[Zelandakh]

OK, then I think in your system you probably need to include 15-bad17 without a stop as a possibility with a pass here and cue with a good 17 or better and no stop. Since you have X = hearts, the hands within the pass are all going to have good defence and low ODR so you can probably survive this.

[Cyberyeti]

 mfa1010, on 2014-February-18, 07:54, said:

Maybe so because you care so little about right-siding here.

I would prefer 30 push-ups to 1N with ♠xxx and would hate it also with Axx, Kxx etc.

Most of the time, the auction proceeds after the 1N rebid 2♣(enquiry)-2♦(minimum no 4M)-2♠(what you got)-3♣(not totally happy about my spades, 5 clubs) and I've got this off my chest nicely, unfortunately it didn't go like that.

I don't like the situation much either.

[jogs]

 Cyberyeti, on 2014-February-18, 05:46, said:

X would show hearts, we open 1♣ with a strong NT 4♣4♥32.

As I said, if you would rebid 2♣, what would you do if the small heart was the Q and you had a 17 count.

That's dated thinking. It overvalues pointcount and doesn't appreciate the length and strength of the suit. Game theory would suggest opening the better four-card suit.

[Zelandakh]

 jogs, on 2014-February-18, 09:17, said:

Game theory would suggest opening the better four-card suit.

As someone who has studied Game Theory (and got the equivalent of a First in it) I will say that this statement is completely meaningless unless you back it up in some way. Bridge has been moving away from such considerations constantly for over 60 years now. What new breakthrough have you found in the scientific research to reverse this trend?

[mfa1010]

 Cyberyeti, on 2014-February-18, 09:10, said:

Most of the time, the auction proceeds after the 1N rebid 2♣(enquiry)-2♦(minimum no 4M)-2♠(what you got)-3♣(not totally happy about my spades, 5 clubs) and I've got this off my chest nicely, unfortunately it didn't go like that.

I don't like the situation much either.

In one single misguided and unnecessary bid we have flushed 3N down the drain every time partner's spade stopper is vulnerable. It is a limited success that might be able to diagnoze our disaster already during bidding. Anything else (p, 2c, 2d) >> 1N imho.

[dake50]

Double should be the 15-17 NT or equivalent. --mfa1010
*** Agree. But 15's must be excellent.
And responder has many 'try to quit low' bids.
Get the little hands to a reasonable spot.
Even making game-on hands harder to show.
(those are rare in a competing auction.)

[jogs]

 Zelandakh, on 2014-February-18, 09:38, said:

As someone who has studied Game Theory (and got the equivalent of a First in it) I will say that this statement is completely meaningless unless you back it up in some way. Bridge has been moving away from such considerations constantly for over 60 years now. What new breakthrough have you found in the scientific research to reverse this trend?

Actually due to the importance of trump length, I think 4-card majors is passé. 5-card majors makes it easier to bid slams. Identify those 5-4 fits quickly.

[Cyberyeti]

 jogs, on 2014-February-18, 11:54, said:

Actually due to the importance of trump length, I think 4-card majors is passé. 5-card majors makes it easier to bid slams. Identify those 5-4 fits quickly.

Opening the minors with 4M4m in a weak NT context means that your majors are always 5+ cards unless you are 44(32) or are (43)33 in a 15+ hand, so all minimum hands are 5+ anyway which is where it's most important in competitive auctions.

Opening the major frequently wrongsides NT as with 17 opposite 8, I'd rather the auction started 1♣-1♦-1N rather than 1♥-1N.

And MFA, we've only flushed 3N down the toilet when partner's spade holding is vulnerable AND we have 9 off the top which is far from guaranteed.

[Wackojack]

Of my 3 of my Acol partners with 2 they like to play this as a support double (guaranteeing extras) Thus very likely a strong no trump with no spade stop. Not a fan of Acol I am pleased that this works here. btw they will never skip a 4 card diamond suit if no longer major and will always open 1♣ with another 4 card suit.

[benlessard]

Big lol to 1NT here.

Either a support X or pass jsut look totally normal.

[Cyberyeti]

 benlessard, on 2014-February-18, 15:28, said:

Big lol to 1NT here.

