[jallerton]

 lamford, on 2012-January-26, 10:57, said:

How does he make a game try if he is not balanced? Surely everyone plays 3m as game-forcing.

With an invitational hand Opener can:

• Raise to 2NT with a balanced or semi-balanced hand
  
• jump to 3♠ to invite with 6 (or 7) spades
  
• bid a second suit at the 2-level, then bid again on the next round over partner's raise or (possibly false) preference bid.

[Poky]

Playing a natural 1NT after the double is a bad usage of this bid (assuming it is IMPs)
If you want to play NT, you shouldn't have any problem with them bidding and playing NT.

[phil_20686]

 FrancesHinden, on 2012-January-26, 14:56, said:

I don't see any point in playing it as 8-11, that's just giving too calls (xx and 1NT) virtually the same meaning.
I think, if natural, it should be weaker than a redouble.

There are plenty of hands which aren't ideal for a a XX despite being 8-11.

I reserve xx for hands with good holdinds in at least two suits, and bid 1NT with hands that dont look right for penalising. For example: Kx Jxx Q86x A765 - do you really want to be trying to penalise 2m with those holdings in the suits? On teh other hand, a hand like x QJ9x KQTx QT98 is ideal for the XX.

I have found hands suitable for XX to be pretty rare, and given the choice I would give that up in preference to a natural 1N bid.

[lamford]

 jallerton, on 2012-January-26, 15:01, said:

[*]bid a second suit at the 2-level, then bid again on the next round over partner's raise or (possibly false) preference bid.

The problem is that partner may well be 2-3 in your suits; after the takeout double, which tends to have the three other suits, this is more likely. The 1NT bidder has defined his hand more narrowly than in an uncontested auction, so will be reluctant to raise to the 3-level, and the 5-2 fit is unattractive after the takeout double, so false preference is dangerous. If all non-forcing 2m bids and all non-game-forcing invitational+ hands have to bid 2m and hope to get a response, then this represents too wide a range. Not to mention the problems that occur when your LHO jumps in hearts and your hand is poorly defined.

[lamford]

 FrancesHinden, on 2012-January-26, 14:56, said:

I don't see any point in playing it as 8-11, that's just giving too calls (xx and 1NT) virtually the same meaning.
I think, if natural, it should be weaker than a redouble.

I agree, and the poll seems to indicate, that 8-11 is too high. g7-b10 would seem to be the range suggested by the poll, with the actual range obviously agreed by each partnership. But I cannot agree that XX and 1NT will have "virtually the same meaning". 1NT shows a balanced hand, while redouble may be less balanced and has no real upper range. It is also used, I believe, to show a 3-card raise, too good for 2S, in some methods.

[gnasher]

 lamford, on 2012-January-26, 18:37, said:

The problem is that partner may well be 2-3 in your suits; after the takeout double, which tends to have the three other suits, this is more likely. The 1NT bidder has defined his hand more narrowly than in an uncontested auction, so will be reluctant to raise to the 3-level, and the 5-2 fit is unattractive after the takeout double, so false preference is dangerous.

The takeout double tells us that both suits are more likely than normal to break badly. Why is it more dangerous to play in a 5-2 fit that is breaking badly but onside than a 4-3 fit that is breaking badly and offside?

Quote

If all non-forcing 2m bids and all non-game-forcing invitational+ hands have to bid 2m and hope to get a response, then this represents too wide a range.

We seem to have moved on from the original question. I thought your objective was to find out what is normal, rather than to analyse and improve upon normal methods?

Quote

Not to mention the problems that occur when your LHO jumps in hearts and your hand is poorly defined.

It's not clear to me that splitting responder's range into 0-b7, g7-10, 11+ represents better definition than, say, 0-b6, g6-9, 10+.

Quote

g7-b10 would seem to be the range suggested by the poll

I don't think you can conclude that. The hands you chose to ask us about are all quite poor, with their scattered values, high proportion of minor honours, and empty suits. If, for example, the six count had been Jx xxx Q10xx K9xx it might well have got some more votes.

[phil_20686]

 lamford, on 2012-January-26, 18:37, said:

The problem is that partner may well be 2-3 in your suits; after the takeout double, which tends to have the three other suits, this is more likely. The 1NT bidder has defined his hand more narrowly than in an uncontested auction, so will be reluctant to raise to the 3-level, and the 5-2 fit is unattractive after the takeout double, so false preference is dangerous. If all non-forcing 2m bids and all non-game-forcing invitational+ hands have to bid 2m and hope to get a response, then this represents too wide a range. Not to mention the problems that occur when your LHO jumps in hearts and your hand is poorly defined.

I dont understand, this is a false preference situation, partner will put you back to spades whenever he has a doubleton.

[lamford]

 phil_20686, on 2012-January-27, 06:15, said:

I dont understand, this is a false preference situation, partner will put you back to spades whenever he has a doubleton.

This is the problem. This is likely to be a 5-2 fit, and may well break 5-1.

[lamford]

 gnasher, on 2012-January-27, 03:24, said:

The takeout double tells us that both suits are more likely than normal to break badly. Why is it more dangerous to play in a 5-2 fit that is breaking badly but onside than a 4-3 fit that is breaking badly and offside?


We seem to have moved on from the original question. I thought your objective was to find out what is normal, rather than to analyse and improve upon normal methods?


It's not clear to me that splitting responder's range into 0-b7, g7-10, 11+ represents better definition than, say, 0-b6, g6-9, 10+.


I don't think you can conclude that. The hands you chose to ask us about are all quite poor, with their scattered values, high proportion of minor honours, and empty suits. If, for example, the six count had been Jx xxx Q10xx K9xx it might well have got some more votes.

The takeout doubler may well have only 3 clubs, or if they play same level correction as non-GOSH, only two. They will generally have short spades, except when they are strong balanced or too good for an overcall.

I was both trying to establish what was normal, and what was best. People gave reasons why they thought the range should be higher. I concurred with those. It is not about splitting the range. It is about not responding 1NT on garbage.

I was trying to give example hands. Perhaps I could have added a ten or two, but I would be surprised if that led to a different result. And aces are indeed better than minor honours, but some regard them as more than four points, anyway. The comments on the whole suggest that 6-9 is not normal, and it is either 7-10 or 8-10, perhaps dependent on the quality of honours, intermediates etc.

[phil_20686]

 lamford, on 2012-January-27, 06:20, said:

This is the problem. This is likely to be a 5-2 fit, and may well break 5-1.

in these situations the 5-2 fit basically always plays better than a 4-3 fit.

[lamford]

 phil_20686, on 2012-January-27, 06:38, said:

in these situations the 5-2 fit basically always plays better than a 4-3 fit.

It may, but it it will certainly play worse than the 5-3 fit, when partner has five clubs, which may well break 3-2, with the takeout doubler having something like 1-4-5-3 or 1-5-4-3, his most likely shapes, just on the theory of available places.

This has become far removed from the thread, which is what range to respond 1NT on! It is pertinent to what the opener should rebid 2C or 3C on, and I shall do another poll some time.