2S or 1N?

[flytoox]

Pd and I have diff. opinion about the following hand:

S: Q9X

H: Q8X

D: QT9X

C: KXX

 

PD opened 1S, right hand passed, playing 2/1 with the above hand, what do you bid? 2S or 1N?

 

I choose 1N due to the balanced hand with Queen and 8,9, but Pd thinks 2S much better, which I dont agree.

 

Your opinion?

 

THanks in advance.

 

Hongjun

[matmat]

the only reason to bid 1N here is if you are treating this as a 3 card limit raise in spades (and 1nt is forcing).

I don't like the soft values and the shape, so i'll settle for a simple 2♠ and accept any game try offered, suggesting 3NT along the way if possible.

[rogerclee]

2♠. You cannot suppress 3-card spade support (with this good a hand) because you think it is more descriptive. You know nothing about partner's hand, and you will cause all kinds of problems later if it becomes relevant to support spades.

 

Just support with support.

[mike777]

2♠. You cannot suppress 3-card spade support (with this good a hand) because you think it is more descriptive. You know nothing about partner's hand, and you will cause all kinds of problems later if it becomes relevant to support spades.

 

Just support with support.

ditto

[pclayton]

2♠. You cannot suppress 3-card spade support (with this good a hand) because you think it is more descriptive. You know nothing about partner's hand, and you will cause all kinds of problems later if it becomes relevant to support spades.

 

Just support with support.

No duh. You can get to 3N later if its right.

[jikl]

Well, I have 14 cards, assuming the 14th card is not a ♠ I will bid 2♠

 

Sean

[peachy]

Could this be unanimous. 2S for me, not close.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

your reasons, why you did choose to bid 1NT instead

of 2S are valid reasons, so your bid was fine.

 

Of course I assume, that you did also decide at this point,

what to bid, if openers 2nd bid was still on the 2 level,

correcting to 2S / passing 2S.

If you go into a tank after 2C, 2D, 2H or 2S, the bid was

...

 

In the end you have to discuss this with partner, because

it is a style thing, looking at the responses may tell you, that

this action would be taken only by a small minority, but this

does not make the bid bad.

 

I would have gone with a constructive 2S raise, since this

showes 3 card support, 7/8-10HCP, which is more or less

what I have, but 1 NT can work as well.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[655321]

2♠, I really dislike 1NT.

[han]

2S, 1NT is not fine.

[Apollo81]

2♠. You cannot suppress 3-card spade support (with this good a hand) because you think it is more descriptive. You know nothing about partner's hand, and you will cause all kinds of problems later if it becomes relevant to support spades.

 

Just support with support.

Agree.

 

You could bid 1NT if you had a 6 count with the same shape for the purpose of slowing partner down, as he is less likely to make a game try after a preference to 2♠ than after a direct raise.

[helene_t]

Playing constructive raises, 2♠ is something like 8-10 so with more or less than that you start with 1NT. You might downgrade this hand due to the 4333-shape and acelessnes, but it is still too good for 1NT.

[TylerE]

Constructive raises are the worst treatment ever. I'd rather play F------y than CR.

[Codo]

CRs are great.

[Walddk]

I would probably bid 2♠, but I don't think 1NT is terrible. This is not even close to a limit raise, so if I bid 1NT, I am not going to show an invite with 3-card support later. Simple preference it has to be if partner bids a new suit.

 

I belong to the constructive raisers (8-10(11)), so with that agreement a direct 2♠ is best. If I give preference to spades later, it would show either 5-7 with 3 or 6-9(10) with 2.

 

As an aside, what do the Acolites (weak NT) bid with that hand? 2♦ to cater for a balanced 15-17 opposite?

 

Roland

[ASkolnick]

I think 1N is fine if you are NOT playing 2-1. If you want to say I have a balanced hand and about this values, with all your queens and stuff its fine. If partner doesn't take another call, you should be OK.

