Frequent off shape 1nt

[Guest Jlall]

no idea

[han]

Out of curiosity, when you alert a 1NT opener (as we do because of the 4441 shape), do you have to announce the range as well in acbl land?

I don't know the rules, but I would expect that you never have to announce anything for a bid that is alerted.

[mikestar]

no. In ACBL regulations if you open 1N with semi balanced thats not alertable. If you do it with unbalanced (eg 4441) it is.

In the ACBL in a GCC game it is illegal to open 1N with a singleton as a matter of partnership agreement--it is legal as a very occasional excercise of bridge judgement (infrequent enough not to give rise to an implicit agreement). Since partner is in the dark, no alert is necessary or possible.

[Guest Jlall]

In the ACBL in a GCC game it is illegal to open 1N with a singleton as a matter of partnership agreement--it is legal as a very occasional excercise of bridge judgement (infrequent enough not to give rise to an implicit agreement). Since partner is in the dark, no alert is necessary or possible.

Really? wow that's surprising. I didn't know the ACBL was THAT dumb, I guess I should stop being surprised at this point.

[luke warm]

i think opening 1nt with a stiff is one of those things that wouldn't surprise anybody's partner... that isn't the same as it being a 'matter of partnership agreement'

[Gerben42]

So what if you have a sequence to show the 4441 just in case your partner exercises judgement which you know will rarely happen and will take you by surprise, but just so that he doesn't get in to rebid problems if he does? :)

[luke warm]

i'd think that would be cheating

[Gerben42]

Not that I would, of course. Somehow with a 4441 I can usually find a 4-card suit I can bid, considering I have three of them.

 

i think opening 1nt with a stiff is one of those things that wouldn't surprise anybody's partner... that isn't the same as it being a 'matter of partnership agreement'

It would surprise me and I would make my partner promise it never happens again.

The question is not if I like it, but what is allowed.

 

In Germany it is specifically allowed to open 1NT with a singleton but only if the singleton is a Q or higher. I'm not sure what to think of this but it strikes me as an odd rule.

[Finch]

i think opening 1nt with a stiff is one of those things that wouldn't surprise anybody's partner... that isn't the same as it being a 'matter of partnership agreement'

It would suprise me. I've never opened 1NT with a singleton, and I don't anticipate ever doing so in a normal partnership.

 

As for semi-balanced hands, it does come down to a matter of partnership style. Our style is to open many 6322s with a 6-card minor, but not to be 5422 (except for exactly 2=2=4=5 too weak to reverse). We allow a 5-card major in 3rd/4th seat as long as the HCP are at the lower end of the range, but the hand has to look no-trumpy; we can still open 1 major if we want. This hand came up at Easter:

 

Ax

Kx

AJxxx

KJxx

 

xx

AQ109x

Qxx

Axx

 

and we were one of the very few pairs in the room in 4H (this time 3NT made, but we will beat all the pairs in 3NT).

 

Similarly, we bid and make more minor suit slams than people who like to open and/or rebid 1NT/2NT as often as possible. You can play complicated shape relays after opening 1NT, but if you are going to do that, why not open 1 of a suit instead, and bid your shape out a level lower?

 

Of course if you open a lot of these hands 1NT you will get some good results, mainly when you bid 1NT-3NT and they make the wrong lead, or mis-defend later because you have given away less information and/or right-sided the contract, or because they have to come in at the 2-level rather than the 1-level. There isn't a straight "right or wrong" - I once played against a clearly world class pair who thought a 5=2=2=4 with two low diamonds was a strong 1NT.

 

On K109x Kx Kx AQ10xx I think it's a clear 1C opening, not least because you don't necessarily want to declare NT. Who do you think should play the hand if partner has Q10x and RHO AJ9xx ?

 

When I play a mini (10-13) 1NT in first seat, I allow all sorts of off-shape distributions as it's primarily being played as a pre-empt, but that's a different philosophy. Still no singleton, though.

