What do you open?

[aguahombre]

If I'm talked out of a major game because my opponent opened a 15-17 1NT with this hand... Good bid, you pulled a fast one on us. I won't tell you how to upgrade or downgrade your hand.

 

Fielding is another story. If your partner has a 9-count, you had better not stop below 3NT...

A nine-count is invitational; I might not accept with this minimum, or I might. But, inviting with a nine is not fielding.

[Benoit35]

A nine-count is invitational; I might not accept with this minimum, or I might. But, inviting with a nine is not fielding.

Sorry, I bad math... I should have said 10.

[TimG]

 

♠96

♥985

♦KJ7

♣AKQJ2

 

 

There were a lot of inviters with this hand

 

AJ8

J965

Q974

82

 

from another recent thread. Some might not have invited with ♥J765?

[aguahombre]

There were a lot of inviters with this hand

 

AJ8

J965

Q974

82

 

from another recent thread. Some might not have invited with ♥J765?

And opener will probably decline, And they might be able to make 2S; and we might make 2NT. And, soon the next hand will begin.

[phil_20686]

There were a lot of inviters with this hand

 

AJ8

J965

Q974

82

 

from another recent thread. Some might not have invited with ♥J765?

 

And then leader doesnt want to lead from QTxx AQxx in the majors so leads a nice safe diamond from xxx and you are laughing all the way to the bank.... :)

[han]

I wanted to get back to rhm's question about the relative strengths of the given hand and the hand AJx 109x A1097 AJx from some years ago. I followed up on the double dummy suggestion made by gnasher then.

 

If partner has a balanced 10-count (no 5-card major) then 3NT will make 115 times out of 400 with the current hand, while it makes 260 times out of 400 with the older hand. By comparison an average balanced 15-count without a 5-card suit will make 3NT 223 times.

 

While playing 3NT opposite a balanced 10-count is only one way out of many to evaluate a hand, and of course double dummy play is quite different from single dummy play, I would venture that these differences are so large that (a) it certainly seems right to upgrade the old hand, and (b) the tactical advantages of opening 1NT with the solid clubs better be large because otherwise it is not worth it to upgrade this hand.

[EricK]

When you say "i did it for tactical reasons" what you mean is essentially that you are violating your agreement. I mean, bridge is a tactical game.

I understand that. But my question is whether you can claim you have disclosed your "tactical" proclivities in this scenario simply because you have mentioned you sometimes upgrade hands into 1NT. And as well as being a tactical game, bridge is also a game of full disclosure (or at least it's meant to be).

[rhm]

You wouldn't call the director, and you think that misrepresenting your hand for tactical reasons is part of the game, but you would feel ripped off. How does that make sense? Do you also feel ripped off when somebody squeezes you?

I do not feel ripped off if somebody squeezes me.

I may feel differently if somebody chooses a ridiculous line of play against me, which just happens to work on the actual deal. Agreed this is part of the game

 

Neither would I feel badly if somebody misrepresents his hand intentionally and without implicit knowledge of his partner.

However, if somebody believes seriously this hand is worth a strong notrump and as a completely unforeseen consequence I as an opponent would miss game in a major (which might not have happened if this hand would have been opened as a weak notrump), then I feel I was the victim of a misjudgement by my opponent.

 

Again part of the game.

No reason to call the director.

 

By the way there are some jurisdictions, which limit strong bids, for example what can be opened as a game forcing 2♣ bid. EBU for example does this.

I find this problematic, but the rules appeared because some 2♣ bids looked more like a preempt to others and some opponents felt damaged as a result.

 

Rainer Herrmann