Do you balance, and with what?

[1eyedjack]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sq642hkq5dkjt2cjt]133|100|Scoring: IMP

(1♥)-P-(P)-?[/hv]

This hand cropped up in a training session that I was kibbing the other day. I am accustomed to being in a minority, but I was a bit surprised to be in a minority of one, in my decision of what to do in the balancing position here. Would be interested to see if a wider audience matches the votes at the table.

[Guest Jlall]

seems like a routine 1N bid, to be honest I couldn't really imagine doing anything else.

[Walddk]

1NT. (10)11-14(15 bad) usually with a heart stopper but I have done it with Qx and Jxx. If you play 1NT as full value, you must double, but I don't think many play 1NT as 15-17.

 

Roland

[KiwiBridge]

1NT all the way

[inquiry]

None problem, 1NT

[bid_em_up]

1N for reasons already listed above.

[1eyedjack]

Thanks for the feedback. I am beginning to wish that I had asked for your second choice rather than first choice :)

 

The choice at the table was 1♠ which was I think rightly roundly condemned. After it was batted around a bit the virtually unanimous vote (yours truly dissenting) was for double.

 

I have to say that I was agonising over a choice between pass and 1N, and it seemed to me sufficiently close that I was a bit surprised that pass didn't get a look-in on this poll. Certainly I prefer pass to double, as a second choice to 1N.

[Guest Jlall]

Partner could still have 12, 13, or 14 points. Partner certainly has a few points, and with all the points with one opponent you have good chances for partscore or a vul game. If you have a game passing will probably net you something decent, 300 or so, but thats still quite a loss to 600 or better. It could easily be the case that you make a partscore and they make 1H.

 

It's possible you were going to beat 1H and let them find a fit, such as clubs, where they go plus, or that you were going to beat 1H and 1N goes down because they have some suit to run (like clubs again) but I think that is a narrow target to aim for with your pass.

 

In general you are not going to get good results defending at the 1 level, especially when your side could be on for a game.

 

As for 1S and X, I don't really understand those bids, 1N shows my point count and my distribution, rightsides the contract, and gets me to by far the most likely strain I want to play in (to avoid heart ruffs).

[1eyedjack]

On the whole I go with 1N, but I have visions of it going double on my left, following which I do not expect much good to happen, or even just sliding a few off undoubled.

 

The worst case scenario in passing it out is, as you mention, our having a game on. If partner has enough for game then in order to justify his passing in second seat he probably has quite a bit in the opponent's suit - hence being "fixed" for a bid. As I hold KQx in the opponent's suit I reckon the likelihood of his having a hand with enough for game AND pass in second seat is reduced. Not to nil, I agree, but reduced even so.

 

It might be interesting to see a Bridge Browser run of the comparison of 1N v pass in this scenario, although not sure how you would define the parameters.

[goobers]

Semi related:

 

Do you play systems over a balancing 1N?

[pclayton]

Semi related:

 

Do you play systems over a balancing 1N?

There's a couple of useful tools out there.

 

What I think is fairly standard after a litltle discussion is systems on over 1 min, but range stayman after 1 major.

 

After 1 maj - p - p - 1N - p - 2C:

 

With a minimum, the 1N bidder just answers stayman. With a max, opener bids 2N, and the process starts over. Note that responder can't make a garbage stayman call after overcalling over 1 major.

[1eyedjack]

One other factor that might argue in favour of passing it out (in preference to balancing with 1N) is that the partnership will have agreed on the upper range of values permitted by a balancing 1N, and stronger hands can be problematic to bid.

 

Say you agree on 11-14 for the range of the balancing 1N, but you get dealt a 15-16 point hand. Presumably you commit to starting with double and then rebidding NT over whatever partner says. Often this will be at the level of 2NT opposite a partner who MAY have some values, but there remains plenty of scope for the opponents to have in total more values than your side. One alternative might be to have a very wide range balancing 1N, but that also presents obvious problems. Another alternative might be to pass out the weaker hands and keep the balancing 1N up to strength (the potential problems associated with passing it out having been identified earlier in this thread).

 

I don't know what the relative frequencies are of having the various point ranges in the pass-out seat. RHO having passed it leaves rather more values available to distribute between the other three hands. To a limited extent that might also be affected by partner's pass in 2nd seat. If the stronger hands are more frequent it might also argue for reserving the balancing 1N to be up to strength.

[mike777]

1nt, clear, in fact you do not even need a heart stopper.

One more reason to not bother with transfer, if partner does not need a heart stopper. See numerous BW articles.

[kenberg]

I would definitely not double or bid 1S. Sticking with my usual pessimism about balancing I was one of the 2 votes for pass. 1NT is fine though. Bidding 1N instead of X, we won't end up playing in clubs unless it is right to be playing in clubs. One needs a way out over a double of 1NT. In my most defined current partnership if opener doubles then partner can redouble as a relay to 2C after which partner will tell me which minor he has.

[1eyedjack]

I would definitely not double or bid 1S. Sticking with my usual pessimism about balancing I was one of the 2 votes for pass. 1NT is fine though. Bidding 1N instead of X, we won't end up playing in clubs unless it is right to be playing in clubs. One needs a way out over a double of 1NT. In my most defined current partnership if opener doubles then partner can redouble as a relay to 2C after which partner will tell me which minor he has.

Do you also have a method of wriggling after it goes

(1♥)-P-(P)-X{1}

(P)-2♣-(P)-2N

(X)

 

{1} This time, with 16 points you are top heavy for a simple 1N on first round

[MFA]

Do you also have a method of wriggling after it goes

(1♥)-P-(P)-X{1}

(P)-2♣-(P)-2N

(X)

 

{1} This time, with 16 points you are top heavy for a simple 1N on first round

Well, I do ;)

I'm not a greedy man, so RD would be SOS and request partner to choose a minor.

[kenberg]

I would definitely not double or bid 1S. Sticking with my usual pessimism about balancing I was one of the 2 votes for pass. 1NT is fine though. Bidding 1N instead of X, we won't end up playing in clubs unless it is right to be playing in clubs. One needs a way out over a double of 1NT. In my most defined current partnership if opener doubles then partner can redouble as a relay to 2C after which partner will tell me which minor he has.

Do you also have a method of wriggling after it goes

(1♥)-P-(P)-X{1}

(P)-2♣-(P)-2N

(X)

 

{1} This time, with 16 points you are top heavy for a simple 1N on first round

Yes, but you probably won't like it. Mike Lawrence tells me that a balancing NT over a major opening can be up through 16 points. Not pretty or accurate, but doubling and then bidding 2NT on a 16 count isn't so beautiful either. Of course it's for emergency use only, hopefully most 16 counts allow you to make a TO double and accept partner's choice of suits.