Basics

[mikeh]

I'm not bidding 3♥ with that hand, despite our agreement. After 1♥ 1♠ 1NT 2♥ (2NT) I thought I was justified competeing to 3.

When you find that you simply refuse to bid according to your agreements, something is profoundly wrong. Either you are completely masterminding or, as here,your agreements are so unplayable that you can’t comply.

 

It’s futile and destructive of partnership to have an unplayable agreement that you won’t play.

 

Consider had you rebid 3H over 1S…not with this hand but with a real 3H bid…16 hcp and a good 6 card suit. Wtf is your partner supposed to do with a decent 7 count and say AJxxx xx Kxx xxx? 4H is the normal bid IF 3H showed a normal 3H but pass is the right bid if you could have a 15 count 2533, and 3S is the right bid if you have 3523 or 3532.

 

If she bid 4H then she’s playing you not to be complying with your agreement, which very, very quickly means that you have an implied secret agreement at odds with what you’re telling your opps, should they ask what 3H shows. You’ll get away with it initially because everyone assumes 3H shows the 16 count 6card suit. But the fact that nobody knows you have a secret agreement shouldn’t make you feel good about it, and I know you wouldn’t

 

See the problems, ethical and bridge-related that arise from having agreements that you won’t abide by, because you know they’re idiotic?

[jillybean]

Yes.

[AL78]

When I play 4CM 12-14NT and I pick up a balanced hand with 5M, I look at the quality of the suit and ask myself how I feel rebidding it if partner responds with 2/1 to decide whether to open 1NT or 1M. If the suit is something like KQTxx or better I'm inclined to open 1M, otherwise 1NT.

[akwoo]

Discussing this with partner, they would rather open A65,KJ865,A2,Q82 1♥ and rebid 2♣/1♠. My Q is are we bypassing what could be the best contract (1NT)

and this is one of the reasons we are playing 12-14NT

 

This is the agreement I'm playing in one partnership. (Actually, on this hand, I'd probably rebid 2S over 1S, but change the spades to xxx and clubs to AQx and I'd rebid 2C.)

 

Yes you could be bypassing the best contract, but any other agreements here lead to problems on other hands. There is no perfect bidding system.

 

Agreeing to open 1N on this hand risks ending up in 1N when you should be in 2H. (If you don't want complicated agreements, it also risks ending up in 3N when you should be in 4H.)

 

Agreeing to make a wide-ranging 1N rebid leads to difficulties in finding the right level later, though this can be mitigated (but you'll still lose some precision) by some artificial follow-ups.

[pescetom]

When I play 4CM 12-14NT and I pick up a balanced hand with 5M, I look at the quality of the suit and ask myself how I feel rebidding it if partner responds with 2/1 to decide whether to open 1NT or 1M. If the suit is something like KQTxx or better I'm inclined to open 1M, otherwise 1NT.

 

I have little experience of weak NT, but in the equivalent situation with strong NT I am skeptical about deciding on suit quality. It's a criterium that might just work between two telepaths, but the average I/A pair is better off with agreements based upon shape, HCP and (perhaps) major suit. Beginners can cheerfully open 1NT based on HCP and agreed shape.

[helene_t]

Discussing this with partner, they would rather open A65,KJ865,A2,Q82 1♥ and rebid 2♣/1♠. My Q is are we bypassing what could be the best contract (1NT)

and this is one of the reasons we are playing 12-14NT

You mean a 12-14 1NT rebid? Yes that makes sense.

 

If you play 5-card majors and don't open a 5M332 hand 1NT, then your 1M followups don't depend on your notrump range.

 

This is because a 1M opening simply means "I have a 5-card major and 12-19 points, balanced or unbalanced". The meaning of the 1M opening is not affected by your notrump range, so the follow-ups shouldn't be either.

 

With balanced hands, after

1♥-1♠

?

you rebid 1NT with a minimum and 2♣ (maybe 2♦ with 3532?) with more. Classically, 1NT is 12-14 while 2♣ includes 15-17 bal.

 

It is maybe also worth discussing with p under which curcumstances you raise 1♠ with 3-card support and a balanced hand. Maybe you should do that only with a bit extra, say 14-16, so that the disapointing shape is compensated by a bit extra power. In any case, it takes a bit of the strain on the 1NT and 2♣ rebids as it is only with exactly 2=5=3=3 that you don't have 3-card support :)

 

It is different with minor suit openings:

1m-1♠

?

Pairs who play strong notrump often agree to rebid 1NT with minimum 1444, 1435, 1345 and 1453, maybe even 1354. So an unbalanced hand becomes balanced once partner bids your singleton. Playing a weak NT, most pairs agree that the 1NT rebid shows 15-17 so they will have to bypass 1NT with the minimum misfitting hands, which is less than ideal, as you say.