Mbodell Posted April 9, 2008 Report Share Posted April 9, 2008 [hv=d=e&v=b&s=s86ha965dakq87ct9]133|100|Scoring: MPPass to you[/hv] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted April 9, 2008 Report Share Posted April 9, 2008 1♦. Why is this a problem? :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted April 9, 2008 Report Share Posted April 9, 2008 I almost always open 1NT with this shape but I have no objections to 1♦ with this suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted April 9, 2008 Report Share Posted April 9, 2008 1♦. Why is this a problem? :blink: 1NT, no idea why this is a problem :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted April 9, 2008 Report Share Posted April 9, 2008 I open 1NT but I have no real objection to 1♦. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_c Posted April 9, 2008 Report Share Posted April 9, 2008 Clear 1♦. Yes 2452 hands can be opened 1NT but doing it on this hand is taking a good thing too far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
655321 Posted April 9, 2008 Report Share Posted April 9, 2008 1NT But no objections to 1♦ either. :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zasanya Posted April 9, 2008 Report Share Posted April 9, 2008 I open 1NT but I have no real objection to 1♦.I am intrigued by this sort of response.If you prefer 1NT then there must be a good reason, so you must have some objection to 1♦.Surely you would not bid 1NT on some occasions and 1♦ on others?Is 1NT bid with 5-4-2-2 shape alertable?If it is not alerted and if a defender notices a dbltn in declarer's hand and misdefends on the assumption that declarer can't have another dbltn does he get any redress? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtfanclub Posted April 9, 2008 Report Share Posted April 9, 2008 I open 1NT but I have no real objection to 1♦.Surely you would not bid 1NT on some occasions and 1♦ on others? By partnership agreement, we don't open 1NT with two small doubletons. Those hands tend to better in suits. However, one issue here is how many diamonds a 1♦ opening promises with a minimum. If 1♦ is always one of 15+ hcp, or5+ diamonds, orexactly 4-4-4-1 distribution then I feel a lot better about opening this 1♦, as if we get competition I'll have gotten more about my hand off my chest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickToll Posted April 9, 2008 Report Share Posted April 9, 2008 With this shape, I usually open 1NT: but, holding AKQxx in diamonds, 1♦-1♠-2♦ seems more descriptive. And 1♦-1♥-2♥ would be even more descriptive... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PassedOut Posted April 9, 2008 Report Share Posted April 9, 2008 1♦, then 2♦ over 1♠, with 2 weak doubletons and a top-heavy ♦ suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted April 9, 2008 Report Share Posted April 9, 2008 this is a 1♦ opening, but I won't say anything about the doubletons being weak, what I see is a 54 hand with all the strenght in the long suits, wich is a 2 suiter, not a balanced hand. Of course saying that the doubletons are weak might mean the same, but I won't ever define a 6-5 as a 2 weak singleton hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skjaeran Posted April 10, 2008 Report Share Posted April 10, 2008 I open 1NT but I have no real objection to 1♦.I am intrigued by this sort of response.If you prefer 1NT then there must be a good reason, so you must have some objection to 1♦.Surely you would not bid 1NT on some occasions and 1♦ on others?Is 1NT bid with 5-4-2-2 shape alertable?If it is not alerted and if a defender notices a dbltn in declarer's hand and misdefends on the assumption that declarer can't have another dbltn does he get any redress? That depends upon where you're playing. In Norway a 1NT opening that might by agreement include a singleton (4441/5431/6331) or 2-3 doubletons (6322/5422/7222) is non-alertable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted April 10, 2008 Report Share Posted April 10, 2008 I think 1NT is clear. The simple fact is if you open 1♦ you probably can't ever stop in 1NT, and if you open 1NT you probably can't ever stop in 2♦ (unlikely exceptions in both cases). It's clear to me that I would rather be able to play a 1NT contract the times partner bids spades than I would a 2♦ contract. Plus if the auction was going 1♦ 1♥ 2♥ on a hand where partner isn't strong enough to invite game, then I'm very glad I opened 1NT since it's the opponents' hand in a black suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted April 10, 2008 Report Share Posted April 10, 2008 1♦, then 2♦ over 1♠, with 2 weak doubletons and a top-heavy ♦ suit. Yes..and not even a close decision for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PassedOut Posted April 11, 2008 Report Share Posted April 11, 2008 I think 1NT is clear. The simple fact is if you open 1♦ you probably can't ever stop in 1NT, and if you open 1NT you probably can't ever stop in 2♦ (unlikely exceptions in both cases). It's clear to me that I would rather be able to play a 1NT contract the times partner bids spades than I would a 2♦ contract. Plus if the auction was going 1♦ 1♥ 2♥ on a hand where partner isn't strong enough to invite game, then I'm very glad I opened 1NT since it's the opponents' hand in a black suit. I too prefer to play 1NT rather than 2♦, if those are the alternatives. But if our side