strong 1nt opener

[sceptic]

what is best 15 - 17 or 16 - 18 and why?

[1eyedjack]

You mean what is better?

[sceptic]

does better come next to pedantic in the dictionary?

[1eyedjack]

does better come next to pedantic in the dictionary?

No, it was a serious response. The wording of your question suggests that one or other of 15-17 and 16-18 is "best", and I think that this premise can be challenged. There is a sizeable population of players much better than I who play 14-16, 13-15, 12-14, 11-14 or 10-12 and consider these to be better than either of the options that you have presented. Personally I fall in the 12-14 (or 11-14) camp, but that means nothing really.

 

If you are committed to playing a 1NT opener of the strong(er) variety, then you simply have to clarify how you are going to bid the balanced hands that do not fall into the 1NT opening range. Do not be bothered about the risks of 1NT (opener) failing or being a bad contract.

 

Over the years, the "strong 1NT" camp have tended toward opening 15-17 rather than 16-18, for two reasons:

 

1) If you open 1-suit with a balanced 18 count and responder passes, you are not missing game, whilst if responder bids then opener has no rebid problems (if necessary, 2NT rebid is safe)

 

2) Balanced 15 counts opened 1-suit tend to be a bit of a problem. If partner responds 1-suit then 2NT rebid is out of the question (nowhere near sufficient values) whilst 1NT rebid carries a wide range, leaving responder in doubt about whether it is safe to invite (or whether game may be missed if he passes).

[whereagles]

I play 9-11. 9-11 > all :D

[Trpltrbl]

I prefer 10-12 NV and 12-14 Vul.

But of the 2 choices I was given I like to play what field does, 15-17.

Maybe overcalling 1 NT as 16-18.

 

Mike :D

[ack_hh]

does better come next to pedantic in the dictionary?

No. It's being dealt with in the second chapter of

"Instant Success With Precise Questions". :D

[inquiry]

If to play strong notrump, 15-17 is better than 16-18, and 14-16 is better still.

 

1NT has preemptive value, so 15-17 occurs more frequently than 16-18, being one reason it is better. 14-16 likewise. In addition, in these days of opening lighter and lighter lowering the value of 1NT to 14 narrows the 1m-any-1NT rebids

 

Ben

[paulg]

As Ben notes it really depends what your opening style is and the pressure this will put on the 1NT rebid.

 

Given that I open most balanced 11 HCP hands, I prefer to play 14-16 NT to allow the 1NT rebid to show 11-13 HCP. This creates a mild problem that the 2NT rebid has to be 17-19 HCP when a smaller range would be preferable, but this is a less frequent issue (and some 19 counts would be upgraded to 2NT opener).

 

Note that if you have a similar style then you should play 15-17 NT in third and fourth positions as partner will never have an 11 count opposite.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

[Free]

It all depends. Play 15-17 in moscito and it's as awfull as 16-18. We NEED 11-14... In standard systems however, the choice is free, and I'd also advise to play 15-17 rather than 16-18 for 2 reasons:

1) 16-18 is not as common as 15-17.

2) with 16-18, a jump NT bid (after 1X opening) is exactly 19 HCP, while a minimum NT rebid is 12-15, too big a range imo. Compare this with 15-17: jump 18-19, minimum 12-14, or even with a 14-16 NT: jump NT 17-19, no jump 11-13, so you can open lighter.

[jtfanclub]

What about going with 15-18? Is that an option?

 

Don't play 15-18 if you like playing 3NT with 18 across 6- you'll regret it when partner has 15. And don't go leaping across the galaxy when you have 18 and your partner responds.

 

You can have some real fun if 1NT is 15-18, 2NT is 19-21, and 2C-2D-2NT is 22-24. 1C-1H-2NT (for example) is now a GF with 3 hearts. That's probably more advanced than you wanted to hear about. :huh:

[pclayton]

what is best 15 - 17 or 16 - 18  and why?

Lets assume you are debating the merits of the various ranges of a strong NT. I sometimes play a 12-14 too, but won't open up that argument here (as others already have).

 

16-18 was developed in the days when opening a balanced 12 count was less common. Nowadays, its common for tournament players to open: Kxx, QJx, Axxx, Qxx, however, a pair in 1955 (especially the Roth-Stone group) would likely pass this collection.

 

If you open most 12's, some 11's and a few 10's and lower (like I do), pushing the 1N opener to 16-18 doesn't make a lot of sense. You end up with a 12-15 1N rebid, which can be problematic, as partner can't sensibly invite with a 10 count.

 

14-16 is a very playable strong NT, if you really like to open light. I play it with my strong club partner and we have had no problems with it. In pairs, you will occasionally get an non-field result in playing 1N with a 14, but its not a huge deal.

 

Certainly a 16-18 1N provides a little more security. However, I believe it creates more problems than it solves.

 

Note: If you still feel the need to play 16-18 NT's, push the 2N opener to 21-22.

[helene_t]

One reason for playing a strong 1NT is that with a semi-balaced hand too weak for reversing, say

♠♠-♥♥♥♥-♦♦♦♦♦-♣♣

you can rebid 1NT with 14 points and reverse with 16. If you play a 15-17 1NT you still don't know what to do with 15 points. Unless you are foreseeing and open 1NT, but in that case you may wonder why you play a strong 1NT at all.

 

Also, if the 2NT rebid shows 19-20, you don't have to be afraid that partner will pass it.

 

But if you open ballanced hands with 12 points, what most people do nowadays, the rebid of 1NT showing 12-15 becomes too wide. So you probably have to live with the problems related to 15 points semibalanced, and you may consider playing weak 1NT instead.

 

Think twice before changing to a weak 1NT, though. You will get the problems with the semibalanced hands more often. 4441-shapes become more nasty. Also, if you open 1 in a suit with a ballanced 16 points and it goes, e.g.,

1♦-(1♠)-pass-(pass)

?

you have a problem. 13 points is a clear pass, 19 points a clear 1NT, but ....

This means that partner has to protect you in this situation. He must make freebids and negative doubles more agresively.

[Free]

you can rebid 1NT with 14 points and reverse with 16. If you play a 15-17 1NT you still don't know what to do with 15 points. Unless you are foreseeing and open 1NT, but in that case you may wonder why you play a strong 1NT at all.

 

Reverse from 15+HCP, and use moderator or some other tool to find out if it's a weak or strong reverse.

 

Think twice before changing to a weak 1NT, though. You will get the problems with the semibalanced hands more often. 4441-shapes become more nasty. Also, if you open 1 in a suit with a ballanced 16 points and it goes, e.g.,

1♦-(1♠)-pass-(pass)

?

 

In this case, Dbl can mean 15-17...

[1eyedjack]

Think twice before changing to a weak 1NT, though.

Think twice. Or even thrice. Then change :angry:

[inquiry]

Think twice before changing to a weak 1NT, though.

Think twice. Or even thrice. Then change :angry:

To the beginners reading this thread. Weak NT is very nice, and I very much like it. But for the time being, play what you rmentors/teachers/and the majority of your opponents play (so you can get advise and see how it works by example). I suspect this is strong 1NT. Switching to weak NT changes the meaning of so many other auctions and you will be poorly placed to handle the other auctions at this time if you change this part of your system.

 

Ben

[paulhar]

My thoughts (from a standpoint of teaching beginners:)

 

It makes sense to them if they know they need 26 points for a game so teaching 16-18 makes it easy for them to bid a game (3NT, 4H, 4S) with 10 points, and to invite with 8. It's also simplicity splitting the opening 1-bid range (13-21) into three equal parts.

 

If you're asking which is better, you're past this stage. With 15-17, you get more opportunities to describe your hand well to partner while making it tougher for the opponents to come in.

 

15-17 also clears up another inconsistency. Playing 16-18, many play that:

1H P 2C (showing 11+) P 2NT is nonforcing, and

1H P 2C P 3NT shows a hand that was too good to open 1NT.

The problem is, that when you have 15 balanced, you know you have enough for game but are stuck for a bid.

 

15-17 solves this problem.

 

The other problem is that people still invite game with 8 (with no possibility of 26) and bid game with 10 opposite 15-17, meaning that players have to assume their play is vastly superior to the opponent's defense. Personally, playing 15-17, I think some bad 10's should only invite - but I seem to be in the minority of one here. My partners who tend to play better than the field they're in complain that they want to be in the same contract as the field and pick up matchpoints in the play - rightly so.

 

15-17 has the slight downside that you're playing 2NT sometimes on 18 opposite 6 (or whatever junk your partner might respond on - so that downside is increased if your partner frequently responds on 4 or 5.)

 

All in all, I would opt for 15-17, and the experts who voted for Bridge World Standard in 2001 thought the same thing.