billyjef

Thank you all. I either forgot the nuance between photo and blue bar or it changed since I wanted to use the feature before. Either way, maybe others will have been as helped by your responses as I was.

I've not been watching the forum topics for some time, and other than playing with the bots, haven't done anything else on BBO for almost two years. It used to be I could click on someone I'm following in the people's pane and there would be the option to view the table, and who was playing, without having to join the table. Is that function no longer available? TIA, Jef

You're right, trumps trick 2. Thanks. :rolleyes:

Game probable, double dummy, in ♠, ♥, and ♣. 5 Clubs has good chance to make on Diamond lead; win the diamond ace, ♠ ace, finesse to the Jack, throw diamond off 3rd winning spade. Hopefully losing no more than the ♥ ace and a ♣.

Not having an agreement about the advance by partner limits the ability to ATB. I assume 2NT would have been the most forward going advance? Thus 3H could be just trying to improve the contract. That said, I'd think such a bid would deny tolerance for spades, which looks to have as much playability as hearts. I'd not have bid 3NT under these circumstances expecting partner to have 6 hearts, and lacking tolerance for spades and no interest in game. Your hand, is just short of doubling first with about 5 playing tricks if played in a black suits. The further question becomes, what would we do with your hand in the auction, (1N) - 2♠-(P)-2N; (P)-3♣-(P)-3♥? I'd still not bid 3N, especially now that there would be no doubt which minor to lead. Knowing we have game, I'd bid 4 clubs I think.

Not being sarcastic, then AKQJT98765432 should = 52 points? Points aren't real, tricks won are. Points help us predict the trick taking power of certain cards (honors) but then situational relativity needs to be assessed somehow, and that is multiple and changing. Certainly, if you are on opening lead, and the contract is notrump AKQ stiff is worth 3 tricks, thus 3 aces. If the cards aren't stiff, then they could be worth more. But if you aren't on lead, then their relative values are more speculative. And, if the contract is in a suit, then they could be worth nothing. But of course, you don't want to value them as nothing when first evaluating the hand...only as the hand progress's will you know their true value. For example, AKQ against a suit contract, each card after the ace has a lesser chance of realizing it's full value, increased chance of being trumped. Much of the bridge world finds comfort in the Work count system; some treat it as written in stone, others see it for it's relative evaluation that it actually is, and except it as "good enough." And even others use a variety of evaluation techniques other than Work.

Something other than Standard Modern Precision has been published? Can you share it? Thanks.

How does Pearson evaluate a singleton King?

Yes, unless I was playing Roth Stone ;)

I'd wait for MikeH's opinion before committing to that POV ;)

I think op meant what does 2N by opener mean in the sequence: 1♣-(P)-1♠-(P)-2N? I've always played it shows 18-19 points, new minor forcing or wolff continuations. It seems the comment about responder's 2N wasn't quite in context. But really not sure.

If you can get by their anecdotal discriminatory policies :)

