1nt with a stiff A/K

[jillybean]

It is becoming in increasingly popular to open 1nt (15-17) with a singleton A or K.

I assume the logic in this is that you are able to describe your hand (15-17) in one bid

and have a better chance of finding a major fit, at the right level.

Why restrict it to only hands with a stiff A or K? Wouldn't it be minimal risk to open all 15-17

hands 1nt, regardless of the x.

 

Comments?

 

I don't want this to turn into a discussion on the laws, I know it is illegal to open 15-17 with a stiff

but either players are unaware of the law or don't care.

[Fluffy]

stiff ace or king devaluate your umbalanced hand, and serve as stoppers, that's why.

 

If your singleton is x, your hand is too strong for 1NT if you have a fit, and you should reverse instead, unless you have 4441, then 1NT opening is very reasonable

[jillybean]

Hmm, I've just spent some effort making my reverse more disciplined (18+), maybe I need to relax that a little.

[mikeh]

I don't know what you mean by 'increasingly popular'. I have seen this done virtually since I began playing, about 40 years ago. I'd have said, if anything, that I see less of it these days than I used to, even adjusting for my lack of playing in recent years.

 

As for the logic, I don't think it helps find a major suit fit. Opening 1N tends to make it MORE difficult, not less, to find a 4-4 partial. You hold 5-7 hcp and a 4 card major and partner opens 1m, you have an easy 1M. But 1N preempts you into a pass.....and if opener has a stiff, that's when you are most likely to want to play your 4-4.

 

A stiff A or K is the most attractive holding for this because those cards give you the best chance of not having that suit run against you off the top. Moreover, if the stiff is a major, you run the risk of partner committing you to a 5-1 partial or a 6-1 game (or even slam) and stiff A or K is as good as or better than xx, which is what he'd assume to be your worst holding.

 

Finally, I suspect that many of the 1N with a stiff crowd simply lack the confidence in their (or their partner's) bidding to bid in a more technically accurate (and legal) fashion. They're worried that they will have a rebid problem and/or that they'll miss game because partner won't play them to hold, say, 16 hcp when they make a non-reverse, non-strength showing rebid. This is a legitimate worry, and I won't pretend I've never opened 1N with a stiff, but doing so carries its own problems (not alone that do it more than once with a partner and you have a tacit illegal agreement not being announced). So it's a tactic that, imo, should be used only when it appears to be the least distortion.

[mikeh]

Hmm, I've just spent some effort making my reverse more disciplined (18+), maybe I need to relax that a little.

Hmm, I've just spent some effort making my reverse less disciplined :P

 

Seriously, for virtually all my bridge-playing life, I was a 'strong' reverser, but have been persuaded, largely by the discussions here, that I should reverse more often.

[CSGibson]

First to answer the OP:

 

Its similar to why people say not to splinter with a stiff A or K - calling a hand unbalanced when you have significant values in your shortage that could cause partner to mis-evaluate is not great. Opposite a stiff, KQJx is 2 tricks, opposite stiff A it is 3. Opposite stiff K, QJxx is 2 tricks. Opposite x, it could be 0...etc, etc.

 

The solution many take is to treat the hand like it is balanced, reasoning that partner will evaluate their hand better that way. Often stiff A/K is as good as or better than xx in a suit anyway. If you do decide to treat the hand as balanced, it is appropriate to open it 1N when it is in range

 

Personally, I will not make the evaluation to open 1N with a stiff A or K in a major, since transfers on any 5 card suit are prevalent then, and because even if I do not land in the major, major suit bias makes it more likely my suit will be attacked on opening lead, but I will consider doing so with a stiff A or K in a minor.

 

As for the law - it does not make opening 1N with a singleton illegal. Stop promoting that idea; it is wrong. What it does do is prohibit the agreement to open 1N with a singleton, or conventional follow-ups to discover what that singleton is [edited]. I estimate that I open 1N with a singleton less than once in 100 times when I open 1N; I do not think that rises to the level of implied partnership understanding, and neither do the directors I've talked to about this.

