[NickRW]

FWIW, at these colours, I think pass gets you a decent MP score more often than anything else. Its a more difficult decision at other colours IMO.

[fred]

jdonn, on Feb 18 2010, 04:48 PM, said:

I'm not anti weak notrump at all though I personally prefer not to play it. I have just always considered it an advantage in competition when I'm balanced and don't open 1NT to have two distinct ranges rather than one wide range. Maybe it's only because it makes my decisions easier, and if that's the case so be it. Your points are all fair.

I also not anti weak notrump even though I prefer not to play it.

One of the things I learned through my experiences playing both weak and strong notrump systems is that, in order to play effectively it takes a lot less work if you play strong notrump.

Strong notrump is easier to play well. I would never agree to play weak notrump in a pickup partnership that formed, say, an hour before an event even if my partner was a top-level player.

For a serious partnership that is willing to put in a lot of work, it is a different story of course, but I still prefer strong notrump. This is not so much because I think strong notrump is "better" - I actually have no idea how one would determine such a thing. The reason I prefer strong notrump in serious partnerships is that, in my experience, one has fewer difficult bidding problems playing strong notrump. This is especially true these days because aggressive competitive bidding, the Achilles heel of the weak notrump, is so fashionable.

For me that works well because it makes me more relaxed and allows me to focus more of my energy on important things like trying to win lots of tricks, judgment, and table presence. I believe that mental energy is a limited resource so I try to devote as much of mine as possible to the things that I know are important.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Old York]

I don't see the problem. If you open 1NT (strong) with this hand, it would be very easy to reach 3NT and oppo cash the first 6 heart tricks.

Opening 1♦ or 1♣ with a strong hand is much safer than opening the same minor with a weaker hand imho. Any minor suit opening is an invitation to opponents to bid a major at the one level, and they always will do so.
Opening 1NT (weak) is more likely to keep opponents quiet

Tony

p.s. I hate the term "weak nt". It is 100% natural to open with 13hcp, and with a balanced hand no-trumps is the natural strain. Opening with 13hcp, you have a mathematical expectancy of finding partner with 9hcp. This gives your side 22hcp and oppo with 18hcp - 4hcp advantage equates to an extra Ace = 7 tricks

[Gerben42]

I am not anti strong notrump but prefer not to play it.



My reason is simple. I prefer systems with a high average opening. Standard American or 2/1 with 15-17 is simply not my type of system. The sort of system played in my club is 5cM weak NT with Acol style 2/1 bids (i.e. forcing to game opposite the strong NT but not very forcing otherwise). I like that, even though it has the difficulties previous posters have pointed out.

With regular partners I play Fantunes (2/1 GF), where a 15-16 balanced hand is much easier to bid because the opener has already promised a Queen more than your standard 2/1 opener when he starts with 1m. Still we would have a problem with the hand shown here, as this is really a very nice 16.

As for the opening poster's hand, I'd bid 3♥, raising 3♠ to 4. Partner doesn't promise 4♠ for this and I don't like 3-3 fits.

I am not passing a T/O Dbl with two small trumps, even though it might work well. I know I double too little in MP, though, but can't seem to find my treatment for this. Most times when I try to cure myself, I see some -670s and give it up.

[junyi_zhu]

lmilne, on Feb 18 2010, 12:48 AM, said:

Dealer: South Vul: E/W Scoring: MP

♠ K43 ♥ 84 ♦ AKJ8 ♣ AJ95

Playing weak NT with a first-time partner, you open 1♦.  Auction proceeds 2♥ (weak) on your left, negative X from partner, pass to you.

Abstain would be great if we could use it at the table...

The intrinsic advantage of strong NT is that it's easier to distinguish the difference between 12-14 and 18-19 than to distinguish the difference between 15-17 and 18-19.
Suppose a very simple auction,
1D 2C
2N:
Suppose you play strong NT,
your 2NT can only be either 12-14 or 18-19.
So you can easily give another push after partner's game bid with 18-19.
So your partner can make a lot of gamebids without disclosing a lot of extra information.
If you play weak NT, your 2NT can be 15-19. now your partner has to take care of the possible 15-17 case and make a few descriptive bids with hands with some extra strength that may make a slam facing 15-17, cause he knows that if he bids 3NT, you wouldn't bid more with 15-17 over his 3NT bid.
This kind of situations happens again and again and again in natural weak NT systems.
No matter constructive bidding or competitive bidding.
Another problem is that you sometimes want to distort your shape and bid some number of NT but you can't.
Suppose you hold x AKQx Qxxxx Jxx or xx Axxx KJxxx AJ, over 1S response, you really want to rebid 1NT, but you just can't cause it shows strong NT.

[aguahombre]

that does clarify Josh's statement that he would rather have split ranges, than one wide range. I got it, believe it or not, with the shorter version

[benlessard]

IMO this is exactly the type of sequence why i prefer weak NT.

Form responder point of view

1D----(2H)------???

you have a borderline hand (you are tempted to ..negative double,2Nt, 3D) ?

