[sceptic]

How weak will you bid 1NT forcing ?


Also same question with strongest hand


does your bidding change if you play a form of Bergen raise


and what will the hands look like?

I am asking this question to try and decide where I can set a stake in the ground for what a direct raise should be min and max

[ArtK78]

Minimum - probably around a 5 count.

Maximum - depends on the partnership agreement. Many players will not bid 1NT on a hand good enough to force to game. Some will use the sequence 1NT-bid-3NT to show a balanced 13-15 or so.

[jtfanclub]

Minimum?

8742
4
987654
63

There's a Yarborough that I'd say 1NT over 1♠ with, and wouldn't feel guilty at all when I put down the hand. We play 3♠ as pre-emptive, but I won't take that chance with a hand like this.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

If you play forcing NT, Bergen and Jacoby:

forcing NT, the single direct raise and raises after a 2/1 reponse
will take care of the hands with 3 card support for openers mayor,
the preemptive raise, Bergen and Jacoby 2 NT will take care of the
hands with 4 card support.

In other words hands with 4-7 and 3 card support go via 1NT,
hands with 4-7 and 4 card support make go via a preemptive raise,
hands with (+)7-(-)10 and 3 card support go via a single raise,
hands with (+)7-(-)10 and 4 card support go via a Bergen raise (3C ?!),
hands with (+)10-(-)12 and 3 card support go via 1NT,
hands with (+)10-(-)12 and 4 card support go via a Bergen raise (3D ?!),
hands with (+)12-??? and 3 card support go via a 2/1 response
or via a forcing NT, if you are bal.
hands with (+)12-??? and 4 card support go via a Jacoby 2 NT

Putting (+)12-15 into the forcing NT is not universal, but makes sense,
as long as 1NT is 100% forcing.
See a similar thread for an alternative solution.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: I dont recommend the above, but it is more or less a raise structure
suggested by Bergen, but he may have updated the above structure
for whatever reason.

[kenrexford]

I like to pass 1NT with a 5332 that I should be ashamed to admit opening. So, 1NT cannot be bid if you'd want to be in game opposite that junk.

[Apollo81]

sceptic, on Jun 4 2008, 03:30 PM, said:

How weak will you bid 1NT forcing ?


Also same question with strongest hand


does your bidding change if you play a form of Bergen raise


and what will the hands look like?

I am asking this question to try and decide where I can set a stake in the ground for what a direct raise should be min and max

The weakest hand is a yarb and the strongest hand is one that doesn't want to force game right now. Obviously the weaker the hand the more often it will be passed instead of forcing NTd.

At fav I would bid 1N with very weak 31(45) hands for instance, we want to make heart bids less appealing for the opps.

[ArtK78]

Apollo81, on Jun 5 2008, 03:00 PM, said:

sceptic, on Jun 4 2008, 03:30 PM, said:

How weak will you bid 1NT forcing ?


Also same question with strongest hand


does your bidding change if you play a form of Bergen raise


and what will the hands look like?

I am asking this question to try and decide where I can set a stake in the ground for what a direct raise should be min and max

The weakest hand is a yarb and the strongest hand is one that doesn't want to force game right now. Obviously the weaker the hand the more often it will be passed instead of forcing NTd.

At fav I would bid 1N with very weak 31(45) hands for instance, we want to make heart bids less appealing for the opps.

This is absurd.

Why would anyone bid 1NT forcing on a zero count?

It makes no sense, unless you like to play game when partner has a near 2♣ opener and you have your zero count, or induce your partner to double out the opps when your LHO bids and partner has a very good hand.

You just can't bid 1NT forcing on a zero count. In fact, I suspect that if you agree to respond 1NT forcing to one of a major opening bids on all zero counts it might come under the heading of highly unusual strength. I don't see any prohibition on the agreement, but I suspect that merely announcing the bid as a forcing 1NT would not be sufficient.

[gnasher]

ArtK78, on Jun 5 2008, 10:05 PM, said:

Apollo81, on Jun 5 2008, 03:00 PM, said:

At fav I would bid 1N with very weak 31(45) hands for instance, we want to make heart bids less appealing for the opps.

This is absurd.

[Snip]

You just can't bid 1NT forcing on a zero count. In fact, I suspect that if you agree to respond 1NT forcing to one of a major opening bids on all zero counts it might come under the heading of highly unusual strength. I don't see any prohibition on the agreement, but I suspect that merely announcing the bid as a forcing 1NT would not be sufficient.

Are you saying that the regulations about conventions and their disclosure have some bearing on the absurdity or otherwise of Apollo's methods?

[jtfanclub]

ArtK78, on Jun 5 2008, 04:05 PM, said:

This is absurd.

Why would anyone bid 1NT forcing on a zero count?

