[MarkDean]

Ah, yeah, that makes sense. I have definetly seen a lot of tempo issues directly over a weak 1NT opener as well.

[Free]

Keep it simple:
2X = to play
pass = to play
RDbl = sos, bid some suits, no 5 card suit (unless 5-5)

After RDbl, opener bids suits up the line, or 2♣ when holding a 4333.

This has worked very well for me, after both weak and strong NT.

[FrancesHinden]

The problem with posting on these forums for so long, is that every now and again I find myself making the same post that I made in the past.

I disagree with the premise that you "have" to play a runout scheme when you play a weak (or mini) NT. There are three big disadvantages to any scheme in which responder shows assorted 1- or 2-suiters:

1. Any method that forces responder to run is a nightmare when responder has a balanced hand. Suppose responder is 4423 and has to use some sequence to show both majors. What is opener, holding a 2236, supposed to do? Similarly, responder is 4324 and makes a call showing "clubs and a major" only to find that opener is 2533, and opener's 2H is "pass or correct". The days are long past when a 1NT opening promised 4333 or 4432 and every suit stopped... When responder has no 5-card suit it's quite possible that the best spot is to play in opener's long suit.

2. Any method where responder makes a forcing call of some form is an enormous advantage to the defending side. One of the resons you play a weak (or mini) NT is to make it harder for the opposing side to bid game. Suppose sitting in fourth seat you have a 3424 7-count and the auction starts on your left 1NT x 2S. You have enough values that your side might be making game, but you aren't certain. You might have a heart fit, but you might want to defend 2Sx on their 2-card fit. Yet the only calls you have available are double (either penalties or take-out by your choice), 2NT (either natural or lebensohl by your choice) or a 3-level cuebid, which forces game. While if the auction started 1NT x 2H (transfer to spades) you can safely double to show values, bid 2S as a distributional take-out double of spades, and pass then double to show a lighter take-out, bid at once (forcing) or pass then bid (lighter)... or whatever, but you have an extra round of the auction. It's even better if it starts 1NT x xx where xx shows "a 5-card suit somewhere, forces opener to bid 2C". Now you have a whole extra level as well as a bonus round of the auction.

This is why I particularly hate transfer responses by the doublee. At least when 2C is e.g. "clubs and a major" the next hand has to act with values, as there's a good chance it ends the auction.

It's true that many partnerships have not discussed their 'extraction' methods after the opposing NT is doubled, but for those that have, there's nothing they like more than to discover the other pair is playing a complex wriggle of some form.

3. It's quite nice to have the redouble as strong, particularly after a mini NT. If that sounds counter-intuitive, it's because people get incited into making light doubles when they discover your 1NT opening is 10-13 (or whatever). If they want to play double as showing 13+ balanced, I want to have a redouble available to show the same thing. Now I'm in a forcing pass auction and (just like point 2) can consult my partner.

My run-out "methods" are the following:

Pass = to play
Redouble = strong, forcing pass at the 2-level
2X = natural, weak
2NT = distributional game force (usually a two-suiter)
3X = natural, 6+ cards, pre-emptive
4X = natural, 7+ cards, pre-emptive
(These are the same as Echognome's)
As a bonus, not only do I think these are the best methods, they are very easy to remember...
I do play that 1NT P P x; xx or 1NT x P P; xx shows a hand that would like to run with a 5/6 card suit of its own. I also play this after 2NT P P x.

[Walddk]

Frances, are you saying that you don't play Allerton's rescue system?? I did not know there was one until yesterday I must confess, but there is (or at least was). Is Jeffrey not unhappy when you have chosen something else? Or is he yet another inventor who doesn't play his own convention?

Roland

[FrancesHinden]

Walddk, on Feb 18 2009, 11:33 AM, said:

Frances, are you saying that you don't play Allerton's rescue system?? I did not know there was one until yesterday I must confess, but there is (or at least was). Is Jeffrey not unhappy when you have chosen something else? Or is he yet another inventor who doesn't play his own convention?

Roland

Jeffrey & I play it at matchpoints, and only after our mini. Even then we are not certain we are doing the right thing.

I could have written another page or two about the difference between IMPs and matchpoints but thought I'd written enough...

[fromageGB]

I think Frances's contribution deserves a reply from a supporter of runout methods. Taking his points :

1. It is not a nightmare with a balanced responder hand. With more than a third of all hands I respond with pass. Partner with a 5+ card suit can easily bid it. Even if you start your runout with a bid, only a quarter all hands is it above 2♣, so again opener can play in his long suit, whatever it is, if he wants to. In fact, if responder has no 5 card suit, only one tenth of the time will he reply above 2♣, and that one time will be a bid of 2♦ (with my runout methods). This means that if opener has a 5 card suit and responder not, in only one hand in 40 will opener not be able to play in 2 of his suit. Hardly a constraint.

