Rank the choices

[1eyedjack]

[hv=d=s&v=e&s=sakj63hk8djt62ca4]133|100|Scoring: IMP

You are South, Dealer, playing SAYC-style with 15-17 1NT opener and 5 card Majors[/hv]

 

How do you rank 1S v 1NT opening bid in first seat?

 

If you open 1S and partner responds 1NT (non-forcing) how do you rank Pass, 2D and 2NT rebids?

 

Thanks.

[hatchett]

I'm not very keen, to say the least, of a 1NT opener, 1♠ is clear to me. Over 1NT non forcing, 2♦ is equally clear.

[gwnn]

1♠=100

1NT=0

 

1♠-1NT-?

 

2♦=100

2NT=30

p=0

[pbleighton]

This is all about style. There is no correct or incorrect answer.

 

1NT for me, but it's close. That's a poor excuse for a four card diamond suit, IMO. But each to his own...

 

Peter

[hrothgar]

1♠ for me, and this is comming from someone who likes offshape 1NT openings.

 

The Aces and Kings scream suit play...

The Ax and Kx scream suit play (I'd much prefer a holding like Axx so I can hold up for three rounds if need be)

[skjaeran]

I open 1NT more often than most. But this hand is very suit oriented; a strong 5-card suit, lots of controls and a slow side suit. All calls for a suit opening.

1♠=100, 1NT=70

 

After 1♠-1NT I play 2NT as a conventional GF, so that's out on this hand. I also play transfers here, so I'd rebid 2♣. Playing with a non-regular partner I rebid 2♦.

[pclayton]

1S = 100

1N = 70

 

I don't hate 1N. I have a good source of tricks, my ♥Kx would like to be protected, and I have some slow diamond tricks.

 

1♠ is still preferable, however. 5-4's are suit oriented, and as Harald and Richard mention, this is a sharp hand, and control oriented hands like to play in suits, not NT.

 

I'll have a little catching up to do, but the sequence 1♠ - 1N - 2♦ - 2♠ - 2N describes this hand to a tee.

[BebopKid]

I personally hate opening 1NT with a five-card major. But if you do, please play puppet stayman.

 

If your partner had 3 hearts, 3 spades and a void in diamonds, wouldn't you rather have opened 1S

[pbleighton]

But if you do, please play puppet stayman.

 

No, don't bother.

 

Peter

[helene_t]

If this hand is strong enough to invite with 2N, there is a case for opening 1N to avoid that. I think I'll pass partner's 2♠ preference bid, though.

 

1♠, followed by 2♦ and passing 2♠: 100

1♠, followed by 2♦ and 2N over 2♠: 90

1♠, followed by 2N: 90 (you miss the chance of 3♦ but you conceal your ♦s for opps as well)

1NT: 80

1♠, followed by 2♦ and 3♠ over 2♠: 70

1♠, followed by pass: 0.

[han]

1S and 2D.

[ralph23]

I would choose 1♠ but 1NT is not at all unreasonable. 1♠ = 100, 1NT = 60 imo.

 

I am not unsympathetic to 2nt response to 1nt. This sometimes works fine and you do get to keep your diamond holding concealed this way. I do think the book rebid is 2♦ over the nf 1NT, however. But the book ain't always right....

[han]

I am not unsympathetic to 2nt response to 1nt. This sometimes works fine and you do get to keep your diamond holding concealed this way.

Since partner will declare the hand anyway you might as well show what you have so that partner can make a good decision. I don't like a direct 2NT, it is a tad light and there is no need. 1S followed by 2D and then 2NT over partner's likely 2S does far better justice to the hand.

[1eyedjack]

Thanks for all the replies.

 

I felt that the key to the hand is whether the hand is worth forcing to 2NT following a 1-level response. If it is then open 1S. If not then you have to choose between opening 1NT or opening 1S and either pass or rebid 2D (then passing a 2S preference).

 

Most of you felt that it was worth forcing to 2NT. I sympathise, but despite being slightly off-shape I don't rate it as having more playing strength than a normal 1NT opener.

 

I personally have problems with arguments based on its being a "suit-orientated" hand, by reference to the flavour of the honour holdings.

 

I am more used to playing a weak 1N style, which permits a slightly lighter 2/1 responding structure. I appreciate that in SAYC you can have a full-blown 10 count for a 1N response, so opener cannot really pass, and as responder will never commit to 2NT on his own, it looks like it is up to opener. But he can also respond on a 5-6 count, which makes for quite a wide range 1NT response. Opening 1NT may take some of the pressure off that.

