[Spock_]

Hi,

What is the best system against 1NT(15-17), when the partnership doesn't use X as penalty?

[jillybean]

This is a great question.

I don't know that it is best but I have some good results and a lot of fun playing;

X = relay to 2C, if doubler then bids 2D they promise both Majors
2C = transfer to 2D
2D = transfer to 2H
2H = transfer to 2S
2S = undefined
note that transfers can be made at any level.

I like this against strong nt as it puts the strong hand on lead.

[DavidKok]

I've played a number of different systems. There are some I like slightly betters than others, and some that I dislike quite a lot. All things considered most of our gains were from being familiar with the defence and the followups more than the strengths of the system itself.

One approach to defences against a strong 1NT is to attempt to safely increase the frequency with which you can bid, in an attempt to take away the opponents' system. Almost always this means having many bids to show two-suiters, since they are comparatively more common than biddable one-suiters (i.e. assumed fit principles make it safe to bid them even with worse suit quality). Two systems I like quite a bit are Woolsey (for its simplicity) and Lionel (for its effectiveness).

Woolsey:

• X = 5(+)m4(+)M, over which 2♣ asks for the minor (P/C), 2♦ asks for the major and 2M shows advancer's own suit.
  
• 2♣ = (54) or longer in the majors.
  
• 2♦ = A 6(+) card suit in an undisclosed major (i.e. a multi).
  
• 2♥ = 5(+)♥, 4(+) in a minor (approximately a Muiderberg)
  
• 2♠ = 5(+)♠, 4(+) in a minor (approximately a Muiderberg)

Lionel:

• X = ♠+another suit, at least (54) either way but usually shorter spades. Over this 2♣ asks for the second suit (P/C), 2♦ and up are natural. With a 3-card spade suit your best bet is often to bid 2♠ and make them guess.
  
• 2♣ = ♣+♥, at least (54) either way but usually shorter hearts.
  
• 2♦ = ♦+♥, at least (54) either way but usually shorter hearts.
  
• 2♥ = 5(+)♥, to play.
  
• 2♠ = 5(+)♠, to play.

One of the pitfalls that I would recommend being careful with is a long list of multi-meaning bids or transfer bids. These give the opponents extra rounds of bidding. That's part of why I like the Lionel - we get to (relatively safely) enter the bidding with several NF bids - even the double can be passed if partner holds some points opposite with spade shortage, but if we do decide to bid on at least we always have the spades.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

a list of conventions can be found here
https://blakjak.org/def_1nt01.htm

A reasonable approach is Woolsey, which is basically Multi Landy / Hamilton with X showing 5+ minor and a 4 card major.
The advantage is, that you can play the same against weak NT, X now being penalty, the name now changes to Multi Landy / Hamilton.

I am not playing this, but I think this is a reasonable combo covering all NT ranges, and it is reasonably well known.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: We play Lionel, works against all ranges, we only modify the promised strength, but is less common.

[P_Marlowe]

DavidKok, on 2023-March-04, 03:22, said:

<snip>
Lionel:

• X = ♠+another suit, at least (54) either way but usually shorter spades. Over this 2♣ asks for the second suit (P/C), 2♦ and up are natural. With a 3-card spade suit your best bet is often to bid 2♠ and make them guess.
  
• 2♣ = ♣+♥, at least (54) either way but usually shorter hearts.
  
• 2♦ = ♦+♥, at least (54) either way but usually shorter hearts.
  
• 2♥ = 5(+)♥, to play.
  
• 2♠ = 5(+)♠, to play.

One of the pitfalls that I would recommend being careful with is a long list of multi-meaning bids or transfer bids. These give the opponents extra rounds of bidding. That's part of why I like the Lionel - we get to (relatively safely) enter the bidding with several NF bids - even the double can be passed if partner holds some points opposite with spade shortage, but if we do decide to bid on at least we always have the spades.

