1nt Containing A Five Card Major

[sheilafran]

We open 1NT with a five card major .. what i want to know is, with a good 5 card major ie AKJxx, is it better to bid the major.

 

Also what is the correct bid

 

1c by rho

 

you hold

 

Qxx

Kx

AKJxx

Kxx

 

Is it better to overcall diamonds or 1nt

 

Thanks

Sheila

[the hog]

You will get many different answers. To a large extent the answer you are seeking is dictated by your system. Personally I feel that all balanced hands, 5 card M or not, should be opened 1NT if in the approriate range.

 

On your second example I would bid 1NT. You have a nice source of tricks in Ds and the 1NT bid expresses the value of the hand better.

[han]

Agree with 1NT on the second hand, best description.

 

First question is a matter of taste, in practice I always open 1NT.

[Guest Jlall]

1N on second hand.

[jdonn]

I have gone through times of always to never opening 1NT with a 5 card major, and everything in between. And I am 100% convinced I know the truth now. So here it is....it sometimes works well, sometimes works badly, and sometimes makes no difference! I would just do what you are comfortable with, but in theory and in practice I believe it's right do use judgment based on your hand, mostly how suit oriented it is. But whenever my partner has a preference I go with it. I'd say playing with myself I would open 1NT about 5 out of 8 times with a five card major.

[gwnn]

1NT is a nice bid on the second hand because it's easier for partner to place you in game or the correct partial if you bid 1NT now.

 

Basically overcalling 1♦ works if you belong to ♦ or you don't belong anywhere (i.e. partner is broke) and overcalling 1♦ works if you belong to NT or a major. The added bonus of reaching game in a much easier manner definitely tilts this decision towards 1NT.

 

Opening 1NT on 5 hearts is always good if you are a simple soul. Otherwise you have to invent a 3 card minor or rebid a 5 card heart suit on all them 15-17's over 1♥-p-1♠... Also, 1NT preempts them out of spades a lot. On 5 spades it should be only optional. But, with the risk of repeating myself, usually partner will be better placed if he knows your exact range. Well, you'll lose some against all those 1♠-p-2♠ all pass dudes, but what are you gonna do.

[655321]

(1) My preference is always to open 1NT, but there are many opinions about this one. :)

 

(2) Easy 1NT. Really, this is the only choice. More interesting is the same hand with the diamonds swapped with a major. I would still overcall 1NT, but now you would get votes for overcalling in your 5 card major.

[CSGibson]

I personally open 1NT with 5 card majors the majority of the time, but I have heard a lot of theory from various people who sometimes do and sometimes don't.

 

One fellow I know will bid NT if his suit is hearts, but not spades.

 

Another will bid NT if he has 3 of the other major, but not if he has 2.

 

A third will look at the suit itself: If it is solid or has 2 holes, he bids the major, if it has 1 or 3 holes, he opens NT.

 

A fourth looks at the rest of his hand; if it's full of soft values, he bids NT, Aces he bids the suit.

 

I neither espouse nor deny any of these theories, but I do consider all of those factors when making a decision.

[mike777]

I open nt with a 5 card major unless xx in a side suit. Lots of opinions.

[awm]

I've tried both styles, and I'm convinced opening 1M with these hands is usually better.

 

Most of the reasons for opening 1NT are "system" reasons -- your system doesn't give you a good rebid after 1♥-1♠ or 1♠-1NT when you have 15-17 balanced. Obviously system is a reason for picking one bid over another, but it's not an argument that the bid you're selecting is actually "better" -- just an argument that your choice of follow-ups is restricting your options.

 

Assuming you have "good" follow-ups, when you have a game on power it's unlikely to matter what you open. You can get to either of 4M or 3NT after either opening; you can find out about the five card major by playing puppet stayman or something over 1NT, or find out about opener's values over 1M by using structured methods after a 2/1 call. The only time it should really matter what you open (in a fundamental way not dependent on your choice of follow-ups) will be on hands where the auction stops in a partial.

