[jmcilkley]

So - you open 1H and LHO doubles and partner bids 2nt. What does this show? For sure it shows heart support up to at least 3h - but what else? I have always played that it also shows that we have the majority of points so probably 10+. But it seems some players don't agree and would bid 2nt to show any 8 loser hand with heart support.
If the bidding goes 1H by me and a 1S overcall on my left then 2S by my partner would also show a good raise to 3H - and again show that we have the majority of the points. So I believe it is exactly the same as the 2NT bid over the double.
What do others think?

[Winstonm]

I’m with you. It’s a limit raise for me.

[Stephen Tu]

The cue bid after an overcall for most guarantees 3 cd support only. For most people dbl-2nt guarantees 4 cd support and 10+ pts. With 3 cd support and various strength raises over the double there are various approaches depending on how fancy gadgets (e.g. transfers) you want to utilize.

[morecharac]

jmcilkley, on 2021-June-11, 14:18, said:

So - you open 1H and LHO doubles and partner bids 2nt. What does this show? For sure it shows heart support up to at least 3h - but what else? I have always played that it also shows that we have the majority of points so probably 10+. But it seems some players don't agree and would bid 2nt to show any 8 loser hand with heart support.
If the bidding goes 1H by me and a 1S overcall on my left then 2S by my partner would also show a good raise to 3H - and again show that we have the majority of the points. So I believe it is exactly the same as the 2NT bid over the double.
What do others think?

We'd play it as almost enough strength for 3NT, stoppers outside, and no desire to look for 4♥. With trump support, 3♥ jams the opponents much better than 2NT does. (Yeah, yeah, good players don't look at minors. Repeat ad nauseum.)

We're primitives, sticking to bidding what we can (usually) remember.

[Stephen Tu]

morecharac, on 2021-June-11, 21:04, said:

We'd play it as almost enough strength for 3NT, stoppers outside, and no desire to look for 4♥. With trump support, 3♥ jams the opponents much better than 2NT does. (Yeah, yeah, good players don't look at minors. Repeat ad nauseum.)

We're primitives, sticking to bidding what we can (usually) remember.

That's super-duper old fashioned bidding.
The logic behind the 2nt as good raise treatment:
1. We want to actually be able to bid 3H and jam the opponents on *weak* hands, way more than *strong* ones. Being able to jam 3H with 4 trumps and about 4-7 pts or so (or whatever weakish range your partnership agrees on) can give the opponents problems, make them unsure whether to compete or not and also deprive them of invitational sequences, so they'll guess wrong more often whether and how high to bid. If you are playing 1h-x-3h as invitational then you don't have a jamming bid with the weaker raises. With 10+ pts it's less necessary to jam since with most hands your side is bidding to game, and 10+ pts opposite an opener is usually sufficient to saw off the opps if they bid over you.

2. If you have a natural 2nt bid, 10+ with no heart fit, it's actually fairly questionable whether you want to declare or not. Fairly often you can double the opponents and collect more than a 2nt partial, or sometimes even more than your 3nt game depending on the vulnerability. Hence the consensus with non-fit hands is to use a mix of redoubling and passing then doubling to try and collect juicy penalties instead of aiming for +120 which just isn't a super-profitable contract, only tending to go for say 3nt when you are at unfavorable and don't have a big trump stack against them.

3. So if you don't really need a natural inv NF 2nt bid, using the 2nt as a good raise now frees 3H up for weak raises.

[pilowsky]

Isn't that Jordan/Truscott?
4 of the bid major and 10+ HCP.
Like Jacoby but slightly weaker?

[Stephen Tu]

pilowsky, on 2021-June-13, 04:43, said:

Isn't that Jordan/Truscott?

Yes those are the names of the convention; Jordan 2nt, aka Truscott 2nt.

[jmcilkley]

I think some of you are missing the point of my question. A friend likes to play stretch raises so after 1H-dbl they would bid 2h with 3/4 hearts an maybe fewer than 6 points and 3H with a 9-loser hand with heart support. Which means they want to bid 2NT to show any hand with 8 losers irrespective of points. My contention is that if they do this then opponents bid on, you now have no idea whether you should double them. I would want the 2NT reply to tell me that we have the majority of the points.

[DavidKok]

jmcilkley, on 2021-June-13, 06:37, said:

I think some of you are missing the point of my question. A friend likes to play stretch raises so after 1H-dbl they would bid 2h with 3/4 hearts an maybe fewer than 6 points and 3H with a 9-loser hand with heart support. Which means they want to bid 2NT to show any hand with 8 losers irrespective of points. My contention is that if they do this then opponents bid on, you now have no idea whether you should double them. I would want the 2NT reply to tell me that we have the majority of the points.

You can either aim for bidding sharp games or for having a good option to penalise the opponents if they compete. In light of your own major suit fit I would dedicate your methods to finding your own game, and only worry about defending if they compete to the four-level. Keep in mind 2NT sets up a force to your 3M, you need a very special hand to prefer defending on the 3-level over bidding your own suit (1♥-(X)-2NT*-(3♠) is somewhat special, you're just outgunned).
If you insist that 2NT claims half the deck that means partner cannot bid this with good shape and support (although 1M-(X)-3m is probably available as a fitbid, so 2NT rates to be (semi-)balanced). This treatment may win if the opponents stretch too much and overcall on the 3-level, and may lose if partner has to choose a more timid way to raise with modest values. I think that against all but the most trigger happy opponents hoping for them to mistakenly enter is anti-%.

