[Chamaco]

I reckon that a jump to 2NT is used by many 2/1 pairs as natural, balanced GF without a 4 card major (maybe 4333).

Question 1

I guess that any NON 3NT rebid by opener here is a slam try.

Do you suggest any specific sequence (artificial or natural) from here to investigate further responder's hand (maybe for a minor suit slam) ?

Question 2

I read in Lawrence's 2/1 workbook that he suggests playing:

1m:2NT = either 12/14 or 18/19 (show battleship at 2nd round)
1m:3NT = 15-17

If so, what is your suggested set of slam try responses after 1m:3NT ?

Thanks all !!

[luke warm]

1) fred recommends natural bidding after 1M : 2nt, where 2nt is natural game force, sometimes with 3 card support for opener's M but in a balanced hand... so opener should bid another 4 card suit if he has it, but i don't think he views this as necessarily a slam try, tho it certainly could be.. just looking for the best contract

2) i personally have no clue ... i'm not crazy about 1m : 3nt anyway... it might be the best bid for that type hand, but it sure seems to take up a lot of space...i'll be interested to see how others answer this part

[pbleighton]

A lot of people play 1m-2NT as invitational, balanced, no 4 card major, and 1m-3NT as min GF, balanced, no 4 card major. I think this is a better treatment.

Peter

[Trpltrbl]

1m-2NT I play as 11-12 with no 4 card major.
1m-3NT I play as 13-15 with no 4 card major.
And I am fairly sure most do play same, even though back in olden days ,when I was 15 years old, I played 2 NT as 12-14 or 18-19 and 3 NT as 15-17.
I am sure that both have their perks, and about slamgoing hands opposite a balanced 4-3-3-3 there are only very few, mostly based on openers very shapely hand. So common sense is biggest part, not a system.

Mike

[Chamaco]

Hi folks,
I know that it is also very common to play 1m:2NT as invitational,
but I am specifically asking opinions on the sequences after the other agreement, proposed by Mike Lawrence (namely, 1m:2NT GF 12-14 or 18-19, 1m:3NT = 15-17).

In a different thread I may ask why do experts prefer one or the other treatment, but in this thread it is not my main concern.

I have quite a few of Lawrence's books but could not find the descriptions of the followups.
As trpltrbl points out, 1m:2NT should not be a big deal, as not many 1m openers will look for slam opposite 12-14 balanced.
On the other hand, 1m:3NT (15-17 bal) is another beast.
Comments ?

Thanks !

Mauro

[helene_t]

Has anybody considered putting one of the intervals, for example the 15-17, in the forcing 1NT response?

[Chamaco]

helene_t, on Jun 28 2004, 10:12 AM, said:

Has anybody considered putting one of the intervals, for example the 15-17, in the forcing 1NT response?

In 99% of natural 2/1 systems, 1Nt is considered forcing ONLY to 1♥/♠ opening.
1♣/♦:1NT is natural, non forcing.

[Trpltrbl]

1m-3NT as 15-17 opener needs to have a good hand aka 16+ and preferable a 5 card or better suit.
That's a reason most "experts" with a good hand don't like to bid 3 NT as it is known as a slamkiller. They will lie a little and come up with a 1♦ bid, or maybe bid a 3 card major, especially when they have a good 17 count.
Go slow and you have much more room to investigate.
But if it goes like I said before I guess you can use Gerber, or Quantative.
Not liking it, but you have to do something, maybe this is why there is not much material out there about this, since most topplayers will go slow.

Mike

[EricK]

Just because you play 1m-3NT as 15-17 balanced no 4 cd major, does not mean that every 15-17 balanced hand with no 4cd major should bid 1NT!

If you had ♠AKx ♥Kxx ♦Axx ♣Kxxx you would be crazy to bid 3NT in response to 1♣.

If you had ♠KJT ♥KQx ♦QJT ♣KJxx you would be crazy not to.

I you reserve jumps to 3NT (or even 2NT) to show NT oriented hands (ie 4333 hands with very few controls) then opener will know which hands to make slam tries on (because it will totally obvious), and he can make entirely natural follow ups.

Eric

[gabika73]

On 1m - 2nt:
This is 13-15(12-14) or 18+ in our treatment (with INV BAL we bid 2nt via other minor).
Of course, no 4cM...

Responses can be:
3♣: asks distribution.
- 3♦: 3343
- 3♥: 2344
- 3♠: 3244
- 3nt: 3334 (and definitely not 18+)

3♦: expresses doubt about major stoppers.
-3M: solid stopper, weak stopper in other major
-3nt: partner, dont worry about majors.

3M: 5+m, 4+M, slammish

4m: Gerber, ORKC, or the like...

Direct 3nt on 1m, since it consumes lot of bidding space, should be made with one specific pattern: 3334. (Also, it might deny, on partnership agreement, a specific number of controls.)
This puts opener in a position to decide on the probably best contract.

[Free]

I don't see the need in such bids, since:

- After 1♣ we either have a 1♦ F1 response or a 2♣ inverted minor F1 response.
- After 1♦ we either have a 2♣ GF response or a 2♦ inverted minor F1 response.

So we don't have to kill any possibility of finding a minor suit slam, we don't have to go high like a crazed man,... The only thing I'd play is 3NT as a perfect 4333 distribution, 4 card in a minor, and around 15-17. With 4432 or 5332 we bid natural. Won't give us much trouble when we have the points anyway. 2NT just invitational balanced, no 4M.

[Chamaco]

Free, on Jul 14 2004, 10:37 AM, said:

I don't see the need in such bids, since:

- After 1♣ we either have a 1♦ F1 response or a 2♣ inverted minor F1 response.
- After 1♦ we either have a 2♣ GF response or a 2♦ inverted minor F1 response.

So we don't have to kill any possibility of finding a minor suit slam, we don't have to go high like a crazed man,...  The only thing I'd play is 3NT as a perfect 4333 distribution, 4 card in a minor, and around 15-17.  With 4432 or 5332 we bid natural.  Won't give us much trouble when we have the points anyway.  2NT just invitational balanced, no 4M.

I hate responding clubs to 1D with only 4 clubs.
I want 1:d:2C guarantee 5+ clubs and I want that 1D:1H/S guarantees 4 cards in H/S (e.g. absolutely NONONO to respndig a 3 card 1H/S with very strong balanced hands).

And, since I'd like to use this scheme for the Precision nebulous diamond, I want 1D:2D to be 5+ cards, not only 4.

So I need a response for the strong balanced responder.
I have no problem giving up the invitational 2NT: many strong players avoid altogether invitational responses.
For example, Buratti and Lanzarotti in their "Nightmare" system have explicitly eliminated invitational sequences.

[Cascade]

What I play doesn't quite fit your question but there might be some ideas that are useful or that you can adapt.

We play 1m 2NT is GF balanced (no singleton), no major and promising at least four cards in the suit opened. The last feature is the difference to what you are discussing.

Our continuations are simplified since a fit is already established as 1m promises four cards. Although I think the scheme would work even if the opening could be a three-card suit.

1m 2NT

3♣ Relay bid asking for controls A=2 K=1 3♦ promises 0-2

3♦/♥/♠ show a singleton

3NT shows a minimum around 11-15 with no singleton. Responder can move with slam ambitions.

If 2NT did not guarantee a fit you could establish your fit after determining that you have sufficient controls for a slam in the CONFI style of George Rosenkranz.