Edited October 31, 2012 by CSGibson

[Fluffy]

Hmm, I've just spent some effort making my reverse more disciplined (18+), maybe I need to relax that a little.

 

I use 18+ for jump shift, and 16+ for reverse as my initial plan, but you need to use judgement when to downgrade a bit (Stiff honnors, doubleton KQ or Qx, bad longest suit), and when to upgrade (6-4/5-5/ 3 card support).

 

18+ for reverse is a bit too much since you are opening a lot of 11 unbalanced counts and some 10 as well.

[neilkaz]

Hmm, I've just spent some effort making my reverse more disciplined (18+), maybe I need to relax that a little.

I feel that I bid better with a less disciplined reverse and using something like lebensohl or ingerberman to stop when responder has a min.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[CSGibson]

This is from page 67 of the ACBL club owners handbook:

 

"If your notrump opening shows a balanced hand, you may occasionally pick up a hand with a singleton,

which you may want to treat as balanced. You may use your bridge judgment to open or overcall

a notrump with a singleton, provided that:

1. It is a rare occurrence (no more than 1% of the time) and,

2. Partner expects you to have at least two cards in each suit and,

3. You and your partner have no agreements which enable you to discover that partner has a singleton.

 

Example:

Using strong notrumps, players may elect to open 1NT with ♠ K 8 3 ♥ A Q 7 2 ♦ A 9 6 5 3 ♣K.

They might judge that they did not want to open 1♦ and rebid such a weak suit, or raise spades on

only three cards after partner’s 1♠ response, or rebid 1NT. You may feel such judgment is incorrect,

but that was their decision. Similarly, a player playing five-card majors may opt to open

♠ A K Q J ♥ 8 7 6 4 2 ♦ K 8 ♣ J 9 with 1♠ rather than 1♥.

 

In today’s bridge world, you should exhibit some tolerance and understanding of opponents’ judgment

when they open or overcall a notrump with a singleton — especially for hands where moving

one card from a long suit to the singleton will produce a 4–4–3–2 distribution. The player has

probably used what little bridge judgment an opponent of yours usually has (just kidding, folks) in

deciding to open his hand 1NT (or 2NT)."

 

And I apologize for side-tracking it, but you can't say something like "I don't want this to be a discussion of Kathryn's character even though she kills small children" and then just expect it to be dropped, especially if this fictional Kathryn does not kill small children.

[mycroft]

Jilly, I know you don't want to get into the regulations of the thing, but one correction. Given where you and I live, the practical issue is the ACBL interpretation of what is a "natural" NT. And that is going to look pretty suspicious if the singleton isn't A, K, or in exceptional cases, Q. Note, not *illegal*, especially in non-ACBL BBO tournaments, just suspicious.

 

Spoilered because it's more Laws stuff, but specifically for Chris Gibson:

As for the law - it does not make opening 1N with a singleton illegal. Stop promoting that idea; it is wrong.

Absolutely. The Law doesn't say anything about 1NT, except that the NBO can regulate any special partnership understandings. The regulations *do*, and given that we three are ACBL, I'll use the ACBL regulations - which, you are correct, do not make opening 1NT with a singleton *illegal*; just the agreement to do so. But note that they're not universal, and for instance, in England, 1NT/stiff agreement is legal if Announced.

What it does do is prohibit conventional follow-ups if you have the agreement to open 1N with a singleton.

That is also wrong (in the ACBL). That game only applies to out-of-approved-range NTs (could be <10HCP, or split range (GCC only) or >5HCP range). If you are deemed to have an agreement that NT could be with a singleton in more than exceptional cases (but not Dynamic 1NT, of course), you are playing an illegal convention, and are ruled as such, and it doesn't matter what your followups are.

 

Theoretically (for instance, if you're taking a trip to England any time soon, or you're playing on BBO), there are benefits to opening 1NT with basically any 4441 as well as hands like the ACBL's K83 AQ72 A9653 K, and for the same reason - these hands are really difficult to rebid in "standard" systems. 4441s, in particular, are such a pain that many different calls (openings and special rebids) have been set aside for them in bidding systems throughout time. Maybe opening 1NT with them is a lesser evil!