 

In these cases, I think opening the major is a big winner. If your side has less than half the points, you will often make 1M when you can't make 1NT. 2M on a 5-3 or even 5-2 fit is likely a better partial than 1NT. And you will find some light games where responder has 3-4 cards in the major and side shortness, but would pass a 1NT opening. There aren't any hands where you can make game but partner passes a 1M call (it takes a lot less to bid over 1M than 1NT). The only really likely partscore win from a 1NT opening is being able to find a fit in the other major a bit more easily. But if opener has 5-3-3-2 shape, which do you think is more likely, a 5-3 spade fit or a 5-3 heart fit? And which is more likely to produce an extra trick, the potential 5-3 fit where the 3-card holding is in the possibly unbalanced hand, or where the 3-card holding is in a flat hand?

 

Of course, I've played systems that "tie my hands" in this sense, where the follow-up methods simply force me to open 1NT with a five-card major. And I agree that there are situations where the major is really bad (for example) and you're better off opening 1NT to avoid playing a 5-2 fit at the two-level. But when system permits a choice I open 1M most of the time on these hands.

[P_Marlowe]

#1 a matter of style, I always open with 1 of the mayor,

the advantage for me, I dont need to decide, if the

quality of the suit is sufficient

#2 1 NT, you tell partner at onece about your shape,

and strength

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Echognome]

I've tried both styles, and I'm convinced opening 1M with these hands is usually better.

 

Most of the reasons for opening 1NT are "system" reasons -- your system doesn't give you a good rebid after 1♥-1♠ or 1♠-1NT when you have 15-17 balanced. Obviously system is a reason for picking one bid over another, but it's not an argument that the bid you're selecting is actually "better" -- just an argument that your choice of follow-ups is restricting your options.

 

Assuming you have "good" follow-ups, when you have a game on power it's unlikely to matter what you open. You can get to either of 4M or 3NT after either opening; you can find out about the five card major by playing puppet stayman or something over 1NT, or find out about opener's values over 1M by using structured methods after a 2/1 call. The only time it should really matter what you open (in a fundamental way not dependent on your choice of follow-ups) will be on hands where the auction stops in a partial.

 

In these cases, I think opening the major is a big winner. If your side has less than half the points, you will often make 1M when you can't make 1NT. 2M on a 5-3 or even 5-2 fit is likely a better partial than 1NT. And you will find some light games where responder has 3-4 cards in the major and side shortness, but would pass a 1NT opening. There aren't any hands where you can make game but partner passes a 1M call (it takes a lot less to bid over 1M than 1NT). The only really likely partscore win from a 1NT opening is being able to find a fit in the other major a bit more easily. But if opener has 5-3-3-2 shape, which do you think is more likely, a 5-3 spade fit or a 5-3 heart fit? And which is more likely to produce an extra trick, the potential 5-3 fit where the 3-card holding is in the possibly unbalanced hand, or where the 3-card holding is in a flat hand?

 

Of course, I've played systems that "tie my hands" in this sense, where the follow-up methods simply force me to open 1NT with a five-card major. And I agree that there are situations where the major is really bad (for example) and you're better off opening 1NT to avoid playing a 5-2 fit at the two-level. But when system permits a choice I open 1M most of the time on these hands.

So we aren't considering the effect it has on opponents being able to overcall at the 1-level? Or to obstruct the opponents from finding their game.

[Gerben42]

There is a huge diffrence between 5♥332 and 5♠332. The upsides are larger if your major is ♥, that's one thing that's sure. Anyway, I'm used to playing a style where 5332 is balanced, regardless of what the major is. Sometimes it's good, sometimes not.

 

Sometimes missing the 5 - 3 major fit and playing 3NT is a blessing.

[Guest Jlall]

I've tried both styles, and I'm convinced opening 1M with these hands is usually better.

