What do you open?

[RunemPard]

This may not be extremely interesting, but I will put it here for opinions. You are playing a very standard 2455 system. It is MP at a mid-level local club. You count your cards, flip them over, and see...

 

♠96

♥985

♦KJ7

♣AKQJ2

 

I chose to open 1NT over 1C. I had 2 very bad suits, but I felt that the possibility of making 5 club tricks alone upgraded this to a 1NT opening. I also felt I am far too strong to reply 1NT to a 1C-1H/S reply. By bidding 1NT, I also have a better chance to find out about 5 card majors from partner directly.

 

Do you all agree w/ my choice?

[RunemPard]

NV for everyone if that affects your decision.

[ArtK78]

I open 1NT in a robot duplicate. With a real partner, I open 1♣.

[aguahombre]

Looks like a 15-17 NT opening to me. Maybe a tick short of saying WTP, but :rolleyes:

[RunemPard]

Thanks for input. The only situation I saw of this hand gaining more information from a 1C opening is if partner replies 1NT, 2C, or 3C. I do not know the odds of the distribution denying my partner a 4 card major, but I can tell they are lower than average. The other thing about putting NT into your hand is that I prefer my partner declaring a NT contract, but you cannot always get it the way you want. A 2C rebid is too weak IMO, and 2D is out of the question as you will be signaling a reverse.

 

Edit: 2C/3C not inverted would say much also...

[nigel_k]

I agree the hand is easily worth 1NT in terms of playing strength, however:

 

1. It may wrong side a NT contract.

 

2. It goes against the field. In a weak field at MP people will be point counters and card play will be poor as well. So you need to be right a lot more than half the time if you take a position early in the hand. And missing a game that everyone else misses doesn't matter if partner takes one trick more than most of them.

 

3. If opponents enter the auction, there is a risk that partner will under-compete as our ODR is unusually high for a 1NT opening. Either that or we will have to unilaterally back in with 3♣.

 

So I think 1NT has too much wrong with it.

[ggwhiz]

1nt white in 3rd seat otherwise 1♣ for all of nigels reasons.

[akhare]

I voted 1♣, with no particular conviction. I can see myself bidding 1N as well, but given that it's a mid-level field, it's likely going against the field.

 

OTOH, it forces them to come in at the 2-level...

[aguahombre]

I agree the hand is easily worth 1NT in terms of playing strength, however:

 

1. It may wrong side a NT contract.

 

2. It goes against the field. In a weak field at MP people will be point counters and card play will be poor as well. So you need to be right a lot more than half the time if you take a position early in the hand. And missing a game that everyone else misses doesn't matter if partner takes one trick more than most of them.

 

3. If opponents enter the auction, there is a risk that partner will under-compete as our ODR is unusually high for a 1NT opening. Either that or we will have to unilaterally back in with 3♣.

 

So I think 1NT has too much wrong with it.

1. Or it might not; or it might not matter. We don't wait for protected cards in all the suits to show size and shape.

 

2. Going against a weak field with bids which suit our methods doesn't bother us.

 

3. Flip side, here: The opponents might well underbid with their (likely) high ODR. It is rare to want to bid game when the other side has opened a strong NT, and that will be their mindset even if game is on for them.

3a. If they compete I am not backing in with 3♣ and give them another chance to bid a major suit game.

 

4. If partner overbids, I have some really good tricks for her. Might even be one of those double game swing hands.

[Zelandakh]

Those opening 1♣ - what is the rebid if partner responds with 1 of a suit? Are you treating the hand as having 6 clubs or downgrading to a weak NT? Are you tempted to raise if partner's response is 1♥?

[JLOGIC]

Easy 1N NV. It is a good preempt.

[mikl_plkcc]

I don't want to play in 1NT with 2 weak suits. I would open 1♣ and rebid 2♣ after a 1/1 response, saying this hand should play clubs.

[dboxley]

I open 1NT in a robot duplicate. With a real partner, I open 1♣.