"I've gradually (based on reading and more learning, and based on an apocryphal bit of philosophy from Zia) increased the frequency of opening 1 NT hands with semi balanced (15-17) hands including sometimes with 5-card majors, and sometimes with an upgraded 14 or downgraded 18, similarly with 2NT (upgrade or downgrade by a point occasionally)". -Fabulous!- "I must admit I dont really have any feel for which hands with a 5 card major (or minor) are best opened 1NT or 1m or 1M and tend to use a bit of feel on the shape and stops." -Less about the cards and more about your rebid.- "However I've also learned not to care too much about having stops in all 4 suits which used to lead me to prefer suit openings." -Excellent.- "I know the usually valid shapes for 1 NT are 4333 5422(???? two doubletons dodgy and should never be bid?)" - There are very few commandments in bridge (nevers/always). With 5422 it is more about risk/reward and follow up auction. Shrug off the exceptions if their wasn't a better option. - "I hardly ever open with singletons although have occasionally started doing it with an Ace singleton (and maybe a King but doubtful)" -Excellent but some experts prefer a singleton king to a singleton ace...lengthy but informative discussion here .- "But is it usually regarded as acceptable and safe practice to open any of those shapes irrespective of distribution of HCPs or are there pointers towards when you should open a suit." -If I can bid strongly and naturally (2nd bid), I tend to show my suits. If my second bid would have to bid a short suit (3 cards or less) I have a tendency to open 1nt, but other factors may influence me...i.e. if all my points are in the 5 and 3 card suit. I will tend to open 1NT if my second bid has to be a doubleton...the important hand here is usually a 4=5=2=2 hand if I can't manage a reverse into spades. This isn't inclusive, only because it is feel guided by experience, judgement and foresight.- "What are the pros and cons. I know 1NT is good for hiding lead options from defence, gives a point count, is preemptive, no trumps may score better at MPs, a no trump game may often be easier (1/2 fewer tricks) but are there any downsides such as the risk of missing a good 5-3 or 5-4 fit. I know they usually will make many tricks in NT too but there is the risk of a bad 2-2 fit in one of the suits." -You got the pros, the rewards, and you have a grasp of the cons, risks. You have a grasp of Offensive vs Defensive points to consider all this leads to discernment that can be applied in the situation...make your best choice, if it doesn't work, determine if you missed something in that particular situation, if not, feel good that you made the best long term decision. I don't worry about missing the 5-3's but ocassionally get a bad board because partner didn't have enough to bid over 1NT and 2 of the major would have scored better. Missing 5-4's are more upsetting but what are the odds in the situation? Hasn't happened often in my memory where we have such a fit in a major and partner can't bid. I don't know the odds though.- "How do the percentages work out. Does it matter between IMPs and MPs". -It feels like they are in favor of opening the strong notrump but I don't have any statistics. I will say I've notice lately, it seems the odds aren't as favorable as they used to seem to be...all subjective...but that is helping me hone my discernment and judgement. I feel the pro's tend to favor opening 1nt at IMPs as well, for all the same rebid reasons and the defensive reasons. But there is of course more reason to prefer a suit occasionally than nt...close calls.- Like declaring, try to envision the what ifs of possible actions by others at the table, including your partner, for each hand and imagine how you will act for each of those potential situations. This, more than trying to map out specifics will develop useful evaluation skills. Not that mapping out isn't useful and helpful, it is, if it is used as a tool to explore evaluation skills rather than rules etched in stone. Personally, like many, I keep an eye on the path through the forest than get hung up on any specific tree. By this I mean that I've learned that trying to worry about every bad thing that can happen, the exceptions, can be counterproductive if I lose site of the value of acceptable risk for a greater reward. I try to focus on what wins in the long run and has the most potential to bring that about; which means being able to stomach the bad results :). Learning to shrug off losses is more helpful and skillful when you know your action was the right thing to do in the moment to achieve long term success. Even that mentality can be fanaticized as well. It is important to understand each situation uniquely and act accordingly (even potential pitfalls, if it can be done stoically)...this takes playing a lot, as you are doing, learning, asking, making mistakes, which you are also doing and all that grows into judgement and discernment which it appears to be your goal. In the long run, I find opening 1NT frequently tends to be a winning tactic and with experience, I've learned not to abuse that tactic :).

Wow, didn't expect to strike such a nerve. I agree with you regarding the treatment and despise the treatment as said. Their teaching is that is what fourth suit game forcing is for. Again, not defending them, just saying for some it is an agreement. I respect you, you perspective, experience and qualifications but I think you might be disparaging the ACBL's Barry Crane list a little harshly, IMO.

If not playing invitational jump shifts, then yeah, 1NT. 1NT in this context is more of a courtesy bid, saying I have to bid partner, I don't have a 4-card major (thus I have the minors) and I'm not strong enough to make a 2/1 GF bid. It doesn't say I have a notrump hand per se. Just the same if you were playing SAYC holding x xxx Qxx KQxxxx.