Clarifying 2NT bids in competition

(as used by Mark Abraham / Tim Johnson / Paul Collins)

Theory: That when we have already shown a suit or suit(s) and the opponents have entered the auction at the one- or two-level (other than by doubling, we which ignore) then we will not want to use 2NT in a natural sense.

Instead 2NT is used to show a hand capable of three-level action in the context of the auction and vulnerability. Direct three-level action also shows a hand capable of three-level action. However there are hands that are shapely and are merely contesting a part-score, and other hands which are interested in playing in game that are in danger of being preempted out by the opponents’ actions. We can utilize the 2NT-or-3-level choices to differentiate these hand types.

2NT will sometimes be the stronger action, and sometimes the weaker action, depending on the logic of the auction. The criterion that determines is the action(s) previously taken by the bidder’s partner.

1. If partner has shown weakness, then there may be real danger that the opponents own this auction. Bidding 2NT with the weaker style of hand may allow the opponents an easy "action" double leading to a penalty of our three-level contract. Additionally we would like to act preemptively when we suspect they own the hand. Hence, when partner has shown weakness, then direct three-level action is weaker than going via the "Good" 2NT.
2. If partner has shown values, then we may be interested in bidding a game constructively when the bidder holds the strong hand. We are also in grave danger of being preempted further, so that we need to take direct descriptive action with our stronger hands. We do not mind further action by the opponents (at the three-level) when we only had a hand contesting the part-score. Hence, when partner has shown values, then direct three-level action is stronger than going via the "Bad" 2NT.

It remains to define what actions by partner show weakness, and which show values. We choose that partner shows weakness only by passing, or by making a Simple Overcall at the one-level. All other actions show values (including NTTO). These choices seem to work. A case might be made for adding Exclusion Bids (1C-P-2H with 0-5 HCP and 6+H) to the weakness definitions.

The 2NT bids require partner to take correctable actions. When partner would have passed a natural 3C bid that had the strength that has now announced by the 2NT bid, then partner must bid 3C, which the 2NT bidder will now pass. If partner would have taken some action over a 3C bid, then he is obliged to either make the lowest bid he would have passed, or take some other strong action.

Doubles in such auctions are takeout unless otherwise defined (e.g. support doubles of Simple Overcalls). When the opponents have opened a weak two or an anchored two-suiter, or something similar, then we have Rubinsohl continuations after a double. When the opponents interfere at the two-level over our 1NT bid (or equivalent) then we have Rubinsohl continuations (and takeout doubles).

An example is in order:
Here your negative double shows values, so partner’s 2NT will be a weaker hand.

Pard	RHO	You	LHO
1H	1S	X	2S
2NT	Pass	?

If you held Qxx xx Jxxx Kxxx then you would have passed if partner bid a non-encouraging 3C, so you must bid 3C. If partner then bids 3D then you will also pass, since partner’s strength was expressed by 2NT. Likewise you will pass his correction to 3H, which shows an opening hand with a likely seven-card suit.

If you held xx AQ xxxx KJTxx then you would again bid 3C, since partner’s 2NT has already warned you that he is only interested in part-score. You would also pass any correction by him. (It is true partner might hold x KJxxxxx AQJ xx but you will have another chance after his 3H bid; you certainly don’t want to force the auction now, and be in 4H or 5C when he has xx Kxxxx Kx AQxx)

If you held xx Kx AJxx KQJxx then you cannot bid 3C. Partner will pass holding Jx AJxxx Qx Axxx when 5C is on, and will also pass holding Kxx AJxxx xx Axxx when 3NT and 5C have play. You also cannot bid 3D, for partner will pass with x AJTxx KQxxx xx when 5D should be played. Likewise you cannot bid 3H, for partner will pass when holding Qxx AQJTxxx Q xx when game in hearts will roll home. You should bid 3S to cater for all these possibilities. Clearly you are insisting on playing in game, and partner will cooperate by bidding 3NT if he holds an appropriate stopper and hand.

If you held AQx Qx KJxx KTxx then you are interested in playing a game opposite any hand partner might have, and can bid 3NT to offer him that contract (remember he has bid notrumps already, so your stopper needs to be full!)

There are a few sequences where the partner of the 2NT bidder has already had the opportunity to show values, and has elected to pass. On these occasions, the level of contract is no longer in question, and a 2NT bid shows tolerance for two contracts. 2NT will be this 2-way "scramble" bid only when it is clear that level of contract cannot be in doubt.

These notes are based on thoughts arising from the series in the OKbridge Spectator (available on the OKbridge homepage for OKbridge members) on 2NT bids in competition by British expert Marc Smith.

The following sections provide clarifications in the various positions and some sample auctions. These are provided only for completeness - except for hands with support for partner’s suit, they can be derived from the above principles.

Sequences with 2NT bid by Advancer

• Note that advancer is defined as the partner of the hand to make the first defensive action in the auction (see, for example, Auctions 6, 7 & 8).
• We treat NTTO and Power Double auctions identically, with appropriate adjustments in advancer's hand evaluation.
• We retain the Marc Smith notion that a free bid by advancer will have values, and that the values are shown by the choice of 2NT or 3-level action. (See footnotes 1 & 2 when raising partner's suit)
• When overcaller has shown near opening values or equivalent (2-level overcall, Power Double, NTTO), then, when holding good values as advancer, we are concerned about being preempted. Thus 2NT shows a "bad" hand and direct 3-level action is a good hand (Auctions 1, 2, 4 & 6). This minimizes the effect of opener re-raising preemptively.
• From the alternate perspective, when overcaller does not or need not have substantial values, then advancer will wish to act as high as possible with weaker competitive hands to preempt the opponent's auctions (Auctions 3 & 5). When the level of contract is not in question, usually because advancer's range is known (and weak), then 2NT indicates two possible places to play, and requests overcaller to act as his hand dictates. (See Auctions 7 & 8 in the contexts of Auctions 1 & 2)
• The number of suits bid by the opponents is immaterial in deciding the good/bad status of 2NT, but will affect the type of hands that can be held for the 2NT bids. (See Auction 2 vs Auction 4, and Auction 6)
• With particular reference to Auction 1, a shapely NTTO may have an opportunity to show that shape after the 2NT response, by making the lowest bid that would have been passed (e.g. with x QJx Qxx AKJxxx bidding 3D rather than 3C, but probably not going to raise a 3H correction to 4H)