We play the 2-suited stuff 44 and 2H / 2S as 6+
The 6+ option makes sure, you dont enter with 5332 shape, but yes I like bidding 2H / 2S in a natural fashion.

[awm]

We have done pretty well playing Meyerson:

X = one major + one minor (5+/4+ either way)
2♣ = both majors
2♦/2♥/2♠ = natural
2NT = 5-5 or better minors

Natural bids are quite useful, both because they don't give opponents a chance to pass and then bid again, and because they clarify overcaller's suit in case responder bids. The double actually gives us quite a few chances to penalize (we try to keep it to about 10+ points so advancer can pass with an opening hand) while giving us a lot of options when opponents continue with a transfer bid (i.e. X=4+ in the suit they bid, 2NT asks for the minor, pass and then takeout double is available, etc).

[HardVector]

I've tried a lot of different systems and here is what I've concluded. You want to focus on the idea of DONT (disturb opponent's no trump). Unfortunately, I don't think that DONT doesn't do a good job of that. The most disruptive bids you can make are 2h and 2s. Having to double first then show your major allows them to exchange information and doesn't disrupt them. The same if you have to bid 2c to show a long suit. You leave Stayman and transfers intact for them. Another thing that bothers me, is systems in which you show a 2 suiter, but partner is allowed to be 5/4 in either suit. It sucks to play in a 7 card major fit when you have 9 in the minor (mp bid).

That being said, I like Meckwell because their 2h/2s bids are natural single suiters and are VERY distruptive. I also like Woolsey as you can show hands that have a 4 card major with a longer minor, very useful in putting it in the right spot. Woolsey's single suited majors start with 2d taking away Stayman, so that's helpful. The 2c bid shows both majors, so they can try Stayman, but they are bidding into your hand doing that.

Whatever you choose to do, you should resign yourself to bidding 3 of a minor if that is the strain you want to play. Rarely will you get to play 2 of a minor.

[straube]

I like Pagan...

dbl-hearts and another
.....2C-p/c
..........2H-4S/5H
..........2S-5S/4H
2C-spades and clubs
2D-spades and diamonds
2H-hearts
2S-spades
2N-minors

Two different but related questions. For Meyerson, how do you sort out the 5/4s in such a way as to find the best fit and not lose a major suit fit when you have it?
For Woolsey users, what are the continuations after double? The reason I like Pagan is because I find more major suit fits, but it comes at the cost of playing 3D instead of 2D.

[HardVector]

straube, on 2023-March-04, 12:41, said:

I like Pagan...

dbl-hearts and another
.....2C-p/c
..........2H-4S/5H
..........2S-5S/4H
2C-spades and clubs
2D-spades and diamonds
2H-hearts
2S-spades
2N-minors

Two different but related questions. For Meyerson, how do you sort out the 5/4s in such a way as to find the best fit and not lose a major suit fit when you have it?
For Woolsey users, what are the continuations after double? The reason I like Pagan is because I find more major suit fits, but it comes at the cost of playing 3D instead of 2D.

After a Woolsey double, 2c=pass or correct to diamonds; 2d=bid your major; 2h/2s=natural (my suit)

[straube]

HardVector, on 2023-March-04, 15:00, said:

After a Woolsey double, 2c=pass or correct to diamonds; 2d=bid your major; 2h/2s=natural (my suit)

Thanks. So if advancer has something like 2452 bust hand he bids 2C and hopes for a 2D correction.

If opener is balanced and overcaller has an unbalanced hand, it seems likely that advancer will have a fair number of mirror opposite hands. So I personally understand better a structure where overcaller can at least show one higher-ranking suit before opting for a lower-ranking suit.

Let's say I were playing Pagan and overcaller bids 2C announcing spades and clubs. Well 2452 is aware instantly of a misfit. No gain there maybe, but Pagan could also start with a double to show hearts and another and now advancer picks hearts. This works better than Woolsey which (after a double) can miss hearts.

