[olien]

What is a good way to play 2NT opening as?

Would prefer NOT natural and NOT both minors.

The 2N opening would be in the context of the following opening structure:

1C 16+ any (18+ if BAL)
1D 10-15 HCP 2+D (possible S or C canape)
1M 10-15 HCP 4+M (possible canape in any suit)
1N 14+-17 BAL
2C 10-15 HCP 6+C or 5+S 4+C
2D 10-15 HCP 5+H 4+D
2H 10-15 HCP 5+H 4+C
2S weak

[blackshoe]

bad 3 level preempt in either minor. Then 3m is a good preempt, one which you'd be happy to see partner bid 3NT.

NB: don't know where you play, but in the ACBL, this is a mid-chart convention.

[effervesce]

blackshoe, on Oct 20 2009, 11:46 PM, said:

bad 3 level preempt in either minor. Then 3m is a good preempt, one which you'd be happy to see partner bid 3NT.

NB: don't know where you play, but in the ACBL, this is a mid-chart convention.

I always thought that 2NT showing a bad minor preempt was brown sticker by WBF. And yet it's allowed in midchart in US? The US is bizzare on what's allowed and what's not...

[dake50]

Solid Major with side void. Then Namyats 4C,4D uses all 4xAces.

[jdonn]

I'm going against the conditions, but make 1NT 14-16 and 2NT strong, there is no other good use you'll get another than something very random and preemptive.

[Jlall]

edit NM I MISREAD

[vincit]

I like to play it as a 65 or a Gambling diamond based (AKQ 6 or 7) because it fits well in my system

It is followed by 3C relay then you show your shape:

3D = 5S6D
3H = 6D5C
3S = 5H6D
3NT = Gambling diamond based

Note that you show your shape two-step under so that you can make a proposal at 3H on 3D

[olien]

In reply to jdonn's comment

This is a relay system, so probably best not to use natural 2N

1C-1D/ 1H=20+ any
So 1C-1D/ 1N=18-19 and stronger ones go via 1H.

We also chose the nt range we did so that the balanced hands that we open 1D tend to be slightly more sound.

[Phil]

blackshoe, on Oct 20 2009, 11:46 PM, said:

bad 3 level preempt in either minor. Then 3m is a good preempt, one which you'd be happy to see partner bid 3NT.

2x

[fred]

olien, on Oct 21 2009, 02:42 PM, said:

In reply to jdonn's comment

This is a relay system, so probably best not to use natural 2N

1C-1D/ 1H=20+ any
So 1C-1D/ 1N=18-19 and stronger ones go via 1H.

We also chose the nt range we did so that the balanced hands that we open 1D tend to be slightly more sound.

What if partner bids something other than 1D over 1C? Can you still work out all your notrump ranges? Or does partner always respond 1D?

Assuming you can answer these questions, there still might be something to be said for 1C-1D-1H=22+ if balanced, else 20+.

I have never played a relay system so the above could well be nonsense

FWIW I am always happy to play against opponents who use 2NT as some bad preempt.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Phil]

fred, on Oct 21 2009, 11:09 AM, said:

FWIW I am always happy to play against opponents who use 2NT as some bad preempt.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Why is this?

[jdonn]

Phil, on Oct 21 2009, 11:16 AM, said:

fred, on Oct 21 2009, 11:09 AM, said:

FWIW I am always happy to play against opponents who use 2NT as some bad preempt.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Why is this?

Something like this might be why:

Double: Strength
3♣: Majors
Pass then double: Takeout
Double then double: Stronger takeout
Double then pass: Balanced strength

I actually played 2NT as a weak preempt in either minor for several years, and had particularly bad results with it.

[Phil]

jdonn, on Oct 21 2009, 11:19 AM, said:

Phil, on Oct 21 2009, 11:16 AM, said:

fred, on Oct 21 2009, 11:09 AM, said:

FWIW I am always happy to play against opponents who use 2NT as some bad preempt.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Why is this?

Something like this might be why:

Double: Strength
3♣: Majors
Pass then double: Takeout
Double then double: Stronger takeout
Double then pass: Balanced strength

I actually played 2NT as a weak preempt in either minor for several years, and had particularly bad results with it.

Seems to me 2N would work identical to a multi 2♦. Would you 'prefer' to play against multi vs other types of 2 bids? I wouldn't, but thats me.

No one has mentioned this but calls of this genre are worlds apart from any transfer preempt.

By the way, how would you simply show clubs at R1?

[fred]

Phil, on Oct 21 2009, 04:16 PM, said:

fred, on Oct 21 2009, 11:09 AM, said:

FWIW I am always happy to play against opponents who use 2NT as some bad preempt.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Why is this?

