[campboy]

Vampyr, on 2011-June-03, 10:06, said:

How often, using this method, have you actually played 1NTXX (making)?

I disagree with much of ARTjoMS' post, but fwiw I've made (or watched partner make) 1NTxx following a pass-forces-redouble method on several occasions. 1NTxx+2 has happened this year in a county A team match. No doubt I get fewer opportunities than ARTjoMS does since frequently those aren't the methods I'm using.

[ARTjoMS]

Free, on 2011-June-04, 04:51, said:

One more argument against playing ReDoubled instead of Doubled on borderline hands: opps have the initiative because they have the lead. Establishing a long suit on borderline hands usually means defeat in 1NT.

lol, you are talking about arguments after your previouats post?
Now you are giving an argument that says playing 1N doubled or redoubled is not going to get positive score and only conclusionthat comes from this is that one should look for alternatives in 2nd level. Your argument is, however at least 2-sided from which one you like to ignore: opponent is leading in the dark and in strong hand, he might as well blow up a trick. One must be careful giving such a statement, especially if you don't have a data to support them (not DD obv).

Quote

It's clear that ARTjoMS is absolutely convinced that his/her method is superior, which takes away objectiveness. His dream of +760 still has to come true while our dreams of +180, -100, +50, +100, +200, +300 and +500 have all come true many times.

If there is something i dream about in nights then these are woman, a dream of non vulnerable 1Nx-1 for -100 earning an IMP is yet to come.

Yes, i am convinced. However i doņ't get your statement about objectiviness. Time ago when i was playing pass=''to play'' i was objective, but after testsing and improving methods, discussions and excessive numbers of analyzed/played hands i come to conclusion that some other method is clearly superior...and now i am subjective? I doubt you can say that you are being objective, and saying someone is not objective while he is not objective himself is ridiculous, just shows lack of intelligence.

Quote

I find the following runout system very satisfying:
Pass = suggestion to play (may be for -1, = or with overtricks)

I find this very optimistic after your lead initiative argument. I wanted to say in your lead directing argument that hands i go for 1Nxx might not be same as those that you go for 1Nx (and you shouldn't assume so), but now i see they really are pretty much same.

Quote

- It's useful to be able to play (or suggest) 1NTx. 4th hand might chicken out and bid something, 1NTx-1 may be the best possible result, opps may make defensive errors and let you make,...

Dude, you are the one giving arguments that there must be way to go for 1Nxx. Opponents will chicken out more often, opponent errors and you say no word about possibility to go down for more than 1.

Quote

- I used to play pass as forcing a RDbl, but I've never played 1NTxx. Either LHO or RHO ran away...

I guess these were those ''noobs'' other poster mentioned.

[Zelandakh]

I used to play something not too dissimilar to the OP method a long time ago. System on over double (including crawling Stayman) with pass forcing redouble for the 4-card suits up the line approach and XX weak with a minor. It was OK but there are better options out there. My current method is modified Spelvic

1NT - (X)
=========
P = forces XX, then 2C = C + red suit; 2D = reds; 2H = majors with longer hearts; higher bids are strong 2-suiters (freaks)
XX = forces 2C, shows a 1-suited hand; anything above 2S is strong
2m = m + spades
2H = majors with equal or onger spades
2S = spades with a decent suit
2N = minors
3any = preemptive

With a weak 4333 hand you mentally add an extra club. So 3=3=3=4 is XX and pass 2C, 4=3=3=3 is 2C, and 3=(4-3)=3 is Pass, followed by 2C. If the opps double 2C then XX conventionally shows the 4333 hand.

[shintaro]

Vampyr, on 2011-June-03, 10:06, said:

How often, using this method, have you actually played 1NTXX (making)?

mmm I have stephanie up 2 at teams

[Free]

ARTjoMS, apparently you play against beginners too much and you need to learn how to read.

[Bende]

I have heard of the following "run out" scheme, but not (for good reasons probably) seen anyone play it:

pass = forces redbl, which will be to play
redbl = to play

If you have a weak hand you look left, look right, and then decide which opponent is most likely to run when put in the pass out seat .

[Vampyr]

campboy, on 2011-June-04, 07:19, said:

I disagree with much of ARTjoMS' post, but fwiw I've made (or watched partner make) 1NTxx following a pass-forces-redouble method on several occasions. 1NTxx+2 has happened this year in a county A team match. No doubt I get fewer opportunities than ARTjoMS does since frequently those aren't the methods I'm using.

I have played (well, partner has) 1NTXX+2 once, with the methods that direct XX is to play. But I or partner have played 1NTX making or down for a good score, or seen fourth hand run, resulting in a good score for us, many times. I would not like to give up the opportunity to play 1NTX, as it comes up fairly frequently and has several ways to win.

[dake50]

Escape to minors. Leave them room to lose nerve and find their M-fit.
Let M-fits or hcp majority go through XX.

[nige1]

For a variety of treatments, consult David Stevenson's page of escapes from one notrump doubled

FWIW, I recommend a simple symmetric system:

After
1N (_X) ??

• XX = Any two suits.
• 2♣/♦/♥/♠ = Natural 5+ cards.
• 2N = Artificial, forcing: good shapely hand, usually 55 or better.

1N (_X) XX (_P)
??

• 2♣ = Normal relay
• 2♦/♥/♠ = Natural 5+ cards.

1N (_X) XX (_P);
2♣ (_X) ??

• _P = ♣ and another.
• XX = Red suits.
• 2♦ = Pointy suits.
• 2♥ = Majors.

1N (_X) XX (_P)
2♣ (_X) _P (_P)
??
If opener doesn't have 3+ ♣, then, as he has already denied another 5 card suit; he must have two other four card suits
So opener can use the same scheme as responder.

• _P = 3+ ♣
• XX = Red suits.
• 2♦ = Pointy suits.
• 2♥ = Majors.

1N (_X) _P (_P)
??
_P = Normally
XX = Any 5+ suit. Then 2♣ by responder is pass or correct. But he can pass with a good hand.

There are other possible refinements with very weak hands These ploys can be used only on very weak hands because you risk playing in an opponent's' suit. And, of course, you must alert the possibility. For example Responder can bid the suit below his 5+ suit. If opponents double, he can redouble as a transfer.

Some advantages of this method

• You usually arrive at the final contract fairly quickly, depriving opponents opportunities to establish their assets.
• With two suits you usually specify both, making it more likely that you play in a 4-4 rather than a 4-3 fit.
• You often find a major fit, quickly. Two of a major is harder for opponents to double.

[dake50]

Wish David Stevenson would date his compendium.
I want to know what I haven't seen.
His is the best place to start thinking about 1NT in competition.