[whereagles]

Hi,

Need some ideas on 1NT escapes. 1NT is 9-11 NV and may have 5 card major.

Basically I need a simple way to bid weakish 44s and 4333s, and I have three bids available: rdbl, 2♣, 2♦. 2M can also be used, but I doubt it will be any good.

Motivation is that the scheme I use right now is fine but a bit too complicated (for pard.. LOL).

[helene_t]

rdbl=one suit, 2bananas=two suits. 3-suited hands short in clubs can maybe bid clubs followed by rdbl.

[whereagles]

Well, 1-suiters are bid in another way. I really only need a way to dig up the 4-4 and 4-3 fits when responder is 4432/4333.

4441s may be treated e.g. as a 44 of stronger suits.

[WesleyC]

I've played a lot of 10-12 NT and my preferred methods over double are:

XX = To Play.
New suits = To Play.
Pass = Scrambling, but usually not extreme shape.
Opener either redoubles or bids a 5c suit (the higher the suit, the better suit quality opener needs) .
After a redouble, responder bids their lowest playable spot (or sometimes 2C on a shortage, planning to xx).

Jumps = To Play. (but opener is allowed to compete/raise with a good fit).
2NT = ART G/F, shapely.

The reasons I like this method are:

1) Natural 2 bids and strong redouble put maximum pressure on the opponents to act immediately.
2) It finds the 5/3 & 5/2 fits when opener has a long suit and responder has a balanced hand (our 1NT is often off-shape).
3) It is simple.

[jgillispie]

I'm just brainstorming what I think of immediately here. Relatively simple, I hope...

4333s should allow partner to show his longest suit, as we don't have very much preference. Also, 44s should be as explicit as possible should the opponents decide to compete (for whatever reason..). If we cannot show every two suiter explicitly (likely), then we should have a way to differentiate in competition.



So, with this in mind:

1N (9-11) - X (Penalty) -

Pass: Penalty; Any moderate hand except for those w/ 5♥/♠. Opener may elect to scramble identically with a really, really bad hand. Subsequent doubles are penalty
-> Note that this makes every bid OTHER than pass <Invitational
XX: ♣+♦ or ♠+ ♥/♣/♦ -> subsequent doubles are takeout for majors/minors
2♣: 6+ ♣ or 4♣+ 4♥ -> Rebid ♣ if needed with 6+; Subsequent doubles are takeout
2♦: 6+ ♦ or 4♦+ 4♥ -> Rebid ♦ if needed with 6+; Subsequent doubles are takeout
2♥: 5+ ♥; Constructive; Subsequent doubles are cooperative
2♠: 5+ ♠; Constructive; Subsequent doubles are cooperative

4333 hands XX.

The auctions 2♣ thru 2♠ are intuitive. After XX:
2♣: Artificial; Neutral -> Now 2♦= ♠+♦
2♦: 5+♦ or 3+♦ 2♣
2♥: 5+♥; Quality Suit
2♠: 5+♠; Quality Suit

"Motivation is that the scheme I use right now is fine but a bit too complicated (for pard.. LOL)."

There is always a way to comprehend any structure. I find comprehending the rationale for each bid's definition the most helpful. For instance, 4333 hands XX b/c there is adequate bidding space for opener. Additionally, mnemonics, repetition, flashcards, discussions... they all work. At then end of the day, anyone who is unwilling to understand their bidding methods cannot hope to progress their game. Period. And complexity is never an excuse.

So, the simple presentation:

1N-X-?

Pass= Content with 1NX
XX- Minors or Spades/Other -> opener bids 5 cd suit or 2D w/ majors or 2C otherwise
2C- Rounds longer C
2D- Reds longer D
2H/S- Constructive; 5+ cd.

[jdeegan]

Gotta luv the Kamakazi NT. It was popular in the 1990's, and much was written about it. Marshall Miles published an elaborate system of responses in the ACBL monthly publication. There is much more. Have you Googled 'Moscow Escapes'? Go from there.

[WesleyC]

A couple of philosophical ideas regarding the Mini 1NT:

I think of the Mini-NT as a preemptive rather than a constructive bid. When the auction 1NT (X) comes up, you're tactically ahead of the field because you've forced the opponents to start their auction with a wide ranging double, that conveys no information about hand-shape. If responder now tries to precisely describe their hand shape they are giving back some of that advantage.

Also 1NT redoubled scores HEAPS of points...