 

Not sure why that would matter. 1NT has several things going for it:

 

avoids rebid problems

keeps opps from bidding a major at the one level

makes the stronger player declarer :)

[aguahombre]

(1NT)

makes the stronger player declarer :)

Do you mean your partner is the weaker player?

[rhm]

Easy 1N NV. It is a good preempt.

If you want to preempt play weak notrumps, what this hand is worth.

Like most overbids you may get lucky, but this hand will go down in 3NT opposite most balanced nine counts.

 

I ran a simulation to prove my point, giving partner a balanced hand with 9-10 HCP

Average number of tricks: 7.5 (add 0.2 tricks if you like for single dummy play)

3NT was down 75% of the time (1000 random deals)

 

Pretending to play strong notrump but then upgrading weak notrumps non-vulnerable is at least problematic if only your partner knows your tendencies.

Giving opponents the impression that they are contending against a strong notrump certainly increases the preemptive effect in a dubious manner.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[MrAce]

If you want to preempt play weak notrumps, what this hand is worth.

Like most overbids you may get lucky, but this hand will go down in 3NT opposite most balanced nine counts.

 

I ran a simulation to prove my point, giving partner a balanced hand with 9-10 HCP

Average number of tricks: 7.5 (add 0.2 tricks if you like for single dummy play)

3NT was down 75% of the time (1000 random deals)

 

Pretending to play strong notrump but then upgrading weak notrumps non-vulnerable is at least problematic if only your partner knows your tendencies.

Giving opponents the impression that they are contending against a strong notrump certainly increases the preemptive effect in a dubious manner.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

OP did not say their NT range but if it is 14-16, i doubt you will end up in 3 NT at mp when he holds 9-10 hcp. And if it is 15-17 you will end up playing 3 NT when pd has 10 hcp. Rest you will pretty much end up in 2 NT at mps.

 

You may end up going down in 2 NT, but depending on vulnerability this actually may turn out to be a good score, as a result of preemptive function of 1NT.

[hrothgar]

 

Pretending to play strong notrump but then upgrading weak notrumps non-vulnerable is at least problematic if only your partner knows your tendencies.

Giving opponents the impression that they are contending against a strong notrump certainly increases the preemptive effect in a dubious manner.

 

 

You have a 14 count and a good 5 card suit.

Plenty of people would consider this suitable for a strong NT opening.

 

It would be interesting to understand how often 3NT went down based on quick losers...

[mikestar13]

1NT for me, describes shape and strength well. Opening 1♣ leaves it too hard to convey the strength. Clearly it's reasonable to treat the clubs as a six carder, but do we underbid with 2♣ or overbid with 3♣ on our rebid. This hand is a systemic gain for bid clubbers, it is clear IMHO in that context to open 2♣: about as preemptive as 1NT and a better description. Big clubbers also have systemic loses on other types of hands, of course.

[rhm]

OP did not say their NT range but if it is 14-16, i doubt you will end up in 3 NT at mp when he holds 9-10 hcp. And if it is 15-17 you will end up playing 3 NT when pd has 10 hcp. Rest you will pretty much end up in 2 NT at mps.

 

You may end up going down in 2 NT, but depending on vulnerability this actually may turn out to be a good score, as a result of preemptive function of 1NT.

OP did say

 

... You are playing a very standard 2455 system....

besides the poll says SAYC, not a system known for a 14-16 NT range and the whole issue would hardly have been raised playing 14-16 NT range.

I tend to bid 3NT with 9 HCP opposite a 15-17 notrump range, but if you play 15-17 only on the convention card this may not be so clever and a more conservative approach may be indicated.

But some would call that cheating or fielding.

Admittedly a lot of Bridge players live under the illusion that any hand with a good 5 card suit should be upgraded and no evidence to the contrary will change their mind.

What is true about the above hand is that in a trump contract the above hand has a high ODR (offense/defense ratio).

