Pros/Cons?

[kenrexford]

♠109x ♥109x ♦Ax ♣Kxxxx

 

Partner opens 1NT. 15-17, first seat.

[Finch]

I shall present the dummy.

[pclayton]

Throw one of those 10-9's into the club suit....

[effervesce]

I'm lost as to what this is about. Are you asking about pros/cons of inviting/bidding 3NT, transferring to clubs, or something else?

 

If so, this looks like a normal pass of 1NT to me.

[uday]

P might have

 

AQJ87

xx

Kxx

AQx

 

or

Axx

Ax

Kxx

Axxxx

 

 

but it seems reasonable to pass 1N, since that is the one action that can be defended successfully in the PM

[skjaeran]

I'm definitely inviting at IMPs with this one. I like my partner's trick taking ability, and this really is a good hand IMO.

[the hog]

♠109x ♥109x ♦Ax ♣Kxxxx

 

Partner opens 1NT. 15-17, first seat.

And? Did partner object to the way I put down dummy?

[Guest Jlall]

I would pass at all forms of scoring

[jdonn]

I invite. If forced to choose I would sooner bid 3NT then pass.

 

I would argue strongly for this (well I won't, partly since I don't post from work any more and partly since I don't care that much.) But I think passing is really quite bad, although I know it would be a strong majority action and that everyone will disagree.

[jdonn]

it seems reasonable to pass 1N, since that is the one action that can be defended successfully in the PM

It certainly seems reasonable to pass 1NT, but I don't think that is the reason.

[skjaeran]

I invite. If forced to choose I would sooner bid 3NT then pass.

Agree.

[Guest Jlall]

I invite. If forced to choose I would sooner bid 3NT then pass.

Agree.

I would also sooner bid 3N than invite unless I could bid 1N p 2N, but I would rather pass than those lol.

[655321]

Pass.

 

I would only invite by asking partner "Are you maximum for your 1NT bid? Or do you fit clubs? No?, OK 1NT then".

 

But the director is unlikely to allow this method. The legal methods of inviting get us to 3NT whenever it is cold, but they also get us to 3NT much of the time it goes down (IMO opener should accept an invitation with most hands that don't fit the description 'bad 15'), and get us to 2NT when partner rejects the invitation.

[Sambolino]

I invite. If forced to choose I would sooner bid 3NT then pass.

Agree.

Agree

[MickyB]

I invite. If forced to choose I would sooner bid 3NT then pass.

Agree.

I would also sooner bid 3N than invite unless I could bid 1N p 2N, but I would rather pass than those lol.

Well said.

[brianshark]

I pass.

[lexlogan]

This hand is a bit better than 8 hcp, due to the 10's and 9's. Double-dummy analysis, for what it's worth, emphatically rejects adding a point for a 5 card suit at notrump. Peter Cheung's website, for example, shows 24 hcp with a five-card suit to be only about 2% better than without -- and well under 50%.

 

Since I am indifferent about game with 25 hcp -- I'd like to be there, but it's not worth the risk of playing 2NT with only 23 hcp -- I routinely pass 8 point hands opposite 15-17, except vulnerable at IMPs. So this is a pass. Anyone who invites with this hand should absolutely bid game with an extra point.

 

I'm fairly certain blasting 3NT is a bad idea at any form of scoring against practically any opposition. I don't believe any amount of skill turns a balanced 22 hcp into a sound 3NT. If you don't like inviting, this should be an obvious pass.

[kenrexford]

The person posing this hand suggested another aspect of the situation worth considering. (As a matter of disclosure, I opted pass, even after the explanation.)

 

First, 1NT-P-2♣-P-2M-P-P-P might be a good sequence. In practice, this option was taken, yielding +200 for all-things-right 2♥ making 5.

 

Second, if Opener rebids 2♦, the likelihood of fitting club cards increases, perhaps justifying the upgrade at that (predicted) point to (barely, or plausibly) invitational. As it also so happens, 3NT does make.

 

All that said, even he agreed and thought himself that passing 1NT may be the long run winner, despite his (successful) choice of 2♣ at the table (planning to pass a major or bid 2NT).

 

But, interesting. Maybe passing is not the long-run winner. Seems very close.

