Please bid!

[jdonn]

Stupid question: I knew that dbl would get more votes than 1NT, and I would dbl for that very reason myself: I think partner will expect me to dbl with this hand.

 

But why is dbl better than 1NT? Does 1NT overstate the strength of the hand?

 

I think 1NT is more likely to get us to the right partscore if we play a 2♣ response as natural, which is my preferred treatment although everybody seems to disagree with me so I am probably wrong. 1NT may be the wrong partscore if it is passed out, but only if partner has a 4-card diamonds which he would bid in response to a dbl, or if a 4-3 fit hearts or clubs plays better than 1NT. If 1NT gets doubled and p doesn't run, we can bid 2♦.

My main qualm with 1NT is that if my stopper is Kx, which is just one stopper and also can't be held up, then I want a bit better hand given that I have a sound alternative in double. But 1NT is not a bad bid.

[mikeh]

Stupid question: I knew that dbl would get more votes than 1NT, and I would dbl for that very reason myself: I think partner will expect me to dbl with this hand.

 

But why is dbl better than 1NT? Does 1NT overstate the strength of the hand?

 

I think 1NT is more likely to get us to the right partscore if we play a 2♣ response as natural, which is my preferred treatment although everybody seems to disagree with me so I am probably wrong. 1NT may be the wrong partscore if it is passed out, but only if partner has a 4-card diamonds which he would bid in response to a dbl, or if a 4-3 fit hearts or clubs plays better than 1NT. If 1NT gets doubled and p doesn't run, we can bid 2♦.

I'm basically with Josh on this one. Kx is a tenuous holding especially when we are minimum with no source of tricks....AQJxx in diamonds would make 1N more attractive since one dummy entry and 10x or even xxx in diamonds gives us play for 5 winners in the suit.

 

1N is far better than 2♦, imo, but still far worse than double....which, tho imperfect, seems to be the best compromise between safety and aggression.

 

As for 2♣ natural, there will always be hands on which one would wish for a specific meaning for a call, but I am with the vast majority of players who think that 2♣ as stayman (whether purely stayman or part of a comprehensive package where it doesn't promise a major) is preferable.

 

I say that knowing that the odds that the partnership has a 4-4 major suit fit are reduced after a 1N overcall of 1M. Reduced does not mean eliminated, and the rewards for finding the 4-4 major suit fit (which include partscore wins as well as games) outweigh, imo, the relatively few hands on which we successfully play 2♣, when the call is natural.

 

Bear in mind that on some hands where advancer wishes to play 2♣, that choice will prove poor....partner has some 3=3=5=2 and clubs don't break but the diamonds were running. On others, the opps will compete. On still others, we can successfully go to 3♣...most have a way to get to 3minor if they can't get to 2minor. So while the natural 2♣ will be a winner sometimes, it is not a perfect device even when available.

[Fluffy]

I disagree mike, 2♣ will be a fantastic improvement when we are very weak, we will get the entries to use those tenaces and won't have to play the suits from the strong hand.

 

On the other hand saying that finding a 4-4 major fit for partscore is an improvement over a 5-3 fit in clubs sounds foolish, when you don't find the major fit you are in heavy trouble, but when you end up palying 2♣ you are much better placed on a 5-2 fit.

 

The fact that 2♣ ain't stayman doesn't mean we cannot use 2♠ as stayman to find the proper game of course.

[wank]

though i think double is the best call normally on this shape, i think 1NT has 1 major advantage that noone's mentioned on this particular hand. whatever contract you finish, it's likely to better played by this hand.

 

there are some awkward hand combinations when partner might be forced to bid NT wrong-siding it over a takeout double. Say partner's hand is Qxxx KJx Jxx KQx, what would you have him bid? I suppose it would be 2NT, but even if he starts with 2S, over 3D, he's got to bid 3NT. 3NT by P is unlikely to make, whereas 3NT by you is likely cold.

 

similarly, if partner has 5H, you'd prefer to play the contract after a transfer. The only time you lose out vis a vis a takeout double is when partner has 5 clubs, or when a moysian 2H plays better a level higher and from the wrong hand.

