[straube]

Assuming a strong club relay system, what are folks thoughts about a natural 2N opening (19+-21 or so)? You give up all the relays and position yourself perhaps better for competition. Which is more important?

[chasetb]

2NT as balanced 19-21 is a loser compared to 1♣ in finding (and sometimes staying away from) small slams. When opponents interfere and partner has a GF, you can occasionally find the Moysian 4M or a very good 5m when 3NT goes down because you opened 2NT. If you make 1♣-1♦; 1♥ as balanced or Hearts, you can move that hand down a level and find good sign-offs that the other table can't find. However, 2NT is a winner when the opponents interfere. Sometimes, they will suggest a lead when the other table goes 2NT - 3NT. It can also put you in a bad spot when partner is 0-3 and you don't know to pass / X / bid on.

I know Rodwell feels strongly about showing that balanced hand range. Van Proojien-Verhees use 22-23 as their range. Kit Woolsey is just the opposite, and Muller-de Wijs also discarded a natural 2NT. Woolsey hates both 1♥ as a relay and 2NT opener as any big balanced hand, so he kept his 1♥ rebid as completely natural (4+), but has no easy way to show 25+ balanced. For his discussion, read the comments at this Bridge Winners page.

Personally, I am in the camp of putting 19-21 into 1♣. I don't like the 1♥ relay, but finding those slams are crucial in my book. I don't agree with Kit with the 5-5 minors pre-empt into 2NT (at least when Vul), but otherwise yes.

[Free]

I've played both approaches and I don't have any strong feelings about either. Currently I play 2NT natural (19-20 or 20-21 depending on vul & seat) and I quite like it.

Some thoughts on a preemptive 2NT:
- The fact that you can have 2NT available for some sort of preempt is nice, but 2NT as preempt is (semi)forcing which isn't that great anyway.
- When you play relays so that opener can ask about responders hand (even opposite semi positives) you can have a very accurate auction when opps don't interfere.
- You can end up too high on hands where opener is min and responder has an invite (for example 1♣-1♦-1NT shows 17-20, responder with 4+-6HCP has to invite).
- Handling interference is a bit more difficult because there are some grey zones in your NT ladder.

Some thoughts on a natural 2NT:
- With a good 2NT structure you'll still get to most games and slams, but obviously you lose a lot of accuracy when it might matter.
- Opps usually don't interfere over a 2NT opening, which makes our lives easier than if we'd opened 1♣ with these hands.
- You can play 1NT more frequent with 23HCP (for example 1♣-1♦-1NT shows 17-18, responder with 4+-6HCP no longer has to invite).
- Your NT ranges are better defined when opps interfere, which is very useful.

One general remark: I wouldn't use a 3-point range for 2NT openings. It's useful to have a clear gap in your NT ranges in 1♣, but 2 points is enough. You'll also make it much easier for responder.

[awm]

Playing IMPrecision, opening 1♣ with 20-21 balanced is a massive winner for us. Of course, our responses and competitive sequences are structured differently from most strong club pairs! Some of the issues I've observed:

1. You will often catch partner with a semi-positive. This is of course worth game opposite the stronger balanced hand; the question is how good of an auction you expect to have here. With most strong club systems your auction will start 1♣-1♦ and you will either continue 2NT (in which case you have gained absolutely nothing by opening strong club) or continue with a forcing and artificial 1♥ bid (in which case you create some issues on natural hands with hearts, and you have lost at least two steps in describing responder's pattern and quite possibly four steps if you play a Kokish-style method where responder is almost forced to rebid 1♠ next). We really have none of these problems in IMPrecision, and have some of our best auctions when responder has a semi-positive and makes an immediate shape-showing response (allowing GF relays on the normal track).

2. If you catch partner with a negative, you want to get out cheaply. In IMPrecision this is easy and we may even find some 4-4 major fits at the two-level.

3. You are sort of afraid of RHO bidding, because this can get a lead-director in when 3NT is your normal contract. However the risk of this is much greater when your auction starts 1♣-1♦ than when responder bids something higher, because RHO's action is cheaper and safer. Again in IMPrecision our semi-positives are not responding 1♦ and if opponents decide to bid over (say) 1♣-1♠ we can often take them for a number.