Do you prefer that partner may have an unbalanced hand or a balanced 12-14 or a unbalanced and a balanced 15-17 ?

It doesnt really matter if you prefer a neg that tend to show values or a neg that always show 4 in the other major, in both case opener has already take some of the pressure off responder by putting the most troublesome (12-14 bal) hand in 1Nt.

Quote

The intrinsic advantage of strong NT is that it's easier to distinguish the difference between 12-14 and 18-19 than to distinguish the difference between 15-17 and 18-19.

For me its advantageous to be able to upgrade a strong NT into a 18-19 is the opponent bidding indicate that honors a well placed.

[NickRW]

benlessard, on Feb 19 2010, 05:14 AM, said:

IMO this is exactly the type of sequence why i prefer weak NT.

Form responder point of view

1D----(2H)------???

you have a borderline hand (you are tempted to ..negative double,2Nt, 3D) ?

Do you prefer that partner may have an unbalanced hand or a balanced 12-14 or a unbalanced and a balanced 15-17 ?

Yeah, perhaps that sums up this weak vs strong NT thing quite well. With a weak NT responder is a little better placed in that he knows p doesn't have a flat hand with a few honours. Whereas a stronger range leaves opener knowing better whether he has the sort of hand where he'd probably wish to either pass or signoff (weak type) or say something interesting.

I think it mainly comes down to what you're used to as much as anything.

Nick

[dake50]

Rather like a 2NT Lebensohl-like as Fred suggests.

[fred]

dake50, on Feb 19 2010, 01:13 PM, said:

Rather like a 2NT Lebensohl-like as Fred suggests.

I was suggesting no such thing - sorry if my post was not clear.

I was suggesting that opener's normal rebid with a strong notrump should be 2NT (even if opener has 4 spades and/or lacks a heart stopper).

This follows from my suggestion that the negative double in this auction should not be about spades. Any weak notrumpers out there who have not figured this out would benefit from thinking about this concept.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[gnasher]

Even playing double as a normal negative double, you can still play that opener bids 2NT on this sort of hand.

[CSGibson]

gnasher, on Feb 19 2010, 09:40 AM, said:

Even playing double as a normal negative double, you can still play that opener bids 2NT on this sort of hand.

Why would you want to? It seems as though we are giving the opponents a free lead through dummy's potential heart stopper by bidding 2N. 3♥ seems reasonable on these hand types.

[gnasher]

CSGibson, on Feb 20 2010, 09:23 AM, said:

Why would you want to? It seems as though we are giving the opponents a free lead through dummy's potential heart stopper by bidding 2N. 3♥ seems reasonable on these hand types.

So that you don't have to bid a game-forcing 3♥ with inadequate values, and also so as to leave a bit more space for exploring the best game.

[straube]

I think Cascade has a point (though I think the odds are a little higher) in that this particular sequence is probably seldom a problem for the weak NT. I'm more afraid of auctions like 1C (1D) 1S (3D) ? in which opener doesn't have four spades. Here, responder has shown even less than in the posted auction and opener will frequently be shut out...or if he acts (support doubles?) it will often lead to silly contracts. Responder has to guess whether opener has a shapely minimum or a strong NT, not to mention the fit and stopper situations.

I like Meckwell's 1N=good 13 to bad 16 (not fav) in their Precision system. This is the sort of medium hand I like to tell partner about right away.

[fred]

straube, on Feb 20 2010, 02:38 PM, said:

I think Cascade has a point (though I think the odds are a little higher) in that this particular sequence is probably seldom a problem for the weak NT.

Of course Cascade is right that the odds of you having a strong notrump without a stopper when the bidding goes this way are not particularly high. However, the 2H overcall itself causes a serious and unsolvable problem for weak notrumpers.

2H forces you to end up in a ridiculous contract on "normal" hands regardless of what methods you play.

Suppose for example that the responder has something like 10 HCP with something like 3325 distribution with not much in hearts. If you cling to the notion that responder must have 4 spades to make a negative double then he has to Pass over 2H.

Now suppose that opener has a strong notrump with something like 2344 distribution. Reopening with either DBL or 2NT is ridiculous - he also has to Pass.

So you end up defending 2H undoubled when the rest of the world is playing 3NT. That doesn't have to be a disaster of course, but it is not the sort of position that one should want to be in (especially if the vul is any different from what it is in this particular problem and especially if you are playing IMPs instead of MPs).

You therefore (smartly) conclude that playing the negative DBL as promising 4 spades doesn't work. Now responder can make a negative DBL with his 3325 10-count, but this time opener has something like 4144 with 13 HCP - he has a comfortable 2S bid over the negative DBL.

Responder is now forced to Pass and you play your 4-3 spade fit instead of your 5-4 club fit that neither player is able to suggest. It is worse than just missing your best fit - if the hands mesh well 5C could easily be an attractive contract.

Responder's uncertaintly will be even greater if, over the negative DBL, it is normal for opener to bid 2S with a strong notrump containing 4 spades. Now responder has to worry about missing a good 3NT as well, but any attempt to improve the contract brings various other disaster scenarios into play.