- Easy to defend against
- Easier to extract a penalty than natural 3m openings and penalties available more often if you preempt with "bad hands"
- Nice not to have to commit to bidding or passing immediately with marginal hand for overcall or takeout double
- When they open 2NT or 3m and you end up as declarer or on defense (ie on every hand) you will know more about the unseen hands than you would against opps who played wider-ranging 3m preempts or who don't preempt at all with "bad hands"
- When they pass sometimes you will be able to draw effective negative inferences (this is one of the main reasons I think 10-12 notrumps are so awful by the way)

Probably I could think of some more reasons...

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[awm]

For a while I tried playing 2NT = strong two-suiter (5-5 or more) without spades. This has a number of advantages:

(1) When you open 1♣ strong with these hands, opponents are often in the auction. Bidding 2NT directly shuts them out.

(2) These hands do better when opener describes, but it's hard to work them into reverse relays. So opening 1♣ and hearing about partner's shape and values is often the wrong way to go about it.

I eventually gave up the experiment because the methods we were using over 2NT (which worked pretty well) were too much to remember. But it's pretty similar to Inquiry's stuff, although without the weak option.

Another idea is to play 2NT=6+ in a particular minor and 4 in a particular major. This is about as frequent as 2NT=minors, acts as a very annoying preempt, and might take a problem hand out of your 1M openings. If the minor is diamonds, you have plenty of room to play 3♣=relay over it too.

[jdonn]

Phil, on Oct 21 2009, 11:25 AM, said:

jdonn, on Oct 21 2009, 11:19 AM, said:

Phil, on Oct 21 2009, 11:16 AM, said:

fred, on Oct 21 2009, 11:09 AM, said:

FWIW I am always happy to play against opponents who use 2NT as some bad preempt.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Why is this?

Something like this might be why:

Double: Strength
3♣: Majors
Pass then double: Takeout
Double then double: Stronger takeout
Double then pass: Balanced strength

I actually played 2NT as a weak preempt in either minor for several years, and had particularly bad results with it.

Seems to me 2N would work identical to a multi 2♦. Would you 'prefer' to play against multi vs other types of 2 bids? I wouldn't, but thats me.

Yes I would, I have said that in that past a few times. I personally believe multi is an inferior convention. This may well not be a popular view, I realize.

[helene_t]

Phil, on Oct 21 2009, 05:25 PM, said:

Would you 'prefer' to play against multi vs other types of 2 bids?

Yes, for a.o. the reasons Fred and Josh mention.

[kenrexford]

There are all sorts of things that in theory make sense.

Weak with both minors or with just diamonds (correct 3♣ to 3♦) would allow 3♦ for some other purpose (maybe both majors).

Tossing in a multi aspect, where 2NT might also be strong, might be fun.

Or, 2NT as weak with both minors, weak with judt diamonds, weak with both majors, or weak with just spades could also be unwound, maybe, and might open up both 3♦ for some purpose and 3♠ as, say, a gambling-expected relay to 3NT, also possibly stacked.

[olien]

In reply to Fred's question about what happens after 1H+ responses to 1C is opener usually relays with a balanced hand and gets a good idea of responder's overall strength and usually learns exact distribution and can make appropriate slam/game decisions.

Anyways, I was thinking of a 2N opener as weak both majors (5/5 NV and 6/5 V). Is this as bad as a 2N opening weak both minors? How about 2N as weak S + H/D like used by bates and sontag?

Thanks for the feedback

[Jlall]

jdonn, on Oct 21 2009, 11:43 AM, said:

Phil, on Oct 21 2009, 11:25 AM, said:

jdonn, on Oct 21 2009, 11:19 AM, said:

Phil, on Oct 21 2009, 11:16 AM, said:

fred, on Oct 21 2009, 11:09 AM, said:

FWIW I am always happy to play against opponents who use 2NT as some bad preempt.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Why is this?

Something like this might be why:

Double: Strength
3♣: Majors
Pass then double: Takeout
Double then double: Stronger takeout
Double then pass: Balanced strength

I actually played 2NT as a weak preempt in either minor for several years, and had particularly bad results with it.

Seems to me 2N would work identical to a multi 2♦. Would you 'prefer' to play against multi vs other types of 2 bids? I wouldn't, but thats me.

Yes I would, I have said that in that past a few times. I personally believe multi is an inferior convention. This may well not be a popular view, I realize.

What? I thought everyone agreed with that since it's so clearly true.

Multi is inferior when you actually have a weak 2, but hopes to make up for that by the gains it gets from freeing up the other 2M bids as something.