1. Having a bid that shows "clubs and a major" is not good practice. "'Something' and a lower" would be better. I said in my topic reply that the most important thing is to find your best fit, and while it is obviously better to define both suits, it is silly to have your anchor suit lower ranking than the alternatives.

2. I agree that the extra opposition possible calls made available by a transfer runout give room for them to determine whether game is on, but
(i) how many of your opponents have such sophisticated methods?
(ii) if they do bid game then you have lost the advantage of playing a preemptive mini NT, but you have lost nothing else. Without the mini they would find the game anyway.

3. I fully agree that it is nice to have a strong redouble available when playing the mini. That bonus is not lost if opener responds to your forcing pass with a redouble, as he often will if you do play (as I do) that the 1NT open denies a 6 card suit and denies a 5 card major.

[FrancesHinden]

fromageGB, on Feb 18 2009, 06:56 PM, said:

I think Frances's contribution deserves a reply from a supporter of runout methods. Taking his points :

If thoughts could fry, you would now be a spam fritter

[Mbodell]

MarkDean, on Feb 17 2009, 12:13 PM, said:

I agree with pass not forcing redouble.

1) 1NTx can be best spot
2) Puts fourth hand under pressure
3) Adam's reason.

Strongly agree.

I'm willing to occasionally end up at the 3 level in exchange for often getting to play 1ntX. Even when it isn't a good spot we often get saved by opponents. I like using an inverted psycho suction run out. This also has the good aspect that Frances mentioned that nearly all bids are non-forcing:

Over (P) - 1NT - (X) and 1NT - (X) I play:

pass - to play
XX - business w/ forcing passes now over their bidding
2♣ - (♣+♦) OR ♥, not forcing (all nf are sometimes passed even if not preference if not doubled)
2♦ - (♦+♥) OR ♠, not forcing
2♥ - (♥+♠) OR ♣, nf
2♠ - (♠+♣) OR ♦, nf
2nt - (♣+♥) OR (♦+♠)
3 level - same suits as 2 level, but now a constructive very distributional hand
4m - South African transfers
4M - to play

Over P - (P) - 1NT - (X) we give up the business XX and now get:
XX - puppet to 2♣, over 2♣:
pass - just ♣
2♦ - just ♦
2♥ - ♣+♥
2♠ - ♦+♠

and this lets us get all the 1 suiters and nearly all the 2 suiters at the one level (only the non-touching 2 suiters where the minor is preferred would force us to the 3 level).

To reiterate, 1ntx-1 white is almost always a good board, 1ntxx-1 not so much.

[MFA]

Walddk, on Feb 17 2009, 01:35 PM, said:

JanM, on Feb 17 2009, 08:00 PM, said:

Maybe because our "weak" NT is 12-14, we don't like to play that pass forces RDBL. Sometimes 1NTX is the best contract.

Spot on, and that does not only apply to a weak NT. An escape method that will not allow you to play 1NT doubled is not worth playing in my opinion.

Personally I prefer Meckwell, but other methods are also playable.

Roland

I agree that there are hands that play better in 1NTX than in 2 of a suit.

But it is not necessarily so easy to identify them in the bidding.

The real trouble for the weak NT is when the combined strength is very low. In those cases it is usually the percentage action for responder to run with any 4-4 and hope for trump tricks. But sometimes this is unsuccessful, for instance because the fit is bad, the opps are able to draw trumps or perhaps able to get ruffs. Etc.
These things are hard to know when one chooses to stay or to run.

[mikeh]

I accept that, in theory, playing the pass forces the redouble can be problematic.. there will be hands on which playing 1Nx'd is the best possible result. My experience is biased because I have always played rescues that don't allow that result, so I can't be sure how the opps would have behaved over our initial pass as responder... since we alert as forces a redouble, 4th seat is in different position than if pass suggested playing there.

But despite this, I have been reasonably happy with the method I currently play:

P = xx. Most good hands, but could be weak with non-touching suits or could be clubs and a major, with longer clubs, or both majors, with better spades than hearts

2♣/♦/♥: the bid suit and the next higher... if majors, then hearts better than spades

2♠ spades and clubs, 5 card spades

2N: gf big 2-suiter, not suited for 1N xx (or not wanting to let 4th seat bid)

3suit: same as 2-suit but more shapely

xx: forces 2♣: one suited runout

We do not allow the weak 1N to have a 6 card minor nor (usually) to be 5 minor + 4 major, nor is opener permitted to have a good 5 card major.

These constraints make some of Frances' concerns about running with 2-suiters less significant than they may be for others.

We play a different structure after 1N P P x

[mikestar]

100% with Frances on this one. Keep it natural. If not superior to more complex schemes, it is at least competitive with them and has much less memory load.

I like to to go one better on opener's redouble after responder passes. It is SOS looking for an escape to a 4-3 or better fit. With a five card suit opener just bids it.