 

Most of the reasons for opening 1NT are "system" reasons -- your system doesn't give you a good rebid after 1♥-1♠ or 1♠-1NT when you have 15-17 balanced. Obviously system is a reason for picking one bid over another, but it's not an argument that the bid you're selecting is actually "better" -- just an argument that your choice of follow-ups is restricting your options.

 

Assuming you have "good" follow-ups, when you have a game on power it's unlikely to matter what you open. You can get to either of 4M or 3NT after either opening; you can find out about the five card major by playing puppet stayman or something over 1NT, or find out about opener's values over 1M by using structured methods after a 2/1 call. The only time it should really matter what you open (in a fundamental way not dependent on your choice of follow-ups) will be on hands where the auction stops in a partial.

 

In these cases, I think opening the major is a big winner. If your side has less than half the points, you will often make 1M when you can't make 1NT. 2M on a 5-3 or even 5-2 fit is likely a better partial than 1NT. And you will find some light games where responder has 3-4 cards in the major and side shortness, but would pass a 1NT opening. There aren't any hands where you can make game but partner passes a 1M call (it takes a lot less to bid over 1M than 1NT). The only really likely partscore win from a 1NT opening is being able to find a fit in the other major a bit more easily. But if opener has 5-3-3-2 shape, which do you think is more likely, a 5-3 spade fit or a 5-3 heart fit? And which is more likely to produce an extra trick, the potential 5-3 fit where the 3-card holding is in the possibly unbalanced hand, or where the 3-card holding is in a flat hand?

 

Of course, I've played systems that "tie my hands" in this sense, where the follow-up methods simply force me to open 1NT with a five-card major. And I agree that there are situations where the major is really bad (for example) and you're better off opening 1NT to avoid playing a 5-2 fit at the two-level. But when system permits a choice I open 1M most of the time on these hands.

So we aren't considering the effect it has on opponents being able to overcall at the 1-level? Or to obstruct the opponents from finding their game.

or the inherent advantage you gain in the cardplay after you have opened 1N and had some unrevealing auction (1N p 3N) or less revealing auction (1N p 2C p 2H p 3N)

 

or the fact that despite saying that "when you have game on power you can get to game either way you bid" 15 opp 9/10 and/or 16 opp 9/10 can be difficult to bid having opened 1H depending on what style you adopt. If you elect to not rebid 2H after an auction like 1H p 1N p 2D p with 10 then you will also find 2N with 10 opp 11/12 quite often. If you elect to rebid 2H with 10 then you will not find 15 opp 10. If you elect to bid more with 16 after 1M p 1N p 2x p 2M p then you will get too high with 16 opp 6/7 very often (or less if you can respond with less than 6, which everyone does). If you elect to pass with 16 you will miss 16 opp 9 games. If you elect to play something artificial to solve this problem (like gazilli) you lose the ability to play 2C. If you like gazilli anyways, you have to show an extra hand type in an already overloaded auction and have less accurate gazilli auctions.

 

or the fact that your 2m bids become less defined since you have to bid 2m on these hands, and the sequence that 2m followed by 2N becomes less defined than if 15-16 balanced is not a possible hand type (if you are playing you open 1N with 15-17 balanced 1H p 1N p 2D p 2H p 2N promises 4 diamonds, responder can back out in 3D now with 4 etc).

 

or the fact that if the opponents start bidding you are put in a lot of awkward spots having opened 1M. This is because "intermediate" range hands are inherently difficult to show in competitive auctions since they feel too strong to pass but are too weak to committ to a high level. This is a problem that weak NTers encounter fairly often. Even an auction like 1H 2S p p can become tough.

 

Adam, you really really oversimplify issues like this imo. "Should I open 1N or 1M with 5M332" is really a question that one cannot answer with simple arguments, it is a question that has overtones on the entire constructive bidding system, competitive auctions, leads, defense, etc. To me this is the equivalent of "what is better, 4 card majors or 5 card majors?" and someone answering "obviously 5 card majors, it makes it easier to find 5-3 fits in competitive auctions, and it is easy to find 4-4 fits anyways because you can play negative Xs and respond 1M to 1 of a major with 4." Obviously that question cannot be answered so simply, if at all.