For you I have repeated the simulation with partner having exactly 10 HCP balanced.

Now trick average is 7.8 and 3NT still goes down on 2 out of 3 deals.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[JLOGIC]

I agree that if partner bids 3N with a 9 or 10 count it probably won't be good on average, there is no debate there. And I will probably often wrongside it when it is our hand for 3N. I still think it will be a winning action to open 1N because it will often be their hand when I have 2 small 3 small in the majors, and white/white at MP if it is their hand and they have a harder time competing effectively that is very good for us. Every action has some plusses and some minuses, looking at only the times when a bid will lose and running a simulation of those times is not a good way to evaluate whether it is a good bid or not.

 

Accusing me of being unethical or cheating because I open 1N with 14 and a good 5 card suit is pretty lol. But fwiw I always write/say 14+-17 or 13+-16 or 10+-13 whatever my range is. I also always tell the opps in a knockout match when they ask our system "all ranges can be upgraded by 1 and are done so more liberally not vulnerable and in third seat." If they ask about my shape I say very liberal on all reasonable shapes (5422, 5 card major, 6 card minor). I view this as adequate disclosure of my style, though perhaps in pair games it is harder and usually they only hear 14+-17 since they don't go over your system at the beginning of the round, but perfect disclosure in pair games is always harder than in knockout matches.

 

edit: For example, here is my system summary form from the last USBF event I played:

 

http://usbf.org/index2.php?option=com_teamforms&task=display&pop=1&page=0&fid=962&pid=186

 

"Ranges are flexible and upgrades are frequent, downgrades not frequent."

[rhm]

I agree that if partner bids 3N with a 9 or 10 count it probably won't be good on average, there is no debate there. And I will probably often wrongside it when it is our hand for 3N. I still think it will be a winning action to open 1N because it will often be their hand when I have 2 small 3 small in the majors, and white/white at MP if it is their hand and they have a harder time competing effectively that is very good for us. Every action has some plusses and some minuses, looking at only the times when a bid will lose and running a simulation of those times is not a good way to evaluate whether it is a good bid or not.

 

Accusing me of being unethical or cheating because I open 1N with 14 and a good 5 card suit is pretty lol. But fwiw I always write/say 14+-17 or 13+-16 or 10+-13 whatever my range is. I also always tell the opps in a knockout match when they ask our system "all ranges can be upgraded by 1 and are done so more liberally not vulnerable and in third seat." If they ask about my shape I say very liberal on all reasonable shapes (5422, 5 card major, 6 card minor). I view this as adequate disclosure of my style, though perhaps in pair games it is harder and usually they only hear 14+-17 since they don't go over your system at the beginning of the round, but perfect disclosure in pair games is always harder than in knockout matches.

 

edit: For example, here is my system summary form from the last USBF event I played:

 

http://usbf.org/index2.php?option=com_teamforms&task=display&pop=1&page=0&fid=962&pid=186

 

"Ranges are flexible and upgrades are frequent, downgrades not frequent."

To make it clear I quoted you but I did not want to accuse you of cheating.

I have no doubts that you believe in full disclosure.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[mikeh]

At the risk of offending Justin, and with no intention of doing so at all, in my opinion if your cc states 15-17 and your partnership style treats this as a 1N opener, you are being unethical.

 

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that Justin should be agreeing with me precisely because, while he sees this a wtp 1N, he stresses that he ensures that his cc reflects this sort of call, and goes even further to inform his opps of his partnership tendencies.....imo, a perfect example of how to deal with the fact that experts don't simply count points.

 

I am a liberal upgrader, and the 5th club is definitely a positive, but the club J isn't worth much (on many hands, AKQxx will produce as many tricks offensively as AKQJx, and the J isn't worth much at all on defence), and the major suit holdings are horrific.

