[sheilafran]

North
♠AQxxx
♥Ax
♦AJx
♣Qxx

Playing 2/1 do you open 1NT or 1C planning on rebidding 2NT

If you open the sequence 1NT bidding is easy ... partner having

South
♠Kx
♥KQJx
♦Kxx
♣Axxx

It would go 1NT 4NT 6NT

but if you open 1S.. how would you suggest the bidding should go.

Also when should you upgrade 17 points and a five card suit?

[Vampyr]

sheilafran, on 2015-April-13, 02:07, said:

North
♠AQxxx
♥Ax
♦AJx
♣Qxx

Playing 2/1 do you open 1NT or 1C planning on rebidding 2NT

I assume that by1♣ you meant 1♠ . I think that this hand is close between an upgrade or not.

But forced to choose, I think that if I had opened 1NT I would feel that i hadn't quite showed my hand. So I would upgrade.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I would open 1S.

Lots of peoble use a 2C response to a 1M opening as art.,
either gf raise with 3 card support, gf clubs or gf bal.

This would fit nicely.

Not playing this, a 3NT response to 1M should show 13-15
and bal., if you dont want to downgrade, reasonable enough,
go with 2C intending to bid 3NT later.

After 3NT from responder, opener will pass.
After 2C from responder, it is common to play 2NT as split
range, 12-14 or 18-?, and the jump to 3NT as 15-17.
Either way, both should get you to 6NT.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Zelandakh]

Not that I play 2/1 but anything wrong with 1♠ - 2♣; 2NT - 3NT; 4NT - 6NT if upgrading?

[WesleyC]

There's no definitive answer to the question of what hands you should upgrade. My preference is to simply upgrade any 14 or 17 count with a reasonable 5c suit (unless I can find a good reason not to).

The effect of this style is that you end up playing a 14.5 to 17.5 1NT, which helps facilitate 1M - 1NT as semi forcing which I like (particularly at MPs). If you do upgrade to 1S, Zelandakh's auction gets you to 6NT very easily.

If you open 1NT, your suggested auction seems silly. Given that partner could easily have 5H, why not explore for a fit?

If you bid 1NT - 4NT what is partner supposed to do holding: [Axx Axxxx Kx Kxx] or many other similar hands where 6H is cold?

[billw55]

sheilafran, on 2015-April-13, 02:07, said:

North
♠AQxxx
♥Ax
♦AJx
♣Qxx

1NT for me. This hand has both positive features (three aces, five card suit) and negative (scattered honors, no spots).

Change a few of those x to T or 9, and I will upgrade. Or make it ♠AKJxx ♥ AQx ♦Kxx ♣xx, also upgrade.

[mikeh]

This hand has 6 controls, all in the form of Aces. It has no wide open side suit. It has a good 5 card major. How anyone thinks this fits within a 15-17 1N is beyond me.

After 1♠, a 2♣ response seems pretty obvious. After that, methods are relevant.

Using 3N to show some 5332 18--19 hcp hand has a lot going for it, since one would rarely pre-empt one's own constructive auction, and should therefor use the call to show a specific good hand. Responder can bid 6N, with the only worry being that we could be missing an easy grand: opener needs little other than AQJxx in spades for responder to picture 13 winners. In fact grand is so possible that I think 5N is a better call than 6N. However, once again, methods matter. Traditionally, in a quantitative auction 5N forces to slam: 1N 5N asks opener to bid either 6 or 7, but I've never seen that sequence in real life. 5N often, these days, means pick-a-slam.

That would be useful if we knew that opener would pick clubs, because then our 6N should be a try for grand. Accordingly, with an expert partner, I would try 5N, planning on correcting clubs (or spades) to 6N. The drawback is when he bids 6N...I have to pass: I think assuming the spade J is too much.

If you don't have 3N available, then bid 2N, and raise 3N to 4N.

[chasetb]

Mike, I agree with you that I would upgrade this to a 18-19 HCP hand and open 1♠, but K&R rates it (with no spots) as 16.9, while DK rates it a good 17. We are allowed to be a max once in awhile.

I would open 1♠ no problem, and 2♣ is the easy response. Then, depending on my partner, I could be bidding 2NT, 3NT, 3♣, or even 2♦.

[Vampyr]

I don't play 2/1GF, but I had thought that after a 2/1 response, 2NT showed a weak NT. Is this not the case?

[mike777]

If you play a jump to 3nt shows a dead minimum opening balanced hand, then 2nt just shows more and unlimited.

But yes responder assumes often wk nt


1nt here seems fine if 16-18 range

[mikeh]

Vampyr, on 2015-April-13, 13:40, said:

I don't play 2/1GF, but I had thought that after a 2/1 response, 2NT showed a weak NT. Is this not the case?

exactly what 2N shows depends a lot on agreement/style.

Thus a significant number of 2/1 players use 2N as the default action when they have nothing else to say, while others use a rebid of 2M as that. The former argue that 2M should show 6 cards, and that this is a priority, while the latter say that 2n should show something in both side suits to avoid wrong-siding or simply having the opps run a side suit that is wide open, and that there are ways to check back for the 6-2 major suit fit over 2M.