 

But you don't *want* to open 1NT with a singleton - even an A or K. You *choose to* open 1NT, because every other call could be worse, or because the system works better if it doesn't have to worry about those hands after one of a suit. You're willing to be on the back foot when partner actually has a fit for you; you're willing to occasionally play a x-1 fit when partner transfers. It's worth it for the times it works; and the times it breaks even, but your auction is simpler; and the times when you don't bid 1NT and you don't have to worry about the dreaded Roman hand when looking for slam (or whether that stiff A or K is pulling enough of its weight).

 

Add to that the fact that stiff A is one stopper (and they're leading that suit, no?); stiff K solidifies any partial stopper partner has. Stiff 7 not so much. Also, what Fluffy said - if you do have a fit, stiff A or K is worth less than that card in another suit and a stiff 7, and opening 1NT is a good way to take your hand judgement out of the auction.

 

Like everything in bridge, it's a balancing of priorities question.

 

Edited: added ACBL regulation clarification spoiler block.

[Fluffy]

actually 4441s in the 15-17 range are not that bad, most of the time you can jump raise partner's 1M response, use mini splinter, or even splinter with sexy 17. Just remember that you must open 1♦ with 1444 no matter what you normally do with 3244 with 12 balanced.

 

The 4441s that you really wanna treat as balanced are the 20+ where you open/rebid 2NT, because the alternatives. Unless you are lucky and might splinter, are normally worse.

[CSGibson]

Thank you Mycroft, I've edited my statement so that it is no longer glaringly incorrect.

 

By the way, I think the passage I quoted, specifically that 1N should not be opened with a singleton more than 1% of the time, is another answer to your OP, Kathryn. If you opened 1N willy nilly with any stiff and the appropriate point count, you would probably be way over 1%

[Phil]

A few points:

 

1. Bidding is easier after a 1N opening. Not just because everyone understands their system over 1N better than 1x - 1y - 1/2z, but also because 1N frequently preempts the opponents out of the bidding. Non-competitive auctions are simpler than competitive ones.

 

2. Any singleton K, Q or J are reasonable holdings to have. The lead is coming up to these holdings, and its worth a lot in the play. The defense does not expect you to have one. Look at this hand from Reno (board 19):

 

IMP 1st Final

 

I opened 1N as West and played 4♥. North led a low diamond and South, apparently thinking their partner forgot to lead a singleton, insta shifted to ♠A, ♠. +620 was a fat 10.29 IMPs for us.

[ggwhiz]

I feel that I bid better with a less disciplined reverse and using something like lebensohl or ingerberman to stop when responder has a min.

 

The escape hatch is exactly what made me more comfortable reversing more often once I got over the learning curve and you can respond on light shapely hands too as long as you are comfortable bailing out in whatever at the 3 level which we can do over most 2nt rebids as well.

 

As for opening 1nt with singletons of any kind, I tried it briefly and got thumped every time. I haven't seen any arguments as to why and when for me to EVER do it again and it strikes me as an insult to partners bidding ability.

[32519]

How about a small adjustment here: Open with 1NT only when your singleton is in either minor suit. Then you needn’t fear partner transferring into your singleton suit when he has a crappy hand.

 

People do these sorts of things for similar reasons that they include a 5-card major in the 1NT hand. It defines the HCP strength of your hand immediately.

[kgr]

Question: Is it illegal in ACBL at any level to open 1NT and explain it as "15-17, not the usual balanced because will often have a singleton" and have follow-ups to discover the singleton?

(seems like system are more restricted in ACBL than in Europe?)

[rmnka447]

Opening 1 NT with a stiff might be a practical solution to a tough bidding problem. So, learning existing bidding techniques better might not be a reasonable way to avoid it.

 

I was just reading the intro to Roy Hughes' new book The Contested Auction on the Barclay Baron site and he used such a hand as an example. It was something like ---

 

♠ K

♥ AQxx

♦ A8xxx

♣ Qxx

 

If you open 1 ♦, you have a terrible rebid problem. 2 ♦ understates the hand. The hand isn't good enough to reverse at 2 ♥ or jump to 3 ♦. 2 ♣ doesn't look right with 3 poor ♣s.

