A question of DONT
Isn’t the purpose of this convention given in it’s full form? Disturb Opponent’s No Trump.
I seek clarification that it’s only destructive to begin with and to end with. That is all. If once your partner applies DONT and your RHO bids I feel the need of the hour is to keep quiet. To begin with it shouldn’t be at all taken to be constructive. Unless your partner bids his second suit if possible at his/her next turn.
Then it’s not intermediate but a little more. For example>>> XX, AQJXX,-,QJ10XXXthat is in this example a 2506 distribution.
Thoughts.
0
Yes, the purpose of the convention is getting opps out of 1NT – at matchpoints, the theory being that opponents are likely to score well in a voluntary bid notrump.
At IMPs, disturbing opponents isn't all that important. The difference between -90 and -50 is only 1 IMP, and -90 and -100 zilch. But you do want to get to your optimum level of playability. So the requirements for entering over 1N at IMP needs to be somewhat more well defined, and partner needs to compete with assurance of a reasonable hand.
Also notice the kind of hand you are offering as example for the DONT bidder to bid again. This is an absolute monster and you are perhaps better off getting this out, right away – say by making a jump DONT bid like 1N-3C.
Even at MP, just because you take them out of 1N doesn't mean you have taken them out of a good score. 2M usually scores quite well too, and you frequently need to compete against that. So partner needs to know that you haven't come in with a dont bid simply because they opened 1N and you got dealt 13 cards.
Ya jump DONT bids as a convention have crossed my mind too. Thanks for separating MPs and IMPs.
Green v/s red even 8 cards in the anchor suit and one more should be enough to enter, IMHO. Well defined should be at least 9 cards in the two suits from a good 7+HCP to what you have.