Frequency of 2NT responses

[ArcLight]

In Robson and Segals excellent book Partnership Bidding at Bridge they suggest an alternative use for 2NT, rather than 11-12 balanced. The Jacoby 2NT response also precludes the use of 2NT to show a balanced 11-12 response.

 

In the last 2 sessions I played a text book hand for a 2NT response came up.

 

Question 1 - How often does this type of hand occur? (11-12 balanced, in response to pards sound opening bid). Robson/Segal say that this type of hand rarely comes up, but it seems to me it does come up, at least more than "rarely".

(Is there a search engine or card distribution simulator taht could easily answer this?)

 

Question 2 - if you use Jacoby 2NT or Robson/Segals suggestion, what do you bid instead of 2NT to show a balanced 11-12? 1NT then 2NT? Or a crummy 4 card suit at the 2 level, then 2NT? Thats a problem if using 2/1. You have to bid 1NT then 2NT I think.

[helene_t]

11-12 seems strange to me, unless parter's opening is very sound so that 11 is enough for a game force.

 

If 11 HCPs is too much for 1NT, then bid 2♣ and you can still end in 2M (either by letting opener rebid 2♦ on a 3-card or 2M if that's non-forcing).

 

It makes sense to play 1♦-2NT as 11-12 and non-forcing, though, since you can then play a 2♣ response as a game force.

[pbleighton]

For me, the 1m-2NT invitaional response comes up pretty frequently. It prevents the opps from finding a major suit fit, and discloses little defensive information.

 

Peter

[Finch]

It's not really a matter of how often it comes up, but how easily you can cope without it. It's true that 11-12 balanced is fairly common, but I don't really miss it.

 

a) Responding to 1 Major

 

Playing Acol-style 2/1 I make a 2/1 (or respond 1S), planning to bid 2NT next round unless something more obvious is suggested by his rebid. It's part and parcel of the method that you make 2/1s on crummy suits quite often.

 

Playing 2/1 or similar where 1NT is forcing or semi-forcing respond 1NT, planning to bid 2NT next round.

 

:ph34r: Responding to 1 minor.

 

You are quite unlikely to have (10)11-12 balanced without a 4-card suit to bid at the one level and without the ability to raise partner's minor. If you are 3334 then you have to respond 2C to 1D (or play that 1D-2NT is natural).

[coyot]

No idea about a search engine that could tell this...

 

But, my experience is:

Against opening 1♣, you never need 2NT, because even with 3-3-4-3 you can bid 1d and then 2NT any likely response (with no long suits, you still need p. to find extra values with weak NT hand (or with long club hand).

 

Against 1♦, you only have problems with 3-3-3-4 - and the easiest approach would be to treat bad 11 as 10 and good 11 as 12 :-) - or even have the 1NT response defined as 6-11. (With totally misfit hands, you'll hardly make 3NT on 25 HCP - and p with 5 clubs and good 14(15) HCP will raise (as he is known not to have 15-17 balanced or 16+ with 5-4...

 

Googling for "bridge card distribution probabilities" provides helpful link: http://www.xs4all.nl/~tpgroen/bridge/index.shtml

4-3-3-3 with 4 cards in a specific suits has a chance of 2.6%. Point count 11 or 12 sums about 16%, so against an opening of 1m, the odds of getting a hand that could only be bid as 2NT are about 0.4% (maybe a little less, because the 11-12 point count is general probability, not affected by the fact that partner has already opened bidding (which gives the remaning 3x13 cards less total points than the 10 average).

 

So, against minor openers, the 2NT 11-12 occurs very rarely - less than 0.5%.

(The only question is, how often will you bid 2NT when you COULD bid differently, to hide your major holdings :ph34r:)

 

Against major openers, the artifical 2NT is a must. In 2/1 system, you're in the clear with 1NT semiforcing as declarer will pass only with a very bare minimum (if ever allowed by the system) - so with any 11 (and even bad 12) you can afford 1NT, while with good 12 a 2/1 bid on minor 4card saves the day.

 

The frequency of these cases is much higher, though, because it covers every distribution with a doubleton in partner's suit, where the three remaining suits are divided 533 or 443 (for 11 HCP) or 433 (for 12 HCP). For 1H opener, the probability is lowered by the chance of responder having 4card in spades.

 

So, roughly: (0.15 + 0.21) * 0.25 (specific doubleton) * 0.08% (11HCP) =~ 0.7%

(0.21)*0.25*0.08 (12HCP) = ~ 0.3%.

 

Against opening 1♠, there is approximately 1% (max. 1.2% wild guess) chance that you have a natural 2NT raise.

 

Against 1♥, the chance would be lowered to about 0.5% or less. (1/3 of 5332 and 2/3 of 4432 11HCP hands scratched, 2/3 of 4432 12HCP hands scratched.)

[hrothgar]

Googling for "bridge card distribution probabilities" provides helpful link: http://www.xs4all.nl/~tpgroen/bridge/index.shtml

4-3-3-3 with 4 cards in a specific suits has a chance of 2.6%. Point count 11 or 12 sums about 16%, so against an opening of 1m, the odds of getting a hand that could only be bid as 2NT are about 0.4% (maybe a little less, because the 11-12 point count is general probability, not affected by the fact that partner has already opened bidding (which gives the remaning 3x13 cards less total points than the 10 average).

Quick comment:

 

This analysis would appear to ignore conditional probabilities...

The odds that partner holds 11-12 HCP changes based on the strength in your hand.

 

The easiest way to solve the original problem is to make use of some form of Monte Carlo simulation using a program like Dealer...

 

Ideally, you would want to calculate the odds that

 

 

Responder holds 11-12 HCP and no 4 card major given that

 

1. Dealer has a 1m opening and

2. RHO does not have a hand suitable for an overcall

[coyot]

Googling for "bridge card distribution probabilities" provides helpful link: http://www.xs4all.nl/~tpgroen/bridge/index.shtml

4-3-3-3 with 4 cards in a specific suits has a chance of 2.6%. Point count 11 or 12 sums about 16%, so against an opening of 1m, the odds of getting a hand that could only be bid as 2NT are about 0.4% (maybe a little less, because the 11-12 point count is general probability, not affected by the fact that partner has already opened bidding (which gives the remaning 3x13 cards less total points than the 10 average).

Quick comment:

 

This analysis would appear to ignore conditional probabilities...

The odds that partner holds 11-12 HCP changes based on the strength in your hand.

 

The easiest way to solve the original problem is to make use of some form of Monte Carlo simulation using a program like Dealer...

 

Ideally, you would want to calculate the odds that

 

 

Responder holds 11-12 HCP and no 4 card major given that

 

1. Dealer has a 1m opening and

2. RHO does not have a hand suitable for an overcall

If you read the bit you quoted correctly, you will find that I mentioned that the probability is lower :-). Since the resulting probabilities are between 0.5% and 1% anyway, it does not make a big difference if the chance drops by i.e. 20%...

 

From what it seemed to me, ArcLight was interested in finding out whether these hands do in real play appear often enough to worry about losing 2NT natural bid...

 

Opponent's overcall lowers the chance of 1x-2NT natural bids even more, too... so the real life odds that you'd have a 2NT natural response (with no other bid) are somewhere about 0.3-0.4% after minors and hearts and about 0.9% against spade opener... which is sufficiently low to scrap the bid

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

playing Acol, 2NT as answer to a one level opening bid is

a non-option B) , because, you will regular play on the 2 NT

or at the 3 level with 21 HCP, which is no real fun.

 

Playing forcing NT, ... the problem is solved playing forcing

NT B) .

 

In my opinion / experience, the lose of the natural 2NT response

is no big deal.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[inquiry]

The problem with 1m-2NT being 11-12 hcp, balanced is, you have to remove all those hands with a four card major. So it is basically 11-12 with 43 or 44 in the minors.

 

The frequency of this is fairly low, so your acceptible "balanced hands" are,

 

SHDC

2245

2254

2344

2353

2335

3244

3235

3253

3334

3343

3352

3325

 

Using Bridgebrowser to check 1C/1D openers and looking at 1 million hands opposite with 11-12 "balanced" (those distributions), I found.. the hands totalled 5.06%, but keep in mind, this inlcuded some precision 1C and polish 1C type auctions, where opener could be long in heart or spades, which increases odds responder will not have a four card major. This is higher than "expected" form earlier post, because I threw in some non-balanced hands. If you restrict responder to 33 in the majors, the frequency is much, much less, (1.6%) but still higher than the rate "guestimated" above of between 0.5 and 1.0%.

 

I suspect it is higher because the frequency of 11-12 hcp ONCE your partner opens is higher than the frequency of 11-12 if no one bid, but who knows.

 

Anyway, although I love R/S methods, I use 2NT over 1m to show 11-12 hcp/balanced. I use 1m-2m as GF raise, and I use crisscross limit raise with support. If option is between showing limit raise and bid 2NT, I show limit raise. For what it is worth.