4. If LHO bids, it might actually help you (either warning about a "danger" suit that would be lead in any case, or allowing you to penalize) but it will depend a lot on your follow-up methods. Playing methods where responder can usually make a descriptive call with a semi-positive will serve you well here, whereas if responder has to make a nebulous double with (almost) all semi-positives, you can wind up guessing. Of course our combination of semi-positive-or-better transfers with semi-positive-or-better takeout doubles works wonders here (admittedly it does occasionally make sequences where responder has a full GF more awkward).

[akhare]

Playing 2N as 19-20- is a reasonable compromise unless playing Imprecision (the best strong ♣ system out there IMO).

When in doubt, these hands can always be opened 1♣ (followed by 2N after 1♣ - 1♦, with 1C - 1♦ - 2♥ as Kokish).

[hrothgar]

akhare, on 2014-February-08, 15:28, said:

Playing 2N as 19-20- is a reasonable compromise unless playing Imprecision (the best strong ♣ system out there IMO).

When in doubt, these hands can always be opened 1♣ (followed by 2N after 1♣ - 1♦, with 1C - 1♦ - 2♥ as Kokish).

My preference is to use 2NT as a bad three level preempt in either clubs or diamonds, allowing 3m to be a fairly disciplined preempt.

The big plus is the ability to place the auction after a 3m opening.

[helene_t]

I dislike having to open 2NT with 20 points and often downgrade 20 counts playing a standard system. Playing strong club I would defiantly put the 19-20 counts, probably also the 21 counts, in the 1♣ opening.

[JmBrPotter]

straube, on 2014-February-07, 23:21, said:

Assuming a strong club relay system, what are folks thoughts about a natural 2N opening (19+-21 or so)? You give up all the relays and position yourself perhaps better for competition. Which is more important?

David,

Bill Gregg and I agree with you about natural 2NT openings. We use the following opening notrump structure:

10-14: Open 1NT (the only natural NT opening bid)
15-18: Open 1♦ and rebid 1NT
19-22: Open 1♣ and rebid 1NT
23 or 24: Open 1♦ and rebid 2NT
25 or 26: Open 1♣ and rebid 2NT
27 or 28: Open 1♦, rebid 2♣ (three-suited 15-34 [3 disjoint ranges] or 27-28 balanced), and second rebid a simple NT
29-37: Open 1♣, rebid 1♠ (three-suited 11-26 [3 disjoint ranges] or balanced 29-37), and second rebid a simple NT

We get a lot of adverse action over our 1NT openings (correct defense). We do not see so much intervention with the stronger balanced hands that rebid after the unlimited 1♣ and 1♦ openings. Intervention is still correct defense, but it is not as clear about what the defense should do against wide range, unlimited hands.

[benlessard]

1NT =12-14
1C-1D-1M = 15-16 or 19-20
1C-1D-1NT =17-18
1C-1y-2NT = 21-22
1C-1Y-2D = almost GF wich is 23-24 if balanced.

Playing a forcing 1C there is a way to avoid 3 pts ranges. Being able to stop in 1NT when 20 vs 0-4 is a fair winner.

being in 2NT 19 vs 0-4 is too ugly for me.

[rbforster]

Remember Zia's 12-14 2NT system for the Cavendish?

http://newsgroups.de...6/msg00126.html

Maybe you can play a sounder version like 13-14 for 2NT, and leave 1NT 10-12 and 1♣ 15+.

[Zelandakh]

3 point ranges are not a problem at the 1 level - not so hot at the 2 level. My scheme is:

(11)12-14: 1NT
15-17: 1♣ - 1♦; 1NT
18-20: 1♣ - 1♦; 1♥ - 1♠; 1NT
21-22: 1♣ - 1♦; 2NT
23-24: 1♣ - 1♦; 1♥ - 1♠; 2NT

Not that this addresses the question in the OP of course. I do not think there is a definitive answer here. You can see that amongst experts both approaches have their adherents. I suspect that as your opponents improve the value of 2NT as a preempt diminishes while the value of removing those balanced hands from 1♣ increases. That might suggest playing 2NT natural if you are regularly reaching the finals of major events but using 2NT for another purpose if playing at a lower level. In any case I dislike the idea of a 2NT opening being 19-bad20. 20-21 or 21-22 are both fine.

[snillrik13]

If you include transfers over 1C it is simple to cover all NT hands above your 1NT opening. (In my case 15+ playing weak NT).