1NT Forcing or Semi Forcing ?
#1
Posted 2011-September-22, 01:33
1. 3 card support in M , Invite.
2. 3 card support in M , "mini-raise" (4-5 points) - though this is rare, raise on some of those.
3. Invitational hands with a minor suit , but not with ♥. (1♠ - 3♥ is nat , inv).
4. 10-11 "balanced" , or with short M , but never a GF hand.
5. All other "normal" 1NT response hands...
Do you think it is a good agreement that opener can Pass 1NT with 5332 11-13 , or similar?
#2
Posted 2011-September-22, 04:30
wyman, on 2012-May-04, 09:48, said:
rbforster, on 2012-May-20, 21:04, said:
My YouTube Channel
#3
Posted 2011-September-22, 05:05
1. A weak hand with no fit (next round new suit or pass partner's new suit)
2. An invitational hand with 2 card fit (next round cheapest return to original suit)
3. An Invitational 3 card fit (next round jump support openers suit)
4. A game forcing 3 card fit 13-15 (next round bid 3nt over a 2 bid, make a slam try over a 3 level response)
5. A slam trying 3 card fit 16-18 not fit for an immediate slam try and lacking a good 2/1 suit to bid (jump into new suit next round or sign off in 4 spades, or make other slam try)
It is very important that my partner never pass the Forcing NT bid since one of its uses is to escape the misfit.
#4
Posted 2011-September-22, 07:59
mich-b, on 2011-September-22, 01:33, said:
1. 3 card support in M , Invite.
2. 3 card support in M , "mini-raise" (4-5 points) - though this is rare, raise on some of those.
3. Invitational hands with a minor suit , but not with ♥. (1♠ - 3♥ is nat , inv).
4. 10-11 "balanced" , or with short M , but never a GF hand.
5. All other "normal" 1NT response hands...
Do you think it is a good agreement that opener can Pass 1NT with 5332 11-13 , or similar?
In could work in some scenerios, but IMO its a overall losing strategy, I see a number of problems.
Using 1NT FORCING as a catchall response is the cornerstone of 2/1. Largely predicated on the fact that effective opponents will most often not allow you to play there. By passing 1NT you side may facilitate the opponents entering the auction at a safer level.
You may be missing a 5/3 Major fit.
You may miss a superior minor suit part score.
Count me out on the 11 point 5332 hands, I'm passing, 2/1 is not designed for this (without some modification). IMO playing all 11 point 5332 opposite 12 in game is losing strategy.
#5
Posted 2011-September-22, 08:48
Opener must respond to the semi-forcing NT unless he has a balanced 10-11 HCP hand (10 HCP being the minimum one opener).
When vulnerable, one bids show a traditional opening bid. In that situation, the 1NT is forcing.
In a 2/1 system (whether game forcing or usually game forcing), it is extremely difficult to deal with many bidding situations if the 1NT response can be passed due to the requirements for a 2/1 response. I choose to give up some of the advantages of using 1NT as forcing in the weak opening structure so as to avoid getting too high when opener is very light.
#6
Posted 2011-September-22, 09:09
- hrothgar
#7
Posted 2011-September-22, 09:21
mich-b, on 2011-September-22, 01:33, said:
1. 3 card support in M , Invite.
Probably a small loss for SF if responder has an unbalanced 3 card raise. If responder is balanced, then its break even IMO.
Quote
If we can steal it for 1N, this isn't so bad, especially if we have hearts. Questionable whether or not the F1NT camp can parse this hand with doubleton support unless some version of BART is employed (which gives up other things).
Quote
Don't blame SF for this one. In one partnership I play it the same way because partner wants to Bergen and we accept the occasional awkward sequence when we hold this hand. In another SF partnership we play 2/1 as a soft GF so this hand type is solved.
Quote
HUGE gain for SF.
Quote
Gain.
Quote
Maybe not 11-13. Even in 'forcing NT' partnerships, I will tell CHO, do not make a 1N response with a balanced 13 or more because I reserve the right to pass you with drek.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#8
Posted 2011-September-22, 14:31
#9
Posted 2011-September-22, 16:33
#10
Posted 2011-September-22, 16:33
#11
Posted 2011-September-22, 18:17
mich-b, on 2011-September-22, 01:33, said:
1. 3 card support in M , Invite.
2. 3 card support in M , "mini-raise" (4-5 points) - though this is rare, raise on some of those.
3. Invitational hands with a minor suit , but not with ♥. (1♠ - 3♥ is nat , inv).
4. 10-11 "balanced" , or with short M , but never a GF hand.
5. All other "normal" 1NT response hands...
Do you think it is a good agreement that opener can Pass 1NT with 5332 11-13 , or similar?
I play 1NT SF, in a very similar system - except 1NT cant have 3 card support invitational (2way bergen), and like it much better than the forcing 1NT, even in IMP.
"But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."
"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."
#12
Posted 2011-September-22, 19:56
We decide if we want to add a bunch of possibilities to 1M-2c or want to keep it real, for instance. Nobody is going to win or lose a debate on the choice of how to treat 1M-1NT. Too much other stuff is involved.
#13
Posted 2011-September-22, 22:26
JLOGIC, on 2011-September-22, 16:33, said:
Sorry, I may be being an idiot here, but aren't there cases where spades takes one more trick that it's a winner? (Like when 1NT=2, and 3S=3.) But I think that I see your point: One is on the three-level, when you could be on the one-level, especially if you can only take 8 tricks. And that when there's a three trick difference, it's better to be in spades. But what about a two trick difference? Wouldn't spades still be better?
I don't disagree with you, btw, about it being better to be SF. I just wasn't following that one piece.
The only 2/1 partnership I'm in plays it SF but we moved 3-card limit raises out of it. But I wonder if my partner would kill me when I strategically "forgot" with balanced hands? Probably so. Except when it works.
#14
Posted 2011-September-22, 22:40
jmcw, on 2011-September-22, 07:59, said:
Count me out on the 11 point 5332 hands, I'm passing, 2/1 is not designed for this (without some modification). IMO playing all 11 point 5332 opposite 12 in game is losing strategy.
Indeed, I don't even see how one can open balanced 12-counts in a 2/1 GF system. Perhaps it could work if 1M-2y-2NT was a potential escape, but I don't think that most people play that.
One could take the 3-card invitational raises out of the 1NT response by using 2♣ as a Drury-like mechanism. This would allow 5-3 fits to be played at the 2-level, which must be a gain compared with both 1NT and 3M.
#15
Posted 2011-September-22, 22:52
Vampyr, on 2011-September-22, 22:40, said:
One could take the 3-card invitational raises out of the 1NT response by using 2♣ as a Drury-like mechanism. This would allow 5-3 fits to be played at the 2-level, which must be a gain compared with both 1NT and 3M.
You can throw the 3-card invite in with the J2N. Not saying I'm a fan of that approach, but it seems to be getting some traction.
#16
Posted 2011-September-23, 00:14
jmcw, on 2011-September-22, 22:52, said:
You can include it with your Bergen or limit raises too. Both of these approaches will get you to the three-level, which is what some people in this thread wish to avoid.
#17
Posted 2011-September-23, 08:53
Elianna, on 2011-September-22, 22:26, said:
Justin was assuming imps, so 120 vs 140 or 90 vs 140 are only 1 or 2 imps compared to 4 to 6 when one makes and the other is down, and 2 or 3 (or rarely 4) imps when they're both down but different amounts.
#18
Posted 2011-September-23, 09:57
- hrothgar
#19
Posted 2011-September-23, 10:09
han, on 2011-September-23, 09:57, said:
For that post, you have earned my favorite sausage and peppers recipe.
#20
Posted 2011-September-23, 10:26
- hrothgar