 

Ben

[han]

I almost never play 2NT as natural, and rarely miss it.

 

Anytime partner has opened or overcalled 1M, our 2NT bid shows 4+ support and limit+ values.

 

So the auctions 1H-2NT, 1H-(2D)-2NT, (1C)-1H-(2C)-2NT etc. all are Jacoby-like raises. Simple isn't it!

[inquiry]

I almost never play 2NT as natural, and rarely miss it.

 

Anytime partner has opened or overcalled 1M, our 2NT bid shows 4+ support and limit+ values.

 

So the auctions 1H-2NT, 1H-(2D)-2NT, (1C)-1H-(2C)-2NT etc. all are Jacoby-like raises. Simple isn't it!

After a major is bid by either partner, I use 2NT as Jacoby like raise. If opener uses it, it is STRONGER than a jump to 3M. IF responder bids it at first it is constructive plus (after 1m-1x-1M-2NT is parter of xyz).

 

Over 1m, I play this...

 

1m - (overcall or dbl) - 2NT

 

Where 2NT is either

A - Despirately weak preempt in minor (to avoid wrong siding), or

B - GF raise

 

This free's up 1m - (overcall or double) - 3m

 

to be semi-constructive preempt, promising some values.

[Gerben42]

after 1 of a minor I think 2NT invitational is a useful bid, better than, say, having to make up a suit you don't have.

 

After 1♥ the only shape that is interesting is 3♠2♥4♦4♣ - my advice: just bid 2 of a minor on that and use 2NT for something else (assuming 2/1 is not GF)

 

After 1♠ you don't want to bid 2NT with 4♥ either, rather bid 2m on those 4432 hands and hope partner can bid 2♥ next. Since now 2m promises only 4 cards, 2344 is also not a problem.

 

So a natural 2NT would show a hand with only 12 cards or so.

 

Playing 2/1 you have no problem. Bid 1NT which is forcing, then 2NT which is not.

[ArcLight]

Perhaps my original post wasn't clear. I didn't mention 2NT as a response to a minor opening, it was a response in general.

 

In SAYC (according to the free software at the ACBL website on bidding) a response of 2NT to openers bid = 11-12 HCP, balanced. I don't think balanced has to be exactly 4-3-3-3. In old SAYC I think 2NT showed 13-15, while in new SAYC 3NT shows a balanced 13-15.

 

I'm aware of the Jacoby 2NT response, and what that 2NT bid shows. It has nothing to do with this question.

 

What I'm wondering is the frequency of the "natural 2NT" response, and what to use as a substitute.

 

In the hand I played, my pard opened 1♥ in 4th spot. We were using 2/1.

I had 11 HCP, balanced. I held:

♥ J 2

♠ K Q 3

♦ A x x x

♣ J x x x

 

I think thats a textbook 2NT response. But if I can't use 2NT (and with 2 card heart support I cant bid hearts) I can either bid 1NT (semi-forcing as a passed hand) or a minor. As a passed hand my 2♦ response wouldn't be a game force, but I wanted to stay in NT if possible.

 

 

I bid 1NT, then pard rebid 2♠ (a reverse). I bid 3♠ which may have been a mistake??? Pard passed and went down. (he didn't have a reverse, and 1NT was a cake walk)

I like the idea of 1NT followed by 2NT.

[coyot]

What I'm wondering is the frequency of the "natural 2NT" response, and what to use as a substitute.

If you play 2/1 GF and 1♥ - 1♠ forcing, then the probability of getting the perfectly balanced hand with which you would want to bid perfectly natural 2NT, is, as shown above approx 1% or a little less after 1♠ and 0.5% after 1[H].

 

If you play inverted minors and are willing to bid 1♣ - 1♦ with 3-3-4-3, you will never 2NT hand after 1♣ and you will get it in about 0.4% against 1♦ opening.

 

And as substitute: Against 1♦ I would opt for bidding 2♣ with very good 11+ and 1NT (6-10) with any bad 11.

 

Against major openers in 2/1 systems, you'll have to do with forcing NT...

[mike777]

In Robson and Segals excellent book Partnership Bidding at Bridge they suggest an alternative use for 2NT, rather than 11-12 balanced.  The Jacoby 2NT response also precludes the use of 2NT to show a balanced 11-12 response.

 

In the last 2 sessions I played a text book hand for a 2NT response came up.

