[bluecalm]

Quote

Also, my understanding of a semi-forcing NT is that opener only passes on hands that would refuse an invite. With 14 and some 13s I would make my normal rebid, in a 3 card suit if necessary.

I stand corrected on terminology.
What I really meant is non-forcing 1NT.
Where I live bidding on 3card suit is not only not normal but would be considered a psyche.
People either play non-forcing or forcing and then 2♣ contain all 5-3-3-2's. Nobody ever rebids 2D with 5-3-3-2, nobody ever rebids 2C on 5-3-2-3 unless it's conventional and it's always alerted.
The only exception to this rule is 1H - 1N - 2D on 4-5-3-1 which is kinda standard but even then many people alert.

This is 1NT top Polish and Italian pairs play and this is what I meant. I believe native English speakers/players here on bbo forum and I will call in "non-forcing" 1NT.

[MickyB]

The term "semi-forcing" is used regardless of whether maximum weak NTs pass or bid, in my experience. Don't ask me why. I prefer "wide-ranging non-forcing" and alert as "5-11 NF" if all weak NTs are to pass.

[gnasher]

MickyB, on 2012-February-21, 14:14, said:

The term "semi-forcing" is used regardless of whether maximum weak NTs pass or bid, in my experience.

If so, I think that's a misuse. We already have a term to descibe a 1NT response opposite which opener is supposed to bid with an unbalanced hand or a balanced 18-count, and pass with 11-14 balanced: "non-forcing". If the term "semi-forcing" is to have any value, it should mean something different.

Quote

I prefer "wide-ranging non-forcing" and alert as "5-11 NF" if all weak NTs are to pass.

But now you have moved from describing what opener is expect to do to describing what responder is expected to hold. That may meet the demands of disclosure at the table, but it's less useful in a discussion of methods.

[ArtK78]

I have mentioned before that I play semi-forcing 1NT responses to one of a major in the context of light (10+) opening bids. Opener is expected to take a second call on any "full" opener or any unbalanced hand. If opener takes a second call, opener treats the 1NT response as a forcing 1NT.

Therefore, the only time we pass the semi-forcing 1NT response is on an opening hand which is a balanced (5332) 10 or 11 count.

[fromageGB]

nigel_k, on 2012-February-21, 13:27, said:

It's good to be able to include 10 HCP hands in the single raise, because most people like to open light with a five card major and at matchpoints especially they might balance. But 5-10 (or even 5-9) is really too wide so you need to split them and it works better to raise immediately with hands in the upper part of the range.

I agree that 5-10 is too big a range, but when you split the range it is arguable that the weaker immediate raise is best, as it is more preemptive. But you can do it either way.

Quote

There is a risk of playing 1NT with (4)5-6 opposite 12 and an eight card fit but quite often opponents will bid and non-vulnerable even -2 is probably ok.

Yes -100 may not be too bad, but vulnerable, I don't like it. Play a different system when vulnerable? Don't forget, if your side has a 17 count 8 card fit playing in NT, the other side has 23 and an 8 card fit and they are on lead. Prospects are more like 3 off than 2 off. Better in my view to pass the 4/5 HCP hands, and play in 1M

Quote

Also, my understanding of a semi-forcing NT is that opener only passes on hands that would refuse an invite. With 14 and some 13s I would make my normal rebid, in a 3 card suit if necessary.

If your style is to open 1NT on 15 and 1M on 11/12-14, you will be passing 1M 1NT as often as you bid on. That is why it is dangerous to include low HCP hands in the 1NT reply.