Are there times not to bid 1NT (strong)

[thepossum]

What types of hands, vulnerabilities, tournaments, and seats would affect decision on not bidding 15-17 NT with some kind of 4423, 4324 or 4333 shapes - eg would you consider 1m. If so why? Do you look at losers - or are they irrelevant. Hands too strong or too weak etc

[mw64ahw]

Probably a hand containing my nth drink of the session where the red suits look like one

[thepossum]

Happy New Year😊

[thepossum]

Deleted dup

[helene_t]

Playing with GIB I almost always open 1NT with 14 and not with 17. Partner is too conservative and I have to compensate.

 

Playing with a human partner, I would just do normal up- and downgrades. So don't open 1NT with AKJT-AKQT-432-32 or KQ-KJ2-K432-K432 but it would have to about this extreme.

 

BTW my personal preference is almost always to open 1NT with 5422 or 6322 if the long suit is a minor, but not usually with 5M332. Obviously those shapes upgrade much more often.

[DavidKok]

Are you asking about upgrading and downgrading? Or about concealing that you have a balanced hand in range?

 

The latter is not a good idea. Most bidding systems don't have the flexibility to show a balanced hand in two different ways, so if you refuse to open 1NT while in range you'll have to misrepresent your hand on the followup auctions. There's just no way to catch up. And, in fact, I think there shouldn't be either. Why devote two different auctions to the same hand type, when it's almost always better to just open 1NT? Current expert trend is the opposite, to open 1NT as often as possible (frequent upgrades, 5cM allowed, 5m4M allowed, 6m322 allowed, (31)(54) allowed, (4441) allowed etc.). The descriptive and preemptive value of a 1NT opening is incredible. Also it is the opening where partner is least likely to take some weird out-of-system action ;)

 

As for upgrading and downgrading, I don't really have good advice there. I moved to 14-16 NT when my partner said he preferred it, and it works so well I never want to go back. Maybe if you play 15-17 but want to get closer to 14-16 you can get there with 'frequent upgrades', although I don't see the harm in just moving down a point rather than trying to clarify what makes an upgrade. Also of course all these ranges are always subject to judgement - if I pick up, say, ♠KQ, ♥QJx, ♦QJxx, ♣QJxx I would choose to represent that as 12-13 balanced and open 1m. Just be aware there's no way to change your mind later.

[bluenikki]

What types of hands, vulnerabilities, tournaments, and seats would affect decision on not bidding 15-17 NT with some kind of 4423, 4324 or 4333 shapes - eg would you consider 1m. If so why? Do you look at losers - or are they irrelevant. Hands too strong or too weak etc

When you have (exactly) four spades, it will often pay to open a minor, especially if there is a notrump flaw.

 

In original Roth-Stone, for example, a notrump opening denied four-card spades.

[apollo1201]

Probably a hand containing my nth drink of the session�� where the red suits look like one

🤣🤣🤣

 

Otherwise, 4333 and 4432 are not the kind of hands that you’d not open a strong NT when dealt 15-17. It is the most orthodox distribution for that. As the othes said, your point zone will be impossible to convey after that.

 

Yes, some dreadful 18 4333 I might open them 1NT and same some disgusting 15 (as per the examples of other posters) I’d open 1m. It is because I deem them worth 17 or 14 on these cases and I will bid them as such.

 

So even if you have a small doubleton or something, open.

 

Less balanced hands with 4 spades (4225 eg) and 15-17 it is really how you feel but I’d open 1NT if I have sth to protect and not good suits eg Jxxx AQ Kx KQxxx. Otherwise à Nice start for the auction will be 1m 1D/H 1S. With 4 hearts (2452) you risk difficult rebid problems unless you your hand is worth a reverse (Kx AJxx AKQxx xx) so I’d open 1NT more freely.

 

Same, 6m322 I let you judge if 1NT or 1m followed by 3m is a best description with

 

Kx

Ax

Kxxxxx

AQ

 

or

 

Qx

Axx

KQJxxx

Ax

 

5M or singleton honors is a more vast subject. I’m not opening it here!