 

Question 1 - How often does this type of hand occur?  (11-12 balanced, in response to pards sound opening bid).  Robson/Segal say that this type of hand rarely comes up, but it seems to me it does come up, at least more than "rarely".

(Is there a search engine or card distribution simulator taht could easily answer this?)

 

Question 2 - if you use Jacoby 2NT or Robson/Segals suggestion, what do you bid instead of 2NT to show a balanced 11-12?  1NT then 2NT?  Or a crummy 4 card suit at the 2 level,  then 2NT?  Thats a problem if using 2/1.  You have to bid 1NT then 2NT I think.

1) If you open 11-12 hcp hands then they will never come up when partner opens in third or 4th seat...so you solve this one issue for half your openings.

2) If you open in first or second seat with a minor then....1nt is up to 11hcp....2nt=12hcp and many but not all 13 hcp. Note 1minor=2s can be offshape invite hands with minor support.

3) If you open a major then yes 1nt may very often be 11-12 hcp balanced hands, even some 13 hcp hands. 1nt forcing is already a junkyard, putting more junk into it does not make it worse but will make your other auctions more constructive.

 

Note I play 1nt semi-forcing, so I may even pass when partner bids 1nt showing 13 HCP over my major openings.

[Stephen Tu]

In SAYC (according to the free software at the ACBL website on bidding) a response of 2NT to openers bid = 11-12 HCP, balanced. I don't think balanced has to be exactly 4-3-3-3. In old SAYC I think 2NT showed 13-15, while in new SAYC 3NT shows a balanced 13-15.

 

I'm sure this is not the case. The free software the ACBL offers is the Learn to Play Bridge programs that Fred G wrote, which is the same as on BBO, and still has 2NT = 13-15. It is describing a SA system, not SAYC specifically in part 1, then some SAYC specific stuff in part 2. SAYC has always been 2nt = 13-15; I am not aware of any site that makes a distinction between "old SAYC", and "new SAYC". There is only one SAYC, the published system booklet by the ACBL which hasn't been changed in decades.

 

I don't particularly like 2nt=11-12 over either minors or majors. Over minors it is mainly a kludge invented so you can play 1♦-2♣ as GF. I don't see that as such a huge gain. Plus you are sometimes endplayed systemically into the bid with no stopper in a major, which can wrongside the contract or get you to 3nt without stopper, that might have been avoided if you just responded in the other minor instead. Plus you preempt yourself from a possibly superior minor partial. Also now you have to bid 3nt with 13-15, which robs you of the 3 level to explore alternate strains for game and slam. Luckily the rareness of these bids (because of no 4cd major) keeps the cost low.

 

Over majors, like Fred G in his 2/1 GF articles, if playing mostly natural (instead of an artificial 2♣ response with relays), I prefer 2nt = 13-15 bal. That way you can count on 5 cd or at least good 4cd suit for the minor responses, which helps hand evaluation. Otherwise when partner's 2/1 suit can be xxxx, Jxxx, or even Kxx (3433 over 1♠, 2♥ promises 5), it's hard to tell whether your Qxx in the suit is a big plus or not. Also this way makes choosing between 4M and 3nt easier, as with some sort of 3244/3433 hand, 3cd support for partner, after 2/1 you can't both show bal hand & support for partner at the same time. Bid 2nt then support partner's major if given the chance is more descriptive than bid one of your mediocre 4 cd suits then support.

[Gerben42]

So tell me what do you bid with 3♠3♥3♦4♣ and invitational after 1m if 2NT is not that?

 

After 1♣ probably managable but 1♦ 2♣ on that asks for trouble.

[Stephen Tu]

1♦-2♣ is a troublesome auction for a lot of systems, but I cannot see how you are worse off after 1♦-2♣-?-2NT than after 1♦-2NT. You have given opener more room to describe, you should be able to have some rebid structure that gets you to reasonable contracts. Kokish rebids perhaps, or maybe 2D with all minimums, there are probably half a dozen playable structures after a non-GF 1♦-2♣. Even if opener's rebid is rather nebulous, if after responder rebids 2nt NF you just ignore the previous bids you are at least on equal footing as an immediate 2nt. You should be better off in theory since opener has denied at least some of the hand types.

[mike777]

So tell me what do you bid with 3♠3♥3♦4♣ and invitational after 1m if 2NT is not that?

 

After 1♣ probably managable but 1♦ 2♣ on that asks for trouble.

with hcp in major suits and that shape I would bid

1nt with 11 hcp\

2nt with 12 hcp or 13 hcp

with hcp in minor suits I would bid 2s..invite with clubs.