 

I am not very convinced of the use of 2SA as "scrambling": I objected to pard that responder should seldom be in a position to scramble.

If he smells a misfit, he should tend to pass quickly pard's 2-level pening, even if he is short in it, anticipating the troubles rather than scrambling via NT to a 3-level contract, which can be much more easily doubled.

 

I proposed the following strategy according to responder's strength:

- 0-8 : responder passes also in misfit with parter. If he introduces a suit of his own despite being this weak, he must have at least HHxx (better if HHxxx)

- good 9-12 (bad 13): responder bids his suit even if it's an ugly suit. There si still the possibility to find game if we find the right fit, so we must keep the bidding alive

- very good 12/13 and stronger: responder uses the strong relay.

 

Partner replied that, since F-N 2-level opener may be simply a 5 card suit xxxxx, there is a need to frequently propose a rescue bid with suits like Kxxxx, even if we are weak.

I disagree, in the sense that I prefer avoid opening a FN 2 opening with 5431 and a 5 card empty suit; I may prefer to treat it as a weak NT opening.

 

 

BOTTOMLINE AND FINAL QUESTION

 

I would like from all of you suggestion for

 

 

a. 2-LEVEL OPENING REQUIREMENTS

 

We all know FN suggest (9+)10-13 hcp and unbalanced hands. (only exception 5422 with majors)

But what about suit quality ?

 

What would you open, vulnerable, holding:

KQx-Txxxx-AKxx-x

 

My idea is to consider a xxxxx suit as a 4 bagger, and to open in many cases 1NT with 5431 and an empty 5 bagger.

Any thoughts ?

 

what about, say, a slightly better suit, but not so great, e.g.:

Kxx-Kxxxx-AKxx-x ?

Would you open 2H vulnerable ?

 

 

 

b. NON FORCING RESPONSES

 

According to the requirements for the 2-level openings, how would you handle as responder the hands in the 0-7/8 hcp range in misfit with the opened suit ?

 

E.g., suppose ur pard opens 2D how do u handle the following hands ?

Consider that pard will not pass your NF bid if he has 0-2 card support, and he'll raise you with 4 cards and the minimum

 

BASICALLY, THE QUESTION IS: SHOULD THE NF BID BE A RESCUE BID ? AND IF SO WHAT SUIT REQUIREMENTS ARE NEEDED ?

 

hand 1

KQxx-xx-x-Jxxxxx

 

This hand cannot rescue directly in a minor; 3C wd be forcing.

It does has a decent 4 card suit though.

 

hand 2

Kxxx-xx-x-JTxxxx

 

This hand is a misfit in diamonds, but the spade suit is a lousy 4 bagger. Yet we might have a better spot than 2D.

 

 

hand 3

JTxxx-Kxxx-x-xxx

 

Here we have BOTH majors to offer, what strategy should we adopt ?

 

 

hand 4

Qxxxx-xx-x-Axxxx

 

Here we have 2 places to play, but should we risk that pard rebids diamonds at the 3 level ?

[glen1]

BOTTOMLINE AND FINAL QUESTION

 

I would like from all of you suggestion for

 

 

a. 2-LEVEL OPENING REQUIREMENTS

 

We all know FN suggest (9+)10-13 hcp and unbalanced hands. (only exception 5422 with majors)

But what about suit quality ?

 

What would you open, vulnerable, holding:

KQx-Txxxx-AKxx-x

 

Yes, playing FN.

 

My idea is to consider a xxxxx suit as a 4 bagger, and to open in many cases 1NT with 5431 and an empty 5 bagger.

Any thoughts ?

 

Too much playing strength if partner has 4 card fit for 5 card major. If singleton in other major, partner may transfer to suit and have you play there on 5-1 fit.

 

 

what about, say, a slightly better suit, but not so great, e.g.:

Kxx-Kxxxx-AKxx-x ?

Would you open 2H vulnerable ?

Yes, playing FN style.

 

 

b. NON FORCING RESPONSES

 

According to the requirements for the 2-level openings, how would you handle as responder the hands in the 0-7/8 hcp range in misfit with the opened suit ?

 

Scramble out to better fit if can find one - FN do this all the time. Opponents rarely know when to double, and sometimes miss entering auction when they should.

 

 

E.g., suppose ur pard opens 2D how do u handle the following hands ?

Consider that pard will not pass your NF bid if he has 0-2 card support, and he'll raise you with 4 cards and the minimum

 

BASICALLY, THE QUESTION IS: SHOULD THE NF BID BE A RESCUE BID ? AND IF SO WHAT SUIT REQUIREMENTS ARE NEEDED ?

 

hand 1

KQxx-xx-x-Jxxxxx

 

This hand cannot rescue directly in a minor; 3C wd be forcing.

It does has a decent 4 card suit though.

 

2S, non-forcing, playing FN style.

 

 

hand 2

Kxxx-xx-x-JTxxxx

 

This hand is a misfit in diamonds, but the spade suit is a lousy 4 bagger. Yet we might have a better spot than 2D.

