A few years back I published an article in this magazine about dealing with opponents' intervention, including double, over partner's 1NT. That article is still available on the BBL web site. To view it, click here.
The article was written shortly after a bridge tutor had introduced me to the concept of a forcing pass over 1NT-double. The forcing pass is such a powerful tool that I have bullied my partners into using it ever since, but in the intervening years I have settled on a much simpler structure after partner's 1NT is doubled. It is a system which enables you always to locate a 7 card fit after an immediate double and in most cases when the double is in 3rd seat. The principal advantage of this system, though, is that it doesn't tax the memory too much.
With strong hand (ie. a reasonable expectation of making 7 tricks in No Trump), or a weak single suited hand, responder should pass. This instructs opener to redouble. Responder can then pass with the strong hand or take out into his suit if weak.
With a completely flat weak hand, responder redoubles. This instructs opener to take out into his best suit, secure in the knowledge that responder has support for whatever suit he chooses.
With a three suited hand, perhaps even a 4-4-4-1, responder picks his two best suits and bids as described below for two suited hands.
With an essentially two suited hand, responder bids his lowest ranking suit. If opener has three card support, or better, he can pass in the knowledge that we have found a seven card fit. With only two card support, opener will bid the next suit up which says "I want to play in your other suit, whatever it is". Responder can then pass or convert to his second suit as appropriate.
There will be occasions when it is appropriate for opener to request playing in responder's second suit even when he has 3 card support (or better) for the first one. For example, if the auction starts 1NT-double-2© then opener knows that responder's suits are © and ª so he can safely remove to 2ª on any hand with better spades than hearts. In fact, opener should remove to responder's second suit whenever there is a significant chance that this will improve the situation and no chance of making it worse.
It may occur to you that the above system doesn't utilise the 2ª response. If 2ª is weak then it must be natural and single suited because any continuations are going to land you at the three level, so why not just pass and bid 2ª over partner's redouble? One possible reason is that the forcing pass has no pre-emptive value so you could use 2ª to stop the next opponent coming in at the two level. Beware, though, of introducing any nuances to distinguish the strength of hands which go for an immediate 2ª from those which go via a forcing pass and redouble. If these nuances can mean advertising especially weak hands then you are pretty much inviting a double of your final 2ª contract from astute opponents.
For want of anything better, my current card lists 2ª as a constructive bid suggesting responder's hand is inappropriate for playing in 1NT doubled but that a major suit game may nevertheless not be out of the question. In other words it shows an intermediate strength, distributional, hand with both majors. This is on my card mainly because I hate having bids that aren't used for anything but I have to admit that it has yet to come up in play.
When is it right for opener to be the first to bid something over 1NT-pass-pass-double? I don't know. With a five card suit of your own then it may be tempting to bid it but don't blame me if you hit a shortage on the other side of the table or if you discover that partner was just itching to "take the money" and was looking forward to recording 1NT*+1.
I have even heard the suggestion that opener should adopt the policy of always bidding 2§ with a tolerance for clubs (ie. at least three). The idea being that a more powerful set of options are available to responder if he knows whether there is a doubleton club opposite or can eliminate that possibility. Hmm. Maybe, but I've never been tempted to investigate the imlications of this.
My preference is to say that opener should never remove a double on his right. It keeps it simple and responder is most likely to know whether an escape is necessary. Responder has more information about opener's hand than the other way about so it is more likely that responder will be able to make a sensible decision.
Let's assume, therefore, that it goes
With a good enough hand to want to play in 1NT it's a no-brainer. Responder passes.
With a weak single suited hand, responder redoubles (SOS). This asks opener to take out into 2§ which responder can pass or convert to his suit as appropriate.
With an essentially two suited hand, responder bids his lowest ranking suit as above.
With a three suited, or completely balanced hand, respnder's only option is to choose his best two suits and treat as two suited.
Return to the magazine page.