helene_t Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 It is not borderline, Nuno, whether you should accept an invite after having opened a 12-14 1NT is a more interesting question. According to the Kaplan/Rubin hand evaluator, you shouldn't. I would, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 It is not borderline, Nuno. Sorry, but totally disagree. There's no way you're going to convince me these two flat 14s are worth the same KJ10 KJ10 KJ7 Q1065 vs KJ2KJ2KJ7Q765 Most textbooks advise on upgrading 1 point balanced hands with plenty of 10s and 9s, so why should this be an exception? Maybe you can say it's because of the lack of aces, but truth is very few (if any!) would downgrade this 15 count KJ2KJ2KJ7K765 to a 1♣ opener. I prefer to open the original hand 1NT, but I also find 1♣ totally normal. What I don't find normal is a one-track-minded way of thinking. But then again, perhaps I'm the odd one when I belive people should think for themselves and be independent :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 The two latest examples you give are 11.40 and 13.05 according to K&R. K&R may not be gospel but it wouldn't occur to me to open a 15-17 1NT with your latter example. I wouldn't even call it bad judgment. I would just call it a misbid. Nuno, you are just wrong. Everyone disagrees with you. Take the opportunity to learn something new. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deep Posted May 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 Kaplan/Rubin's Hand Evaluator ishttp://www.jeffgoldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.cgi I went in the site that you advised of Kaplan and Rubens I make do the calculation writing the cards in matter and the result was of 18.05 and that is to say DK=15 +. It does it means I did not understood. I hope to understand because my English is poor. Ty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 Enter the hand as KJT KJT KJ7 QT65(You can also use 10 instead of T, doesn't matter). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deep Posted May 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 Enter the hand as KJT KJT KJ7 QT65(You can also use 10 instead of T, doesn't matter). I did this and the result is: 18.05 and DK 15+ It does it means? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
655321 Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 Enter the hand as KJT KJT KJ7 QT65(You can also use 10 instead of T, doesn't matter). I did this and the result is: 18.05 and DK 15+ It does it means?http://www.jeffgoldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.c...JT+KJT+KJ7+QT65 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deep Posted May 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 Enter the hand as KJT KJT KJ7 QT65(You can also use 10 instead of T, doesn't matter). I did this and the result is: 18.05 and DK 15+ It does it means?http://www.jeffgoldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.c...JT+KJT+KJ7+QT65 ok now 12.70 and 14+ but It does it means? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 Enter the hand as KJT KJT KJ7 QT65(You can also use 10 instead of T, doesn't matter). I did this and the result is: 18.05 and DK 15+ It does it means?http://www.jeffgoldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.c...JT+KJT+KJ7+QT65 ok now 12.70 and 14+ but It does it means? 12.70 means that according to Kaplan/Rubins it is 12.70 points. 14+ means that according to Kleinman it is 14+ points worth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 Enter the hand as KJT KJT KJ7 QT65(You can also use 10 instead of T, doesn't matter). I did this and the result is: 18.05 and DK 15+ It does it means?http://www.jeffgoldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.c...JT+KJT+KJ7+QT65 ok now 12.70 and 14+ but It does it means? Translated: It means this hand is a piece of dung. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted May 19, 2009 Report Share Posted May 19, 2009 Nuno, you are just wrong. Everyone disagrees with you. Take the opportunity to learn something new. What's the matter with you? This doesn't sound like you at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninja89 Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 I normally play good 14 to bad 17 1NT openings, and this hand doesn't seem good enough in that context. I don't like the lack of aces and the 4333 shape. In a weak no-trump context, I wouldn't co-operate with a balanced invite, but my hand should be ok if partner shows up with some distribution, despite the fact that some of my honours will be wasted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Nuno, you are just wrong. Everyone disagrees with you. Take the opportunity to learn something new. What's the matter with you? This doesn't sound like you at all. Maybe you should listen to her, Nuno. When the better players (aka the more experienced and more successful players) unanimously advance a certain position, an intelligent, open-minded reader should at the very least try to understand their position and consider changing his mind. Stubbornly clinging to bad ideas is a human characteristic. It is also one of the most powerful factors preventing otherwise smart people from putting their intelligence to work for their own benefit... this is true, in my experience, in many fields, but bridge is one of the notable ones. 1N is silly, in a 15-17 framework. No Aces=downgrade. 4333=downgrade. Lots of jacks=downgrade. 