Still others would argue that one shouldn't pre-empt one's own auction and so 2N should be assumed to show nothing extra, but it doesn't deny significant extras.....these players need to be careful since otherwise some decent 31-33 hcp slams get missed when responder makes a heavy raise to 3N and opener isn't quite strong enough to bid 4N.

Every serious partnership playing 2/1 has to have a good set of agreements here, and while I have my own thoughts on what is optimum, this is one of those very common situations in which a sub-optimal method, well-understood, is better than no agreement at all.

[aguahombre]

mike777, on 2015-April-13, 14:47, said:

If you play a jump to 3nt shows a dead minimum opening balanced hand, then 2nt just shows more and unlimited.

The jump in notrump should not be one of the "fast arrivals", even if you use FR at all. But, if there is the slightest danger that this partner is unaware of that, then MikeH's approach is too dangerous.

In practice, we do use 3NT as the specifically 5=3=3=2 hand too big for 1NT. This leaves us two quants with the same range and shape. The slow one (2-3-4) implies a very good concentration in the opened major -- giving us extra room to go for slam (count tricks) if responder rebids 3S or 3C instead of 2NT.

[rhm]

WesleyC, on 2015-April-13, 06:25, said:

There's no definitive answer to the question of what hands you should upgrade.

There is, but it requires judgement, which is in short supply and neither K&R nor DK are the answer.

Rainer Herrmann

[benlessard]

Quote

If you play a jump to 3nt shows a dead minimum opening balanced hand, then 2nt just shows more and unlimited.

This is an awful method, Im pretty sure no serious players play like this.

Either 2NT is 11-14 or 18-19 and a jump to 3NT is 15-17 (best imo).
or 2NT is 11-15 and jump to 3NT is 16-17 and with 18-19 you jump to 4NT quant. Jumping to 4NT is a notorious slam killer but its still descriptive and those hand are rare anyway.

[rhm]

benlessard, on 2015-April-14, 02:30, said:

Either 2NT is 11-14 or 18-19 and a jump to 3NT is 15-17 (best imo).

If you open 1NT with balanced hands and 15-17 this is not best.
You could use 3NT as 15-17 with a six card major (6M322) with stoppers in the unbid suits.
This makes 3NT quite a descriptive bid, where responder is in a good position to choose the right game.
6-2 major suit fits often play well in 3NT.
Also this is otherwise a problem hand for slam bidding and slam is often missed.

Rainer Herrmann

[nekthen]

Anyone use Banzai count? I make this hand 24 points (add 1 for 5 card suit) which equates to 16 hcp. This assumes no tens. So I open 1N. If partner looks for slam then the controls warrant accepting but if p is weak we may well struggle due to lack of stuffing

[benlessard]

Quote

If you open 1NT with balanced hands and 15-17 this is not best.
You could use 3NT as 15-17 with a six card major (6M322) with stoppers in the unbid suits.

Lol, if your style is to open all 15-17 5M332 with 1nt than obviously the jump to 3NT is something else.

[The_Badger]

Playing 2/1 (with whatever vulnerability) I would open 1NT always. Bidding 1NT with a balanced 5M-3-3-2 is not anathema these days and many professional players do so. There are 5 solid reasons why 1NT is best: a) It limits your hand immediately b) It is less likely that the opponents will interfere over it c) It is an awkward(ish) hand to rebid, especially using 2/1, and every opening bid should promise a clarifying rebid on the second round. d) There is a good possibility that you will become declarer and the stronger hand is shielded (especially if partner responds 1NT to a 1M opener) e) The ♠ suit is lacking intermediates (stuffing such as AQ109x) and is hardly worth a rebid.

The only downsides are that a hand with controls (aces and kings) is usually best played in a suit contract as opposed to NT, and that you might miss a ♠ fit

[fourdad]

With 5 card suits, I open 1NT unless I have 2 doubletons, then 1 of suit.
Pretty simple rule that has worked well over 40 years.

[Zelandakh]

fourdad, on 2015-April-14, 04:40, said:

With 5 card suits, I open 1NT unless I have 2 doubletons, then 1 of suit.

This makes it sound as if a 5530 hand is also opened 1NT....but I guess we all know what you mean

What this and the previous response miss is that the thread is not about whether a 5332 hand should be opened 1NT (which would likely be the main discussion in a French or German forum) but rather whether this hand is too good and should be treated as an 18. That Banzai cound values it as a 16 is hardly surprising either - it is surely one of the worst evaluation methods around.

The previous response also suggests that opponents will be less likely to compete over a 1NT opening than 1♠. This I find rather dubious as there are plenty of hands that would stick their oar in over a strong NT that would be silent after 1♠. I also do not understand the comment about it being a difficult hand to rebid - if you are treating it as a balanced 18 then presumably there is some sequence in the arsenal to describe that. If not then we have bigger issues. The summary also misses the point entirely - the downside of opening the hand 1NT is that is has far more playing strength than a typical hand. If the NT range was 16-18, there would be less to discuss and then the points would be more valid.