[awm]

The continuations after the Meyerson X are:

2♣ = bid your five-card suit (pass if it's clubs)
2♦ = bid your major
2M = "this is my own suit" (usually six cards)

Out of question, if you have 2452 and partner shows ♣+♠, how do you know which suit is five? A 4-2 fit is usually pretty disastrous.

It's true that in principle partner could double showing a major and a minor and if I have 2452, we could play a 5-2 club fit instead of a 4-4 heart fit (we will not miss a 5-4 heart fit). But this means opponents have missed an 8+ card spade fit, which will be a good result for us if it actually happens.

When opponents are passing after the double, we normally end up in the same place as Woolsey (note that 2♣ is not "pass if you have clubs" -- it's "pass if you have FIVE clubs and only four in a major"). However, we gain a few things compared to Woolsey:

1. More frequent doubles means more chances to convert to penalty.
2. Natural 2♦ overcall is pretty disruptive.
3. We know overcaller's single-suited major which can help if responder bids lebensohl or the like.

[pescetom]

HardVector, on 2023-March-04, 15:00, said:

After a Woolsey double, 2c=pass or correct to diamonds; 2d=bid your major; 2h/2s=natural (my suit)

And 2N after the response to 2d asks for minor (we agree that a direct 2N asks the same but denies a major, but I don't think that is standard).

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2023-March-04, 02:12, said:

I like this against strong nt as it puts the strong hand on lead.

Transfers do, but they also offer a painless double and are likely to wrongside the contract.
Curious if anyone has done the analysis, but it never struck me as a great idea (except for convenient forgets).

[straube]

awm, on 2023-March-04, 16:02, said:

Out of question, if you have 2452 and partner shows ♣+♠, how do you know which suit is five? A 4-2 fit is usually pretty disastrous.

That's a good point. So if opener has 2542, what's his rebid after a 2C advance? 2H suggesting 5H/4D? You have then to go to the 3-level to get to a diamond contract but you're better off here than folks who use an immediate 2H for hearts and a minor.

I like your method. I didn't realize Woolsey used the 2C advance as "pass with five" but it makes sense.

[pilun]

I like double for penalty, if only to limit the other actions.
Also I don't want to change method because of their range.
Normal and sensible is to double a weak notrump for penalty.
Is 14-16 strong? Is 13-15 weak?

[mw64ahw]

Based on 'Hello'
2^nd Seat
X 15+hcp or a running minor i.e. AKQxxx(x)
2§ 6¨ transfer or 5M4m NV/5M5m VN
2¨ 6© or 5©ª Str playing strength or 5© Opening points
2© Both Majors 44+ NV/54 VN
2ª 6ª or 5ª Opening points
2NT 6+§ transfer or 55+ Both Majors Str
3§ Both Minors
3¨ 7+ pre-emptive
3© 7+ pre-emptive
3ª 7+ pre-emptive

After a 2^nd seat bid 2NT shows an Intermediate plus hand as per responding to a Weak2.
4^th Seat
X 6§ transfer or 5M4§ NV/5M5§ VN
2§ 6¨ transfer or 5M4¨ NV/5M5¨ VN
2¨ Both Majors 44+ NV/54 VN or 5©ª Str playing strength
2© 6© or 5© Opening points
2ª 6ª or 5ª Opening points
2NT Both Minors or 55+ Both Majors Str
3§ 7+ pre-emptive
3¨ 7+ pre-emptive
3© 7+ pre-emptive
3ª 7+ pre-emptive

[foobar]

pilun, on 2023-March-05, 21:52, said:

I like double for penalty, if only to limit the other actions.
Also I don't want to change method because of their range.
Normal and sensible is to double a weak notrump for penalty.
Is 14-16 strong? Is 13-15 weak?

+1...the only adjustment is that a X a PH shows something like a Woolsey X (longer minor and a major). It's an effective check on ensuring that the lower bound of their NT range range doesn't drift southwards too often.