Upgrade to 1NT, playing 15-17 no special agreements #2

[diana_eva]

[hv=pc=n&http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?s=S765HQ42DAKTCKQ82&d=s&v=e&a=?]200|300[/hv]

 

Would you open this 1NT? No special agreements, 15-17 assumed. Does this fall into a "just bridge judgement 1NT" for you?

[broze]

Only playing with the bots. If you are playing against real people and your card says 15-17 (or even 14+-17) then you are not giving them full disclosure.

[neilkaz]

YUCK this is just a normal 14 at best.

[Trinidad]

I have "14+ - 17-" on my card, but I would not open this 1NT. I cannot find any reason to upgrade.

 

My normal reasons for calling a 14 point hand "14+" are:

• 
   
  
• 5 card suit
  
• lots of 10's and 9's
  
• AAKK
  

 

The only "plus" about this hand that I can see is that it has no jacks. Other than that there are only minuses.

 

Rik

[NickRW]

The other one was close to an upgrade (though not quite there for me). This one is not close.

[mgoetze]

This one I would hesitate to open 1NT even playing with GIB. It's 4333, only one Ace, only one 10 and that 10 is in the worst possible place ... still a routine 1NT opener playing 14-16 but nowhere near an upgrade to 15-17.

[mycroft]

It's a joke, but it's not necessarily wrong, what Jeff Goldsmith's Imperious Rules has to say about upgraded NTs:

If you open a strong notrump with 14 HCP, it's probably good enough to accept a game invitation.

This hand has none of the reasons I'd want to upgrade:

• square shape
  
• it's the minors that are strong
  
• the majors don't even have "pushers" except for the ♥Q
  
• no real reason to have the lead come into this hand
  
• I don't even upgrade 11s into a 12-14 NT with only four controls (unless three of them are AK-fifth and otherwise good)
  
• Despite what passes as normal these days, it is allowed to have a maximum for your bid
  

The only benefit I can see of opening 1NT with this hand is you get to play the 5-3 major fit, and you get to hide your hand from partner, who won't notice you don't have 15. [Edit: I see from the other thread that this was online, so they don't even get to hide their hand from partner...]

[johnu]

I would upgrade if I could find anything worth an upgrade. I just got a new pair of glasses with a new prescription which may explain why I couldn't find anything to upgrade.

[whereagles]

This one is even worse than the other. At least you're 1st seat, so if you open 1NT pard's game bids may have some slack.

 

But still, I'd just play along here. No fancy 1NT for me.

[ggwhiz]

Closer to a pass than an upgrade.

 

I know it's not a pass but it's still closer.

[the hog]

[hv=pc=n&http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?s=S765HQ42DAKTCKQ82&d=s&v=e&a=?]200|300[/hv]

 

Would you open this 1NT? No special agreements, 15-17 assumed. Does this fall into a "just bridge judgement 1NT" for you?

 

Why on earth would you even consider upgrading this 14 count 4333 to a 1NT opening?

[mikeh]

This hand isn't even remotely like the hand in the other thread. Only a walrus would think that the two hands bore any meaningful resemblance.

 

The other hand had 5 controls and 2 4 card suits, both good news. This hand has only 4 controls, and the difference includes having only Ace. Worst of all, we are 4333, which is a horrible shape for taking tricks. I'd view this as equivalent to a moderate 13 count, and the other as very close to 15.

[gszes]

When considering opening 1n (of any range) it is normally a good idea to picture

what kind of hand responder will bid game with. While few will meet the minimum

qualification it is a decent idea to picture a good balanced 10 count (15-17) say

one ace and 2 kings. If you picture this opposite the proposed hand we can see that

even with something favorable in clubs and the spade ace onside we would still need

to conjure up another trick from somewhere.

Hand upgrades usually involve some extra risk but the risk is worthwhile because of

suit quality etc that creates a higher trick expectation than mere HCP.

 

In this case it is an especially bad upgrade since we have a rock solid 1c opener and

(probable) 1n rebid with no concerns. To upgrade with these types of hands is primarily

looking for trouble or maybe there is a little person inside that really really wants

to open a lighter NT than 15 17:))))

[BillPatch]

Everyone polled denies that this is a strong NT. But is it really closer to a pass than a 15 hcp strong NT? The two rating scales on the Goldschmidt web site disagree significantly. Kaplan and Rubens rate it as 13.5. The Kleinman evaluator rates it as an even 14. Since I usually use the Kleinmam count as an approximation of the other rating, I am troubled by the discrepancy between the two scales.

[chasetb]

Everyone polled denies that this is a strong NT. But is it really closer to a pass than a 15 hcp strong NT. The two rating scales on the Goldschmidt web site disagree significantly. Kaplan and Rubens rate it as 13.5. The Kleinman evaluator rates it as an even 14. Since I usually use the Kleinmam count as an approximation of the other rating, I am troubled by the discrepancy between the two scales.