 

Personally, I would be more comfortable agreeing to play a 14-16 range than choosing to open 1N. The fact that I am tempted to open 1N says more about that feeling than it does about whether this hand is a 1N bid. After all, when one plays a 15-17 1N, one is (usually) opening for constructive reasons, and as Justin noted, this 1N is probably more effective for peremptive reasons.

[aguahombre]

I know that KNR is scornworthy, but it really likes that Jack of clubs right where it is, and rates the hand at 14.8. I doubt a challenge to disclosure/ethics would be successful if the pair uses and claims 15-17.

 

AKQJX rates to run five tricks opposite a singleton or a doubleton (void, if lucky 4-4 split). AKQXX doesn't rate to run unless pard has 3+. I know, simplistic expression of the obvious, but it seems important to me.

[rhm]

I know that KNR is scornworthy, but it really likes that Jack of clubs right where it is, and rates the hand at 14.8. I doubt a challenge to disclosure/ethics would be successful if the pair uses and claims 15-17.

 

AKQJX rates to run five tricks opposite a singleton or a doubleton (void, if lucky 4-4 split). AKQXX doesn't rate to run unless pard has 3+. I know, simplistic expression of the obvious, but it seems important to me.

I agree.

I would not call the director if I, as an opponent, were on the receiving end missing say a major suit game after such a 1NT opening. But I know I would have a feeling of being ripped off.

This has to do with your objectives in the bidding, which change, depending on the notrump range your opponents announce.

This is what makes the preemptive effect so much better when you claim this to be a strong notrump hand.

Game considerations tend not to be a major objective, when opponents open a strong notrump. You are more in obstruction mode. The reason of course is that you expect a strong notrump to have more defensive tricks than this hand.

 

Now we have two separate issues here.

If you honestly believe this hand is a strong notrump hand go ahead.

I have given Bridge reasons, why I believe this hand does not belong into the 15-17 notrump range, assuming, somewhat naive, constructive considerations are predominant for this notrump range.

You can also misrepresent your strength for tactical reasons. That is part of the game as long as you and your partner have no secret understandings about this.

Whether the preemptive effect compensates for the instances where partner will put you into a no-play 3NT everyone has to decide for himself.

 

KNR is a good trick estimator, but for hands played at a (sensible) trump contract. KNR is not such a good evaluator when estimating trick potential of hands played at notrump, which is different. KNR also makes no distinction between majors and minors when evaluating a hand.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[JLOGIC]

At the risk of offending Justin, and with no intention of doing so at all, in my opinion if your cc states 15-17 and your partnership style treats this as a 1N opener, you are being unethical.

 

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that Justin should be agreeing with me precisely because, while he sees this a wtp 1N, he stresses that he ensures that his cc reflects this sort of call, and goes even further to inform his opps of his partnership tendencies.....imo, a perfect example of how to deal with the fact that experts don't simply count points.

 

I am a liberal upgrader, and the 5th club is definitely a positive, but the club J isn't worth much (on many hands, AKQxx will produce as many tricks offensively as AKQJx, and the J isn't worth much at all on defence), and the major suit holdings are horrific.

 

Personally, I would be more comfortable agreeing to play a 14-16 range than choosing to open 1N. The fact that I am tempted to open 1N says more about that feeling than it does about whether this hand is a 1N bid. After all, when one plays a 15-17 1N, one is (usually) opening for constructive reasons, and as Justin noted, this 1N is probably more effective for peremptive reasons.

 

I mean, it's kind of circular but if I had agreed 15-17 and never opened an ave+ 14 1N then I would still open 1N. Yes, I'd probably have to change my cc/we'd have an implicit agreement after but I view it as a totally winning bridge action even playing 15-17 and misleading partner. But of course probably that I feel this way has led me to my current agreements of always upgrading a lot of 1 point less and 5 card suit hand types, so like I said it is circular.

 

This is just my view and you can disagree with my opinion that the tactical gains of opening 1N on this type of hand outweigh the times that partner overbids and/or we wrongside NT. I do not know this for sure obvioulsy, but I feel like my experience strongly supports this.