[giorgis_di]

Hello everyone,

With my regular partner we started to play 2♦ = 5-10 hcp and 5-4 (at least) in majors. In that spirit, I thought whether it's worth to use 1NT as a weak hand with 5-4 in minors. Specifically, responses could be something like

(a) 2♣/♦ = to play
(b) 2♥/♠ = 12-16 hcp with 5+ cards, non-forcing
© 2NT = 17+ unspecified
(d) 3♣/♦ = preemtive
(e) 3NT = to play
(h) 3♥/♠ = solid 7 cards

The immediate problem is that you may miss a 5-3 fit in majors. For instance, opener may has the following distribution: 0454 or 1345 or 0355. I try to solve this problem with (b).

Another problem is that we may miss a game in majors. I try to solve it with ©. Specifically, opener rebids:

i) 3♣/♦ with a minimum hand, denying 3 cards in majors
ii) 3♥/♠ = (7)8-10 hcp and 3-4 cards in that major
iii) 3NT = 8-10 hcp with exactly 2254 distribution

The most serious problem, though, is that you loose the 'natural' 1NT opening. There is a huge discussion on the benefit of 1NT, either as strong or as a weak opening bid. By employing the aforementioned approach, I borrow (with some mods) from the TOP3 system the 1♦ = 14-16 hcp and balanced.

Here are some thoughs for the responses after the 1♦ opening bid:

a) 1♥ = 8+hcp, with no major
b) 1♠ = 0-7 hcp
c) 1NT = 0-7 hcp with 54 in minors or 6+ cards in a single minor
d) 2♣ = stayman
e) 2♦/♥ = transfer

However, the problem with that is that you can be easily overcalled. In such a case, some thoughts are:

a) over 1♥/♠ overcall, responder passes with a weak hand, doubles with 8+hcp and the rest is the same
b) over 1NT overcall, responder passes = transfer for double, double = transfer for clubs, clubs = transfer for diamond, etc.
c) at the 2-level overcall you can use Lebenshol or any other convention


Note, that under such an approach I use 1♣ = 11+ with any hand.

Any thoughts are more than welcome

[DavidKok]

I admire the creativity and enthusiasm. The opening is weaker but somewhat similar to Groove, and some other custom systems (in particular some strong diamond systems) I am familiar with. They use 1NT as approximately 10-15 with 54(+) in the minors either way. The weaker range solves a lot of the problems simply because responder holds an invitational hand much less often, so simple to-play bids will be able to handle most of your system requests.

That being said I feel the need to be blunt: this strikes me as completely unplayable, in the sense that your score will plummet. The strain between nebulous minors, a sensible notrump ladder and light openings is already pushing many optimised systems to its limits. If you wish to open balanced 11's and also take the 1NT opening out of your notrump ladder you are easy pickings every time you open 1m, which will be most of the time (around 52-58% of all opening hands are balanced, depending on your exact requirements). This opening does not win enough (or possibly even 'at all', more discussion below) to make up for increased losses on those hands.

In general both-minors preempts have three big flaws, not even counting the opportunity cost of using 1NT for something else:

• If the opening is artificial you are giving the opponents, in particular LHO, two bites at the apple to coordinate whether to play or defend. This makes it drastically less useful as a preempt.
  
• Very few auctions end in 2m, and if you have a decent fit the opponents can almost certainly play in a major suit. They might not be able to find it, but if they can you've gained nothing (in fact, you are now well behind as declarer knows the layout).
  
• Since 1NT is so low it is relatively safe for the opponents to come in, so you won't be shutting out their action all that often. I rather like 2♦ as a natural preempt because it takes away most space while leaving both majors in play, 1NT showing both minors is the exact opposite.

Over the constructive 10-15 1NT showing both minors I recommended giving up on playing in 2♣, and instead using that as an artificial inquiry. It might seem strange to give up on the cheapest bid in a strain opener has shown, but I think you very rarely want to play in 2♣ (and when you do, you won't get to) while the constructive benefits of a cheap asking bid are significant. Also keep in mind that with a lousy misfit you can choose to pass the 1NT opening - if you are never going to make use of that you may as well move this into the 2♣ opening, which I think is much more effective as a preempt by forcing LHO to commit immediately. Lastly I think the 1NT-2M responses you suggest are serious liabilities - you are in no man's land, with not enough points to commit to the 3-level, no known fit, and you can't rule out game either. What is poor opener to do? Can you give an overview of the requirements for passing/retreating to a minor/raising/other?

[mw64ahw]

You can probably build something out so that
1N-2♥ asks for Shape/Strength? with the aim of finding the 4-4 or 5-3 Major fit.

