[mycroft]

If you are a believer in 'only we play 1NT white at MPs', then this is a great hand and something has to be done. I think I would have gone for bidding rather than doubling, but that's me and my system. Yes, -100 vs -90 is bad, but -100 vs -120 is very good, and one of the nasty things about a weak NT is that when it makes 2, frequently the rest of the room makes one (because it goes 1x-1y; 1NT there and the lead's better).

Of course, another of the nasty things about weak 1NT is that the best scores come from -500 into nothing, so bidding is not without risk... However, the bad scores for a weak 1NT come when they miss the 4-4 major fit, which doesn't look likely with this hand either (okay, if it's spades, the suit's lying perfectly for them).

On the other other hand, Weasel vs Weak NT works - which is why my scores improved 2%/night when Announcements came in. For that matter, Weasel vs Strong NT works - ask the Barrington Bridge Club or Kate Buckman's, both of which made a club rule that there is no bridge reason for needing to know if 1NT is 15-17, 16-18 or 15-18, and asking is deemed to provide UI (before Announce all 1NT ranges came in).

How would I rule? No idea. I don't have to worry, because I work in the ACBL, and if the weak NTers fail to do their job (or the strong NTers, for that matter), that's their problem, not their opponents' or mine, and any UI that gets passed from partner requiring the regs be followed is basically tough luck.

Michael.

[helene_t]

Aren't weak 1NT alertable in Denmark? If it was not alerted, you have UI, regardsless of it shuld have been alerted or not.

I think to reopen or not has everything do do with agreement and nothing with judgement. You agree with partner what a double would mean in this situation and if it's a maximum (semi)-bal passed hand, then pass is not a LA. But of course, if you have no agreement we're back to judgement.

As for Richard's comment, it's true of course that you get a biased result if you poll peers of the player in this way. But maybe we should consider usself peers of the director rather than peers of the player. Anyway, Richard, I think you should frase such comments in a more polite way, and without block capitals.

Just my two cents (two Euro cents is two and a half US cent, though).

[Walddk]

helene_t, on Oct 21 2005, 01:14 PM, said:

Aren't weak 1NT alertable in Denmark?

No it's not and I see no reason why it should be.

Roland

[helene_t]

pigpenz, on Oct 19 2005, 10:55 PM, said:

I have a question say one opens weak nt unannounced, opps asks and other opp says weak 12-14...now other opps says pard what do we play against weak nt direct and balanced.

Is that legal?

Nope. Do your best to defend against this unannounced agreement. If you feel damaged, call the director. (You might call the director as soon as you notice that they don't have a CC).

[Fluffy]

Walddk, on Oct 19 2005, 09:47 PM, said:

pclayton, on Oct 19 2005, 10:44 PM, said:

If the Opponents didn't announce the NT range (no idea what you do on the right side of the pond ....

No, we do not announce the NT range. We display a convention card of course, and weak notrump is pretty common here.

In my opinion there is no reason to ask about the range when you can look for yourself - unless you intend to wake your partner of course. That is UI for sure, and he is obviously not allowed to take advantage.

Finally, Phil, thanks for pointing out that we are on the right side of the pond, and MikeH therefore on the wrong side

Roland

Mmm, here we have some beatiguful cc, wich are 60% fully blank on the first day, while on the next ones 95% are blank. We don't need to ask about range because everyone plays 15-17 or 16-18. If someone plays weak he should normally alert.

Then on your scenario things are different, you aren't used of asking at all, then I guess it changes things. To me asking about range is just a simple question that carries no UI at all. We are talking about a simple question, not about 5 minutes of thiking.

If you consider both an UI do you rule exactly the same for both who reopen? I will doubt it, althou maybe the rules say you should.