[cnszsun]

Scoring: IMP

(1N*)-ps-(2♣*)-ps
(2♦)-AP

1N=9-12
2♣=non-forcing stayman

---

I have no any experiences against mini-nt, could N-S do anything better (3nt can be made by N-S)?

[gwnn]

I'm pretty sure you got screwed and there's nothing u could have done about it.

[rogerclee]

I think the short answer is, no, they cannot do better. Playing a mini NT is an inherently risky thing that has big rewards (shutting out their game) and big losses (getting nailed over nothing). This one was a big gain for them.

To interefere with a weak NT, you should have sound values. From someone who prefers to play weak NT, I can tell you that my biggest gains don't come from cheating the opponents out of their games. They come from nailing bad opponents who overcall or make penalty doubles with nothing.

[whereagles]

Perhaps South could balance with 2♥ (on his QTxx, yes ). Then North could perhaps bid 2NT.

But yeah, agree this 3NT isn't easy at all to bid.

[Gerben42]

I would have passed throughout.

[kfay]

What would 2♦ by the opponents be? Transfer or forcing stayman?

If the latter maybe S can find a X the 1st or 2nd round by otherwise I don't see anything wrong. I've heard that it's best to only interfere with the mini-NT with sound values whereas over a strong NT you only need constructive values, but I don't have much experience so I can't say anything from my own time at the table.

I think this is normal, considering. Just beat them 3-4 tricks and you beat the other table if they don't find game.

[P_Marlowe]

cnszsun, on Feb 14 2008, 07:33 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

(1N*)-ps-(2♣*)-ps
(2♦)-AP

1N=9-12
2♣=non-forcing stayman

---

I have no any experiences against mini-nt, could N-S do anything better (3nt can be made by N-S)?

Hi,

Depends on your method.

The given pair of hands shows, why methods like
Lionel sacrifice the penalty double.

If you believe (as I do) in the theory, that it is more
important to get in to fight for the part score, if they open
a weak NT, rather than be able to make a penalty double,
you play one of those methods, if you dont, you have to
accept that you loose on this hands, which is ok as well,
because those before hand mentioned methods loose
in cases a penalty double would be handy.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: If you play Lionel, South can double the 1 NT opening
bid to show a 2-suiter (+4-+4) with spades, and constr.
values (+11HCP), after which East / West will have a hard
time to find a resting place.
But counter example exists as well.

[TylerE]

BTW, if this took place in ACBL-land, the 1N opening is illegal, since they're playing conventions over it. 10-12 is the lowest you can play conventions over.

[han]

I would have duplicated your passes .

[FrancesHinden]

The weak (and the mini) NT have their biggest goals when you are 13 opposite 12 or similar with two balanced hands and miss game. Personally I think you just have to live with it. I don't want to come in over 1NT looking at a balanced (4-4) hand.

If West has long clubs (as it looks from the auction) then 3NT might be off on a club lead anyway.

[rbforster]

Some people play that a double of the weak NT stayman shows a good hand with no direction, maybe 14+ or something (rather than showing clubs). I don't think South's hand is quite good enough for this, but it's important to have that option so North can get involved when he's passed with an opening hand.

TylerE, on Feb 14 2008, 09:36 AM, said:

BTW, if this took place in ACBL-land, the 1N opening is illegal, since they're playing conventions over it. 10-12 is the lowest you can play conventions over.

To be more precise, the opening is legal as long as it promises 8+ points and a reasonably balanced hand. You are correct that 2♣ as pure stayman would not be allowed when the minimum of the NT range falls below 10 points. Of course that's not to stop them from playing "natural/better minor" stayman if it promises 3+♣s (since that's "natural").

[Cascade]

Just like others I am pretty sure we would have duplicated your auction.

However thinking about this a little but I haven't thought these ideas through maybe someone should be bidding.

It occurs to me that in a way - the opponent's get to the two-level on sub-normal values - this auction is similar to nebulous two-level openings. There are many of these: multi-2♦, Ekrens etc etc.

Against those nebulous openings we have found that we often need to get in there with moderate balanced hands - good weak no trumps up.

Possibly when this auction dies in 2♦ a balancing double should just show a decent weak NT hand. We have the advantage of having passed already which means we have denied a much stronger hand. Therefore double and pull is necessarily limited.

Just a thought - what do others think?

[Cascade]

cnszsun, on Feb 15 2008, 01:33 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

(1N*)-ps-(2♣*)-ps
(2♦)-AP

1N=9-12
2♣=non-forcing stayman

---

I have no any experiences against mini-nt, could N-S do anything better (3nt can be made by N-S)?

Here the auction might be:

(1NT) Pass (2♣) Pass
(2♦) Pass (Pass) Dbl
(Pass) 3♦* (Pass) 3♥
(Pass) 3♠ (Pass) 3NT
All Pass

[awm]

I agree that you're just fixed here... but I think a lot of it is that opponents chose to play in a six card fit, and that your high cards are equally divided and you have two balanced hands. It happens.