[Jinksy]

whereagles, on 2014-December-03, 05:14, said:

Hi,

Need some ideas on 1NT escapes. 1NT is 9-11 NV and may have 5 card major.

Basically I need a simple way to bid weakish 44s and 4333s, and I have three bids available: rdbl, 2♣, 2♦

It seems like any system which doesn't allow you a NF pass or nat redouble is a loser.

That basically leaves you with natural or some form of Stavely wriggle. I'm a big fan of the latter, which let you show any 2-suiter excluding ♣s, with some extra precision in the majors. Its only real downside that I can see is that opener can't make preemptive raises of a potentially nonexistent suit, but I haven't seen that come up much.

It also lets opener pull more safely, since responder's pass is usually made on a balanced hand. Here's our full system:

Responder's calls:

2♣ = ♣s or any other two-suiter
(Next call by responder after they X)
- XX = ♦s and ♥s
- 2♦ = ♦s and ♠s
- 2♥ = ♥s and ♠s*

2♦ = ♦s or ♥s and ♠s
(Next call by responder after they X)
- XX = ♥s and ♠s with (equal or*) better ♥s
- 2♥ = ♥s and ♠s with better ♠s

2♥♠ = nat

* NV we play showing the majors via 2♣ as better ♥s, vul we just bid the better minor to reduce the risk of playing undoubled in your 3-1 fit.

If opener passes he usually has a mid-strength balanced or semibalanced hand. Opener then has all the same options, plus XX to show whatever 2-suiter(s) you prefer (presumably ♣s and at least one other), which responder can also use after passing to a double by LHO.

Side benefit: it's a lot more fun than other wriggles

[Jinksy]

jgillispie, on 2014-December-03, 17:36, said:

Additionally, mnemonics, repetition, flashcards, discussions... they all work. At then end of the day, anyone who is unwilling to understand their bidding methods cannot hope to progress their game. Period. And complexity is never an excuse.

Right, because most parterships have time to do this for every single sequence, and all are aiming to be world champions

[fromageGB]

whereagles, on 2014-December-03, 05:44, said:

Well, 1-suiters are bid in another way. I really only need a way to dig up the 4-4 and 4-3 fits when responder is 4432/4333.

I don't think you can isolate the 1-suiters. It may be more practical to have a bid that shows a 1-suiter if you follow with a pass, but a 2-suiter if you follow with another bid, like a transfer method. If some complexity is allowed you can add the distinction of showing which major is longer when responder is {54}xx, but for real simplicity this might be too much for partner.

However, playing this 1NT style you must be very experienced in being doubled, and would need to have thorough and hence more complex escapes that need to be remembered. If this is too difficult, maybe you should consider a different strength 1NT.

[Vampyr]

jgillispie, on 2014-December-03, 17:36, said:

At then end of the day, anyone who is unwilling to understand their bidding methods cannot hope to progress their game. Period. And complexity is never an excuse.

You have it backwards; players should use methods they understand and embrace a level of complexity that they are comfortable with.

[helene_t]

Whatever you do, make sure you know what you are doing if they double 1NT in balancing seat, or if they double your (presumably) stronger 3rd/4th seat 1NT, or 1NT overcall.

[whereagles]

fromageGB, on 2014-December-04, 05:39, said:

I don't think you can isolate the 1-suiters. It may be more practical to have a bid that shows a 1-suiter if you follow with a pass, but a 2-suiter if you follow with another bid, like a transfer method. If some complexity is allowed you can add the distinction of showing which major is longer when responder is {54}xx, but for real simplicity this might be too much for partner.

However, playing this 1NT style you must be very experienced in being doubled, and would need to have thorough and hence more complex escapes that need to be remembered. If this is too difficult, maybe you should consider a different strength 1NT.

1. It's a piece of cake to me lol. It's pard who insisted in playing a 9-11 NT, despite him having little/no time to study escapes, ha!


2. Since people are getting curious as to 1-suiters, here's what I do with them. Remember: you heard it first here

1NT (dbl) pass

pass = either 1-suited escape OR penalty. Pard is requested to redouble (or bid a 1-suiter of his own if he prefers), after which responder passes/corrects.
This style solves the following, very common, situations:

(a)
1NT (dbl) pass (2x)
??

(b)
1NT (dbl) pass (2x)
pass pass ??

