A Discussion with Adam Kaplan and Carol and Lee Hargrave

Lee: I talked to Adam Kaplan and he said he doesn’t like to defend against weak NT’s; he’d like to discuss Modified Cappelletti with us and interfering after a weak NT. Adam, can you give me some ideas?

Adam: You could use Cappelletti, Modified Cappelletti, or natural bids. Whatever you do, you need a penalty double available against the weak NT when the opponents are in over their heads.

Lee: I like Modified Cappelletti better than standard Capp because it allows you to enter the auction and show your major right away. It’s more pre-emptive to bid the major instead of bidding 2♣ to show a single-suited hand.

Carol: Good! I agree. Let’s discuss Cappelletti and Modified Capp and see how they work.

Adam: Cappelletti works like this:

1. Double is for penalty and partner should pass.

2. 2♣ shows any long suit (partner bids 2♦ to ask).

3. 2♦ shows both major suits.

4. 2♥ shows hearts and a minor suit.

5. 2♠ shows spades and a minor suit.

6. 2NT shows both minor suits.

Carol: Great! How does Modified Capp work, Lee?

Lee:

1. Double is the same as normal Cappelletti, for penalty.
2. 2♣ shows diamonds or a two-suited hand with a major and a minor.
3. 2♦ shows both major suits.
4. 2♥ shows hearts.
5. 2♠ shows spades.
6. 2NT shows both minor suits.
7. 3♣ is a natural bid showing length in clubs.

Carol: When we compete against the strong NT, there is a very slim chance for game. Our purpose is to disrupt the opponents’ auction or perhaps just to collect a part-score.

However, against the weak NT, there is a much greater chance that we might really own the hand and even have a game. Thus, our bidding should change somewhat in nature.

Adam: I don’t necessarily agree. I think the main idea while defending against weak NT’s is to interfere but not to the point where you go for 1100.

Lee: I agree with you, but don’t you think that we need to be more constructive in our bidding? I don’t think we should be competing with really weak hands. If I’m your partner, Adam, I need to know how to respond. That would be difficult if you were weak one time and strong the next time.

Carol: Here are a few guidelines I suggest. First, you need a way to double the opponents for penalty with a good hand. You should be at the top of the NT bidder’s range or better and should want your double left in for penalty. You need a good suit that will set up quickly and entry cards. Let’s look at a few hands when the opponents open with a weak NT.

I would double since it looks like I can set them with this hand. If they run out, I can always bid spades to show a good hand and suit.

Bid 2♦ to show both majors.

This is a perfect 2♠ bid and about as weak as you should be.

It’s OK to bid 2NT to show a good hand and both minors.

I’m not strong enough to bid against the weak NT, but I might use it against the strong NT in the direct seat, but it doesn't quite meet Mel's rule. I would use it in the balancing seat against the strong NT, however; since it almost meets Mel's Rule, which we’ll discuss month.

This looks like another good penalty double. If they run, I’ll bid my diamonds.

This is a bunch of fluff. I wouldn’t bid with it.

Adam: Here are two hands that illustrate Modified Cappelletti in action. I played these hands a few weeks ago.

I was South and opened a weak NT (10-13). Without a discussed weak NT defense, West passed. North bid 2♥ to play and East, with 11 HCP, couldn’t come in. West, not knowing whether North had 4 or 10 HCP, passed and the opponents made three. Let’s go back to West’s first bid. Over 1NT, West should have doubled to show 14+ HCP. North will bid 2♥ and East will bid 2♠ or 3♠. West will raise to 4♠ … the optimum contract.

I was sitting West. East dealt and passed. South opened a 12-14 NT, which gave West problems. Playing Modified Cappelletti, West doubled showing a 14+ point hand, over which North made a 2♦ heart transfer. East doubled 2♦, a call he would never normally make. South dutifully accepted the transfer and bid 2♥. West next bid 3♦, which became the final contract.

Carol: We obviously adopted this column style from the Granovetter’s column. If you like it, please let us know. We have volunteered to do a conversational bridge column monthly on bridge topics of interest. If you’d like to join in on these conversations and do one with your favorite partner, please let us know. We’d like other contributors. We’d also like to know what you’d like us to discuss.

Lee, Adam and Carol: The Final Word. Remember you and your partner should always discuss and agree what conventions you are playing versus the weak NT and the strong NT. Don’t come to the table unprepared!