[Codo]

In our standard systems here in Germany iít is more or less forbidden to open 1 NT with a 5 card major. This influences many players so that it is a very small minority who bid 1 NT with all 5332s.

To alwyays open 1m with five of the suit is no bad idea, Adam mentioned some advantages for this method.

 

But like Josh and others, I tried different approaches myself with the same experiences: As long as you and your partner agree, everything works well.

 

For me it was a big gain to play weak NT including the 5 card major, no matter how the honour location was. But the main advantage was not the more frequent 1 NT opening and the uninformative bidding.

The main advantage for me had been that the 1 M openings are better defiend. They always have extra playing strength and do not include the dreaded weak 5332 hands.

 

And I strongly agree with Justin on one point: The strength and possible shape of your 1 NT opening is such a central cornerstone in any bidding system that any even small change has a big impact on the complete bidding system.

[Gerben42]

In our standard systems here in Germany iít is more or less forbidden to open 1 NT with a 5 card major.

 

... which is surprising because French top players don't mind :P

[helene_t]

I think the quality of the 5-card major is not so relevant. Playing a strong 1NT system, your alternative to 1NT is to describe the hand as a 2-suiter, so what is relevant is whether you have a decent 3-card clubs that looks like a 4-card. Also a doubleton in the other major could be a reason for not opening 1NT since you may end up in the wrong major if p transfers. And as Gerben said there is a difference between hearts and spades. Especially at favorable vulnerability I am eager to open 1NT with five hearts.

[Codo]

In our standard systems here in Germany iít is more or less forbidden to open 1 NT with a 5 card major.

 

... which is surprising because French top players don't mind :P

But we live in Germany, we obey the laws.

 

Is there any expression in English for "päpstlicher als der Papst?"

[helene_t]

Is there any expression in English for "päpstlicher als der Papst?"

"More Roman than the Pope" gives 227 hits on Google while "More Catholic than the Pope" gives 20,000. So I stand corrected. Tx Csaba ♥.

Edited February 1, 2008 by helene_t

[gwnn]

In our standard systems here in Germany iít is more or less forbidden to open 1 NT with a 5 card major.

 

... which is surprising because French top players don't mind :P

But we live in Germany, we obey the laws.

 

Is there any expression in English for "päpstlicher als der Papst?"

More Catholic than the Pope.

[helene_t]

Oh btw with a minimum, you don't have to bid on after

1M-1N

2m-2M

while you cannot show your 5-card with a jump response to Stayman. OTOH, with extras, you would have to bid 2N over

1M-1N

2m-2M

while you could bid 3M in response to Stayman if you open 1N. So with a minimum, it's more attractive to open 1M, especially if the suit is good so you like the idea of 2M in the 5-2 fit.

 

Also in SAYC you have a comfortable pass after

1M-2M

if you have 15 points.

[awm]

So we aren't considering the effect it has on opponents being able to overcall at the 1-level? Or to obstruct the opponents from finding their game.

 

or the inherent advantage you gain in the cardplay after you have opened 1N and had some unrevealing auction (1N p 3N) or less revealing auction (1N p 2C p 2H p 3N)

 

or the fact that despite saying that "when you have game on power you can get to game either way you bid" 15 opp 9/10 and/or 16 opp 9/10 can be difficult to bid having opened 1H depending on what style you adopt. If you elect to not rebid 2H after an auction like 1H p 1N p 2D p with 10 then you will also find 2N with 10 opp 11/12 quite often. If you elect to rebid 2H with 10 then you will not find 15 opp 10. If you elect to bid more with 16 after 1M p 1N p 2x p 2M p then you will get too high with 16 opp 6/7 very often (or less if you can respond with less than 6, which everyone does). If you elect to pass with 16 you will miss 16 opp 9 games. If you elect to play something artificial to solve this problem (like gazilli) you lose the ability to play 2C. If you like gazilli anyways, you have to show an extra hand type in an already overloaded auction and have less accurate gazilli auctions.