winds up in 3NT, I think partner declaring will have the better shot at a good board. If the auction turns competitive or if we end up defending, partner will have a better picture of my hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted April 11, 2008 Report Share Posted April 11, 2008 Anybody for upgrading to 1D-1S-1NT? It's a nice hand isn't it? I would rather open 1NT than bid 1D-1S-2D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Posted April 11, 2008 Report Share Posted April 11, 2008 1♦ and i do have a problem with partner opening 1NT. I prefer playing by the system as much as possible. The effect of playing as simple as possible and following our system without inventing the wheel is very good for a partnership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted April 11, 2008 Report Share Posted April 11, 2008 I think 1NT is clear. The simple fact is if you open 1♦ you probably can't ever stop in 1NT, and if you open 1NT you probably can't ever stop in 2♦ (unlikely exceptions in both cases). It's clear to me that I would rather be able to play a 1NT contract the times partner bids spades than I would a 2♦ contract. Plus if the auction was going 1♦ 1♥ 2♥ on a hand where partner isn't strong enough to invite game, then I'm very glad I opened 1NT since it's the opponents' hand in a black suit. I too prefer to play 1NT rather than 2♦, if those are the alternatives. But if our side winds up in 3NT, I think partner declaring will have the better shot at a good board. If the auction turns competitive or if we end up defending, partner will have a better picture of my hand. I would rather declare 3NT on an auction that totally hides my shape than have partner declare on an auction that completely reveals both our shapes. Yes if it becomes competitive than better to have mentioned diamonds. But two points about that. One is that the same argument applies if you hold Qxx Jxx AKQx Jxx too. The other is that 1NT will often prevent it from become competitive when 1♦ would have allowed the spade bid in. Flame I have to admit....I have no idea what you're talking about lol. Isn't opening 1NT 'playing as simple as possible'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted April 12, 2008 Report Share Posted April 12, 2008 1NT for me also. No great objection to 1D though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PassedOut Posted April 12, 2008 Report Share Posted April 12, 2008 I would rather declare 3NT on an auction that totally hides my shape than have partner declare on an auction that completely reveals both our shapes. Actually I agree with this, and the frequency of straight 1NT - 3NT auctions is an advantage for the weak notrump, in my opinion. I do not (did not, anyway) consider myself a fanatic about right-siding notrump contracts, but I gather that many good players these days open 1NT with hands I would not have considered. I've also observed that tendency with some strong partnerships on vugraph. (Other strong partnerships seem stricter about the shape requirements than I am.) I wish I had a way to quantify the gains and losses for each strategy. If there is no difference, of course, it would indeed be better to open 1NT on offshape hands to further restrict suit rebids. Anyway, it's very helpful for players to provide their thinking on these matters. On defense against notrump these days, I definitely have more possible declarer hands to consider. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted April 12, 2008 Report Share Posted April 12, 2008 I wish I had a way to quantify the gains and losses for each strategy. If there is no difference, of course, it would indeed be better to open 1NT on offshape hands to further restrict suit rebids. I think the best way is to track prevailing expert opinion over time. You make a very good point in your second sentence. If just weighing the concerns of rightsiding vs hiding your hand, and if you could judge these to have equal weight here, then 1NT would still be better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherdano Posted April 12, 2008 Report Share Posted April 12, 2008 I open 1NT but I have no real objection to 1♦.I am intrigued by this sort of response.If you prefer 1NT then there must be a good reason, so you must have some objection to 1♦.Surely you would not bid 1NT on some occasions and 1♦ on others?Is 1NT bid with 5-4-2-2 shape alertable?If it is not alerted and if a defender notices a dbltn in declarer's hand and misdefends on the assumption that declarer can't have another dbltn does he get any redress? No, he should have asked about their style with 2452 hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted April 13, 2008 Report Share Posted April 13, 2008 Yes if it becomes competitive than better to have mentioned diamonds. But two points about that. One is that the same argument applies if you hold Qxx Jxx AKQx Jxx too. The other is that 1NT will often prevent it from become competitive when 1♦ would have allowed the spade bid in. And thirdly sometimes you will get to bid the diamonds in a competitive auction anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benlessard Posted April 14, 2008 Report Share Posted April 14, 2008 Opening a weak nt with this is really disgusting for me. It might make sense to open a strong Nt as a tactical bid, but a weak nt ? Yurk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.