It makes no sense, unless you like to play game when partner has a near 2♣ opener and you have your zero count,

Not to disagree with anything Jlall said (insert joke here)

but I think if you randomly generate a 'near 2♣ opener' with 5+ spades, and put it across my 4162 Yarborough, you'll make over half the time. And if you put it across a 3154 Yarborough, it'll make often enough that it won't be an embarrassment.

[paulg]

Jlall, on Jun 5 2008, 09:59 PM, said:

Regarding responding with a 0 count and 3 card support for pard + a stiff, here are a few of the sentences from system summary forms from the USBC under general bidding style:

"Responses can be light..." Meckwell
"May respond with a very weak hand..." Martel/Stansby
"May respond with a weak hand NV" Katz/Jacobs
"May respond with a very weak hand." Rosenberg/Zia
"We respond 99% of the time" Bates/Sontag
"We will rarely pass an opening bid NV" Grue/Cheek
"Responses to opening bids (especially non-vul) could be very light." Gitelman/Moss
"We may respond very light to opening bids." Garner/Weinstein
"We respond with a very weak hand particularly not vulnerable" Pratap/Landen

I think calling it absurd is a big overbid, and I might even venture to say it is a common thing to do for top (american) experts!

Personally I think we've reached the stage where pairs who do not respond light should be disclosing this fact.

Paul

[peachy]

Jlall, on Jun 5 2008, 04:59 PM, said:

Regarding responding with a 0 count and 3 card support for pard + a stiff, here are a few of the sentences from system summary forms from the USBC under general bidding style:

"Responses can be light..." Meckwell
"May respond with a very weak hand..." Martel/Stansby
"May respond with a weak hand NV" Katz/Jacobs
"May respond with a very weak hand." Rosenberg/Zia
"We respond 99% of the time" Bates/Sontag
"We will rarely pass an opening bid NV" Grue/Cheek
"Responses to opening bids (especially non-vul) could be very light." Gitelman/Moss
"We may respond very light to opening bids." Garner/Weinstein
"We respond with a very weak hand particularly not vulnerable" Pratap/Landen

I think calling it absurd is a big overbid, and I might even venture to say it is a common thing to do for top (american) experts!

You don't even have to be expert to respond light, particularly notvul. Keeps the partnership from temptation to open borderline 2C, and also makes life harder for opponents.

[gwnn]

I respond 1NT on all 0 counts unless I miscount.

[mcphee]

I generally respond with a hand type that will not make me ill if; 1 partner rebids 2NT, 2 if partner jump shifts, so this means responding with most hands.

The F NT is a strong toy that makes players in the next seat concerned about overcalling on hands where they might get into a heap of do-do. Good-ish hands for example that are in the range of an o/c with a not so good suit. If you are able to block the enemy for entering the bidding you turn many positions into good results where you take a minus at the 2 leve.

This nonsense about needing 5 points is simply ridiculous.

[mikestar]

If we are never going to pass an opening one bid, then why the hell are we playing 2/1 instead of Fantunes?

[awm]

I'd normally pass with 0-4 points and with some 5 points hands. While it is true that occasionally responding can get you to a better partial or can make life hard for opponents, it's also true that partner sometimes bids something like 2NT or a jump shift that really fixes you.

The exception is hands with three or more cards in partner's major. Holding four-card support or three-card support and a bit of shape, it's almost always better to bid. The known fit offers you a lot of safety if partner has a big hand (you will often make game in partner's major holding three trumps and a singleton opposite a maximum one-level opening from partner) and it also means that opponents are more likely to actually have something you can talk them out of (if you have a fit, they generally have a fit).

[Apollo81]

Jlall, on Jun 5 2008, 06:21 PM, said:

Noble's example was 31(45) after a 1S opener, but I would also understand bidding with like 0346 in order to avoid playing 1S, and possibly to find a game if partner has a 2 suiter (yes that's right a GAME when you have ZERO points!) as well as make it tough on the opps who will have a tough time bidding with spade length.

Agree; I would never pass 1♠ on 0346 if NV

[ArtK78]

Apollo81, on Jun 6 2008, 03:44 PM, said:

Jlall, on Jun 5 2008, 06:21 PM, said:

Noble's example was 31(45) after a 1S opener, but I would also understand bidding with like 0346 in order to avoid playing 1S, and possibly to find a game if partner has a 2 suiter (yes that's right a GAME when you have ZERO points!) as well as make it tough on the opps who will have a tough time bidding with spade length.

Agree; I would never pass 1♠ on 0346 if NV

When you have 0346 shape, the most likely rebid by partner will be 3♠. After that, the most likely rebids by partner will be 2♠ or 4♠.

I don't think you want to hear any of those bids.