 

or the fact that your 2m bids become less defined since you have to bid 2m on these hands, and the sequence that 2m followed by 2N becomes less defined than if 15-16 balanced is not a possible hand type (if you are playing you open 1N with 15-17 balanced 1H p 1N p 2D p 2H p 2N promises 4 diamonds, responder can back out in 3D now with 4 etc).

 

or the fact that if the opponents start bidding you are put in a lot of awkward spots having opened 1M. This is because "intermediate" range hands are inherently difficult to show in competitive auctions since they feel too strong to pass but are too weak to committ to a high level. This is a problem that weak NTers encounter fairly often. Even an auction like 1H 2S p p can become tough.

 

Adam, you really really oversimplify issues like this imo. "Should I open 1N or 1M with 5M332" is really a question that one cannot answer with simple arguments, it is a question that has overtones on the entire constructive bidding system, competitive auctions, leads, defense, etc. To me this is the equivalent of "what is better, 4 card majors or 5 card majors?" and someone answering "obviously 5 card majors, it makes it easier to find 5-3 fits in competitive auctions, and it is easy to find 4-4 fits anyways because you can play negative Xs and respond 1M to 1 of a major with 4." Obviously that question cannot be answered so simply, if at all.

In fact 1♠ tends to be more obstructive than 1NT. There are many hands where people routinely overcall against a strong notrump and would pass over 1♠. This is because most people play that two-level overcalls against a 1M opening require sound values (because you're still looking for game on power), whereas people have lots of ways to get into the auction with weak distributional hands over a strong 1NT opening. For obstructiveness, I'd rate 1♥ as not being much worse than 1NT either -- opponents have a cheap spade bid, but they don't have easy ways to show spade/minor two suiters cheaply, or to show hands with a long minor but less than sound values, etc.

 

If you're going to generally bash 3NT (i.e. don't check back for five-card major) then you will obtain some advantages in card play, but you will lose on those hands where the major suit fit is a better game. There is always a tradeoff between bash versus science, and you can produce unrevealing bash auctions like 1M-4M or 1M-2N(nat)-3N over a major suit opening also at times, perhaps with hands that would typically bid more slowly over 1NT (i.e. hands with four hearts). I've found that this is roughly break even -- 1N-3N sometimes makes when a slower auction starting with 1M would fail (i.e. opponents lead your major or miscount your hand) but there are also times when you bid 1N-3N and find that you have a small doubleton opposite a small doubleton and an 8-card major suit fit...

 

The argument about 15/9 and 16/10 is again a system argument. Sure, playing some systems (for example 2/1 without Gazzilli) this problem exists. But this seems akin to arguing that "it is better to open 1♦ with 4♦/5♣ rather than open 1♣, because 1♣ would show 16+" or "it is better to open 1♣ with 2-3-4-4 because a 1♦ opening shows an unbalanced hand." Obviously if this is your system, you're stuck with it. And maybe your system is a winner on other hands. But the fact that "my system doesn't handle these hands well" is only an argument for that opening in the context of your system, not an argument that it's a better opening in some fundamental way.

 

As for competitive auctions, my observation has been that people love to bid after 1♥-P-2♥ or 1♠-P-2♠. Balanced hands with mild extras (i.e. 15-17 notrumps) are among the best hands to penalize people on this auction! So there are definite competitive wins to compensate for any competitive losses. And there are also situations where partner has an easy competitive raise (say 4♥ and 7 hcp) over 1♥-2♠ but has to pass over 1NT-2♠.

