[Ant590]

Hey everyone,

I was wondering if there was any consensus amongst experts on what the sequences

(1NT*) - 3x
and
(1NT*) - p - (p) - 3x
mean?

* 12-14

If one plays 2♣ and 2♦ as artificial I presume then 3♣/♦ are natural, but supposing you play natural overcalls what would these show? How would they differ to doubling then bidding your suit?

Many thanks

[kenrexford]

For a few years, I dabbled with the idea of a jump to 3♣ or 3♦ being what I called "Leaping Ripstra." In other words, a jump to 3♣ showed something like a strong 4414 and a leap to 3♦ showed a strong 4441.

It never came up. Maybe once, actually.

I have tried different methods, also, but nothing ever seems to come up.

I'm also curious if anyone plays anything here that actually comes up enough to be able to assess its value.

[helene_t]

I suppose 3m would be just weaker than what it takes to make a penalty dbl.

Maybe a penalty dbl based on length in a minor suit could be made on less HCPs than a penalty dbl based on a balanced hand, but in case p makes a game try I think it's a good idea that a penalty dbl is based on a consistent minimum of HCPs regardless of shape. So if a penalty dbl is 15+, 3m would be 11-14 or some such.

3M is preemptive.

[gwnn]

A hand that is all about that minor

maybe

x xx Axx AKQxxxx

Of course they wouldnt make 1NT but they have their cozy partial of 2M, so why double first?

[ASkolnick]

I am going to take the dumb opinion.

Case 1: Preemptive

Who says this is our hand. A weak NT is still an opening bid and there is nothing to say LHO does not have an invitational hand. Let's let them make the last guess.

Case 2: Whatever you want

If pass is not a value showing pass, it sort of depends what your system is.
We play transfers, so you can always raise yourself. Leaping Ripstra I can see is as good a treatment as any, but with a really good 4441, wouldn't you be better off doubling. If partner has any hand, you would rather let them play 1NT-x and if they run into your stiff, cuebid. So, I can certainly see an intermediate to good hand in balancing seat.

[MickyB]

I think this question was intended as "should jumps be weak or strong"

There are definitely hands that are too good to bid 2M but too offensive to double - you could land up defending 1NT X making (with overtricks) when your side is cold for game. If you play a 3M jump as preemptive, then you need to decide between 2M and 4M on the stronger hands.

After 1NT-P-P, a jump should definitely show a good hand.

[helene_t]

MickyB, on Dec 7 2007, 05:29 PM, said:

There are definitely hands that are too good to bid 2M but too offensive to double - you could land up defending 1NT X making (with overtricks) when your side is cold for game. If you play a 3M jump as preemptive, then you need to decide between 2M and 4M on the stronger hands.

Yes, but maybe those artificial 2m overcalls (and 2NT) will save us. There was an article about some modifications to the Woolsey (Multi-Landy) structure in the most recent issue of IMP.

[ArtK78]

This is easy.

A direct jump to 3 over a weak 1NT is preemptive.

If you have a strong hand, double.

Now, if the auction goes 1NT-(P)-P-?, the situation is much different. There is no need to preempt, as you are likely to buy the hand with any simple bid. The problem could be that the methods that you are using don't allow you to bid a single-suited hand. If you can show a single-suitee hand in your suit, then the jump to 3 must have a different meaning. What should be the meaning of the bid? That is a matter of personal preference. There is still an argument for the jump to be preemptive - that despite the pass to 1NT, the opps might back into the auction (the weak NT bidder might have a 5 card suit - even a major - they might be missing a 9 card major suit fit).

I would still double with most strong hands, but there is an argument for the fourth seat jump to show a good hand and a good suit.

[Cascade]

Since we have 2♣/♦ as artificial we play 3♣/♦ as natural. Against a weak NT where there is a real prospect of your side having a game we play them as intermediate jump overcalls - around 10-14 NV and a bit better vulnerable.

3Maj is a weak jump for us.

All of those come up reasonably often but I am not sure they are as sophisticated as the early posts had in mind.

I have played in another partnerships the 3-level jumps show various strong two-suiters. Like lots of things they work ok when they come up but are not very frequent.

[pclayton]

I've always played these as int / strong (14 - 18).

Its generally a bad policy to double with a strong single suiter, since the opps are running and pard can't properly judge.

[joshs]

I have always played these as intermediate. I think thats pretty standard for 3 of a minor (since most methods do not let you overcall at the 2 level with a minor) but there is a case to be made for playing 3M differently.

In the balancing seat these should all certainly be intermediate.....

[whereagles]

pclayton, on Dec 7 2007, 07:40 PM, said:

I've always played these as int / strong (14 - 18).

Its generally a bad policy to double with a strong single suiter, since the opps are running and pard can't properly judge.

There's a point in playing it as intermediate, yes. You can actually play it as int+ with transfers:

(1NT) 2NT...3♥ = 1-suiter in next suit, from decent hand up to a monster.