[helene_t]

NickRW, on Jul 16 2008, 05:09 PM, said:

My point was that 4cM is quite playable with weak NT (indeed, for MP, arguably better than just playable). But if you shift your NT range higher it gives problems.

Why is that? OK, if 1M openings include balanced 12-14 hands interference becomes difficult to handle but the same is true for the 1m openings in a 5cM system.

I don't quite understand why people here in England play either 4cM with weak NT or 5cM with strong NT. Maybe strong NT goes with 5cM just because both are American customs? 4cM with weak NT is impractical IMO because:
- It is not so interesting to preempt when you have 15-17 points. Might as well open 1m.
- Responder must cater for the balanced 15-16 by responding 2/1 with a 9-count, thereby making many 2/1 follow-ups NF (or of unclear forcing character).

I can better imagine playing a strong or intermediate 1NT and playing 4cM with hands below the NT range, while 5cM with hands above the NT range. Like the Scanian system.

[FrancesHinden]

helene_t, on Jul 16 2008, 05:18 PM, said:

I don't quite understand why people here in England play either 4cM with weak NT or 5cM with strong NT.

I play 4CMs and 14-16 NT in speedball or simple system events.

The auctions tend to be faster and simpler than my usual convoluted 5CM-with-lots-of-gadgets methods.

[skjaeran]

NickRW, on Jul 16 2008, 06:09 PM, said:

My point was that 4cM is quite playable with weak NT (indeed, for MP, arguably better than just playable). But if you shift your NT range higher it gives problems.

I don't know why you make this statement.

Coming from a 4-card majorite environment, where 'everyone' play 15-17 NT, my experience is quite the opposite. It's very easy to play 4cM, 15-17NT and 2/1 = 10+ hcp. Dropping the NT range seems to give a lot of problems to me. Sure' you solve a few things (never being minimum when you open one of a suit), but I've seen too much trouble with standard acol sequences to believe that 12-14NT makes things easier.

A 14-16 range is OK IMO.

[fromageGB]

helene_t, on Jul 16 2008, 11:18 AM, said:

I don't quite understand why people here in England play either 4cM with weak NT or 5cM with strong NT. Maybe strong NT goes with 5cM just because both are American customs?

I'm in England playing 2/1 (5cM) with a mini NT 10-12, and that is very playable. You get the preemptive bid on weak hands. With 13+ you open 1♣ on balanced hands and never miss the 4/4 major fit.  Add in a wide ranging 1NT rebid of 13-16 with checkback and it seems to cater for all possibilities.

I can't see why more people don't try it. I think it is as you say, the standard in the US is 5cM and strong NT, so people erroneously think they have to go together.

[Stephen Tu]

mini-nt - main objection is that the 13-19 range becomes a little too wide and you either:
- have this wide range 1nt rebid, and light 2nt rebid on 17, which can get you in trouble esp. across light responses, and also buys you more losses on invitations after 1nt
- open 1c/1d depending on strength range negatively affecting the suit length integrity
- open 2nt 19+ more often and kill finding your slam or just too high to begin with

If you think the wins overshadow these losses then fine. I like the mini more in a strong club context personally but YMMV.

As for 4cM strong NT, Kokish has said that he thinks 4cM strong and 5cM wk are better than the other combos. With 4cM strong, you can have a wider range 1nt response without missing game, and stronger 2/1 responses. You get some of the preemptive effect of the weak NT, without missing your 4-4 major fits, and are harder to penalize.

[NickRW]

helene_t, on Jul 16 2008, 04:18 PM, said:

NickRW, on Jul 16 2008, 05:09 PM, said:

My point was that 4cM is quite playable with weak NT (indeed, for MP, arguably better than just playable).  But if you shift your NT range higher it gives problems.

Why is that? OK, if 1M openings include balanced 12-14 hands interference becomes difficult to handle but the same is true for the 1m openings in a 5cM system.

Well, never mind opposing bids, my distaste for 4cM with anything other than a weak NT coupled with a 2/1 that shows 9 (or even 10 as some play it) (as I was originally taught and played years ago) stems from this sort of hand:

Kxx
AQ9x
QTx
J9x

Flat as a pancake it is true, but a decent 12 count all the same and you open it 1♥ and partner, as an unpassed hand, comes back at you with 2m - now what? 2N? I've personally had my fill of being -1 in those sorts of contracts on a combined 21 or 22.

To my mind to solve this you either need to go a] 5cM or b] drop the NT range back to 12-14 (or just maybe weaker if you're that way inclined) or c] put the 2/1 response up to at least GI if not GF. (Or just maybe d] putting your opening bid requirement back to 'ye olde' 13 count - but that doesn't seem to me to be winning bridge either especially at MP).

If others think that is workable way to go about designing a system, well, ok, perhaps I should shut my mouth - but I will say in closing that I won't relish being your partner.

Nick

[NickRW]

skaeran, on Jul 16 2008, 07:22 PM, said:

NickRW, on Jul 16 2008, 06:09 PM, said:

My point was that 4cM is quite playable with weak NT (indeed, for MP, arguably better than just playable).  But if you shift your NT range higher it gives problems.

I don't know why you make this statement.

Coming from a 4-card majorite environment, where 'everyone' play 15-17 NT, my experience is quite the opposite. It's very easy to play 4cM, 15-17NT and 2/1 = 10+ hcp. Dropping the NT range seems to give a lot of problems to me. Sure' you solve a few things (never being minimum when you open one of a suit), but I've seen too much trouble with standard acol sequences to believe that 12-14NT makes things easier.

A 14-16 range is OK IMO.

Harald, if I were playing IMPs a lot, then I'd agree with you. It seems to me that the modern Acol style works fine for MP - but outside of that form of the game I'd be looking for something else.

Nick

[helene_t]

NickRW, on Jul 17 2008, 01:03 AM, said:

Well, never mind opposing bids, my distaste for 4cM with anything other than a weak NT coupled with a 2/1 that shows 9 (or even 10 as some play it) (as I was originally taught and played years ago) stems from this sort of hand:

Kxx
AQ9x
QTx
J9x

Flat as a pancake it is true, but a decent 12 count all the same and you open it 1♥ and partner, as an unpassed hand, comes back at you with 2m - now what? 2N? I've personally had my fill of being -1 in those sorts of contracts on a combined 21 or 22.

If you play a 15-17 1NT, a 2/1 should want to be in game opposite a balance 14 counts (if you need more than a balanced 14 to be in game, it's safe to respond 1NT).

This makes it a little awkward to rebid the 18-19 and 14 hands since you can't rebid a NF 2NT with 14. I suspect that the 15-17 range comes from a time when balanced 12-counts were not opened. It may be better to play a 14-16 1NT nowadays. Of course if you play 5cM it doesn't matter, but as long a 1♦ can be a balanced hand with only four diamonds, a 14-16 1NT range would help here as well.

[NickRW]

helene_t, on Jul 17 2008, 11:32 AM, said:

If you play a 15-17 1NT, a 2/1 should want to be in game opposite a balance 14 counts (if you need more than a balanced 14 to be in game, it's safe to respond 1NT).

If I understand you right, then you're as good as agreeing with me - 2/1 would be fine with 11, but, without fit, many 10s and nearly all 9s would be too weak to be inviting opposite 14 - so therefore your 2/1 is GI as opposed to Acol's normal style of 9+ which is merely encouraging.

Nick