[kgr]

If opps play weak or very weak NT, like 12-14, 8-10 ....
and you agreed to play a system with a penalty DBL:
what points do you noramlly have agreeed then for then penalty DBL in direct and balancing seat. (I assume that this is mostly based on pnts and not on suit length or trick taking against NT?)

[mtvesuvius]

I like the upper range of the opponent's notrump and higher, but against 10-12 I think X = 14+ is good. Balancing X is generally takeout, but can be converted to penalty. These things require some discussion .

[mikeh]

I have a lot of experience playing 10-12, 11-13, 11-14 and 12-14 notrumps, and my approach to doubles is based in large part on what causes my partnerships problems.

I like:

direct seat: 15+. Can be shaded to a good 14... that is, a hand with a good lead.

balancing seat: no penalty double available... double means whatever fits with the scheme in use.. I currently play DONT in balancing seat with one partner and Suction with another (when suction not allowed, molson... double is either clubs or majors or one major). We don't (no pun intended) balance light, so the double is convertible whatever it means.

I strongly recommend against playing that the double shows an equivalent hand or (especially against 10-12 or 11-13) the top of the range.

When the hcp are balanced equally between the 2 sides, the side that gets to 1N usually wins (assuming balanced hands). Thus, if rho shows 10-12 and you hold 12... most of the time the opps are ahead of you. This may sound like an argument for getting in there but it is not. The point is that doubling may and often will turn an average minus into a zero or a loss of 4-6 imps into a loss of 12-14.

LHO is in a perfect.. truly perfect..position to nail your hide to the wall...

In my view, you need to have the percentages on your side...and that means that you would like to be able to assume that if the missing hcp are split between lho and partner, your side has more than their side.

Also, the weaker your double may be, the more often partner will make the wrong decision. Say he holds 6 hcp.. and your double could be on as few as 12 or 13... if you are minimum, and you will hold 12-13 more often than you will hold 15-16, his best bet is to try to scramble to a 4-4 fit somewhere... but if you promise 15 or more, then the odds swing towards passing and trying to beat it. Note, that when the first two bidders hold between 22 and 28 hcp, a borderline 4th seat holding is extremely likely.

[gwnn]

As a subtle highjacking maneuvre, may I ask everyone whether penalty doubles by 1NT opener's partner (1N-2S-x) are a good idea in the case of some mini NT. I've been told this by a couple of good players and I am sceptical.

[mtvesuvius]

gwnn, on Jan 8 2009, 08:02 PM, said:

As a subtle highjacking maneuvre, may I ask everyone whether penalty doubles by 1NT opener's partner (1N-2S-x) are a good idea in the case of some mini NT. I've been told this by a couple of good players and I am sceptical.

I like to always be able to penalize them, but I think negative Xs work best here.

[helene_t]

gwnn, on Jan 9 2009, 02:02 AM, said:

As a subtle highjacking maneuvre, may I ask everyone whether penalty doubles by 1NT opener's partner (1N-2S-x) are a good idea in the case of some mini NT. I've been told this by a couple of good players and I am sceptical.

I think penalty makes more sense when p opens a weak NT than when he opens a strong one.

This is because the weak notrump forces opps to act when they have a good hand with a suit that is not good enough for an overcall to be safe.

[Mbodell]

I agree that penalty doubles are good as partner of weak nt bidder. We are less likely to have a game we need to find (which a negative would help) and our opponents are more likely to make a mistake and bid too high. And the partner of the nt bidder is well positioned to penalize opponents since they know partner has at least 2 of the trump suit in question and at least the minimum points for your 1nt opening.

I'm a big fan of my opponents playing X of our weak or mini-nt as "same hand or better". IME this is an awful agreement that gets them in to trouble and/or rarely lets them penalize us or find their good fit. I think a X should be penalty where it is more about expecting to set the 1NT bidder than any specific point value. A hand with no good suit to lead but scattered 15 points should maybe pass over a 12-14 nt. A hand with 12 points but a good KQJTxx suit should be comfortable making the penalty X. I'd generally expect partner to pass the penalty X more often than not, but to pull with a shapely hand with few points (<5 say).