 

Opening 1 ♥ on the hand has the obvious flaw that partner would never figure out you have just 4 ♥.

 

So, he says, the latest tendency is to open the hand 1 NT as the least odius lie and at least get the approximate strength right.

[nigel_k]

With:

 

♠ K

♥ AQxx

♦ A8xxx

♣ Qxx

 

Maybe you can rebid 1NT, but you couldn't with an extra jack somewhere. And I would hate to reverse on that. A 1NT opening seems best, but I have never had to worry about the legality issue where I play. If you make the singleton a small card and add a jack, so something like:

 

♠ x

♥ AQJx

♦ AK8xx

♣ Qxx

 

Now my feelings about reversing go from hate to just intense dislike. And I don't consider myself a 'strong' reverser. I would rebid 2♣ but any heart fit is probably lost because I would pass a preference to 2♦. At least there is only a narrow-ish range of hands where this can happen. Or you can play reverse Flannery.

 

The weak NT helps to some extent because you can rebid your suit on weaker hands and rebid 1NT on stronger ones.

[Stephen Tu]

How about a small adjustment here: Open with 1NT only when your singleton is in either minor suit. Then you needn’t fear partner transferring into your singleton suit when he has a crappy hand.

 

- partner is allowed to transfer to a minor with a weak hand and a 6+ suit. Granted this is much less frequent than major transfers with 5+ suits.

- with a minor stiff, you greatly increase your chance of missing a 4-4 major fit. Also, the rebid problem is less acute, since frequently you can rebid 1s, or raise partner to an appropriate level, or make a lightish reverse (if you play practically game-forcing reverses IMO you are old-fashioned, handicapping yourself, and I think this is not really compatible with modern light openings; works better with Roth-Stone openings).

 

Most of the time you feel like opening 1nt with a stiff, IMO it's with stiff *spade* because of rebid issues. And you hope your spade honor functions as well as xx would have if partner transfers you and leaves you there.

 

As for the ACBL rules, I think their stance is totally ridiculous, they claim that you can do it if it's "judgment", but not "system". This is logically impossible if your judgment is consistent. Even if you are doing it < 1% of the time, if you are say doing this routinely with 1=3=(54) and 1=4=4=4 stiff spade K/A, to me it implicitly becomes partnership agreement and systemic. It should simply be allowed IMO up to some declared percentage without alert necessary, without system catering to it. And beyond that percentage it should just be alerted and opponents informed, IMO. If someone wants to devise system with NF "natural" 1nt that contains a lot of small singletons routinely, which I think is probably a losing strategy, they ought to be allowed to IMO, as long as opps know this is happening!

[jillybean]

Ok, help me understand this! Is it illegal/legal to open 1nt with a singleton under ACBL regulations when;

 

1. You have discussed opening 1nt with a singleton A or K and have done so once or twice.

2. You have discussed opening 1nt with a singleton A or K but have never done so.

3. As a pro you recommend to your client that they open 1nt with a singleton Ace or King.

4. You have never discussed opening 1nt with a singleton but have done so once or twice.

 

Chris, I am impressed that you can remember your last 100+ nt openings and that less than 1 of these contained a singleton.

I would perhaps remember if any of my last 20-30 1nt openings contained a singleton, but not the last 100.

I would be interested to know the results of a simulation - how frequent is a 15-17 hand with a stiff A or K?

[CSGibson]

Ok, help me understand this! Is it illegal/legal to open 1nt with a singleton under ACBL regulations when;

 

1. You have discussed opening 1nt with a singleton A or K and have done so once or twice.

2. You have discussed opening 1nt with a singleton A or K but have never done so.

3. As a pro you recommend to your client that they open 1nt with a singleton Ace or King.

4. You have never discussed opening 1nt with a singleton but have done so once or twice.

 

Chris, I am impressed that you can remember your last 100+ nt openings and that less than 1 of these contained a singleton.

I would perhaps remember if any of my last 20-30 1nt openings contained a singleton, but not the last 100.