10's=upgrade. This is not close... not even remotely close, I am afraid. The 4321 scale is known to overstate Jacks while seriously understating A's.... and the 10's, while nice, don't offset the presence of the latter and the absence of the former. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Nuno, you are just wrong. Everyone disagrees with you. Take the opportunity to learn something new. What's the matter with you? This doesn't sound like you at all. I agree that was out of character for her. Maybe you can look inward instead of outward to find out why? Not that I expect that to happen... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickRW Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 1N is silly, in a 15-17 framework. No Aces=downgrade. 4333=downgrade. Lots of jacks=downgrade. 10's=upgrade. This is not close... not even remotely close, I am afraid. The 4321 scale is known to overstate Jacks while seriously understating A's.... and the 10's, while nice, don't offset the presence of the latter and the absence of the former. While I agree that this hand is not a 15-17 1NT opener, I don't quite agree with your assessment of the 4321 system. For suit purposes, yes, 4321 does overstate jacks (and queens) while drastically undervaluing aces. But for NT purposes, 4321 understates 10s (even some would says 9s) and the slack should be borrowed, according the system of fifths, from the kings and queens. I think people make the mistake (perhaps understandably given the example of pretty much all bridge literature) of trying to use one number to evaluate a hand. This works for a lot of hands that are neither particularly NT or suit oriented. This particular example, however, is fairly lousy for suit play - and actually quite good for NT play - albeit, to my mind, not quite there for a 15-17NT. Of course, if you do ever upgrade a hand of this type (say a marginally better one), and partner bullies the contract into a suit, then he/she may be disappointed with the dummy. Equally, if you don't upgrade and later find yourself in NT (quite likely with this sort of holding of course), you could find yourself lower than you should be. But that is problem more of how one applies their system rather than hand valuation. Nick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 michael haargreaves and josh donn: as long as you two keep that silly, childish attitude of yours towards me, I'm not going to bother replying. So why don't you two do us all a favor and MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 michael haargreaves and josh donn: as long as you two keep that silly, childish attitude of yours towards me, I'm not going to bother replying. So why don't you two do us all a favor and MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS You posted it publicly, it's everyone's business. If you don't want replies, there is this awesome private messaging option that the forums offer! But I wouldn't want to have a childish attitude, that would involve me doing silly things like disagreeing with 30 people just because I like to make a point of not learning anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeh Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 michael haargreaves and josh donn: as long as you two keep that silly, childish attitude of yours towards me, I'm not going to bother replying. So why don't you two do us all a favor and MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESSYou purport to be an expert... you offer opinions that conflict with those voiced by proven experts... you attack those who disagree with you... and you do this openly. Hey, it's a public forum.. but for those who are trying to improve, it is, I hope, of value, when seeing divergent views, to understand not just what the expert choices are but also the reasons. This cannot be done properly without a criticism of divergent, eccentric views... which you tend to hold (or post, anyway) to a disproportionate degree. I'd guess, without being bothered to do the research, that of all the posters who have, say, 500 or more posts on the bridge forums, you and Ken are the two whose views are most often at odds with the expert consensus. Ken, to give him his due, usually acknowledges that he is promoting non-standard methods. You, otoh, seem to believe that you are advocating good bridge in a standard context. You do...sometimes... heck, we've even made the same choices on occasion, and we can't both be wrong, can we? :rolleyes: But when you are advocating something that most experts think to be incorrect, expect to be called on it. In the meantime, if you disagree with the content of my posts... with the arguments I put forward in support of my choice, why not explain where those arguments fall flat? I have changed my mind on several methods precisely because of feedback on these forums... thus I am now willing, if I can find a partner who agrees, to rebid 1N with a stiff and to respond to 1 red, when holding gf values and 4-4 in the blacks, with 2♣ on some hands. If you can explain to me why a 4333 hand with no Aces, and no rebid problem after opening 1minor, should be upgraded to 15-17, well... I doubt that you will persuade me because this one is so simple.. but I'd read. You, otoh, never seem to acknowledge that you have learned anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 michael, time after time I tried to reason with you in private. You never wanted to be my friend, so why should I bother explaining anything to you? 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.