 

2S, non-forcing, playing FN style.

 

 

 

hand 3

JTxxx-Kxxx-x-xxx

 

Here we have BOTH majors to offer, what strategy should we adopt ?

 

2H, non-forcing, playing FN style. Partner will bid 2S if no fit and 4Ss.

 

 

 

hand 4

Qxxxx-xx-x-Axxxx

 

Here we have 2 places to play, but should we risk that pard rebids diamonds at the 3 level ?

 

2S, non-forcing, playing FN style. Partner with no fit should bid 3C with 4+Cs or 2NT with much of anything else, allowing a 3C rebid by responder.

 

[Gerben42]

I would not respond quite as agressively as glen does but pass with very weak hands. If 2♦ really is so terrible it'll go pass pass dbl pass pass and NOW we can do something. If it gets passed out and I am weak (4 - 6 HCP or so like your examples) they will have the balance of power and I am not giving them another chance to get into the bidding).

 

Bottom line: It can be a rescue bid if the suit is long, if the suit is not so long it must be a constructive bid.

[Chamaco]

hand 2

Kxxx-xx-x-JTxxxx

 

This hand is a misfit in diamonds, but the spade suit is a lousy 4 bagger. Yet we might have a better spot than 2D.

 

[/color]

2S, non-forcing, playing FN style.

 

Consider that opener wil ALWAYS raise you to the 3 level if he has 3+ card support.

Besides, if we adopt opener's 2NT rebid as "scrambling" (as you suggest- if I understood correctly -, while in the original F-N system , 2NT rebid by opener is a 3 card raise), opener will raise directly to 3S even holding 3 cards.

Are you willing to drive to the 3-level opposite a (9+)10-13 opener, even risking a Moysian ?

 

hand 3

JTxxx-Kxxx-x-xxx

 

Here we have BOTH majors to offer, what strategy should we adopt ?

 

2H, non-forcing, playing FN style.  Partner will bid 2S if no fit and 4Ss.

 

Opener might rebid 3C with no fit, if he has 54/55 in the minors.

In F-N, 2S is not a scramble but natural.

 

hand 4

Qxxxx-xx-x-Axxxx

 

Here we have 2 places to play, but should we risk that pard rebids diamonds at the 3 level ?

 

2S, non-forcing, playing FN style.  Partner with no fit should bid 3C with 4+Cs or 2NT with much of anything else, allowing a 3C rebid by responder.

 

 

 

Here too, for both hands 3 and 4 are you willing to be raised automatically by opener with 3+ cards and a max, even if we are vulnerable ?

[Chamaco]

Bottom line: It can be a rescue bid if the suit is long, if the suit is not so long it must be a constructive bid.

That was also my own view.

A weak responder should have a VERY good reason to bid (e.g. a good own suit).

 

A constructive responder may loosen up the requirements.

[glen1]

THE PROBLEM

 

My new partner proposed that over a NF bid, opener should rebid 2NT with a misfit hand that is not sure of the safe spot (instead of using it to show a max 3-card raise).

He suggested that with a max hand worth a raise, opener could simply raise at the 3 level with 3 or 4 cards.

First, note that FN with hands of the shape for a two level suit opening, open 1 of a suit instead with some 12 HCP hands, and many 13 HCP hands. Also they open a few 8 HCP hands on the two level, and some 9 HCP hands (except in 3rd seat where they frequently do so with 8-9 since responder will usually not have enough values to get them in trouble).

 

So the two level openings have quite a narrow effective range, and should be treated as 10-12 hands, even though they will sometimes have poor 13s and good 9s or great 8s. Thus the FN style is not to have too many game invite sequences - instead they usually force to game or stay low.

 

So if responder bids a suit that opener has 3 or 4 card support for, opener will usually pass. To raise would require a four card fit, maximum, and extra shape (not just 5-4-3-1). Playing this style, responder can explore for a better fit on a weak hand, as the bidding will stay low.

 

This is why FN don't mind opening 2♦ with 4-4-4-1. Responder will not pass with a singleton/void in ♦s, but instead will bid a four card or longer major with one. Also responder knows that since opener is often 5-4-3-1 (and never 5-4-2-2) opener will either pass with a 3 or 4 card fit, or bid again if singleton/void. For example if 5-2-1-5 over a 2♦ opening, responder bids 2♠, and if opener runs out of that, there is likely a ♣ fit.

 

Note how effective this approach can be against the opponents. The bidding goes 2♦-Pass-2♠-?. Now does the opponent bid here, into a possible misfit, or pass here and perhaps miss out on game or a good part score? Compare to a Precision 2♦ instead - now the opponent knows that 2♦-Pass-2♠ is based on some sort of fit.

 

Sometimes the FN run out will leave them at the three level playing in opener's suit with no fit. Stuff happens. The opponents don't often double and the contract goes down a bunch, but two of the same contract was also going down.