I would be interested to know the results of a simulation - how frequent is a 15-17 hand with a stiff A or K?

 

First of all, its not the most recent 100 NT openings, its that you average approximately 1 per 100 nt openings at most. I can tell you that is definitely true.

 

2nd, I always discuss my opening/rebid style with partner, including what hands I am likely to have when I open 1N with a stiff. I do not have the agreement that I will always open those hands 1N, just warned partner that it is possible that I will use my judgement in those situations. In fact, one of the things I discuss with partner is that they should always assume I have a balanced hand type when responding to 1N; if I have deviated from that, then I will take the blame for a bad result. I also discuss when I am likely to rebid a 3 card suit, and when I am likely to overcall or open a 4 card major. The reason I discuss those is not to prepare partner, or to come to an agreement that is possible, but in general to get partner's opinion of those actions so I don't upset him or her when they occur.

 

As long as we don't have methods to determine when that has happened, as long as its not required to make those bids, and as long as we do so at most 1 time in 100 when we make those calls, it is all right to do so is my interpretation of the rules - and its an interpretation that has been deemed appropriate by the ACBL in their literature, and by the tournament directors that I have discussed this with.

 

As far as I know, it is legal to open 1N with a stiff A or K in all of your scenerios, as long as you don't do so more than 1 in 100 NT openings, and as long as you have no systemic way to differentiate between that opening and any other.

 

If you don't have a good memory for when you have deviated from expected agreements, then statistically it should be possible to calculate how frequent a 1N opening in any range is, and then compare it to the frequency that you are dealt hand patterns in which you would potentially decide to open 1N with a stiff A or K that are also in the NT point range. I think if you do so, you will find that the opportunity to do so within those specific rules is less than 1 in 100, and that in the majority of those hands, another auction would be more frequent.

[mycroft]

Question: Is it illegal in ACBL at any level to open 1NT and explain it as "15-17, not the usual balanced because will often have a singleton" and have follow-ups to discover the singleton?

(seems like system are more restricted in ACBL than in Europe?)

Absolutely, and yes, by and large, but with amazing exceptions.

 

In no ACBL-sanctioned game, including the Spingold Final, may you have an *agreement* to open 1NT with a singleton, and bids that investigate a potential singleton are <i>prima facie</i> evidence of that agreement.

 

[EDIT: this is wrong. See below. Illegal on the GCC, though]

[CarlRitner]

Absolutely, and yes, by and large, but with amazing exceptions.

 

In no ACBL-sanctioned game, including the Spingold Final, may you have an *agreement* to open 1NT with a singleton, and bids that investigate a potential singleton are <i>prima facie</i> evidence of that agreement.

 

 

May a 1NT opening ever be artificial, assuming agreements that include unbalanced shapes?

[blackshoe]

May a 1NT opening ever be artificial, assuming agreements that include unbalanced shapes?

Yes.

General Convention Chart, allowed under opening bids: FORCING 1NT OPENING BID (15+ HCPs) indicating a strong hand, balanced or unbalanced.

 

One such bid is the Dynamic NT, a cornerstone of the Romex system (either balanced 19-20 with six controls, or unbalanced 18-21 or so, at least 5, usually 6 controls, 4-5 losers (basically, a hand which in standard or 2/1 would reverse or jump shift, and some which might open 2♣)).

[jillybean]

I have obviously misunderstood ACBL's rules on 1nt openings, as others I have talked with about this have.

 

It is a rare occurrence (no more than 1% of the time), Your partner expects you to have at least two cards in each suit, and You and your partner have no agreements which enable you to discover that partner has a singleton.

 

So, we can agree to open 1nt with a singleton (A,K, or what ever we agree to) as long as we have no methods to discover the singleton.

 

 

Can someone please explain how "Your partner expects you to have at least two cards in each suit" is met when we have agreed to open 1nt with a singleton ?

If we agree to open all 15-17 hands, or all 15-17 with a stiff A or K 1nt, will we run a foul of the "no more than 1% of the time" rule, how frequently do these 15-17 hands with a singleton occur?