Auction

[Lobowolf]

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sxxxhaqxdatxckjxx&s=sahkjxxdqxxxcqtxx]133|200|Scoring: MP

No opposition bidding. Standardish system but with 12-14 NT.[/hv]

[TimG]

Gee, these look very familiar...

[Lobowolf]

Gee, these look very familiar...

Oh, after a while all hands look the same.

[jdonn]

What is the point of threads like this? To show to yourself that if a bid doesn't always work, and you are in the minority who disagrees with it, everyone else is nuts? If it's just me then sorry, but I find them in such poor taste.

[rogerclee]

If it's just me then sorry, but I find them in such poor taste.

Not just you. This is retarded.

[pclayton]

How much better is 3N with ♠Ax? What if dummy has ♠xx opposite Ax?

 

What if North's spades and clubs were reversed?

 

In the other thread, North had the opportunity to get us to 4♥. Here, South used judgment to open 1N. Sure, 1♦ gets us to 4♥ as well, but it also may get us to a silly 4-2 diamond fit.

 

Bidding 3N over 1N with the North hand in the other thread is just bad bridge, even at MPs.

 

It's so easy to present a layout where just about ANY bid can be justified.

 

And it deserved to get flamed.

[Lobowolf]

Well, when it's addressed in the original thread, you get comments like "resulting is beside the point," so it seemed like a separate thread was a better forum.

 

I guess the real question would be, if the auction in this layout were 1NT-3NT (presumably making north's bidding blameless), and it led to a poor result, in an "assign the blame" thread, would the overwhelming consensus really be "no blame...just one of those things"? I'm inclined to doubt it, but maybe it would.

 

Ironically (in the Alannis Morrisette sense of the word) the point, to the extent that Josh's question isn't rhetorical, is to avoid resulting by considering a layout on which north doesn't have the 4th heart and see if south's role in the original post is still dismissed fairly cavalierly.

[Lobowolf]

How much better is 3N with ♠Ax? What if dummy has ♠xx opposite Ax?

 

What if North's spades and clubs were reversed?

 

In the other thread, North had the opportunity to get us to 4♥. Here, South used judgment to open 1N. Sure, 1♦ gets us to 4♥ as well, but it also may get us to a silly 4-2 diamond fit.

 

Bidding 3N over 1N with the North hand in the other thread is just bad bridge, even at MPs.

 

It's so easy to present a layout where just about ANY bid can be justified.

 

And it deserved to get flamed.

ok, fair enough. No more such threads from me in the future. FWIW, I wasn't trying to justify 3NT, but to subject 1NT to a little more scrutiny than it had been getting.

[cherdano]

I would bid 1N-3N. Wtp? Next hand.

[pclayton]

How much better is 3N with ♠Ax? What if dummy has ♠xx opposite Ax? 

 

What if North's spades and clubs were reversed? 

 

In the other thread, North had the opportunity to get us to 4♥. Here, South used judgment to open 1N. Sure, 1♦ gets us to 4♥ as well, but it also may get us to a silly 4-2 diamond fit.

 

Bidding 3N over 1N with the North hand in the other thread is just bad bridge, even at MPs.

 

It's so easy to present a layout where just about ANY bid can be justified.

 

And it deserved to get flamed.

ok, fair enough. No more such threads from me in the future. FWIW, I wasn't trying to justify 3NT, but to subject 1NT to a little more scrutiny than it had been getting.

Well, I think its fine to scrutinize 1N. But 2♣ (thread-jumping here) is blatantly obvious.

 

I think hands like this are a lot of the reason weak NT-ers tend not to open them. I mean, if 1N isn't an option, what is the proper rebid after 1♦ - 1♠?

 

Perhaps a solution might be to pass 12 counts like this, open 1N on 13's and 1♦ with 14 (and rebid 1N). Or something along those lines.

[EricK]

How much better is 3N with ♠Ax? What if dummy has ♠xx opposite Ax? 

 

What if North's spades and clubs were reversed? 

 

In the other thread, North had the opportunity to get us to 4♥. Here, South used judgment to open 1N. Sure, 1♦ gets us to 4♥ as well, but it also may get us to a silly 4-2 diamond fit.

 

Bidding 3N over 1N with the North hand in the other thread is just bad bridge, even at MPs.

 

It's so easy to present a layout where just about ANY bid can be justified.

 

And it deserved to get flamed.

ok, fair enough. No more such threads from me in the future. FWIW, I wasn't trying to justify 3NT, but to subject 1NT to a little more scrutiny than it had been getting.

If South chooses to pass (which would be many people's first choice, or second choice after 1NT) then the bidding could easily go 1NT 2♣ 2♦ 3NT. If South opens 1♦ which is the "standard" opening on this hand, it might easily go 1♦ 3NT. Avoiding 3NT on these isn't easy at MPs playing a standardish system (whether or not you play a weak NT!)

[matmat]

I would bid 1NT-3NT, then go down and complain about the hand on the forums. Next deal, please.

[MFA]

How much better is 3N with ♠Ax? What if dummy has ♠xx opposite Ax? 

 

What if North's spades and clubs were reversed? 

