They Open 1NT

 

"To compete or not to compete?", that is the question in the following hands.  See also the extracts on DONT and Cappelletti.

 

16th August, 2007             Board 28      Dealer West      N-S Vul

 

 

Over 1NT, as East you have some choices:

(a)     Pass and see what happens … we don’t like this one at all, altogether too feeble.

(b)    A penalty Double (if one is available in the partnership methods) … not a great idea, East has no

       obvious lead, and it’s easy to see how Declarer might have a couple of Club stops, 4 or 5 Diamond

       tricks, and who knows what else.

(c)     Show a two-suiter in Clubs and Spades (if possible) … again, not a good idea, there is too great a

       disparity between the two suits.

(d)    Bid Clubs … yes, of course!

 

Yes, the simple and obvious is best here … East bids the Club suit, and, if he gets a second chance later in the auction, he can throw in a 2♠ bid to complete the description of his hand.

 

Of course, if E-W are playing Cappelletti over 1NT, it won't be possible to get Clubs in the auction below the 3-level, a defect of the method.  In those circumstances, it would be tempting to try 2♠, showing Spades and a minor ... yes, a bit weird with a 4-6 hand, but those Spades are quite beefy.

 

 

27th September, 2006       Board 8      Dealer West       None Vul

 

 

Most partnerships play some form of conventional defense to the opponents’ 1NT openings, perhaps the most popular of these being DONT and Cappelletti.  The general idea is to provide additional ways to get into the auction, especially by being able to show two-suiters.  Some methods even give up on the strength-showing Double, using that bid instead as another way to get into the auction.  So this is really a 2-part problem:

-         If you play Cappelletti:  Playing this convention (or any other method which preserves the strength-showing Double) we would double here.  This is not guaranteed to succeed, though, it’s quite possible that they will score 5 Clubs and a Heart, netting us +100 when we can make some number of Hearts.  More likely is that West or North will bail out of 1NT doubled, in which case our plan is to bid up to 3♥.

-         If you play DONT:   Here, there is no strength-showing Double, the Double being used to show a one-suiter.  So, again, with this hand we would Double, though with a totally different meaning to before.  Partner is requested to bid 2♣, after which we’ll reveal that our one-suiter is in Hearts.  But, bidding just 2♥ is not enough, we’d bid 3♥, showing a hand with interest in game (with a preemptive hand, we would have bid 3♥ directly over 1NT).

 

 

1st November, 2006          Board 21      Dealer North       N-S Vul

 

 

What are the choices here?  Three possibilities come to mind:

-         Compete in Clubs with whatever methods you use for that purpose … we don’t like this choice one little bit, the hand is shapeless, the trump suit has no fillers, there is altogether too much defense, only modest offense, and, as if that was not enough, we are also vulnerable.

-         We could double, assuming that, in our methods, this shows a good hand, but it’s far from certain that we can beat it, and if Partner is really weak he’ll pull the Double and it could be us scoring the vulnerable undertricks instead of them.

-         We could just pass, hoping for a 2-trick set and the magic +200 on a part-score hand.  This would be our choice, the only real downside is that they will go down one when we can make a part-score.

 

On the actual hand, nobody can make anything at the two-level, and good defense beats 1NT by two tricks.  Double would have worked fine, too, South would probably scramble into a 2♥ contract, doubled and down one for the same 200.

 

 

29th November, 2006       Board 8      Dealer West       None Vul

 

 

 After the 1NT opening, it would be most feeble of West to sell out when non-vulnerable (and merely quite feeble if E-W were vulnerable).  The real decision is not whether to bid, it’s whether to show a Spade one-suiter or a major two-suiter.  It’s usually better to offer Partner a choice, so if our methods allowed us to show a major two-suiter, then that's what we would do.  And, if we had no major two-suiter in our arsenal?  Then we’d try 2♠, though with slightly more trepidation.

 

 

9th May, 2006                   Board 15      Dealer South       N-S Vul

 

 

If your methods allow a Penalty Double here, would that be your choice?  It’s not ours, the opponents are not vulnerable and it’s easy to see one of these bad things happening:

-         North takes her 7 obvious tricks, but that’s all for the defense, just +100 when a Spade part-score can be made

-         The defense takes 8 or 9 tricks but it’s not enough to compensate for the missed Spade game.

-         The Spades don’t even run and Declarer makes her contract!

 

No, we would prefer to get Spades into the auction, so next we have a two-part question:

-         How do you bid this playing Cappelletti?

-         How do you bid this playing DONT?

 

Playing Cappelletti, we’d suggest bidding 2♣ (unspecified one-suiter), then jumping to 3♠, showing a good hand (but not forcing).  Of course, bidding 3♠ directly over 1NT would be preemptive.

 

Playing DONT, North has two ways of bidding 2♠.  She can either bid 2♠ directly, or she can Double (unspecified one-suiter) and then bid 2♠.  It seems logical for the direct 2♠ to be the weak bid (it’s more preemptive), and for the slow route to 2♠ to show the stronger hand.

 

 

30th May, 2007                 Board 19      Dealer South       E-W Vul

 

 

First, let’s suppose that North had not made that (penalty-oriented) Double.  Partner’s 2♣ showed Clubs and another suit and with a silent North we would bid 2♦, saying “I don’t like your Club suit, let’s play it in your second suit, whatever it is”.  And, if East were to bid 2♥ or 2♠ opposite Partner’s 2♣?  That would say “I don’t care about your second suit, I want to play it in my suit”.

 

Moving on to the actual auction, East has an extra option available, namely the Redouble.  The recommended treatment in this situation is:

-         Redouble is “SOS”, saying “Let’s get out of Clubs and play in your second suit”

-         2♦ or 2♥ or 2♠ all say “I want to play in my suit”.

 

 

12th September, 2007       Board 19      Dealer South       E-W Vul

 

 

It’s standard procedure to look at our vulnerability before we plunge into the auction after their 1NT opening.  But the opponents’ vulnerability is a consideration also and this hand illustrates that point rather well.

 

Let’s suppose that our South here dives right in with a 2♣ DONT bid, showing Clubs and another suit.  You can go to the Hand Analyses if you want to see all the hands, but here we’ll just say that 2♣ is likely to get passed out and likely to score 7 or 8 tricks.  Let’s say that it’s 8 tricks, and that N-S score up +90.  Pretty good, eh?  Not especially, because that is still worse than the +100 N-S could have got defending and beating 1NT.

 

Remember, the point here that it’s not just our vulnerability that matters when we compete over their 1NT, their vulnerability is also a consideration, all the more so when we are competing with a minor suit.  For 2♣ to succeed, South needed help from Partner, and perhaps that help would be enough to beat 1NT on defense.  If that is the case a Club contract needs to score 9 tricks to beat 1NT down a vulnerable undertrick.  To put it simply, there should be less of an imperative to interfere with a vulnerable 1NT than there is when they are non-vulnerable.

 

Does that mean that here, with the 1NT opener vulnerable, we would not compete with 2♣?  Actually we would, but with less alacrity than if the 1NT opener was non-vulnerable.

 

 

© BES, Inc

All Rights Reserved