[pescetom]

Playing with a human partner, I would just do normal up- and downgrades. So don't open 1NT with AKJT-AKQT-432-32 or KQ-KJ2-K432-K432 but it would have to about this extreme.

 

BTW my personal preference is almost always to open 1NT with 5422 or 6322 if the long suit is a minor, but not usually with 5M332. Obviously those shapes upgrade much more often.

 

I am not sure there is any such thing as "normal" up/downgrades, at least based on reading that other forum.

Struggling to be normal, I would be concerned about opening KQ-KJ2-K432-K432 as 1NT 15-17, but 1♦ doesn't thrill me either.

 

In my most perverse partnership, all 5M332, almost all 5422 and all 6m322 are automatic (requires a dose of courage and specific developments).

[thepossum]

Are you asking about upgrading and downgrading? Or about concealing that you have a balanced hand in range?

 

 

I was thinking specifically of the most balanced NT shapes in the exact range. - the more shapely hands have more options but I nearly always bid 1NT even with 5cM

I will occasionally open a point (or even 2) lighter at favourable vulnerability but don't tell anyone - I find 17 pts very high.

It was whether there are times to open a minor (or even occasionally a 4-card major :)) and how to consider adjusting up or down. What sort of criteria to choose a different bid to 1NT

Whether some flat 15-17 hands look better/worse prospects than others

[thepossum]

Playing with GIB I almost always open 1NT with 14 and not with 17. Partner is too conservative and I have to compensate.

 

Playing with a human partner, I would just do normal up- and downgrades. So don't open 1NT with AKJT-AKQT-432-32 or KQ-KJ2-K432-K432 but it would have to about this extreme.

 

BTW my personal preference is almost always to open 1NT with 5422 or 6322 if the long suit is a minor, but not usually with 5M332. Obviously those shapes upgrade much more often.

 

Thx Helene, that's based on control strength? or with all the points in a few suits?

[helene_t]

Thx Helene, that's based on control strength? or with all the points in a few suits?

Yeah, points in long suits and concentrated in two suits. Also, an ace is a bit better than two Queens or four Jacks.

[thepossum]

So one proxy (even in NT) would be whether you have 6,7, or 8 losers?

 

...or an alternative point count to 4321 :)

 

EDIT Just looking at the two examples you put up

[hrothgar]

You might consider looking at requirements for opening 1NT back in the weird old days...

 

There were all sorts of additional restrictions like "You must have all four suits stopped and the like"

I'm not suggesting that any of these are good ideas mind you, however, it will give you an idea of some of the stuff that used to be popular and have since been abandoned.

 

My impression is that in this day and age, people look for excuses to open 1NT, not ways that that they might avoid opening 1NT

(Response systems to 1NT are pretty good, after all)

 

I suspect that most example where folks would argue against opening 1NT with the right number of HCPs and the appropriate shape boil down to hand valuation.

 

"Yes, this hand has 17 Walrus points, but its really better than that or some such"

[DavidKok]

My impression is that in this day and age, people look for excuses to open 1NT, not ways that that they might avoid opening 1NT

So one proxy (even in NT) would be whether you have 6,7, or 8 losers?

 

...or an alternative point count to 4321 :)

 

EDIT Just looking at the two examples you put up

hrothgar has it exactly right. Generally the right shape and the right HCP will do for an excuse to open 1NT.

I wouldn't worry about losers or stoppers. If you want to improve your hand evaluation for balanced hands some criteria are:

Upgrades:

• Aces and kings are undervalued.
  
• A 5-card suit is often worth a bit extra.
  
• Tens are worth 0HCP but can be a valuable asset.
  
• Having values in your long suits is a plus.
  

Downgrades:

• Queens and jacks are overvalued, especially in short suits.
  
• Having a (small) doubleton in a major is a risk, whether or not partner has got length in the suit.
  

 

The Milton Work count is staggeringly robust for balanced hands, so all of these only come into play when you are already on the fence about the 1NT opening. There are other (better) point schemes out there, but I think it's not worth the effort to incorporate them into your evaluation. If you do wish to open 1NT while light you definitely have to disclose that, and I'd recommend simply shifting your range.