 

In the other thread, North had the opportunity to get us to 4♥. Here, South used judgment to open 1N. Sure, 1♦ gets us to 4♥ as well, but it also may get us to a silly 4-2 diamond fit.

 

Bidding 3N over 1N with the North hand in the other thread is just bad bridge, even at MPs.

 

It's so easy to present a layout where just about ANY bid can be justified.

 

And it deserved to get flamed.

ok, fair enough. No more such threads from me in the future. FWIW, I wasn't trying to justify 3NT, but to subject 1NT to a little more scrutiny than it had been getting.

Well, I think its fine to scrutinize 1N. But 2♣ (thread-jumping here) is blatantly obvious.

 

I think hands like this are a lot of the reason weak NT-ers tend not to open them. I mean, if 1N isn't an option, what is the proper rebid after 1♦ - 1♠?

 

Perhaps a solution might be to pass 12 counts like this, open 1N on 13's and 1♦ with 14 (and rebid 1N). Or something along those lines.

A kind of "when fixed - stay fixed" extension. Seriously, what's the hurry with opening this very marginal hand, when the system will cause us so much trouble? A stiff spade honour is a big-big flaw, no matter what the macho debaters postulate.

[awm]

1♦(1) - 2NT(2)

3♠(3) - 4♣(4)

5♣(5) - Pass

 

(1) Natural. No reason to open 1NT with a singleton.

(2) Natural game force, 12-14 or thereabouts. No 4M, likely no 5m.

(3) Shortness.

(4) Natural, likely 3334 (no 4♦) doesn't want to play 3NT opposite spade shortness.

(5) Very minimum hand with club fit.

[jdonn]

No reason to open 1NT with a singleton.

That is untrue, there is a huge reason. How much that reason weighs on you relative to other ones is of course up to you.

[cherdano]

1♦(1) - 2NT(2)

3♠(3) - 4♣(4)

5♣(5) - Pass

 

(1) Natural. No reason to open 1NT with a singleton.

(2) Natural game force, 12-14 or thereabouts. No 4M, likely no 5m.

(3) Shortness.

This is doubtful. Showing shortness with a singleton ace will lead partner to choose the wrong game very often (especially given that we are just 1444 and we could also be 1354 or 1363 for this bid?).

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

1D (1) - 3NT (2)

Pass (3)

 

(1) As I said in the other thread, opening 1NT

is fine, if I do it or not, is a matter of mood,

and heavily depend on some esoteric sun moon

constellations

 

(2) 13-15 bal., denying a 4 card major, but either minor

could be a 4 card suit.

 

(3) What else? Ok, opener knows (!), that the partnership

has at best 4 spades beweent them, but there is no

reason to believe the 4-4 fit in the minor to play better

than 3NT, sometimes you have 9 running tricks.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[awm]

That is untrue, there is a huge reason. How much that reason weighs on you relative to other ones is of course up to you.

 

I would like to hear what this reason is. Is it that we have twelve high card points unbalanced? Is it so we can miss a game in hearts? So we can play our 5-1 spade fit? So we can reach a bad 3NT when partner has a weak spade holding? So we can miss a minor suit slam? Honestly I have seen virtually no good results come from opening notrump on these hands. And it's not even like we have a difficult rebid problem after 1♦-1♠ -- we bid 2♣ which shows diamonds and clubs and a minimum of around 12 hcp. This is different from a strong notrump system where 1444 with 16 hcp presents a possibility of missing game after 1♦-1♠-2♣ (I still wouldn't open 1NT on such a hand).

 

This is doubtful. Showing shortness with a singleton ace will lead partner to choose the wrong game very often (especially given that we are just 1444 and we could also be 1354 or 1363 for this bid?).

 

I disagree. Our shape is not relevant here -- partner is supposed to bid 3NT with a strong spade holding and otherwise bid 4♦ with four of them or 4♣ with four clubs and no four diamonds. Partner is evaluating his spade holding, not his "degree of fit" for any particular suit. As to showing shortness on singleton ace, this particular hand has a lot of slow cards and no long suit. It will be very difficult to make 3NT if the ♠A is our only stopper; in fact even if partner has a second stopper like Kxx or QJx, this reduces the number of aces in partner's hand and it will be tough to develop our tricks fast enough to make 3NT. I would be willing to bet that most partner hands with 33(34)/(23)44 shape and Kxx or weaker spades will play better in 5m than 3nt.

[han]

Honestly I have seen virtually no good results come from opening notrump on these hands.

In the Las Vegas swiss I ended up bidding 1NT 3 hands in a row. On the first hand I had rebid 1NT with a singleton and we had a good result. On the second hand I overcalled 1NT over 1H with a singleton diamond. The opponents were clearly surprised when I ruffed the second diamond trick.

 

On the third hand I had some 4333 16-count and opened 1NT. The opponents completely misdefended, I suspect that they were playing me for a stiff somewhere. This is an advantage of bidding 1NT with a stiff that I had never considered before.

[han]

I would be willing to bet that most partner hands with 33(34)/(23)44 shape and Kxx or weaker spades will play better in 5m than 3nt.

