[pclayton]

gnasher, on Oct 4 2008, 01:54 AM, said:

jdonn, on Oct 3 2008, 09:18 PM, said:

Because 1NT is much easier to double and gets doubled much more often (at least when there has been no redouble). I don't see why you threw in "on hands where partner isn't going to raise you" though. Isn't it very relevent that partner may raise you?

We already agree that showing an 8-count when you have a 6-count will lead to poor results when partner raises. I was interested in your other concern about bidding 1NT on weakish hands, which, as I understand it, is that bidding 1NT instead of 2m is more likely to lead to a large penalty on hands where partner doesn't raise.

I don't think that either 1NT or two of a suit gets doubled much in this situation (except, of course, when responder has passed on a good hand, intending to double everything). After

  1S   dbl  pass 1NT

most people need a fairly unusual hand to double. It's dangerous to act on a balanced 19-count when both opponents have shown values, responder has suggested weakness, and most of the opposing strength is over you.

Similarly, the 1NT advance is most unlikely to be doubled by a responder who couldn't respond 1NT himself.

If you respond two of a suit to a takeout double, the most likely way to be doubled is when opener makes a takeout double and responder leaves it in. It seems to me that this is rather more likely than being doubled in 1NT: having shape makes it safer for opener to act, and a weak responder will be more comfortable defending when his hand can contribute some trump tricks.

Gnasher, do you prefer 1N on lighter hands just over 1M, or over 1m as well?

It seems to me that if the bidding starts 1♣ - x - p - ? that I have more options to show a weaker hands and that 1N should be a better hand.

Furthermore, I am also of the opinion that the lower range for a double of 1m is below the double of 1M.

[gnasher]

pclayton, on Oct 4 2008, 04:37 PM, said:

Gnasher, do you prefer 1N on lighter hands just over 1M, or over 1m as well?

After 1♣, I'd expect the lower limit of 1NT to be a point or two stronger. One wouldn't conceal a four card major, or bypass diamonds on a weakish hand. Given that, it's reasonable to bid 1♦ on a poor 3=3=3=4 as well, so as to allow a narrower range for 1NT.

After 1♦, it's no more attractive to bid 2♣ on a three-card suit or a poor four-card than it is after one of a major. To bid a three-card major really is asking for trouble, so I think that the range of 1NT should be the same as after one of a major. The frequency of hands at the lower end will, of course, be less.

[skjaeran]

This is a clear 1NT response for me. Not an absolute minimum.

[peachy]

clear 1NT for me. 1 point light, but other bids are worse and more misleading, IMO.

[P_Marlowe]

1NT, wtp?

And no, this is not a min. for me.

Sry, not a very enlightened post, but I read
qwnns post and felt I had to respond, ...

With kind regards
Marlowe

[SoTired]

This is a fairly ordinary 7 HCP hand. If you advance 1N over a takeout dbl with this hand, then I would say your 1N range starts at 7 HCP.

Do I hear 6?

[P_Marlowe]

SoTired, on Oct 6 2008, 09:34 AM, said:

This is a fairly ordinary 7 HCP hand. If you advance 1N over a takeout dbl with this hand, then I would say your 1N range starts at 7 HCP.

Do I hear 6?

... or 5, if I have to, e.g. take away the Queen
of clubs in the given hand.

As they say, bidding NT is a dirty job, but someone
has to do it.
Of course partner will play me for +6/7, but who
cares ..., it may just force me, to improve my
declarer play.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[SoTired]

The reason I mention this, is that many players will shave a point or 2 off ordinary hands without realizing they are changing their partnership agreements.

A pair playing 11-14 HCP 1N, opened 1N in first position against me with something like AJxx Qxx Kx xxxx. No 10's or 9's. I complained to the director that this was an ordinary 10 HCP and either should not be opened 1N or they should change their CC to 10-14. Although I got no relief for the hand, the director warned the opps that either they change their CC or he will punish them next time they open a 10 HCP 1N.

[MarkDean]

jdonn, on Oct 3 2008, 01:16 PM, said:

pclayton, on Oct 3 2008, 01:13 PM, said:

Its a style question. If you are allowed to double 1♠ on: void, Qxxx ATxx K9xxx or x QJxx ATxx K9xx then your 1N response needs to be up to snuff (8-11).

Allowed to? Do you know an advanced or better player who wouldn't?

I realize I am in the minority here, but I would not double with those hands. We are battling spades, and I find we usually lose that battle and declarer has more information. Yes, there are layouts were double works well, but I prefer to let partner know I have a bit more when I do double. Doubling 1S is also much more dangerous if partner is broke as we will be scrambling on the two level.