I don't know how to evaluate the hand using the 4 C's method, but I have the document showing how Danny Kleinman would evaluate it, with his steps:

1.) 13 + 9(2) + 5(2) = 41 (or a good 13, since 41/13 = 13 R2)

2.) +1 for KQx(x) combination

3.) +2 for AKT (the 10 gets a point each for the Ace and King)

4.) -2 points for 4333 shape

Now add up the adjustments and divide everything by 3. So we get 42/3, or a 'bad' 14 HCP.

 

I am guessing that they added an extra point because the Ten (assuming it's a 'picture card', otherwise the King?) is accompanied by the Ace. Oddly enough, AKJ is the same as AKT in Kleinman's view. The Jack is worth 2, but this nullifies the +2 for the Ten accompanied by the AK. Also, you lose a point for a suit whose lowest card > 10 , but since the Jack has a King or Ace with it, it gains back that point. In KnR, the Jack replacing the Ten adds 0.25, making the hand worth 13.75 to them.

 

Maybe we need to make one small change - if the suit is exactly HH10, that suit loses a point?

[whereagles]

why are some people saying "closer to pass than 1NT"?

 

come one, is there anyone who would pass this?? (other than playing strong pass or somefink?.. lol)

 

even I would open 1NT in the right circumstances (e.g. playing a palooka)

[BillPatch]

.... In KnR, the Jack replacing the Ten adds 0.25, making the hand worth 13.75 to them.

 

Maybe we need to make one small change - if the suit is exactly HH10, that suit loses a point?

According to my previous entry which you quoted and were replying to above, the KnR(Also known as the Kaplan and Rubens count and the 4C's count, was (Edited)13.50. I got this from the Goldschmidt site. Where did you get a 13.75 value?

 

I know that in KnR there is a deduction with HHT for an honor unaccompanied by a spot card. The T is still better placed there than if we switched it with a spade spot, and I think the KnR also would reflects this difference for this change.

 

I assume in your deduction for HHT you were deducting a Kleinman count computing point, or 1/3 of a hcp.

[BillPatch]

why are some people saying "closer to pass than 1NT"?

 

come one, is there anyone who would pass this?? (other than playing strong pass or somefink?.. lol)

 

even I would open 1NT in the right circumstances (e.g. playing a palooka)

Everyone polled on this forum disagrees with the original bidder's upgrade to a 15-17 NT. What we are evaluating now is differences in hand evaluation methods, possibly to determine if this is worth a 14-16 point NT. (I don't think so.) or to accept a raise after a NT rebid. (I accept.)

[yunling]

No way. I suspect if it is suitable for a 14-16 NT.

[NickRW]

No way. I suspect if it is suitable for a 14-16 NT.

 

Personally I like a 14-16NT that will downgrade a few 14s as too weak (and similarly put a few unenticing 17s in range). This is one that I'd downgrade.

 

Nick

[mgoetze]

Downgrading this out of a 14-16 NT is just silly. There's an AK sequence and a KQ sequence, a average number of 10s, it's really a pretty straight down the middle 14. The only way you are downgrading this is if your partner was the one who wanted to play 14-16 and you went along but secretly wanted to play 14+ to 17- instead. And citing K&R isn't going to convince me... I love K&R but only for suit contracts.

[NickRW]

Downgrading this out of a 14-16 NT is just silly. There's an AK sequence and a KQ sequence, a average number of 10s, it's really a pretty straight down the middle 14. The only way you are downgrading this is if your partner was the one who wanted to play 14-16 and you went along but secretly wanted to play 14+ to 17- instead. And citing K&R isn't going to convince me... I love K&R but only for suit contracts.

 

I'm not interested in K+R for balanced hands either. And I wouldn't agree to 14-16 and then play 14+ to 17-. But I'd want to agree that "14-16" means 14+ to 17- (and if p didn't agree, well, I'd play 14-16 straight).

[Cthulhu D]

I'm struggling to grasp why you'd downgrade this out of 14-16 straight NT range though as Bill Patch is advocating. Like.. really? Maybe if it was match points and you wanted to be with the field on a 1C-1M-1NT auction or something, but even then. I'm going to be much happier when I get the entire hand of my chest with 1 bid, and that bid is 1NT (playing a 14-16, as I do). Then I'm much better positioned for any subsequent auction, and I've got 3-3 in the majors so none of the usual concerns about playing in a 5-2 major fit apply.

 

Maybe if it was the totally garbage J65 Q42 AQT KQ82 or something similar (Q65 Q42 AQT KJ82), but the hand at question is a lot better than that.

 

Plus partner 'knows' that you don't have a decent 14 and thus is much less likely to invite than the field (he's going to be inviting hoping for game opposite a good 12, so plenty of stuff your supermax '13' is going to make game against is going to pass 1NT imho, like so-so 11 counts), so I'm not even sure that is a good idea.