[Echognome]

....

 

Similarly, we bid and make more minor suit slams than people who like to open and/or rebid 1NT/2NT as often as possible.  You can play complicated shape relays after opening 1NT, but if you are going to do that, why not open 1 of a suit instead, and bid your shape out a level lower?

 

...

 

When I play a mini (10-13) 1NT in first seat, I allow all sorts of off-shape distributions as it's primarily being played as a pre-empt, but that's a different philosophy.  Still no singleton, though.

The preemptive nature of it is what buys it for us. We play an 11-13 NT in 1st/2nd NV and 10-14 NT in 3rd NV.

 

As per the constructive nature of finding minor suit slams, we don't use any fancy relays, but rather a simple 2♠ = Minor Suit Stayman, and 2NT = Transfer to clubs or a 4441 type hand game forcing. With these two (relatively simplistic) bids, we find most of the minor suit slams.

[luke warm]

It would surprise me and I would make my partner promise it never happens again.

 

It would suprise me.

 

ok, so it would surprise you two... i've seen a whole bunch of very good players (including fred) who *have* opened 4441 hands with 1nt... sure they had a good reason for it, but even tho i'd bet there was no p'ship understanding regarding the openings i saw i'd still bet their partners weren't shocked... or if so, for only a moment

[Cascade]

In the ACBL in a GCC game it is illegal to open 1N with a singleton as a matter of partnership agreement--it is legal as a very occasional excercise of bridge judgement (infrequent enough not to give rise to an implicit agreement). Since partner is in the dark, no alert is necessary or possible.

Really? wow that's surprising. I didn't know the ACBL was THAT dumb, I guess I should stop being surprised at this point.

ACBL - 1NT with a Singleton Policy

 

This article suggests that your frequency of 1NT with a singleton needs to be less than 1%.

 

It is not clear to me: 1% of what?

 

But if it is 1% of 1NT openings then you would not be able to open 1NT with 4441 every time you had a singleton Ace, King or Queen. Probably even one of those options would be too much.

 

This ruling seems overly restrictive to me.

 

I also believe it is of dubious validity since L40D only allows regulation of conventional bids and ultra-light openings. A 1NT opening that is offering to play in NTs is not by definition a conventional bid. This is true even if the ACBL choose to say that a natural 1NT will not have a singleton.

[jdulmage]

Looking for comments and results from players regarding very frequent off shape 1nt 14-16 or 15-17.

 

 

In this case off shape is much more than just 5332 but could be 2254 or 4225 etc with one 4 card major and a 5 card minor or 2236 with long minor, etc. I assume 5224 with 5 major and 4 minor is not playable.

 

Do you think this is very poor style?

Do you insist on HCP in short suits or anything goes?

If poor often, do you see any advantage to playing it?

 

Yes, I did read Zeke's article trashing 5332 openings.

 

 

Thank you in advance.

I disagree with Zeke. The original definition of 1NT was: A hand with at least 16 to 18 HCP and balanced. Balanced meaning or singletons or voids and no more than one doubleton. So this is definately not off shape, at least now by the original meaning of this opening bid.

 

I like opening 1NT when I have say a hand like this:

 

[hv=s=stxxhkxdqxcakqxxx]133|100|[/hv]

 

On a heart lead, you will most likely find 7 tricks, if you can find an 8th, you are beating those in 3♣ making 3 for 110. Also, if partner is to invite 2NT, you are more interested in bidding 3NT on hopes of running clubs and finding just 3 more tricks from your hand and partners.

 

More so, if they bid over the 1NT, you still have a rebiddable club suit. It's great. I discontinue doing this with a singleton or void, rules or no rules, it's just plain silly.

 

It has never failed me yet.

 

In returns to the "...I didn't know the ACBL was THAT dumb, I guess I should stop being surprised at this point". You need to learn some manners; rules are rules, if you can't follow them, don't play. That is like saying "murdering someone is against the law? I didn't know the government was THAT dumb"