In terms of preempt auctions, this seems most similar to a 2♣ opening showing either a strong hand or a weak two in diamonds. Would you really play that 2♣!-P-2♦-P-P-X is a weak notrump? It seems kind of suicidal to me. Usually these "I have a good hand" type of bids are made in direct seat over a call that usually doesn't have much length in the suit they named, rather than in balancing seat over a call that actually shows the suit they're now about to play in. Much more typical in that sort of auction would seem to be that a direct double of 2♣ is "card-showing" whereas a balancing double of 2♦ is "takeout" which is basically what most people play in the weak 1NT opening auction as well.

Again, preempts work. Generally preempting works particularly well when both opponents have balanced hands with equally divided values and equally divided moderate length in the preempt suit.

[jdonn]

You bid fine. Probably the best gain for weak and mini notrumps vs strong opposition is when both opponents have about 12 or 13 balanced, in which case neither can get into the auction (without what is generally considered too much risk anyway.) One good point for discussion is that it's a good idea to play if south doubled stayman here it would show general values, about the same as doubling the 1NT itself. That is much more useful over a weak notrump than showing clubs. Same with doubling a transfer (even moreso in fact.) So if he had a little better hand south couldnt have doubled 2♣ and you would be in the auction.

[hotShot]

cnszsun, on Feb 14 2008, 02:33 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

(1N*)-ps-(2♣*)-ps
(2♦)-AP

1N=9-12
2♣=non-forcing stayman

---

I have no any experiences against mini-nt, could N-S do anything better (3nt can be made by N-S)?

Basically it depends on your methods.
This is a typical case of a partnership agreement that only wins, if it gets opps unprepared.
Unmodified the usual defenses like DONT or Cappelletti are not working well against mini-NT or even weak NT. The best thing I know is Lionel in those cases.

Using Lionel North has a dbl over Wests 1NT opening showing 11+ HCP with 4+ ♠ and a second 4 card suit. This enables South not to downgrade his ♠KQ and he can make his decisions on the base that his side has 24+ HCP. Depending on EW-bidding you might reach a NT contract or at least they will get punished with a penalty dbl.

[gwnn]

hotShot, on Feb 15 2008, 12:48 PM, said:

cnszsun, on Feb 14 2008, 02:33 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

(1N*)-ps-(2♣*)-ps
(2♦)-AP

1N=9-12
2♣=non-forcing stayman

---

I have no any experiences against mini-nt, could N-S do anything better (3nt can be made by N-S)?

Basically it depends on your methods.
This is a typical case of a partnership agreement that only wins, if it gets opps unprepared.
Unmodified the usual defenses like DONT or Cappelletti are not working well against mini-NT or even weak NT. The best thing I know is Lionel in those cases.

Using Lionel North has a dbl over Wests 1NT opening showing 11+ HCP with 4+ ♠ and a second 4 card suit. This enables South not to downgrade his ♠KQ and he can make his decisions on the base that his side has 24+ HCP. Depending on EW-bidding you might reach a NT contract or at least they will get punished with a penalty dbl.

what if north's majors would be reversed or north is 4333 or whatever?
you can't state lionel>penalty doubles just like that

[P_Marlowe]

gwnn, on Feb 15 2008, 06:21 AM, said:

hotShot, on Feb 15 2008, 12:48 PM, said:

cnszsun, on Feb 14 2008, 02:33 PM, said:

Scoring: IMP

(1N*)-ps-(2♣*)-ps
(2♦)-AP

1N=9-12
2♣=non-forcing stayman

---

I have no any experiences against mini-nt, could N-S do anything better (3nt can be made by N-S)?

Basically it depends on your methods.
This is a typical case of a partnership agreement that only wins, if it gets opps unprepared.
Unmodified the usual defenses like DONT or Cappelletti are not working well against mini-NT or even weak NT. The best thing I know is Lionel in those cases.

Using Lionel North has a dbl over Wests 1NT opening showing 11+ HCP with 4+ ♠ and a second 4 card suit. This enables South not to downgrade his ♠KQ and he can make his decisions on the base that his side has 24+ HCP. Depending on EW-bidding you might reach a NT contract or at least they will get punished with a penalty dbl.

what if north's majors would be reversed or north is 4333 or whatever?
you can't state lionel>penalty doubles just like that

If Norths majors are reversed, and if you play Lionel,
you have a 2C overcall, which shows +4-+4 in clubs
and hearts and +11HCP.
If you hold 4333, you have to pass with the North hand,
but you dont have a fit anyway in this case.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[awm]

This has really nothing to do with Lionel. You can bid 2♣ (clubs and a major) with the north hand playing DONT, or in principle bid 2♠ (spades and a minor) playing CAPP. You could double (major and a minor) playing Woolsey.

The point is just that if you play a defense without a penalty double and then regularly come into the auction on 4432 hands, you have a bid with the north cards. That style will work out great any time this situation comes up -- your points are equally divided, you have two balanced hands, and you have a clear majority of the strength.

However, coming into the auction with a balanced hand at the two-level when RHO's hand is a known quantity to all at the table is going to get you crushed any time LHO has a good hand! And you're also going to have trouble when your high card points are not evenly divided (say 16-9 instead of 13-12) because the person with the 16-count has no way to show his extras.