 

Anyways I agree that it's "not a simple issue" and definitely depends on your choice of follow-up methods. But I find that an awful lot of the arguments people make for 1NT revolve around not being able to make good game decisions after 1♠-1NT or not having a good rebid after 1♥-1♠. And I would make the point that this has a lot more to do with the choice of follow-ups than anything else. In a strong club system it could well be a good idea to open 1NT with 4225 because this hand is otherwise awkward to show (since you can't open 1♣ natural). This doesn't make opening 1NT with 4♠/5♣ a "better opening" -- it's just a hole in the big club system that you're trying to plug.

 

I've noticed that my results have improved substantially since I started opening 1M on these hands most of the time. At the same time I've noted a trend among good players to open 1NT more and more (but of course this is influenced by the fact that "expert standard" in the US is 2/1 GF without Gazzilli, which happens to handle followups over 1M when opener has a strong balanced hand particularly poorly). So I thought it was worth presenting alternative view.

[Apollo81]

We open 1NT with a five card major .. what i want to know is, with a good 5 card major ie AKJxx, is it better to bid the major.

IMO 1NT openings tend to work out better if you have 3 in the other major. The extra horse of making it easier to find that 5-3 fit if it exists tips the balance.

[ulven]

Didn't this one get worked out in this thread?

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=15252&hl=

[Guest Jlall]

Anyways I agree that it's "not a simple issue" and definitely depends on your choice of follow-up methods. But I find that an awful lot of the arguments people make for 1NT revolve around not being able to make good game decisions after 1♠-1NT or not having a good rebid after 1♥-1♠.

Hi, maybe I wasn't clear. My whole point of the 16 opp 10/15 opp 9 etc argument was that it creates a problem. However you solve this problem, even if it is with gazilli, you are losing something in the process. Losing a natural 2C is a loss, you may think it is a worthwhile loss (I'm not saying I disagree), but it is a loss. If you think gazilli is a winner anyways, you still have to dedicate a bid after you bid gazilli to show this hand type. You are thus losing accuracy in your gazilli auctions. And if you bid 2C with 15, I think that is significantly worse than playing 2C as 16+ (in general), but you need a bid for a balanced 15 so that is affecting the whole gazilli system. Also it affects your 2/1 auctions, etc etc. Your first post did not really make any mention of this.

 

Basically my point was your decision on this issue affects your whole system, and to analyze something like this based solely on what happens when you open 1N with 15 to 17 and a 5 card major is flawed. It is perfectly possible theoretically that it is a loser to open 1N with that hand but that it enhances the other bids in your system (regardless of what that system/followups is) that it is a winner to be opening 1N with these hands (not saying that this is my view).

 

tbh we are mainly in agreement on a lot of things involving this except:

 

I've found that this is roughly break even -- 1N-3N sometimes makes when a slower auction starting with 1M would fail (i.e. opponents lead your major or miscount your hand) but there are also times when you bid 1N-3N and find that you have a small doubleton opposite a small doubleton and an 8-card major suit fit...

 

I really feel that you do not break even on this, and that you are winning a lot when you are bidding 1N-3N. I think that you are probably even winning when you have a 5-3 major fit, not to mention that I think you are winning huge when you do not have a 5-3 major suit fit.

 

The only other thing I have to say is that it is not a question of always using science or never using science after a 1N opener. I would be very happy to bid puppet with Qxx Kxx xx ATxxx, and I would never use puppet with Qxx Kxx Jxx Axxx. There are in between hands, but you CAN still get to 4M when it is right and still get to 3N when its right (while bashing). While it is true that the accuracy of your contract can be the same after opening 1M, you can never have a totally non descriptive auction after you open 1M, and you are losing on those hands imo.

 

I think that is the crux of our differing views on which to open here, the rest of my posts were mainly just to voice my disagreement with your method of deciding which is a "better" thing to do. I think that this:

 

I've noticed that my results have improved substantially since I started opening 1M on these hands most of the time.

 

is your best argument for why you think opening 1M is better given how complicated this issue is to analyze/simulate.