[pclayton]

The person posing this hand suggested another aspect of the situation worth considering. (As a matter of disclosure, I opted pass, even after the explanation.)

 

First, 1NT-P-2♣-P-2M-P-P-P might be a good sequence. In practice, this option was taken, yielding +200 for all-things-right 2♥ making 5.

 

Second, if Opener rebids 2♦, the likelihood of fitting club cards increases, perhaps justifying the upgrade at that (predicted) point to (barely, or plausibly) invitational. As it also so happens, 3NT does make.

 

All that said, even he agreed and thought himself that passing 1NT may be the long run winner, despite his (successful) choice of 2♣ at the table (planning to pass a major or bid 2NT).

 

But, interesting. Maybe passing is not the long-run winner. Seems very close.

Very interesting idea Ken.

 

The 4-3 major fit did not occur to me, but there's a lot of reasons why a Moysian could be a good idea:

 

--we have a ruffing value

--our points are sharp

 

Notwithstanding that, 1N certainly looks like a good spot and preserves the plus score.

 

I also like the idea of finding pard with fitting club cards if he bids 2♦. And if pard doesn't have them, our ♦A might be the key card for pard.

 

So I'm a convert to 2♣. This isn't 'gambling stayman'; I'd call it 'covered call Stayman'.

[Finch]

Depends a bit on how much you like opening 1NT with long diamonds.

Anytime I assume partner has club length when he doesn't have a 4-card major he turns up with a 3352 or 3262. But I'm an eternal pessimist.

[Finch]

This hand is a bit better than 8 hcp, due to the 10's and 9's. Double-dummy analysis, for what it's worth, emphatically rejects adding a point for a 5 card suit at notrump. Peter Cheung's website, for example, shows 24 hcp with a five-card suit to be only about 2% better than without -- and well under 50%.

It's worth virtually nothing.

(I know, I'm like one of Pavlov's dogs)

 

The reason that DD analysis does not value the 5 card suit is that when you are in a light HCP 3NT with a long(ish) suit in one of the hands the result will depend hugely on the choice of opening lead - much more so than on declarer play. So they don't balance out at all; the DD analysis will favour the defence.

 

Take this example hand opposite a strong NT opener:

 

xx

xx

AKQxxx

xxx

 

Any bridge player would raise to 3NT. I am certain that single dummy analysis shows that this is right and that it will make far more than 50% of the time (I've done the analysis for about 100 deals and it is pretty conclusive)

 

But I bet you DD analysis shows that 3NT is going off the majority of the time.

 

Alternatively, when you are in a light HCP 3NT bid on the basis of lots of good honour combinations and 10s and 9s with every suit well stopped, the DD analysis will favour declarer who will get every guess right.

[kenrexford]

Very interesting idea Ken.

 

The 4-3 major fit did not occur to me, but there's a lot of reasons why a Moysian could be a good idea:

 

--we have a ruffing value

--our points are sharp

Heck, what about the 5-3 fit? Partner could easily have some 5332 with a major.

 

Another point that was mentioned was that 2♣ also has that (rare?) potential benefit of blasting the opponents out of the auction. Of course, that also might be a bad thing if nobody makes nuttin'.

[jdonn]

Another reason a 5 card suit adds more value in practice is that if you can run the suit you force the opponents to make many discards, and often give away an unmakeable game.

[nige1]

♠109x ♥109x ♦Ax ♣Kxxxx

Partner opens 1NT.  15-17, first seat.

IMO 6♣=10, 4N=9, 5♣=5, 3N=4, 4♠=3 :rolleyes:

My simulations prove that slam is playable opposite as little as ♠ AKQ8 ♥ Ax ♦ xx ♣ Axxxx

(Seriously, I do understand your point, Ken)

[kenrexford]

♠109x ♥109x ♦Ax ♣Kxxxx

Partner opens 1NT.  15-17, first seat.

IMO 6♣=10, 4N=9, 5♣=5, 3N=4, 4♠=3 :)

My simulations prove that slam is playable opposite as little as ♠ AKQ8 ♥ Ax ♦ xx ♣ Axxxx

(Seriously, I do understand your point, Ken)

Don't you think that the spade Queen is overkill, though? :rolleyes: