Join Bridge Winners
Is it necessary to be able to play in 1 weak NT redoubled?

Runout schemes after your weak NT can be divided into two categories:

a) those where 1NT-XX is (sometimes) available as a contract

b) those where the XX is always used as a stepping stone to some other contract

Many years ago, I did a (not very strong) analysis of several schemes and came to the conclusion that is was necessary to be able to play in 1N-X frequently, but 1NT-XX "never", at least from the point of view of available scores. A good analysis would attempt to estimate frequencies.

Defining 'weak' for the purposes of this poll as nominally 12-14; and ignoring  possible special cases (e.g. 1NT-(p)-p-(X); XX-(p)-p-?), do you think that it is useful to be able to play 1NT-XX?

*Added* - let me try to define 'useful' here: does including the ability to play 1N-XX in a system weaken it relative to a system where 1NT-XX is always used for some purpose other than as a final contract? 

It is useful to have 1(weak)NT-XX as a place to play at MP and/or IMP scoring
It is not useful to have 1(weak)NT-XX as a place to play at any scoring

Sorry, to answer polls. Registered users can vote in polls, and can also browse other users' public votes! and participate in the discussion.

Getting results...
loading...
29 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top