Is the obvious bid correct?

[jdeegan]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sq6hk32daq964cakj]133|100|Scoring: MP

1♦-1♠-P-P

???[/hv]

 

What to do? What is going on? How is this auction likely to develop? What is your bid? Any close second choices?

[inquiry]

What to do?

Double, what else?

 

What is going on?

 

I hope partner has a spade stack and passes the double, I suspect me and my LHO have the majority of the hcp, and partner is weak without an obvious bid over 1S

 

How is this auction likely to develop?

 

I will double, and LHO might bid again, or partner might bid 2C, 2D or 2H (ideal he will pass of course).

 

What is your bid?

 

Double

 

Any close second choices?

 

1NT.. sometimes Qx stands up as a stopper (hehe), but really, double seems right and pass partners minimum response

[flytoox]

1N looks perfect to me. I dont like dbl. If pd bid 2H over my dbl I wont be very happy. With SQ in my hand, it is unlikely pd has a good spade holding.

[P_Marlowe]

I have shortage in overcallers

suit, I dbl, no other bid comes even close

enough to be worth considering.

 

Most likely we will play at the 2

level in a 7 card fit, but that's it.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[whereagles]

1NT runs the slight risk that pard passed with a decent 6 and game is on. But since this is matchpoints, I'll bid 1NT anyway.

[Finch]

1NT runs the slight risk that pard passed with a decent 6 and game is on. But since this is matchpoints, I'll bid 1NT anyway.

No, if partner has a decent 6-count he will raise 1NT, possibly to the 3-level.

 

However, I would double as I seem to have a take-out double distribution.

[whereagles]

Frances: the trouble is that this sort of 1NT balancing bids don't necessarily show a balanced hand. In a strong NT system, the bid could show:

 

- a nice balanced 14

- an unbalanced 15-17, shape unsuitable for a take-out double

- the balanced 18-19 variety

 

Unless pard has like a penalty of 1♠, he probably won't be raising your 1NT. That's, at least, the way I see the situation :P

[SoTired]

I dbl, but 1N is a reasonable alternative

1N in this situation cannot be less than about 16-17. And pegging this bid to be exactly 18-19 (same as 2N rebid) would be a reasonable interpretation

[Codo]

Frances: the trouble is that this sort of 1NT balancing bids don't necessarily show a balanced hand. In a strong NT system, the bid could show:

 

- a nice balanced 14

- an unbalanced 15-17, shape unsuitable for a take-out double

- the balanced 18-19 variety

 

Unless pard has like a penalty of 1♠, he probably won't be raising your 1NT. That's, at least, the way I see the situation :P

YOu can play it this way, but I doubt, that this is even close to be common practice.

If you have a non balanced 15-17 HCPs, just bid your suit or pass or double.

With 14 balanced, which you decide to open 1 m, you simply pass.

So this leaves the 18-19 HCPS hands, where Pd quite often will raise you with 6.

[Finch]

Standard practice (and this is supposed to be a forum for standard bidding) is that the re-opening 1NT shows 18-19 balanced, or at least similar playing strength.

[whereagles]

I guess we all have different "standards"...

[inquiry]

I guess we all have different "standards"...

Well, there is standard, and then there is what "we play". We might like to think what we play is "standard" but in reality, there is only one standard.

 

Let's examine this auction...

 

1D-(1S)-P-P/ 1NT....

 

If you play some version of big club (precison or polish, etc), a 1NT rebid can never be (17)18-19(20), since you failed to open 1C. So for these guys, it has to be something else. But as Francis points out, this forum is for 2/1 or SAYC, where clearly the standard is as she states, for the 1NT to be a hand too strong for a 1NT opener.

 

To support this contention, I used BRIDGEBROWSER and tested this auction and examine the "average" hcp range for the 1NT rebidder. This is what I found from a large database...

 

HCP Times

20    15

19    555

18    946

17    163

16    130

15    182

14    362

13    260

12    107

11    13

 

As you can see, the two most popular hcp range was 19 and 18. Using BridgeBrowser data can be (it is not in this case), fraught with danger. The first danger is some of these 1NT rebidders play a big club. So their 1NT bid can not be as high as 18 or 19. We have no way to know how many fall into that category. There is a second problem, which deals with the FREQUENCY of opener holding 14 hcp say versus 19 hcp. Obviously, there are many, many more chances for someone to be looking at 14 hcp than 19. If you correct this data (normalize) for the expected frequency of hcp versus the number of bids made, you find the above trend GREATLY ehanced...

 

HCP   Frequency corrected for expected frequency of indicated hcp

20      1.8

19      36.4

18      42.6

17      5.1

16      2.8

15      2.9

14      4.7

13      2.7

12      0.9

11      0.1

 

 

As you can see, the normalized frequency for a 18 to 20 hcp 1NT rebid is over 80% (20 is unexpected as most open 2NT with that). If you include 17 hcp for those (like me) who play a 14-16 1NT the frequency for 17-20 goes up to more than 85%. I think it safe to assume that Frances was 100% correct stating that the standard rebid of 1NT on this auction shows 18-19 hcp (and remember, a lot of the lower hcp totals are people playing none sayc non 2/1).

 

Ben

[whereagles]

:)

 

It's funny to play with statistics, but even funnier is the interpretation one might give to it.

 

For instance: I clearly see a secondary peak at 14 hcp. I can interpret that by saying "Some people do play 1NT as a good 14. That meaning to the bid cannot thus be set aside".

 

While I do agree there is a clear tendency for the bid to show the 18-19 balanced variant, I do feel it's really a bid that can be twisted a bit because in 95%+ of the time pard will have 4-5 hcp and will pass regardless of it showing 14 or 19...

[SoTired]

I don't care for the BB statistics to show what is standard. There are plenty of players with poor bidding judgement.

 

Simply put: Partner passed and could have 0 and likely <6. So bidding 1N with 14 is a poor bid. Normally, 1N rebid with 12-14 only after partner has responded showing 6+.

 

So what is a good range? If partner has 3 or 4 we need some beef to bid. 16 minimum. But with a balanced 16 we would open 1N. So it is reasonable to assume we have the 18-19 jump to 2N hand. Of course, It would be much more clear if the bidding had gone 1H p p 1S 1N, but the same principle applies.

 

And I don't care if 90% of BBO players bid 1N here with 14. When I do it, I will have 16+ and probably 18-19.

[inquiry]

I don't care for the BB statistics to show what is standard. There are plenty of players with poor bidding judgement.

 

And I don't care if 90% of BBO players bid 1N here with 14. When I do it, I will have 16+ and probably 18-19.

Hmmm... seems something like 4% of the time 1NT is bid on 14HCP, and nearly 86% with 17-20, and most (>80%) with 18-19. What about the BridgeBrowser statistics did you not like? I had ZERO doubt that Francis was correct and that the bid should show 18-19, I just wanted to address the statement that there are different standards for different people. This 1NT is almost universally 18-19.

 

There are exceptions, of course. Bad bidders is one issue (some rebid 1NT with 11 hcp and 4333), and as I noted, strong club openers can not have 18-19 so their 1NT has to be something else by default. There are even some weak 1NT'er who might rebid 1NT her with 15-17 instead of 18-19. But the data seems conclusive to me.

[whereagles]

Balancing with 14 isn't that out of this world. If pard has 0 hcp, opps have 26 and probably wouldn't have bid like they did. It's a fair bet to assume pard has like 5-6 hcp, which makes a shot at 1NT a fair gamble, especially at MPs.

 

Not that I would balance with 14 in a regular basis... I much prefer the 16-19 (if 16-17, unbalanced) definition for the bid.

[SoTired]

I found many BB posts useful, revealing and sometimes surprising. The most useful are the ones like "You have X and partner has shown Y. If you bid Z, you will have a 65% chance of making." That type of analysis is invaluable and is not available without BB. Real-world results from real-world decisions.

 

For example: I have opined that you should open a weak 2 with any 6-card suit. I don't worry about 4-card majors nor outside aces. Others argue for a more restrictive weak 2. But opinions (even top expert ones) are useless. What really counts is which style is more successful.