Either a support X or pass jsut look totally normal.

Do you still pass if it's 17 (with Q♥ rather than x) rather than 15 given that support X is not available (X shows 4♥)

[benlessard]

when you pass 1S you should still have a strong NT or 4S. Since with an unbalanced hand you can bid 2C,2D or X (no matter what the X show).

So 1NT should show 16-17 with a stopper. Passing, waiting for the balancing X and bidding 1NT show 4S or 15 bal.

With 17 without a stopper I might X even if that tend to show 4H in your system but IMO its no big deal to pass with 17 and only 2D with no S stoppers.

If partner pass in balance you wont make game anyway, if he bid 1NT you have an easy raise if he double you can cuebid.

Note that usually most play Walsh so after 1D responder will only hold 4H if hes got a good hand so that why the X is better showing 3D than showing 4H.


An idea that I like for the weak NT

1D--1NT should show 8-9 or 8-bad10 so that vs 16-17 opener make another call. With 6-7 or good10+ its ok to bid a 3 card M or 2NT.
Over 1C its basically the same thing, 1D is often 6-7 or 10+ or a 6 card suit. The main drawback is that opener cannot raise on 3 cards.

[Cyberyeti]

 benlessard, on 2014-February-18, 17:18, said:

An idea that I like for the weak NT

1D--1NT should show 8-9 or 8-bad10 so that vs 16-17 opener make another call. With 6-7 or good10+ its ok to bid a 3 card M or 2NT.
Over 1C its basically the same thing, 1D is often 6-7 or 10+ or a 6 card suit. The main drawback is that opener cannot raise on 3 cards.

Since the whole point of what we play is in most circumstances not to play 3N from the weak hand with 16/9, this is exactly what I don't want to play.

[cherdano]

Weak NT is just too difficult to play for weak NTers.
(With apologies to David Hilbert.)

[wanoff]

 cherdano, on 2014-February-18, 18:19, said:

Weak NT is just too difficult to play for weak NTers.
(With apologies to David Hilbert.)

Not too difficult if you keep it simple. 1NT opening = 12-14, 1NT rebid = 15-17, dbl = 15+ (not 15-17 with a stop)

[Vampyr]

 Cyberyeti, on 2014-February-18, 12:07, said:

Opening the minors with 4M4m in a weak NT context means that your majors are always 5+ cards unless you are 44(32) or are (43)33 in a 15+ hand, so all minimum hands are 5+ anyway which is where it's most important in competitive auctions.

Opening the major frequently wrongsides NT as with 17 opposite 8, I'd rather the auction started 1♣-1♦-1N rather than 1♥-1N.

And MFA, we've only flushed 3N down the toilet when partner's spade holding is vulnerable AND we have 9 off the top which is far from guaranteed.

Unfortunately (at least for me when I play with an Acol partner) it is for some reason much more popular to open the major with 4-4.

[Vampyr]

please delete duplicate.

[akwoo]

 Zelandakh, on 2014-February-18, 08:30, said:

OK, then I think in your system you probably need to include 15-bad17 without a stop as a possibility with a pass here and cue with a good 17 or better and no stop. Since you have X = hearts, the hands within the pass are all going to have good defence and low ODR so you can probably survive this.

This is what I think.

For the record, I pass, and if the low heart was a Q, I consider it a good 17 and cue.

[cherdano]

 cherdano, on 2014-February-18, 18:19, said:

Weak NT is just too difficult to play for weak NTers.
(With apologies to David Hilbert.)

 wanoff, on 2014-February-18, 19:14, said:

Not too difficult if you keep it simple. 1NT opening = 12-14, 1NT rebid = 15-17, dbl = 15+ (not 15-17 with a stop)

Weak NTers pretending that strong NTs aren't difficult to handle in competition won't exactly change my mind on this...

[the hog]

 mfa1010, on 2014-February-17, 12:10, said:

Double should be the 15-17 NT or equivalent. It is intolerable to bid 1N here with xxx in spades.

Having played Acol for many years, I totally concur with this statement. Bidding 1NT is absurd with this hand. It certainly shows a stopper. We always showed the strong NT with a X in this position. I see no reason not to do it on this hand.