[awm]

I like double to be 15+ in direct seat, certainly not promising a balanced hand. In passout seat I prefer to play it a bit lighter, like a good 12 or better; several reasons for this:

(1) I don't want to be stolen from when we have 13 opposite 13 balanced and cannot act.
(2) The fact that opener's partner passed reduces the odds that opponents have the strength.
(3) Positionally, it is sometimes harder to beat 1NT when most of our values are located in front of the weak notrump, so I prefer to try to penalize when we have 13-9 rather than 16-6.

By passed hand I just play our methods vs. strong notrump, because I won't hold even the "balancing" 12+ double.

[MFA]

14p against 12-14, 13p against mini. Or a goodish hand. I think that fairly aggressive doubles of weakNTs pay off.

First subsequent double is takeout. Lebensohl from the weak hand. Doubles of all their stayman or transfers are the same as a pen. double of 1NT.

[OleBerg]

I am quite in agreement with MFA, but we are also from the same environment, where 12-14NT is the normal range. (Being an overbidder, I will sometimes double a 12-14NT with 13 and a reasonable lead.)

One more thing that has to be considered, is whether the double establishes a force. If it does establish a force, or establish it until a certain level, you have to uppen your requirements a bit.

A little consideration will also have to be given to some other factors. The most obvious being Red against white with a passed partner. In this case, I would not double on 14 scattered, and maybe even pass 15, if they looked real bad.

[ArtK78]

I have been playing 10-12 1NT openings nonvul for quite some time. I find that penalty doubles by the partner of the 1NT opening are very effective.

One of the basic premises of the mini 1NT opening is that the opponents will be outside of their comfort range. So, as the partner of the 1NT opener, one should not compete when the opponents intervene without a clear cut action. Often one will find that the opponents have not found their best spot and it is best not to disturb them.

Of course, if they are really out of line, you double.

Competitive auctions after a 10-12 1NT auction are full of guesswork. Let the opponents do the guessing.

[hotShot]

kgr, on Jan 9 2009, 02:04 AM, said:

If opps play weak or very weak NT, like 12-14, 8-10 ....
and you agreed to play a system with a penalty DBL:
what points do you noramlly have agreeed then for then penalty DBL in direct and balancing seat. (I assume that this is mostly based on pnts and not on suit length or trick taking against NT?)

What have your opps agreed for further bidding?

Anybody playing a weak NT has a strategy to reach the best possible spot after a penalty dbl. They sure have agreements and a lot of experience there. You can be sure that if you play 1NTx your side will miss something better more often then their side will lose big.

If you play dbl as penalty, responder has pass, redbl and all the 2 level bids left for his constructive bidding. What information can your partner give you, if responder bids pass or redbl, when he is bound to pass to leave the penalty dbl in. So your partner loses a chance for constructive bidding as well. This leaves opener with all the 2 level bid and often redbl for an informed escape move if opps need it. Now that opps presumably reached their best spot, you get to bid again. How do you intend to get to your best spot now?

[barmar]

ArtK78, on Jan 9 2009, 09:05 AM, said:

Competitive auctions after a 10-12 1NT auction are full of guesswork. Let the opponents do the guessing.

Which of course makes it all the more dangerous to balance. Responder can pass with as much as a balanced 12 count, since he knows there's no game. He's just sitting there, innocently waiting for you to take the bait.

[Vilgan]

I played mini NT for a while and really enjoyed it.

A few quick observations/confirmations of what people have already said:

"equal or better" is bad, 15+ is a good guideline unless you have tricks/a lead

If you have a suit/tricks/a good lead, X'ing is now a lot easier. Doable with 13/14 imo.

Responder having X available for everything is really nice. I have gotten a lot of nice swings on auctions like: 1NT - 2S - X.

Balancing back in is really good at MPs especially if the side that opened 1NT is not vulnerable. It might go for a number.. weak NT openers tend to mix things up. However, I have gotten sick amounts of MPs from 1NT p p p when RHO could have balanced and gotten a 110 or 140 instead of 50 or 100. It is more risky at imps.. but still frequently a good idea.