 

A forcing NT does not promise a balanced hand in 2/1, so why would you suppress your support? If partner makes another call, you can always bid NT to show a flattish hand with 3 card support.

[marcD]

Even playing Non Forcing NT and non constructives raises I think 1NT is misguided: over 2 x (minor or hearts) from partner 2♠ will sound as a mere preference and could could easily play 2♠ while 3NT is cold

[kenberg]

Somewhere I read: Bridge is a game where it does not pay to conceal major suit support. I try to follow this. Every rule has its exceptions but I don't see this as one of them. If the opponents come in over 1NT, as well they might, you will never be able to convince your partner that you hold this hand. If they come in over 2S, a little harder for them to do, he will have a much better shot at judging correctly, whatever conventional agreements you may have.

[han]

It is a common misconception that a "standard" 1NT response to 1 of a major shows a balanced hand, it doesn't.

[Cascade]

2♠ and 1NT are both fine in my opinion.

 

I would normally bid 1NT with this hand but I usually play a four-card major system.

 

I would be tempted to bid 1NT though even in a five-card major system. I wouldn't criticize my partner for bidding either 1NT or 2♠ with this hand.

 

I think there are many auctions where you can get back to spades after 1NT especially if partner is aware that you might bid 1NT with this sort of hand.

[effervesce]

I prefer 2♠, but I don't mind 1NT. [Edit-saw that it was for 2/1 - then 2♠ definitely better than 1NT]

[jdonn]

These answers are pretty shocking. 1NT is simply wrong.

[andy_h]

By bidding 1NT puts a lot of pressure on partner sometimes. Playing 2/1 I would say this is a mandatory 2S bid. Like others have said, support with support. If you do bid 1NT with this, how is partner ever going to know you have 3 card support and a decent hand but less than invitational values (assuming they go through 1NT)? After a direct 2S raise, there's also nothing stopping us from playing 3NT as well.

 

Let's say you do bid 1NT with this hand. The auction then goes 1S-1NT; 2x-? Obviously now you have to bid 2S as 3S is a huge overbid and most of the time this sequence doesn't even promise 3 card support unless it's in the 4-7 range or whatever it is. Now sit in partner's seat. If he has some unbalanced 5431/5422 type of hand, he sometimes has to guess whether or not to bid on again with marginal invitational values. He could hit gold or it could be a disaster. Telling partner about the fit will greatly help him judge what to do for the remainder of the auction.

[benlessard]

This hand is too strong for 1Nt forcing and a preference to 2S.

This hand isnt strong enough for 1Nt follwed by 2NT to show 10-11 balanced.

 

So playing forcing 1NT you should bid 2S.

Not playing 1NT forcing but in Imps you should of course bid 2S since the +10 is pointless.

 

Not playing 1Nt forcing but in MP you still have the same problem, if partner pass 1Nt then 1Nt vs 2S is a fair gamble but if partner bid 2m you are a bit stuck, a 2S preference will be an underbid and 2Nt/3S will be a gross overbid.

 

All in all 2S is clearly better. This hand as the NT feel but the strength will be too tough to show if you bid 1Nt.

[P_Marlowe]

By bidding 1NT puts a lot of pressure on partner sometimes. Playing 2/1 I would say this is a mandatory 2S bid. Like others have said, support with support. If you do bid 1NT with this, how is partner ever going to know you have 3 card support and a decent hand but less than invitational values (assuming they go through 1NT)?

He will never know this in the bidding.

 

But it is important to know, that the only thing

we are hiding, is the 3 card support.

 

Bidding 1 NT means, you are betting that the stock

exchange goes down.

You take a view, thats all what there is too say.

As long as you know, what risks you are taking, the

bid is fine, even if I would not make it myself.

 

Saying 1NT will prevent you from reaching thin games

is fine, but ignores the fact that you will also stay out

of 3S partial or of games, which have no play at all.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe