Do you open?

[Hanoi5]

No one vulnerable, you're dealer:

 

♠AK52

♥Q72

♦J84

♣QT4

[Phil]

Its close but not me.

[hanp]

Yes I would. There are some 4333 12-counts that I would pass even non-vulnerable but this isn't one of them. You gave me an ace and a 10.

[jdonn]

I don't pass too many 12 counts, but this is one I do pass. This is really bad honor structure, and really easy to bid on pretty much any auction after passing.

[Hanoi5]

Jdonn, happy birthday. Also,

no hard feelings when it goes all pass and you lose 3 imp's to 2♠ making?

[Free]

I'll open, wouldn't even think of passing.

[OleBerg]

I never, ever, pass a 12 count.

 

Happy to Jdonn.

 

Weather clearly indicates he's been a good boy.

[mikeh]

I open, but only if playing a method in which my rebid, over 1 red, is systemically 1N: I will not open if partner insists on bidding strictly up the line.

 

Of course, we weak notrumpers are all asking: wtp? :P B)

[mtvesuvius]

I open anything that hand 13 cards and looks pretty.

 

Well, at least this opener has 13 cards...

[rogerclee]

I would open unless I specifically agreed to play a style that includes sound opening bids. I've never done that, though.

[neilkaz]

No rebid problems and the fact that I can tolerate a ♣ lead..so I open 1♣ but if PD passes this, I have no issues.

[gnasher]

Of course, we weak notrumpers are all asking: wtp? :P B)

Does that mean that you're more inclined to open a marginal balanced hand if you're playing 12-14 than if you're playing 15-17?

 

I would do the opposite, if anything. If you're opening a pile of junk it's better to have the auction start

  1♣ (1NT)

than

  1NT (dbl)

[mikeh]

Of course, we weak notrumpers are all asking: wtp? :P  B)

Does that mean that you're more inclined to open a marginal balanced hand if you're playing 12-14 than if you're playing 15-17?

 

I would do the opposite, if anything. If you're opening a pile of junk it's better to have the auction start

  1♣ (1NT)

than

  1NT (dbl)

Opening 1N, with a reasonable range, is the most powerful single opening bid available. Almost all pairs have good to excellent constructive and preemptive structures available over partner's 1N.

 

Opening 12-14 increases the risks, of course, but also increases the frequency of occurence, by a huge amount.

 

Of course, the impact of range is felt throughout the method. But for me, the ability to define the hand type and range so well at bid one offsets the additional risk.

 

I would open this hand playing any method, other than R-S, but I am certainly more comfortable if I can open 1N... reserving my right to feel otherwise if LHO doubles and partner has a flat yarb.

 

BTW, this isn't a terrible 12. Imagine no Aces... and no 10... this is a poor 12, not a horrible one.

[gnasher]

Opening 1N, with a reasonable range, is the most powerful single opening bid available. Almost all pairs have good to excellent constructive and preemptive structures available over partner's 1N.

 

Opening 12-14 increases the risks, of course, but also increases the frequency of occurence, by a huge amount.

 

Of course, the impact of range is felt throughout the method. But for me, the ability to define the hand type and range so well at bid one offsets the additional risk.

 

I would open this hand playing any method, other than R-S, but I am certainly more comfortable if I can open 1N... reserving my right to feel otherwise if LHO doubles and partner has a flat yarb.

 

BTW, this isn't a terrible 12. Imagine no Aces... and no 10... this is a poor 12, not a horrible one.

Those sound like arguments for playing a 1NT range that has a high frequency rather than one that has a low frequency. That wasn't what I was getting at.

 

Suppose that:

- On Tuesdays you play a 12-14 notrump

- On Wednesdays you play a 15-17 notrump, with 1x-1y-1NT showing 12-14.

 

Are there some balanced 11/12 counts that you would open on a Tuesday but not on a Wednesday?

[mikeh]

Opening 1N, with a reasonable range, is the most powerful single opening bid available. Almost all pairs have good to excellent constructive and preemptive structures available over partner's 1N.

 

Opening 12-14 increases the risks, of course, but also increases the frequency of occurence, by a huge amount.

 

Of course, the impact of range is felt throughout the method. But for me, the ability to define the hand type and range so well at bid one offsets the additional risk.

 

I would open this hand playing any method, other than R-S, but I am certainly more comfortable if I can open 1N... reserving my right to feel otherwise if LHO doubles and partner has a flat yarb.

