Help
PhantomSac, on 2014-July-07, 22:21, said:
For a long time now I have played semi forcing NT. I am never uncomfortable bidding 1N with a 3 card LR that does not have a singleton, if partner passes I get to play 1N with 2 balanced hands rather than 3M, that sounds awesome to me! There are many hands where 1N will make and 3M will go down, the converse is much less likely, you need the major suit fit to play THREE tricks better than 1N when you don't have singletons. I view it as a system win that I get to play 1N tbh.
Last week there were 2 hands where this happened and I got to play 1N instead of 3M and on both of them I went plus in 1N and 3M would have been difficult (tbh I don't know if it would have made or not). I mean seriously, if your partner is gonna pass only with 5332 minimums if you are 4432, 4333, or 5332 are you really unhappy with that?
At MP it is different, if 3M is making then it's probably better than 1N (unless you make 3 in 1N). You still win when 3M is down and 1N makes 7+ tricks though. But at imps I'm sure 1N will do better than 3M long term on these hands.
Hands with a 3 card limit raise and a singleton are a different story, I view it as a system hole that I might play 1N. We know they have a 9 or 10 card fit in my singleton, and it is likely that playing my major and getting ruffs will be very advantageous. In most partnerships I have no way to show that hand type, I end up often making a light GF raise (which in my view is fine with a singleton and a fit at imps when I'm not going to be able to show my singleton anyways... inviting is lame when you have shortness and can't show it, it's not really about whether partner is min or max but how they fit your stiff, in those cases I am ok punting game and hoping we fit well anyways...). Other options are a heavy constructive raise or just risking 1N... it isn't that likely partner passes and if he is going to the opps might bid, they have almost half the deck and a 9/10 card fit, and even if it does go 1M p 1N AP you still might make it.
With Bob I played that a direct LR could be an unbalanced 3 card LR and that worked out reasonably fine also. I am not a fan of dedicating a bid to a 3 card LR rather than bidding 1N, and even if I did I would still bid 1N with a bal 3c LR and only use that with an unbal one.
I don't understand the point of not wanting to bid 1N with the OP's hand... if it goes AP I am really happy. I guess not many others feel that way?
So basically +1000 to Frances itt.
Last week there were 2 hands where this happened and I got to play 1N instead of 3M and on both of them I went plus in 1N and 3M would have been difficult (tbh I don't know if it would have made or not). I mean seriously, if your partner is gonna pass only with 5332 minimums if you are 4432, 4333, or 5332 are you really unhappy with that?
At MP it is different, if 3M is making then it's probably better than 1N (unless you make 3 in 1N). You still win when 3M is down and 1N makes 7+ tricks though. But at imps I'm sure 1N will do better than 3M long term on these hands.
Hands with a 3 card limit raise and a singleton are a different story, I view it as a system hole that I might play 1N. We know they have a 9 or 10 card fit in my singleton, and it is likely that playing my major and getting ruffs will be very advantageous. In most partnerships I have no way to show that hand type, I end up often making a light GF raise (which in my view is fine with a singleton and a fit at imps when I'm not going to be able to show my singleton anyways... inviting is lame when you have shortness and can't show it, it's not really about whether partner is min or max but how they fit your stiff, in those cases I am ok punting game and hoping we fit well anyways...). Other options are a heavy constructive raise or just risking 1N... it isn't that likely partner passes and if he is going to the opps might bid, they have almost half the deck and a 9/10 card fit, and even if it does go 1M p 1N AP you still might make it.
With Bob I played that a direct LR could be an unbalanced 3 card LR and that worked out reasonably fine also. I am not a fan of dedicating a bid to a 3 card LR rather than bidding 1N, and even if I did I would still bid 1N with a bal 3c LR and only use that with an unbal one.
I don't understand the point of not wanting to bid 1N with the OP's hand... if it goes AP I am really happy. I guess not many others feel that way?
So basically +1000 to Frances itt.
Assume opener to have a balanced minimum.
Nobody really argued playing 1NT balanced opposite a balanced 3 card limit raise.
You have a preponderance of strength, the average trick difference between notrumps and a major suit contract is a little bit more than one trick and though you are a favorite making 3♠ your chances making 1NT are even better.
I probably bid and play notrumps with a known 5-3 major suit fit more often than most.
The issue is really when responder is unbalanced. Now responder will be weaker in HCP reducing your chances making 1NT and opponents will have at least half the strength.
The claim that you rarely have to play 1NT is not convincing.
Deals where the trick difference amounts to 4 or 5 tricks between a major suit trump contract and notrumps are not that rare now.
In fact I have seen deals where the difference was 8 tricks with opener always 12-13 and 5332 and the average trick difference in my simulations increases to more than 2.5 tricks.
If you insist that a limit raise has to have four trumps and you have no alternate bid for three card limit raises you have to live with this. But do not claim it is not an issue.
Rainer Herrmann
Everyone seems to agree that the 2/1 system gives up something to get that extra level of below game cue bidding for slam and near slam hands. Your issue is between using a 1NT response to a 1