 

with Ax of spades double is much more appealing.

[OleBerg]

though i think double is the best call normally on this shape, i think 1NT has 1 major advantage that noone's mentioned on this particular hand. whatever contract you finish, it's likely to better played by this hand.

 

there are some awkward hand combinations when partner might be forced to bid NT wrong-siding it over a takeout double. Say partner's hand is Qxxx KJx Jxx KQx, what would you have him bid? I suppose it would be 2NT, but even if he starts with 2S, over 3D, he's got to bid 3NT. 3NT by P is unlikely to make, whereas 3NT by you is likely cold.

 

similarly, if partner has 5H, you'd prefer to play the contract after a transfer. The only time you lose out vis a vis a takeout double is when partner has 5 clubs, or when a moysian 2H plays better a level higher and from the wrong hand.

 

with Ax of spades double is much more appealing.

Disagree about the wrongsiding thing. I would prefer any contract to be played by the overcallers partner.

 

At a glance, this even seems to be the case with your example hand.

[mikeh]

I disagree mike, 2♣ will be a fantastic improvement when we are very weak, we will get the entries to use those tenaces and won't have to play the suits from the strong hand.

 

On the other hand saying that finding a 4-4 major fit for partscore is an improvement over a 5-3 fit in clubs sounds foolish, when you don't find the major fit you are in heavy trouble, but when you end up palying 2♣ you are much better placed on a 5-2 fit.

 

The fact that 2♣ ain't stayman doesn't mean we cannot use 2♠ as stayman to find the proper game of course.

I did not say and would not assert that there is no upside to 2♣ natural, anymore than I argued that one would look for a 4-4 major suit fit on hands on which 'if you don't find one, you are in heavy trouble'. We would, I expect, use stayman with weak hands only when intending to pass 2♦.

 

All systemic choices involve tradeoffs, and while the majority is not always right (if it were, no innovations would ever prosper since they start as minority choices), the fact that historically 2♣ was natural and the stayman usage supplanted that approach argues, strongly, that the totality of experience by tens of thousands of competent to expert players, over several decades, suggests that the stayman usage is better than the weak natural approach.

 

I don't think this is a good field for simulations, without a huge amount of effort, since the bidding decisions will be very subjective...when do we pull to 2♣ if natural, rather than play 1N? When do we bid 1N rather than double, etc?

[wank]

oops nevermind

[jjbrr]

The problem with comparing "Europeans" with "Americans" is that Europe, being made up of fifty countries with fifty different traditions, isn't at all homogeneous.  There's no reason to expect a Croatian to bid more like a Dutchman than an American.

Neither is America, made up of more than 50 states.

Are you leveling us?

[Fluffy]

I don't think simulations work either Mike, I feel more or less the same as you, my experts of reference think that natural bidding on this position stands out, but I don't have their experience to tell you for sure that it is best.

 

a bit out of topic, but when I play with something new, my first 2 questions are: do we play negative free bids? do we play transfer after (1♣)-1NT-(pass). Some luck can recover you if you missunderstand an invitational with a game forcing hand or play in a 5-2 fit, but if you totally miss the meaning you are toasted.

[benlessard]

X better than 1 NT wich is still clearly better than 2D. Not close at all. Im surprised this post has 5 pages.

[Codo]

Im surprised this post has 5 pages.

This was your comment on page 6? Refreshing

[jjbrr]

Im surprised this post has 5 pages.

This was your comment on page 6? Refreshing

Pro tip: 100 entries/page.

[hanp]

Pro?

Crossruff

 

 

Group: Members

Posts: 297

[jjbrr]

So how many entries per page do you use, han?

[hanp]

Usually I write only one entry per page, but sometimes people ask stupid questions...

[jjbrr]

I didn't ask how many you make. Reading comprehension?

[Free]

Pro?

Crossruff

 

 

Group: Members

Posts: 297

the tip is pro, the player I don't know :blink: