The R/W Matchpoint 1N

[mtvesuvius]

[hv=pc=n&s=saq76ht53da52ckq5&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=pp1c]133|200|What is your call? Scoring is MPs, you play a 14-16 NT as well, so partner "could" open some BAL 11s if they want.[/hv]

[mike777]

x

[655321]

1NT for me even if LHO wasn't a passed hand, -200 is bad but +120 is good.

[rogerclee]

I would double, there's not much to say beyond the usual. Double is a safe medium that makes it hard to get to 1N when it's right, and 1N could be right but is very risky.

[jillybean]

1N, I'm eager to hear why this is wrong.

[inquiry]

1N, I'm eager to hear why this is wrong.

 

You are not terribly wrong. This is matchpoints and you have two potential stoppers in their suit. If you double, you have no way to steer the contract to notrump if partner responds (say with 1♥) without mistating your values significantly. And since this is matchpoint, you want to play in NT if you can. So if you are going to bid 1NT seems better than double to me at matchpoints: Caution, I don't do all that well at matchpoints so take that advise for what it is worth.

 

I am somewhat in favor of passing, but I don't object to this 1NT overcall (at matchpoints). After passing, should you get a chance to bid later, you have a better chance to describe your hand "safely".

[plaur]

Bridgewinners has a recent article "Passed Hand Partner: Overcalling" that I thought was a good read.

 

http://bridgewinners.com/bridge-articles/119-advanced/532-passed-hand-partner-overcalling

 

Quote:

"The most common adjustment neccessary is to refrain from overcalling 1NT on close hands. Since partner passed, the risk of missing game drops considerably.

TIP: Consider making a takeout double opposite a passed partner with some marginal balanced 15 point hands."

[JLOGIC]

X

[Siegmund]

The recent Bridgewinners article notwithstanding I think this is still a 1NT bid with 2 likely club stoppers and 4333 shape. Too timid to pass and KQx in clubs is a big obstacle to doubling for some of us. I even expect to go plus - we will have half the deck at least as often as not though we will rarely go to game, and if partner has a long suit he can get us to it.

 

At IMPs I would understand a pass, since the -200/-500 losses are not balanced by many big wins.

 

If you want to adopt a 'power double' like the Overcall Structure uses, fine, adopt it and alert it accordingly. But I shudder to think what will happen if the whole B/I forum gets wind of the idea that its standard to double with a flat hand and an opening bid.

 

You can get me to double with 4333 when it's three small in the opp's suit, but that's as far as I have been dragged.

[the hog]

Pass for me. Partner is a passed hand. I do not like 1NT because I have no real source of tricks. I dislike a double because of the flat nature of my hand. Actually I would pass even if pd were not passed; the fact she is makes the pass a standout for me.

[Phil]

Double.

[pooltuna]

Oh a chance to get into trouble...double :) The problem with 1NT is that you have no real source of tricks so you need to be stronger to compensate. While the double is not perfect and 1NT is not 100% imperfect, X gets the hand off your chest with the most flexiblity as partner now has 3 suits for runout with a 7 point spread making the opponents X more difficult.

[awm]

I'll bid 1NT.

 

There are three possible situations to consider on this hand.

 

(1) They have the balance of power, the goal is to avoid being doubled for a number. Here double will work out better than 1NT.

(2) We have the balance of power, and we want to find our game contract. Here the two calls are roughly equal (partner jumps in response to X on more or less the hands that make game).

(3) It's a battle for the partial.

 

The thing is, the third case is by far the most likely. After all, RHO opened and I have 15 hcp. It's unlikely that either side has substantially more strength than the other. At IMP scoring we would be concerned that case (1) involves a lot of big swings and we want to avoid the damage (even though it's infrequent) but this is matchpoint scoring where frequency is king.

 

I expect that double will lead to a lot of pretty poor partials. For example, we could easily play in a 4-3 fit in either red suit with no ruffs in the short hand. It will be difficult to reach 1NT when that's the best partscore. Further, if the opponents have a fit in hearts they will find it after my double (LHO bids 1♥ and RHO raises) whereas a 1NT overcall might crowd them out. We can still find our 5-3 fits after the 1NT call, and these are the times that we are most likely to want to play in a suit. Partner also might overcompete the hand if I double; for example say the auction goes Pass-1♣-X-3♣. Holding a five-card red suit, singleton club, and modest values partner will almost surely bid at the three-level, when defending 3♣X is a much more likely way to win the board.

 

Again, I think that if the scoring were IMPs then double has a lot going for it. You find your games and mostly avoid being penalized... the small swings from playing in the wrong partial are no big deal. But at MP scoring I think a 1NT call is standout. Yes, I know I'm disagreeing with a nice article by Gavin Wolpert... but I'm not convinced that his article was primarily geared towards matchpoint play.

[vuroth]

The reason I don't like 1NT is no source of tricks. The double stopper is nice, but there's a decent chance opp isn't bidding a real club suit anyways.

[mycroft]

Oh a chance to get into trouble...double :) The problem with 1NT is that you have no real source of tricks so you need to be stronger to compensate. While the double is not perfect and 1NT is not 100% imperfect, X gets the hand off your chest with the most flexiblity as partner now has 3 suits for runout with a 7 point spread making the opponents X more difficult.

Well, 1NT has equal flexibility as partner has 3 suits for runout with about a 7 point spread (4 suits and potentially more (conventional XX) if opener doubles), too. Not really sure which is easier to double - p-p-1C-1NT; X (vs p) or p-p-1C-X; XX (vs p). Less likely to get a XX than a double of NT? Yeah, true.

 

I do agree about "less likely to make", but I also don't like Txx in partner's most likely suit. But I see that the people who play much better than me are doubling, so call me an old fuddy-duddy.