 

On the other hand, BB statistics are not relevant when defining what a bid means or should mean. It is heartening to know that common BBO usage agrees with me, but I would not care if it did not nor would it affect my opinion.

 

And, finally.... Thank you Ben for the BB analysis you do perform. Whether I find it relevant or not, it is always useful and interesting.

[jdeegan]

What to do?

Double, what else?

 

What is going on?

 

I hope partner has a spade stack and passes the double, I suspect me and my LHO have the majority of the hcp, and partner is weak without an obvious bid over 1S

 

How is this auction likely to develop?

 

I will double, and LHO might bid again, or partner might bid 2C, 2D or 2H (ideal he will pass of course).

 

What is your bid?

 

Double

 

Any close second choices?

 

1NT.. sometimes Qx stands up as a stopper (hehe), but really, double seems right and pass partners minimum response

:D The odds of partner having a penalty pass is miniscule. First, he needs 10+ HCP. I have 19 and RHO has a minimum of 8. This leaves 13 HCP to be split THREE ways. Even given RHO's pass, I would judge this to be around 8%.

 

Then we have the need for partner to have five or more spades and not too weak a suit in terms of texture. Another 8%. The two are multiplicative, so the overall odds should be LESS THAN ONE PERCENT.

 

So, my next question is whether a double is best given that a penalty pass is most unlikely.

[inquiry]

:D The odds of partner having a penalty pass is miniscule. First, he needs 10+ HCP. I have 19 and RHO has a minimum of 8. This leaves 13 HCP to be split THREE ways. Even given RHO's pass, I would judge this to be around 8%.

 

Then we have the need for partner to have five or more spades and not too weak a suit in terms of texture. Another 8%. The two are multiplicative, so the overall odds should be LESS THAN ONE PERCENT.

 

So, my next question is whether a double is best given that a penalty pass is most unlikely.

The odds of a penalty pass are not as remote as you propose. Have you ever heard of a psyche? LHO may have a weak hand with bunches of hearts or clubs and squat in spades. That is fairly remote, and even if not a psyche, But if you think for a non-vulnerable 1♠ overcall the player needs 10 hcp, you have been living under a rock for a while. Light overcalls at the one level, non-vul, is frequent in matchpoint games. In just BBO tournament MP games, 1S overcalls on less than 10 hcp occurred Using BridgeBrowser and BBO tournament database, looking at 1♠ overcalls when the 1♠ bidder was not vul, 16.65% of the 1♠ overcalls contained 8 or fewer than hcp. Anohter 10.2% had only 9 hcp, making the total percentage of hands with less than 19 hcp 26.85 (one in four).However, I admitted earlier that the penalty pass is unlikely adding " I suspect me and my LHO have the majority of the hcp, and partner is weak without an obvious bid over 1S"

 

But, even though penalty pass is unlikely, this doesn't mean other bids are better. For example, 1NT really should have a spade stopper. Why? Because if your partner was stuck for a bid with 7 hcp and only clubs, he might leap to 3NT. Even with 6 he is likely to raise to 2NT, and without a stopper that is too high. Either of those could be ugly on a hand where there is no earthly reason to distort your bidding. You have great support for the unbid suits (honors to three cards in each), a roughing value (doubleton spade) and extra values. And should partner discover some diamond cards, a raise would be welcomed there too. Your have a takeout double shaped hand, use it.

[HeartA]

And I don't care if 90% of BBO players bid 1N here with 14. When I do it, I will have 16+ and probably 18-19.

I second that.

[mikeh]

Standard practice (and this is supposed to be a forum for standard bidding) is that the re-opening 1NT shows 18-19 balanced, or at least similar playing strength.

I agree entirely. Any poster who claims that they play the 1N reopening otherwise, and that this different treatment, represents another form of 'standard' is being oxymoronic.

 

Standard is a consensus understanding: I do not care how qualified an individual may be at the game: if his or her use of a bid is contrary to the consensus of what 'standard' is, then it is not standard.

 

BTW, in my experience, at the table, the vast majority of bridge players lack a firm grasp of standard. Thus the community within which the consensus should be taken is primarily, but not exclusively, the expert community.

 

Indeed, one of the hallmarks of the expert is a firm grasp of bidding theory, which almost always rests upon an understanding of standard usage.

 

This is not to say that standard is to be judged by what experts actually play: the vast majority of experts have developed their own idiosyncratic usages for many sequences... altho anything other than 18-19 balanced seems unlikely here, for any pair, unless they would have already shown that hand by a different opening bid.

[arrows]

1NT, roughly showing 19 HCP.

 

1. It's the most descriptive bid. I always prefer descriptive ones to speculative ones.

 

2. Suppose LHO is not insane, looking for a penalty double is against the odds. the

expectation is opps have 7 cards in spades, so if you can beat 1S by 2 tricks, you

making 3NT. It's highly unlikely you can beat 1S by 3 tricks.

 

3. Given your spade holding, partner probably does not have a comfortable pass

even when it's the right choice. IMO, put parnter on test too often is not a good

idea.

 

4. Defend with too much value concentrated in one hand, you are going to be

tortured.

 

5. Position-wise, RHO is the last one to say after a penalty pass, he might run to 2C

or 2H. Then it would be much harder to make an informed decision because

you didn't bid the descriptive 1NT.

 

6. Worst case, suppose LHO IS insane, and you could have beaten 1S a million, you

still have the field protection, because you are not in nuthouse and no one

else would overcall 1S.

[hrothgar]

I like double

 

If partner can convert, I'll be overjoyed

If partner bids 2♥, I'll table a good dummy

If partner bids 2♦, I'll be thrilled

 

If partner bids 2♣, I'll wish that I had bid 1NT (which does not show a 14 count)

[awm]

This hand is an interesting advantage for those who routinely open 1♣ with 4-4 in the minors.

 

Why so? Suppose we go with the majority and decide to double. If partner bids a five-card suit we're pretty happy to be in a playable spot. But what if partner has some distribution like 3334 or 4234? This seems to put partner to a guess which minor to bid, and the hand will likely play much better in the 5-3 diamond fit. If you normally open 1♦ with 4-4 minors, partner will not know what to do here and will probably bid 2♣. This we must pass as partner could be weak with 5-6 clubs, and we play the 4-3 fit. But opening 1♣ with 4-4 minors, the 1♦ opening will not include four clubs unless also including five or more diamonds. This makes it relatively easy for partner to prefer diamonds with 3-4 in the minors, reaching the best fit.

 

Of course, opening 1♣ with 4-4 minors puts partner to the guess when you balancing-double a 1♠ overcall of 1♣, so this is not clear evidence that one style is actually "better".... just that it works better on this particular hand. :D

[jdeegan]

But, even though penalty pass is unlikely, this doesn't mean other bids are better. For example, 1NT really should have a spade stopper. Why? Because if your partner was stuck for a bid with 7 hcp and only clubs, he might leap to 3NT. Even with 6 he is likely to raise to 2NT, and without a stopper that is too high. Either of those could be ugly on a hand where there is no earthly reason to distort your bidding. You have great support for the unbid suits (honors to three cards in each), a roughing value (doubleton spade) and extra values. And should partner discover some diamond cards, a raise would be welcomed there too. Your have a takeout double shaped hand, use it.

:D I think I said RHO in my last post when I should have said LHO. However, the problem on this hand (given that a penalty pass by partner is 'unlikely' or 'very unlikely') is whether to lie about our points or our spade stop. This thread has taught me one thing: for most, A REOPENING 1NT ADVERTISES A BALANCED 18-19 HCP - not a lesser hand.

 

The actual problem hand with the actual auction presented was played 24 times in a recent BBO tourney. The actions were:

 

Pass -1

Dbl. - 12

1NT - 3

2D - 6

3C - 1

3D - 1

 

My partner reopened with 2♦, a bad bid imo without a six bagger, which almost misled me into a potentially mediocre bid of 3♦. I passed specifically because partner did not reopen with a double, so probably had 2 or 3 spades or else short hearts. We ended up defending 2♠ down four for an 82% board.

 

My hand:

 

J972

A32

753

1092

 

Over a 1NT reopen, I have an easy pass for a good score.