The NT ladder shouldn't be too hard.
12-14 & 15-17 can go via 1♣ using a Tansfer Walsh approach
18-19 & 20-21 can go via 2♣ using reverse Kokish

[giorgis_di]

 DavidKok, on 2024-June-10, 06:42, said:

I admire the creativity and enthusiasm. The opening is weaker but somewhat similar to Groove, and some other custom systems (in particular some strong diamond systems) I am familiar with. They use 1NT as approximately 10-15 with 54(+) in the minors either way. The weaker range solves a lot of the problems simply because responder holds an invitational hand much less often, so simple to-play bids will be able to handle most of your system requests.

That being said I feel the need to be blunt: this strikes me as completely unplayable, in the sense that your score will plummet. The strain between nebulous minors, a sensible notrump ladder and light openings is already pushing many optimised systems to its limits. If you wish to open balanced 11's and also take the 1NT opening out of your notrump ladder you are easy pickings every time you open 1m, which will be most of the time (around 52-58% of all opening hands are balanced, depending on your exact requirements). This opening does not win enough (or possibly even 'at all', more discussion below) to make up for increased losses on those hands.

In general both-minors preempts have three big flaws, not even counting the opportunity cost of using 1NT for something else:

• If the opening is artificial you are giving the opponents, in particular LHO, two bites at the apple to coordinate whether to play or defend. This makes it drastically less useful as a preempt.
  
• Very few auctions end in 2m, and if you have a decent fit the opponents can almost certainly play in a major suit. They might not be able to find it, but if they can you've gained nothing (in fact, you are now well behind as declarer knows the layout).
  
• Since 1NT is so low it is relatively safe for the opponents to come in, so you won't be shutting out their action all that often. I rather like 2♦ as a natural preempt because it takes away most space while leaving both majors in play, 1NT showing both minors is the exact opposite.

Over the constructive 10-15 1NT showing both minors I recommended giving up on playing in 2♣, and instead using that as an artificial inquiry. It might seem strange to give up on the cheapest bid in a strain opener has shown, but I think you very rarely want to play in 2♣ (and when you do, you won't get to) while the constructive benefits of a cheap asking bid are significant. Also keep in mind that with a lousy misfit you can choose to pass the 1NT opening - if you are never going to make use of that you may as well move this into the 2♣ opening, which I think is much more effective as a preempt by forcing LHO to commit immediately. Lastly I think the 1NT-2M responses you suggest are serious liabilities - you are in no man's land, with not enough points to commit to the 3-level, no known fit, and you can't rule out game either. What is poor opener to do? Can you give an overview of the requirements for passing/retreating to a minor/raising/other?

To start with, thanks for your comments. The rationale of not missing 5-3 fit in majors (or rarely a 4-4 fit). Also, the 1NT opening values are bounded to the 5-10 hcp interval. Responder knows that game is unlikely, but he/she may wants to try for a 5-3 fit. Note that the 2M response promises at least 5c in that major.

Let's say that the action goes like 1NT-2♥. Now, opener can pass with 1=3=45 or 2245 if he/she is poor enough. By bidding 3♥ opener promises 8-10 hcp and 1=3=45 or 0=4=45. Now in cases where opener has 0 or 1 ♥ and he/she is weak (5-7hcp) I really havent thought the bidding. One solution could be to bid 2NT = asking the responder to bid its best minor.

Responding to your 2nd comment. The purpose is to make opponents life a little bit more difficult. If the have a major fit they can easily find it by overcalling my 1♣ opening over the 1NT opening. Also, it is not clear to them which is the best level to rich, since by bidding at the 2-level they have wasted so much space.

For instance, let's say that I hold xx xx KQxxx Jxxx and the LHO holds AKxxx xxx Jxx Ax. By passing, the LHO easily opens 1♠, but by oppening 1NT how easily the LHO will overcall 2♠?

Responding to your 3rd comment. I dont see any dfference between 1NT opening and a 2♦ opening. In both cases, opponents can bid their major at the 2nd level. The only difference is that the natural 2♦ shows 6 cards and possibly some values on that, whereas 1NT shows 9 cards. For me, 1NT is much more descriptive, unfortunately for opps as well.

[giorgis_di]

 mw64ahw, on 2024-June-10, 08:58, said:

You can probably build something out so that
1N-2♥ asks for Shape/Strength? with the aim of finding the 4-4 or 5-3 Major fit.

The NT ladder shouldn't be too hard.
12-14 & 15-17 can go via 1♣ using a Tansfer Walsh approach
18-19 & 20-21 can go via 2♣ using reverse Kokish

That's a possibility as well. Thanks for the recommendation

[mikeh]

Test

[nullve]

Just know that your system would be a HUM (see the WBF Systems Policy) if it allowed you to open at the one-level with fewer than 8 Milton Work points.