![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jackI was always taught the normal responses to a 1-level opening were:
- if you have a fit for partner's suit, raise it to the level you want to play at. [Good partnerships can bid a major first if the bid suit was a minor, and use a conventional bid such as 2NT to show a good fit rather than jumping straight to game.]
- if you have 6+ points, bid your longest suit at the 1 level (if you can)
- if you have 10+ points, bid your longest suit (at the 1 or 2 level)
- if you have 6-9 points and no suit you can bid at the 1 level, bid 1NT (it doesn't matter if your hand isn't balanced)
And I think most people I know play something similar (unless they're playing a completely different system).
The point I'm not sure of is the requirement to have 10 pts to bid at the two level. In other words, the idea that if you don't have 10 pts or a suit biddable at the one level you have to bid 1NT. I've found this very fiddly to explain to beginners, so have mostly dropped it from the early part of my unofficial curriculum.
But I know several reasonably good players who don't think that's a rule, and I'm not sure what the best convention is.
I assumed the logic of "need 10 pts to bid at the 2 level" is that if responder has good shape (better than 9 losers) but <10 pts, the partnership can have <20pts between them and may well have no fit, so if opener has a minimum, he/she can pass to play in 1NT, rather than bidding inexorably to 2-of-a-suit or 2NT. And also that if responder has shown >10 pts, opener can bid more confidently in competition. In other words, 10pts means 10 high card points that are useful in NT and in defence, not just the equivalent in loser count.
But maybe that's not necessary, as long as opener knows that responder may bid at the 2 level with 6 points.
Which is better?
- if you have a fit for partner's suit, raise it to the level you want to play at. [Good partnerships can bid a major first if the bid suit was a minor, and use a conventional bid such as 2NT to show a good fit rather than jumping straight to game.]
- if you have 6+ points, bid your longest suit at the 1 level (if you can)
- if you have 10+ points, bid your longest suit (at the 1 or 2 level)
- if you have 6-9 points and no suit you can bid at the 1 level, bid 1NT (it doesn't matter if your hand isn't balanced)
And I think most people I know play something similar (unless they're playing a completely different system).
The point I'm not sure of is the requirement to have 10 pts to bid at the two level. In other words, the idea that if you don't have 10 pts or a suit biddable at the one level you have to bid 1NT. I've found this very fiddly to explain to beginners, so have mostly dropped it from the early part of my unofficial curriculum.
But I know several reasonably good players who don't think that's a rule, and I'm not sure what the best convention is.
I assumed the logic of "need 10 pts to bid at the 2 level" is that if responder has good shape (better than 9 losers) but <10 pts, the partnership can have <20pts between them and may well have no fit, so if opener has a minimum, he/she can pass to play in 1NT, rather than bidding inexorably to 2-of-a-suit or 2NT. And also that if responder has shown >10 pts, opener can bid more confidently in competition. In other words, 10pts means 10 high card points that are useful in NT and in defence, not just the equivalent in loser count.
But maybe that's not necessary, as long as opener knows that responder may bid at the 2 level with 6 points.
Which is better?