OK I'm taking you up on this bet, will post results later.

[jdonn]

That is untrue, there is a huge reason. How much that reason weighs on you relative to other ones is of course up to you.

 

I would like to hear what this reason is.

1 - You can EASILY get to a 4-2 diamond fit, perhaps missing an 8 card heart fit and 7 card club fit along the way.

2 - If partner rebids 2NT after 1♦ 1♠ 2♣ you will miss any heart fit.

3 - You can easily get to a 4-3 diamond fit at the three level (see 1.)

 

There are more reasons (maybe your opponents make something in spades!) but I think you have to admit it's a pretty foolish statement that there is no reason to open 1NT.

[mikeh]

I play a weak notrump.

 

I have no problem with either a pass or an offshape 1N on this hand: I would not open 1♦. The stiff A is not worth the hcp strength that we usually associate with an Ace, since it has no kickers to which it adds strength, nor is at useful, should partner hold spade cards, as it would be if it were Ax. I hope this is self-evident, but consider a simple example such as A opposite KJxxx compared to Ax opposite KJxxx.

 

But we might be dealt a slightly stronger hand: say add the ♦J to the hand, while keeping it 1=4=4=4. Few would support Pass now.

 

Say we didn't like 1N: say we held x KQxx KJxx Axxx. We'd be less inclined to open 1N with a stiff x as opposed to a stiff A, and 1♦ still risks reaching a 4-2 fit.

 

I think that this is just a cost of doing business: show me a system with no built-in vulnerabilities, and you are showing me a system not yet invented.

 

Oh, I forgot: maybe we can all switch to mini-roman, and ask wtp? :) I knew that there had to be a hand on which mini-roman would shine.

[awm]

In the Las Vegas swiss I ended up bidding 1NT 3 hands in a row. On the first hand I had rebid 1NT with a singleton and we had a good result. On the second hand I overcalled 1NT over 1H with a singleton diamond. The opponents were clearly surprised when I ruffed the second diamond trick.

 

On the third hand I had some 4333 16-count and opened 1NT. The opponents completely misdefended, I suspect that they were playing me for a stiff somewhere. This is an advantage of bidding 1NT with a stiff that I had never considered before.

There is a big difference between rebidding 1NT, overcalling 1NT, and opening 1NT. I know this concept is tough for a lot of people. But the general point is that a 1NT rebid denies length in partner's suit. You can't have four cards (would've raised) and certain hands with three cards there would've raised. Since your most common holding will be two cards in partner's suit, adding a few awkward hands which have only one card is no big deal. As for overcalling, there are many hands where you have no other sensible bid except pass, because your natural opening of 1m in a mediocre suit has been taken away by the opponents' opening bid.

 

There are more reasons (maybe your opponents make something in spades!) but I think you have to admit it's a pretty foolish statement that there is no reason to open 1NT.

 

Nope. There are also "reasons" to open 2NT on this hand. After all, it may talk the opponents out of a cold game. It may make it hard for them to find their sacrifice in 4♠ over our 4♥. It may be among the only ways to reach a pushy but making game for our side. It may "right side" our eventual heart contract.

 

Nonetheless, I think most of us would agree that there is no reason to open 2NT on this hand. In other words, while there are some "reasons" of things that might happen which are favorable due to that action, the most likely effects are so overwhelmingly negative that we wouldn't do it. Maybe a more accurate statement is: there is no reason that makes sense, from the standpoint of a rational player trying to optimize his expected or most likely results on the hand in question. And I feel the same way about opening 1NT. What is to stop partner from doubling their cold spade contract after we open 1NT? Who is to say that we are not better off in two of a minor than 1NT with our weakish hand? And don't an awful lot of people play reverse flannery (in which case you cannot miss a heart fit on this hand anyway)?

[jdonn]

You are starting to make me lol. I guess I'm just an irrational player who does not try to optimize my expected results.

[han]

I would be willing to bet that most partner hands with 33(34)/(23)44 shape and Kxx or weaker spades will play better in 5m than 3nt.

OK I'm taking you up on this bet, will post results later.

I regret to say that I lost the bet.

 

I ran a double dummy analysis of 200 deals. In those deals south had the opening hand with the stiff ace of spades and partner had any 33(43) or (23)44 hand with 12-14 HCP and at most Kxx in spades. The results:

 

3NT makes on 69 hand.

The better 5m makes on 77 hands.

 

Whether this has anything to do with bridge is not clear. For example, most of my partners would not bid 2NT holding xx Axx Axxx AQxx, yet that was one of the 200 hands. Also, opponents don't always defend perfectly and typically they defend and lead better when you give them more information. I noticed that the lead was much more relevant against 3NT than against 5m, in 3NT the opponents almost always had to lead a spade to get the optimal result. Finally, even awm might not always get to the best 5m when partner is 4-4 in the minors, yet on those hands 5C and 5D didn't always take the same number of tricks.

 

As an aside: when partner has exactly Kxx in spades then 3NT makes 63% of the time and the best 5m makes 20% of the time.

 

So I remain convinced that showing spade shortness on the hand in question is very poor bridge.