 

I would habitually open 1NT with a 5 card major if 5332 in range, mainly for the above reason, and I was wondering whether possession of the 4 card minor tips it just too far. Probably not enough empirical data around to test it by reference to historical results.

[1eyedjack]

1♠, followed by 2♦ and passing 2♠: 100

<<Snip>>

1♠, followed by pass: 0.

Given the other options to which you award marks, never below 70, I find the disparity beween the 100 score and the 0 score to be very odd. If you intend to rebid 2D and then pass 2S without making a further game try, then the only possible reason for bidding 2D is to improve the partscore. I agree that it is quite likely to improve the partscore, but if you are committed to stopping in a low level partscore, it seems to me that (sans major fit) 1NT is going to be the right spot a significant proportion of the time.

[Fluffy]

If you open 1S and partner responds 1NT (non-forcing) how do you rank Pass, 2D and 2NT rebids?

I don't play SAYC, but playing any other 5c Major system I'd rate

 

pass= 0%, 2♦= 100%, 2NT=0%

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

#1 1S is clear

#2 I prefer 2D (clear for me), followed by 2NT,

and pass is, what is left

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

1♠, followed by 2♦ and passing 2♠: 100

<<Snip>>

1♠, followed by pass: 0.

Given the other options to which you award marks, never below 70, I find the disparity beween the 100 score and the 0 score to be very odd. If you intend to rebid 2D and then pass 2S without making a further game try, then the only possible reason for bidding 2D is to improve the partscore.

<snip>

No.

 

2D gives you have the chance to catch a raise

to 3D from partner.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[jdeegan]

1S = 100

1N = 70

 

I don't hate 1N. I have a good source of tricks, my ♥Kx would like to be protected, and I have some slow diamond tricks.

 

1♠ is still preferable, however. 5-4's are suit oriented, and as Harald and Richard mention, this is a sharp hand, and control oriented hands like to play in suits, not NT.

 

I'll have a little catching up to do, but the sequence 1♠ - 1N - 2♦ - 2♠ - 2N describes this hand to a tee.

:D Interesting how the suits involved and the honor card structure affect the decision to open a 5-4 hand 1NT. With spades and diamonds the only really awkward auction is 1♠-P-2♥. With spades and clubs, 1♠-P-2♦ is also a problem.

[1eyedjack]

1♠, followed by 2♦ and passing 2♠: 100

<<Snip>>

1♠, followed by pass: 0.

Given the other options to which you award marks, never below 70, I find the disparity beween the 100 score and the 0 score to be very odd. If you intend to rebid 2D and then pass 2S without making a further game try, then the only possible reason for bidding 2D is to improve the partscore.

<snip>

No.

 

2D gives you have the chance to catch a raise

to 3D from partner.

Over which, your plan is?

[P_Marlowe]

1♠, followed by 2♦ and passing 2♠: 100

<<Snip>>

1♠, followed by pass: 0.

Given the other options to which you award marks, never below 70, I find the disparity beween the 100 score and the 0 score to be very odd. If you intend to rebid 2D and then pass 2S without making a further game try, then the only possible reason for bidding 2D is to improve the partscore.

<snip>

No.

 

2D gives you have the chance to catch a raise

to 3D from partner.

Over which, your plan is?

Bidding 3NT?

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Guest Jlall]

I'll go with

 

1S=100

1N=0

 

2D=100

2N=0

pass=0

[1eyedjack]

I'll go with

 

1S=100

1N=0

 

2D=100

2N=0

pass=0

The ranking seems fine. The weighting is questionable.

 

An option should only ever have a score of zero if it is inconceivable that it might ever work out better than the alternatives. I have no difficulty constructing hands (perhaps a minority but that is not the issue) where 1NT is the right spot and where opening 1NT is the only route there.

[jdonn]

An option should only ever have a score of zero if it is inconceivable that it might ever work out better than the alternatives.

So if there are three passes to you in fourth seat and you hold a balanced 17, and you can construct a layout such that any opening will lead to a minus score, does that mean you don't give pass a 0?

[Guest Jlall]

An option should only ever have a score of zero if it is inconceivable that it might ever work out better than the alternatives. I have no difficulty constructing hands (perhaps a minority but that is not the issue) where 1NT is the right spot and where opening 1NT is the only route there.

I don't agree with this (see jdonn's post). I should probably have given 1N a 20 or something on the first part of the question, but I really can't imagine passing or bidding 2N on the second part (both seem equally bad).