Do I need to go on?

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[gnasher]

fred, on Feb 20 2010, 07:01 PM, said:

Suppose for example that the responder has something like 10 HCP with something like 3325 distribution with not much in hearts. If you cling to the notion that responder must have 4 spades to make a negative double then he has to Pass over 2H.

I think responder should overbid with 3♣ rather than underbidding with pass. That creates problems of its own, of course: you get to game on some partscore hands, and slam bidding will become more awkward because of responder's wider range.

[fred]

gnasher, on Feb 20 2010, 06:15 PM, said:

fred, on Feb 20 2010, 07:01 PM, said:

Suppose for example that the responder has something like 10 HCP with something like 3325 distribution with not much in hearts. If you cling to the notion that responder must have 4 spades to make a negative double then he has to Pass over 2H.

I think responder should overbid with 3♣ rather than underbidding with pass. That creates problems of its own, of course: you get to game on some partscore hands, and slam bidding will become more awkward because of responder's wider range.

Sure - you could do that.

But as you point out yourself, the statement I made in bold in my previous post remains true.

Besides that, you low will you go? What if responder has, say, a good 8 HCP? You won't bid 3C with that, right?

And what if he isn't lucky enough to have a 5-card suit to bid? Maybe is 3334 or similar. You won't bid 3C with that, right?

Anyway, I don't think it is necessary for me to ask you these questions - you seem to be one of the few who understands that there are no good answers. Hopefully some of the other posters are starting to see the point...

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[nigel_k]

Fred, I don't understand why you said "the 2H overcall itself causes a serious and unsolvable problem for weak notrumpers" when your 4441 example illustrates that it causes a problem for everyone.

Playing weak NT I might rebid 2♠ with 15 but not more and certainly we could miss a game. But playing strong NT you will rebid 2♠ holding any weak NT with four spades and will encounter similar problems if responder is a bit stronger, e.g. 11-12 HCP and the same 3325 shape. Responder can bid more but will get too high often. And I think this is higher frequency.

Overall, I still feel quite strongly that in close competitive decisions you are better off when responder knows that opener cannot have a weak balanced hand. You're also better off on the hands where open 1NT and obviously you do this more playing 12-14 than 15-17.

The 'split range' that results from a 15-17 NT is good when opener gets to pass before responder acts, e.g. 1♣-P-1♥-2♠-P. But a more common situation is that there is a direct jump overcall and responder acts before opener. In these situations, knowing that opener is either stronger or more distributional than a weak NT really helps.

[Cyberyeti]

I just bid 3♥ and accept I owe partner a point.

I think I'm in better shape than the strong no trumpers in this auction.

How can a strong no trumper's partner know what to do if he hears you rebid 3♣ and doesn't know whether you're 4-4, 5-4 or 5-5 in the minors with a minimum hand. (there may be some gadget in use, but if so I don't know it)

At least playing a weak no trump you can guarantee the 5th diamond or 15 points so you have some idea of a source of tricks if you have 11-12 for the double.

[fred]

nigel_k, on Feb 20 2010, 07:24 PM, said:

Fred, I don't understand why you said "the 2H overcall itself causes a serious and unsolvable problem for weak notrumpers" when your 4441 example illustrates that it causes a problem for everyone.

Playing weak NT I might rebid 2♠ with 15  but not more and certainly we could miss a game. But playing strong NT you will rebid 2♠ holding any weak NT with four spades and will encounter similar problems if responder is a bit stronger, e.g. 11-12 HCP and the same 3325 shape. Responder can bid more but will get too high often. And I think this is higher frequency.

Playing weak notrump, the problems start when responder has enough to invite game opposite a strong notrump - say a good 8 HCP.

Playing strong notrump, you can comfortably Pass with a hand in this range that lacks 4 spades. If you have as much as 11 HCP, the chances of you having enough in hearts to bid 2NT increases. If you have any more than that, you can force to game by bidding 3C and your chances of surviving are good.

For sure there is still a gap when you play strong notrump, but it is a much smaller gap than the one that exists when you play weak notrump.

Also, when you play strong notrump you can effectively play the negative DBLer to always have 4 spades, even though he occasionally may be forced to DBL without 4 spades. Playing weak notrump this is not the case - it happens a lot more than occasionally.

I'm just about ready to give up trying to convince the unconvinced via what I consider to be crystal clear logic. For those of you who don't see it (and maybe it is my fault for not expressing myself well), I will try to convince you in another way:

I have played a lot of hands in high-level tournaments with excellent partners using both strong notrump and weak notrump systems. This experience strongly suggests that competitive bidding is significantly easier in strong notrump systems - it is not even close. If you think "maybe he is biased" then maybe you are right, but such bias (if any) would favor the weak notrump.

Forums regulars will not recall reading many claims like this from me: I know I am right about this one.

And, just to be clear, I am not claiming that strong notrump is "better". Obviously both approaches have their pluses and minuses. My point is that auctions like this one represent a clear minus for the weak notrump approach.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com