[bluenikki]

If you do wish to open 1NT while light you definitely have to disclose that, and I'd recommend simply shifting your range.

As to shifting range. Suppose you hypothetically open 1NT with 14-18. But you open with 18 only with no aces. (In Goren's version of 4321, you were suppose to deduct a point for no aces.). And you open with 14 only with three tens.

 

The extreme counts are very rare. Writing your range as 14-18 will give the opponents a distorted impression.

[helene_t]

So one proxy (even in NT) would be whether you have 6,7, or 8 losers?

 

...or an alternative point count to 4321 :)

 

EDIT Just looking at the two examples you put up

I wouldn't go so far. 4321 is quite close to optimal for notrump purposes, and adding, say, 0.2 for a 10 in a long suit and 0.3 if it is supported by a Jack etc. would only make it marginally better, I think, and in any case make it very complicated.

 

So I prefer to just use 4321 and then adjust by one point in extreme cases.

[thepossum]

Occasional psychs :)

 

More seriously though I would tend to prefer at least ore flexibility based on vulnerability :)

 

May occasionally open many distributions in 15-17 range as 1 NT :)

 

I have now disclosed my vague approach to 1NT

 

Similar approach to 2NT with a few points occasionally leeway on the light side

 

In fact its my general approach to all (opening) bids. I find many systems/styles rather conservative and am prepared to risk the occasional minus score :)

I would go so far as to argue that I hardly ever psych - in the strict sense of the word - mistake is a more accurate word

[DavidKok]

As to shifting range. Suppose you hypothetically open 1NT with 14-18. But you open with 18 only with no aces. (In Goren's version of 4321, you were suppose to deduct a point for no aces.). And you open with 14 only with three tens.

 

The extreme counts are very rare. Writing your range as 14-18 will give the opponents a distorted impression.

I think such a 5 point range is illegal in ACBLand, for the record. And the point is that you properly disclose your range. If your range is "15-17, but we bunch some rare 14-counts and 18-counts in there", possibly with a specified list of conditions, that is your range. You should not claim to play 14-18, or 15-17, or anything else. I'm not sure why you would claim it is "14-18" when it is not.

 

I'm not suggesting keeping the 15-17 but moving some rare hands into/out of the range based on evaluation. I was suggesting shifting the range - including a host of 14-counts, say, and excluding a host of 17-counts. Regardless of what you choose to play you have to accurately disclose it.

 

Occasional psychs :)

 

More seriously though I would tend to prefer at least ore flexibility based on vulnerability :)

 

May occasionally open many distributions in 15-17 range as 1 NT :)

 

I have now disclosed my vague approach to 1NT

 

Similar approach to 2NT with a few points occasionally leeway on the light side

 

In fact its my general approach to all (opening) bids. I find many systems/styles rather conservative and am prepared to risk the occasional minus score :)

I would go so far as to argue that I hardly ever psych - in the strict sense of the word - mistake is a more accurate word

I think this is the worst way to go about it. This will make you an unreliable bidder. You force your partner to choose between frequent total guesses or attempting to mastermind your actions. Having a light or aggressive opening style is very profitable and I highly recommend it, but this "vague approach" sounds awful to me. It is a major goal of the bidding to cooperate with partner to find the best contract. In my opinion the best approach is to sit down with your partner and discuss in what situations you'd like to take a non-conventional action, and then attempt to make those part of your bidding system. Incidentally it also helps with disclosing them. I am not at all confident that "I have a vague approach to 1NT" is sufficient disclosure.

[blackshoe]

I think such a 5 point range is illegal in ACBLand, for the record.

Permitted on the Basic and Basic+ Charts: "A Natural NT opening bid, as long as it shows at least 10 HCP and the Range is not greater than 5 HCP."

Disallowed on the Open and Open+ Charts: "A Natural 1NT opening bid that has a Range greater than 5 HCP."

 

From the examples on the Open and Open+ Charts (this probably applies to the two Basic Charts as well): "An Agreement to open 1NT showing 11-15 is permitted, but actually showing 10-15 is not. If your agreed NT range is 11-15, you cannot upgrade 10 HCP hands or downgrade 16 HCP hands. This does not apply to a psych. To be considered a psych, the hand must contain at least 4 HCP less the minimum."

 

Basically, a five HCP range is okay, but if you have a five HCP range, you better not be upgrading or downgrading.

[DavidKok]

Thanks, so 14-18 is safe.

[pescetom]

I think such a 5 point range is illegal in ACBLand, for the record.

Legal in ACBLand, as blackshoe pointed out above.

 

Legal in EBUland too (they allow any continuous range, oddly enough considering how uptight they are about strength in general).

 

Illegal in FIGBland (max 4 point range).

[thepossum]

I wouldn't want a 5 point range. Top is heading into 2NT territory :)

 

EDIT - correct me if I am wrong but that could be 1 or 2 tricks

[thepossum]

I think such a 5 point range is illegal in ACBLand, for the record. And the point is that you properly disclose your range. If your range is "15-17, but we bunch some rare 14-counts and 18-counts in there", possibly with a specified list of conditions, that is your range. You should not claim to play 14-18, or 15-17, or anything else. I'm not sure why you would claim it is "14-18" when it is not.

 

I'm not suggesting keeping the 15-17 but moving some rare hands into/out of the range based on evaluation. I was suggesting shifting the range - including a host of 14-counts, say, and excluding a host of 17-counts. Regardless of what you choose to play you have to accurately disclose it.

 

I think this is the worst way to go about it. This will make you an unreliable bidder. You force your partner to choose between frequent total guesses or attempting to mastermind your actions. Having a light or aggressive opening style is very profitable and I highly recommend it, but this "vague approach" sounds awful to me. It is a major goal of the bidding to cooperate with partner to find the best contract. In my opinion the best approach is to sit down with your partner and discuss in what situations you'd like to take a non-conventional action, and then attempt to make those part of your bidding system. Incidentally it also helps with disclosing them. I am not at all confident that "I have a vague approach to 1NT" is sufficient disclosure.

 

I try to bid according to the strength of my hand :) - which hopefully is reliable

My disclosure stated occasionally bid on the light side :)

 

Occasionally I will be so unreliable and have a similarly unreliable partner who gets me to 6NT with 30 points which I think is more fun for all at the table

 

I think you would find me remarkably and disappointingly disciplined in most serious bridge

 

But I will always make every endeavour to bid my hand accurately according to strength and shape (most of the time)

 

I strive more than most to find an accurate bid, often struggling against systems - what would be the point in doing otherwise :)

 

Can you not write on your card. Occasional light openings, especially at favourable vulnerability etc General approach. I have hardly ever strayed into very light but it does happen very rarely

 

But I have bigger concerns at the moment. As I was writing this I noticed white smoke coming from somewhere in the vicinity of my laptop

[mycroft]

Whether or not it matches the games around the ACBL charts, "exceptional 14 to aceless flat 18" is a perfectly good description.

 

Having said that, I reiterate that "judgement is allowed" (with the caveats in the convention charts, if you're ACBL. They don't want disallowed agreements "sneaking in" under judgement, and yeah, there are unintended consequences deemed acceptable) and only Walruses (and people who have been nailed by the CCs on their own pet convention) are going to complain about a 14-count with ♦AKT85 opened a "15-17" NT.

 

Cue my "please provide a *useful* set of guidelines for Announcing NT ranges that give a good, standard idea of 'how often you upgrade', Señores C&CC" rant - again.

 

In answer to OP, the way standard systems have been built, the times not to open a 15-17 1NT is when you don't have a 15-17 point balanced hand. Whether it's right on this hand (or even this category of hands) or not, the damage to the rest of the system caused by having to cater to those hands in the 1-suit openings is much higher. You could build a system where the damage is less. But many people have tried this (well, they "had conditions" in the Goren, etc. days) and it hasn't worked as well. There is always a perfect system for *this* hand; the problem to solve in bidding is how to make the "closer-to-perfect" system for *all* hands. And that's a very interesting problem.