[Double !]

I am curious about what other people play (assume some version of an approximately 15-17 1NT opening system such as 2/1) should the following situation occur.

Partner opens with 1m and your rho overcalls 1NT (non-conventional). What are your responses and agreements?

It was suggested to me a number of years ago to respond as though partner had opened 1NT (doubles still being penalty, but FOC or systems on otherwise.) This has been effective on the limited number of times the situation has occurred, and has needed little additional discussion when the system of responses to 1NT openings has already been at least somewhat discussed. I believe that there is actually a name for this convention/ treatment, "As if I Bid It", but I haven't seen it listed lately in the myriad of web sites that I know or have found.

I am curious if any of you play this, what kind of experiences you have had with it, the correct name for it (if any), and your assessments/ evaluations of this method of handling 1NT overcalls by opps.

Thank you in advance,
DHL

[Free]

I keep it simple:

Dbl = penalty
2X = natural NF, fighting battle scores

EDIT: meant 'part scores'

[mikeh]

If partner opened a minor, I suggest a simple method is to use 2 of that minor as showing a weak to moderate hand (too weak to double) with both majors.

The logic is twofold:

1. partner's minor may be relatively short: often no longer than and maybe shorter than RHO's holding, so competing to, say, 2♣ on a 4 card 'fit' is not likely to get you to a good spot

2. in the case where you have a good fit (you hold 5+ support or partner really has the suit) the odds are high that LHO has a 5 card major or at least 1 4 card major and enough to squeak out a bid.

So if 2m is wrong, they let you play it and if 2m is right, they almost always get to their major fit anyway.

Therefore, aiming for 2m as natural is usually a waste of effort.

So use a 'raise' as a form of stayman.(altho partner is supposed to bid his best major, even if relatively short... of course, he can always pass with a long suit and no major fit). We used to call this 'kokish', until he denied any responsibility for it

That leaves 2 of the other minor as weak and natural. This is playable since RHO has not suggested strength or length in that suit, and you are far more likely to have, say, QJ98xx of the other minor than of partner's minor.

This leaves all new suit bids as natural, non-constructive, and almost all good hands start with double. Freaks can be bid at the 3-level if good and single-suited, while 2N shows a good playing hand with a definite 2-suiter: often 65 or better.

1♦ (1N) 2N (P)

with 4=2=4=3, partner bids 3♣, and with the majors you bid 3♥ and he corrects to 3(or 4) ♠ and so on.

[pclayton]

Here's something Joe Kivel taught us:

After 1 minor - 1N overcall:

Double - penalty

2C - some sort of single suiter or a raise. Opener typically relays to 2D.

2D - hearts and spades but longer hearts

2H - hearts and spades but longer spades

The biggest issue isn't competing to 2 of a minor in these cases, but its burying the other major.

Another simpler way to play is that a raise of the minor is like a TO x for the majors.

[luis]

The most simple approach is to use:
X = penalty double
2x = weakish
2NT = Game forcing hand that can't or don't want to double 1NT

[mgtusi]

DOUBLE = 9 and more, penalty oriented
After that, it follows the same lines than after 1x-dbl-rbl

The other responses shows less than 9 HCP

2 Clubs = 44 majors after a 1m, transfer for ♦ after a 1M (5+)
2 Diamonds = transfer for ♥ always (5+ or 3 in case of a ♥ opening bid)
2 Hearts = transfer for ♠ always (5+ or 3 in case of a ♠ opening bid)
2 Spades = transfer for ♣ always (the opp never let you play 2m unless it's ok for them)
2 NT = 55 minors always
3 clubs = transfer for ♦ in case of a 1m opening bid.
3 of the major is preempt.


Have a nice day

[pbleighton]

"I keep it simple:

Dbl = penalty
2X = natural NF, fighting battle scores"

Agree.

Peter

[Double !]

Thank you for the responses so far.
A few of the responses suggested a certain degree of simplicity and several respondents offered some more extensive response structures. Every response is appreciated, they demonstrate that there is no "standard" treatment, and IMO every response warranted high merit.

The motivation for me to post this question actually came from my inability to remember the recommendations or structures that were suggested for such a situation in a Bridge World article from eons ago as well as having seen some disagreements occur at the table from time to time. I, too, am often looking for a better quality mousetrap and, therefore, value it when you all offer some new or different ideas.

[Fluffy]

I know some others that pply the methods they use to interfere a NT opening, of courase this will work only if double is for penalties .