[Stephen Tu]

jmcilkley, on 2021-June-13, 06:37, said:

I think some of you are missing the point of my question. A friend likes to play stretch raises so after 1H-dbl they would bid 2h with 3/4 hearts an maybe fewer than 6 points and 3H with a 9-loser hand with heart support. Which means they want to bid 2NT to show any hand with 8 losers irrespective of points. My contention is that if they do this then opponents bid on, you now have no idea whether you should double them. I would want the 2NT reply to tell me that we have the majority of the points.

Well, first off, how are they counting losers? Maybe the first step is convincing them that losing trick count isn't a good method to begin with. If they are using raw unadjusted LTC, where Jxx Axxx Axxxx x is "8 losers" and Jxx Qxxx Qxxxx x is also "8 losers", one should be able to see that this is obviously hopeless for evaluating chance to make game. If they are using an adjusted LTC that accounts for the greater strength of aces vs queens and accounts for jacks and tens, this is better and more workable, but it still tends to overvalue distribution to some extent.

If they are raising 1h-dbl-2h on very few hcp (<7), they need a different approach with a 3 cd raise with their normal constructive raises. Very common these days is to use transfers starting with 1nt, so the one-under bid, 1h-dbl-2d is used with the stronger single raise hands. There have been other approaches, e.g. "BROMAD" (google for it).

As for their higher raises, 3H should probably contain both 9 loser and some of the 8 loser hands (since raw LTC is such a coarse/bad evaluation system, "8 losers" covers a *wide* strength range), the non-invitational ones, hands that don't want to be in game opposite a typical flat 14 or shapely 12, and ones that have minimal defense. Some of the more shapely ones can even bid 4H. They may or may not want to give up a bid such as 1h-dbl-3d to show a "mixed raise", ~7-9 or so, so that you jam the bidding with those too instead of using the lower constructive raise.

I do agree with you that 2nt should be stronger hands with some defense.

[jmcilkley]

I came across an interesting alternative - transfer bids after 1M-dbl-
After 1H-dbl then 1S is natural, 1nt is a transfer to clubs, 2C transfer to diamonds, 2D is a GOOD raise to 2H and 2H is a weak raise to 2h
After 1S-dbl then 1NT is for clubs, 2c for diamonds, 2d for hearts, 2h a GOOD raise to 2S and 2S a weak raise to 2S

Similarly at the 3 level, over 1H-dbl- 3d is a good raise to 3H and 3H is a weak raise, over 1S-dbl- 3h is a GOOD raise to 3S and 3S is a weak raise.

Now maybe you could use the 2nt bid as game forcing like Jacoby 2nt?

[mikeh]

jmcilkley, on 2021-June-14, 09:49, said:

I came across an interesting alternative - transfer bids after 1M-dbl-
After 1H-dbl then 1S is natural, 1nt is a transfer to clubs, 2C transfer to diamonds, 2D is a GOOD raise to 2H and 2H is a weak raise to 2h
After 1S-dbl then 1NT is for clubs, 2c for diamonds, 2d for hearts, 2h a GOOD raise to 2S and 2S a weak raise to 2S

Similarly at the 3 level, over 1H-dbl- 3d is a good raise to 3H and 3H is a weak raise, over 1S-dbl- 3h is a GOOD raise to 3S and 3S is a weak raise.

Now maybe you could use the 2nt bid as game forcing like Jacoby 2nt?

There are several ways to play transfer advances

In my main partnership, we play transfers after a double of any one level suit opening bid, with redouble the cheapest transfer

1C x xx is diamonds, etc

1S x xx is a balanced 8+...basically a 1N response but with no upper limit.

Transfer end at one under opener’s suit...a transfer to 2 of that suit is a sound raise, while 2 of the suit is a weak raise

In my other partnership, we transfer after 1C x, because in both partnerships we already play transfer responses to 1C, but our transfers over 1M start with 1N. I much prefer the other approach.

If responder is looking for blood, he passes the double of 1D or 1H, in the first method, and then doubles when they run. Since, for us in that partnership, 1D is always 4 and usually 5, the double is, practically speaking, never left in so the pass is pretty safe. Since 1C is as short as two, it’s not very safe to pass with, say, 4441 12 count, where we’d otherwise want to go hunting

Otherwise, our experience has been that there is very little loss from losing the penalty redouble. It’s a rare hand on which one collects a number at the one level after 1m x xx or 1H x xx. Meanwhile, as is often the case, the transfer method significantly increases available bidding space.

[Stephen Tu]

jmcilkley, on 2021-June-14, 09:49, said:

I came across an interesting alternative - transfer bids after 1M-dbl-
After 1H-dbl then 1S is natural, 1nt is a transfer to clubs, 2C transfer to diamonds, 2D is a GOOD raise to 2H and 2H is a weak raise to 2h
After 1S-dbl then 1NT is for clubs, 2c for diamonds, 2d for hearts, 2h a GOOD raise to 2S and 2S a weak raise to 2S

Similarly at the 3 level, over 1H-dbl- 3d is a good raise to 3H and 3H is a weak raise, over 1S-dbl- 3h is a GOOD raise to 3S and 3S is a weak raise.

Now maybe you could use the 2nt bid as game forcing like Jacoby 2nt?

Yes, as I mentioned before the transfer scheme is quite popular among advanced/expert players.

Usually for the jump raises, the one under raises (if not used as fit-showing or weak) are used as "mixed" raises, just under invitational, ~7-9 HCP, which are "good", but not "really good". You want to distinguish the very weak hands from the ones that have game potential opposite stronger openers. Too wide a range like 7-11 leads to too much guesswork. So 2nt has to cover 10+, which it does relatively easily since there's space. Plenty of people use 2nt as 10+ even not in comp.

It is possible to keep 2nt as GF, but that typically requires giving a 2nd bid for the limit raises, so one could play say Bergen on in comp, 1h-dbl-2nt/3c/3d/3h being GF/mixed/inv/weak respectively.