[Chamaco]

First, note that FN with hands of the shape for a two level suit opening, open 1 of a suit instead with some 12 HCP hands, and many 13 HCP hands.

 

Sure.

The logic behind this evaluation is that any hand that would bid game opposite a 10 count would open at the 1 level, even if it's not strictly a 14 count.

 

I would say that any 6.5 losers hand or better opens at the 1 level, regardless of point count (of course, minors oriented hand should better be more careful to adopt the LTC, since often we would land in 3NT short of power).

 

 

Similarly, they will open at the 2 level a hand that can make game opposite a responder holding a GOOD opening hand (good 12/13+, basically a 6.5 losrs hand or better- same requirement for 1 level opening), but that would NOT see game if responder had barely a 10 count or so.

 

So, of course, the distinction between opening at 1 or 2 level is not purely Milton Work point count, but the overall hand quality.

 

So if responder bids a suit that opener has 3 or 4 card support for, opener will usually pass.

 

No.

This is not Fantoni-Nunes system, although the agreement you suggest is playable.

I have their original notes.

 

In their original notes, opener, over a NF bid will:

- pass with 3 cards and minimum

- raise to 3M with 4 cards and minimum

- raise to 4M with 4 cards and a max

- bid 2NT with 3 cards and a max

- rebid long suit or show second suit with 0-2 card support of responder's suit, regardless of min or max.

 

This is their original system.

Of course we are free to change it , but that's how it is.

 

So, basically: 1) anytime opener has 4 card support he will raise; 2) anytime opener has 0-2 card support, he will rebid something else forcing to the 3-level.

 

Of course this is key point, and the post was related to the consequences of using such an approach by F-N.

It seems to me that adopting this priciples means that weak responder should pass more often, because he risks to force the bidding at the 3 level with a weak hand.

[glen1]

This is not Fantoni-Nunes system, although the agreement you suggest is playable.

I have their original notes.

Love to get a copy even if in (gasp) Italian. Send to FN @ bridgematters . com

 

Didn't have their notes, just went through the vugraph archives looking at all the hands they played, so it seemed to me that opener usually passes.

 

So, basically: 1) anytime opener has 4 card support he will raise; 2) anytime opener has 0-2 card support, he will rebid something else forcing to the 3-level.

 

Of course this is key point, and the post was related to the consequences of using such an approach by F-N.

It seems to me that adopting this priciples means that weak responder should pass more often, because he risks to force the bidding at the 3 level with a weak hand.

 

I agree, that if the style is for opener to raise any time there is a four card fit, you can't respond on these weak hands. In which case I would not play FN two bids as the problems you posed earlier are unsolvable. For example if you wait until they double, and then run out on a misfit hand, the sharks will taste the blood in the water, and goodbye to various body parts.

[luis]

Well I have been playing this since September in last year, so what I'm going to say is what we are doing with the 2 level openings and how the results are.

 

We play 2♣, 2♦, 2♥ and 2♠ as 9-13 unbalanced but can be 5332 in third position.

We often upgrade good 13 counters to a 1 level opening, good 8 counters (specially 6-4 hands with 2 aces are opened 2x without much problem)

With 5-5 and 10-13 HCP we frequently prefer NOT to open 2x since we have speciallized responses over 1x to show 5-5 hands with 10+HCP, those responses have produced good results and it's hard to describe a 5-5 hand after a 2x opening.

From the 9-13 hands that qualify as 2x openings as described above we open about 90%, when vul vs not, for example we don't open a hand that has 9-10 HCP and honors in the short suits. We don't care about suit quality but location of honors instead.

 

Over our 2x openings we have been using a different approach than the one described, we keep the 2NT relay over 2d, 2h and 2s for forcing game hands. But then the other bids are NF (at any level) and constructive. This means that we pass with missfit hands without values, we don't try to improve the contract. Since our responses are constructive opener is encouraged to bid with a fit and a good hand or a very good hand himself.

After 2d-2h, 2d-2s or 2h-2s we use 2NT to show a good or intermediate hand without a spade fit, we raise with 3 with a good hand, we pass with bad hands (with or without a fit).

[glen]

Fantoni, East, just had:

 

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sqt864hj987d92cq5]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

Nunes opens 2♣, 10-13. Fantoni, with 5 points, relays with 2♦

[PrecisionL]

Interesting, food for thought. There was another thread recently in this forum discussing F-N 2 bids.

 

I have been playing (since 2000) 2♠/2♥ opening bids as 10 to a bad 14 and 5332 (no singleton) with 2 honors in the 5-card major. This works surprisingly well at MPs and IMPs. 2NT response is weak with 6♣ or GI or better with another suit. 2 over 1 responses are to play usually with singleton in major and 6-card suit. 3♣ response is G.I. with clubs & 10-11 good hcp.

 

Recently, we changed to 5+M and 4+♣ at IMPs with 10-14 hcp to cover the 5-4 and 6-4 hands when playing a strong club so as not to miss light double fitting games.

 

Larry