 

BTW, this isn't a terrible 12. Imagine no Aces... and no 10... this is a poor 12, not a horrible one.

Those sound like arguments for playing a 1NT range that has a high frequency rather than one that has a low frequency. That wasn't what I was getting at.

 

Suppose that:

- On Tuesdays you play a 12-14 notrump

- On Wednesdays you play a 15-17 notrump, with 1x-1y-1NT showing 12-14.

 

Are there some balanced 11/12 counts that you would open on a Tuesday but not on a Wednesday?

Yes

 

Really soft 12 counts, with, say, 2 or fewer controls, and sterile shape... I open 1N, 12-14, since the range is so well defined that partner can easily cater to this... but I pass when 1N would be 15-17. Now, if you promised me an uncontested auction, I would open. But I see borderline 1minor openings as inviting the opps into the auction. LHO will bid on hands on which he must pass if I pass or if I open 1N.

 

In those scenarios, either they can successfully compete or our side will have less room in which I can define my hand at a safe level... thus, my notrump rebid may have to be at the 2-level, depriving partner of a way to invite game, or he may overcompete, hoping for a longer minor in my hand, and so on.

[jdonn]

It makes sense I'm the wimp here, I became older today.

[JLOL]

I hate opening this and would not.

 

Also I have heard this "I never pass a 12 count" rule a lot, is that just conceding that you can't evaluate hands that well or something?

[skjaeran]

I'd open this 1♣ in most partnerships. Playing a light opening style.

 

In a previous 5-year partnership, this hand was a clear pass. So it's a style issue.

[gnasher]

Also I have heard this "I never pass a 12 count" rule a lot, is that just conceding that you can't evaluate hands that well or something?

No, it just implies that your minimum for opening is lower. You probably have a comparable rule "I never pass a 13-count".

[655321]

I would open.

[helene_t]

Close, with Shogi I would pass, with anyone here in Lancaster I would open but then again people here open the most horrible crap.

[NickRW]

Personally I would not open this. I play shapely openings light - but balanced stuff conservative.

 

Nick

[kenrexford]

I open, but only if playing a method in which my rebid, over 1 red, is systemically 1N: I will not open if partner insists on bidding strictly up the line.

 

Of course, we weak notrumpers are all asking: wtp? :) B)

If you play strong 1NT, then you open this 1♣. WTP?

[OleBerg]

I hate opening this and would not.

 

Also I have heard this "I never pass a 12 count" rule a lot, is that just conceding that you can't evaluate hands that well or something?

Partly that, partly I hate to pass.

 

But honestly; if I am in a situation e´where I am averse to any swing, I might pass 12 lousy in 3.rd or fourth, red.

[NickRW]

I think this thread is silly and of no great help to someone reading it who wants to understand whether they should or should not open hands of this type. Mostly it consists of "yes I would" and "no I wouldn't" comments with insufficient reasoning to help anyone (I was guilty too). Harald possibly came closest to saying something sensible when he said it is a style issue - but that doesn't define what "style" is.

 

If you open a weak (or mini) NT and consider this opening to confer tactical advantage to your side, then you probably think this hand is OK to open - I won't necessarily agree with that - but I won't argue with it either. The merits of a weak or mini NT as a tactical weapon is discussed and argued about elsewhere.

 

If however you play "standard" or even use a weak NT and consider this opening to be primarily constructive, then you have to seriously ask yourself "how low do we go" with respect to weak openers. This is a fairly crucial question as sometimes 12 counts oppposite another 12 provide quite reasonable play for 3NT, and other times they do not.

 

By far the best published answer (for balanced hands) to this question IMO is Thomas Andrew's page here. I guess most forum regulars have read it, but the casual reader may not have.

 

Briefly he suggests using the regular 4321 count, but adjusting it down a fifth of point for each K or Q and upgrading two fifths for a ten. (To which I might add that subtracting a fifth for 4333 shape and adding a fifth for a 5332 is no bad tweak).

 

He also identified that, on this basis, 24.2 points is probably good for a 50% shot at 3NT (and 23.8 gives you a 40% shot which is useful to know for vulnerable games in long running team matches).

 

On that basis you need to open 12.2 hands (or 12.0 vul in long team matches). There is no constructive reason for opening less.

 

This hand is 11.8 (or 11.6 with my suggested tweak). Therefore I suggest, for those that like constructive openers, this hand isn't an example. If you like tactical openers - or have a system that allows weak openers - then probably it is.

 

Nick