In (a) opener can now double for take out with a doubleton. This is safe because if responder is weak he has a 5-card suit. Plus across he will find a fit + ruffing values. Obviously, if responder is strong he can sit the double with a suitable hand. If instead opener does not have a take out dbl, he passes 2x and we get to situation (b):

In (b) responder can double for take out if strong and with a short. Opener has at least xxx across (frequently better than this) and he can pass for penalties if suitable. With a weak 1-suiter, responder simply passes. Note: major suit 1-suiters in the competitive range bid 1NT (dbl) 2M directly.

[Jinksy]

As far as I can see, virtually no top pairs play a forcing pass over a penalty double. 1Nx is too often the best spot for you, or the best spot you'll be able to find with >50% probability (for eg when deciding whether 4333 is one-suited or two suited, and if the latter, which is your second 4-card suit).

Quote

In (a) opener can now double for take out with a doubleton. This is safe because if responder is weak he has a 5-card suit.

'Safe'?! The opps are going to be able to axe your 5-3 fits at the three level after this auction whenever it's right to do so, which will be a lot of the time. If responder has no shortage, even a 5-4 fit might go for several hundred against a part score.

[mycroft]

Well, it's not exactly *top* top pair, but Canada's arguably top pair plays pass-forces-redouble on their 11-13 NT. I can't find you any 9-11 NTers with ACBL players for some odd reason :-).

I don't play pass-forces-redouble (or pass-forces-anything for that matter), because I want to ratchet up the pressure on 4th hand. If I pass, I'm saying "I think our best score is the hardest contract to defend, with you having minimal values and partner being 'strong' undefined. You get to decide if I'm right, right now." If I redouble, I'm saying "I reasonably certain we can make this; certain enough that I expect we'll get a good result no matter what you do. Could be a *really* good result. Have fun describing your hand!" I also am not comfortable that we can get the most out of 1NT-X-p (runout or penalty)-bid.

What I give up is the ability to find our *best* save with two-suited hands; and with our system, I play a lot of hands for +90 or +110 (or even -50 or -100) where I have +110 or +140 available, because we never find our major fit, playing instead in our minor fit, whether it's better or not.

Everything gives up something.

[Free]

We've had a lot of discussions on this forum about this topic, I'm sure you can find a lot of useful arguments for all kinds of structures.

With the following schemes I've had some very nice results:
Pass = to play (obviously opener can still bid his own suit if he thinks this will be a better spot)
RDbl = scrambling (no 5-card suit)
2X = to play, 5+X

This combines a lot of stuff:
- fast arrival when we have a suit of our own puts pressure on opps. We also hide the 'unknown' hand, opps don't know much about our strength!
- 1NTx-1 or even -2 can be a great score, so you don't always have to make your contract. When you're obligated to play 1NT redoubled you rarely get a good score when going down. So pass should be to play. Moreover, this puts pressure on 4th hand: did we pass to go 1 off, or to make?
- scrambling allows us to find 4-3 or 4-4 fits easily enough. There's no need to 'tell' your entire hand (and lie with 4333 like in most schemes).
- it's simple and efficient!

[steve2005]

Vampyr, on 2014-December-04, 06:24, said:

You have it backwards; players should use methods they understand and embrace a level of complexity that they are comfortable with.

Besides simple can still be pretty effective, not maximum but pretty good.

[whereagles]

Thx all. I got some food for thought now.

There are a lot of methods for 4-4s, but to combine these with 4333's is way more difficult. I think I might have to stick to the current method.

[benlessard]

I strongly believe this scheme is one of the best scheme available.

Pass = pts or 4333 (obviously opener can still XX with a 5 card suit)
RDbl = scrambling (no 5-card suit)
2X = to play, 5+X

Imo treating a 4333 as a single suiter or double suiter is a losing strategy.

After you get doubled on round 2, XX = lowest suit is better, bid = this suit + a better higher suit.

ex

1NT-(X)-xx-(P)
2C--(X)-??

2H= H+S better spades
2D = D+M better major
XX = better D+M or better H+S

this allow you to rightside more often.

[whereagles]

Ben: that scheme looks nice, but has the problem of pass leaving opener in the dark in situations like this:

1NT dbl pass 2x

now opener would like to act if pass was points, but pass if it was a 4333. I played schemes similar this and realized I was too much in the dark when it came to part-score battles.

That was when I came up with the idea of playing "pass = weak 1-suiter or points". With this scheme opener can always bid over 2x when he's short. It also makes it much easier for responder to do something when he has cards.