From: geppo@dworkin.wustl.edu (Giuseppe Bianchi)
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Subject: Re: A novice convinces his partner to play weak NT
Date: 27 Sep 92 21:49:35 GMT
Organization: Washington University,  St Louis MO

In article <1992Sep27.060156.19624@umr.edu> ckincy@cs.umr.edu (Charles Kincy) writes:
>Ok, I think I have my partner nearly convinced that weak NT is the
>way to go, but I have a few questions.
> [...]
>[The only problem I have:  What about when responder to 1C has a 5-card
>club suit and no four-card major and about 9 or 10 points?  I guess he
>can bid 1NT, and that has the declarer reversal problem.  Oh, well. 
>*sigh*]

Play inverted minors, or something similar. My own systemation is the
following:
   over 1C:  2C = 10+p, at least 4 card club, no 4 card major
             3C = preemptive, 5+ cards of clubs
             2NT= limit raise in clubs, 6-9 pts, 5+ cards
             (the hands that naturally must be bid 2NT can be preceeded
             by a waiting 1D)
   over 1D:  2D = 10+p
             3D = preempt
             3C = limit raise
with such sistemation you don't have to misbid the hands with 6-9 pts and
5 cards support, that some inverted minor players bid in 1NT.


>(1)  We play Jacoby and Texas Transfers.  Should we turn them off for
>the weak NT?  I have justification for both ways; I was just 
>looking for some people who've played weak NT and their experiences
>in this regard.   (As it happens, some LHOs will interfere w/ a weak
>1NT with Landy or something, and the transfers are off anyway.)

Texas and Jacoby are no more important for being able to play the hand on the
NT side, but neverheless they are VERY important to augment the possibility
to describe the responder hand.

Particularly don't limit Jacoby to the weak hands, but insert limit hands and
some kind of forcing or slam hands. a reasonable systemation:
(on the example 1NT-2D-2H):
   pass = weak hand
   another suit= limit hand (game try) with 4H and 5x (or conversely)
   2NT = 5332 game try
   jump to another suit = 5-5 slam try
   3H = 6 cards, not two honors;
   4H = I played 7 1/2 - 8 tricks, with solid hand, slam possibilities.
        But many other systemations are reasonable.
   3NT = 5332 for game
and there are many possibilities of extention and better hand description
(i play 2S and 2NT still transfer for weak C, D, OR 5-5 game try OR 5-5
game forcing, .. If you want some details contact me).

Change a little the texas: play 4C->H and 4D->S with a very specified hand,
2D->2H - 4H and 2H->2S - 4S with another well specified hand, and a direct 
4H and 4S with any other hand. Notice that in all the cases in which you'll
specify exactly your hand, you'll be dummy.

Notice finally that, using multimeaning Jacoby and texas,  when you use 
stayman you reduce a lot the number of hands responder can have and you give
a lot of informations to your partner!


>I look at it this way.  A lot of times the opening hand will have the
>same strength as the responding hand, so it won't matter who is declarer.

Right. But you have seen how the classical Jacoby and Texas structure can be 
improved.

>But, on the other hand, inconsistencies in conventions cause people
>to forget at most inopportune moments. =)  Do you think one outweighs 
>the other?

Not true. When you play convention with a given logic inside You won't forget
them easily! expecially when those conventions are very frequent. And if 
conventions like Jacoby give to you a much better possibility to describe the
responder hand ... well, a small mnemonic price is worth!

>
>I really, really, really like the weak NT.  It helps solve a lot of 
>problems that SA system has with that balanced yuck hand of 12-14 points.
>It also makes life difficult for opponents to interfere with you at
>the low level.  And woe be unto an unwise pair that interferes with
>your 1C bid when you're sitting with 15-17 HCP!!  :-)

Be careful! Playing 1NT weak you will have the need to:
   1) handle more frequent overcalls (I suggest lebehnsol, and some study
      of defense against conventional overcalls)
   2) you must be able to run out when they double you!
      my systemation is: 
         XX with one suit hand (openers must bid 2C and i report to my real
            suit
         2 xxx: two suit hand, 4-4,  with xxx and an higher rank suit
      but I think the net can propose much better runout systems.

>(Also, as Alfred Scheinwold put it, "Many players feel it is below
>their dignity to let a weak 1NT go unchallenged, but their dignity
>often costs them dear.")

True! weak NT is a knife with two blades! If it's dangerous for you, it is
very very often dangerous for the overcallers!


For concluding, a couple of observations. Weak NT is more difficult to manage
and requires some additional effort OUTSIDE the 1NT opening.

a) you'll have to lower the point count of a sputnik double (1C-(1x)-X)
   to 5-6 pts, in order to play in NT or in a partscore with more points.

b) 1C and 1D openings can be really awful, and often you'll need bad second
   declarations. Often you'll also open 1NT 5-4 hands.

c) after 1C-1x-1NT you must have the elements to investigate the opener hand:
   play some sort of checkback stayman (on new minor forcing)

d) after overcall of 1m, you must clear how opener declares a strong NT opening
   expecially if he has no stopper in the opponents suit

e) .... many other problems that you'll find with some practice.

So, playing weak NT is wonderful, but requires a good partnership!

Giuseppe
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge