[akwoo]

I open 1N on both.

But I've played too much 12-14 NT, where you clearly don't have enough to reverse on the equivalent hands (being a K lighter), and the advantages of playing 1C-1red-1S promising an unbalanced hand (i.e. almost certainly a singleton somewhere) are bigger.

[jillybean]

jdiana, on 2025-January-29, 20:45, said:

Still 1♣ for me. I have no problem reversing into hearts, i.e., 1♣-1♠-2♥ or 1♣-1NT-2♥. I don't know what problem you solve by opening 1NT. But I also don't see as much value in these hands as others do.

My style of reverse promises a stronger hand than what I have here. Give me QJx,AK63,3,AQ872 I may upgrade and bid 2♥ over a 1♠ response.
It's looking much more like a chunky 2 suiter, with 3 card support for partner.

I posted this in the N/B forum thinking it would be almost unanimous, simple answers.
Oh how wrong I was.

[jillybean]

smerriman, on 2025-January-29, 19:41, said:

2NT, probably a bad idea, but hey.

I wouldn't, but I liked your post anyway.

[jdiana]

jillybean, on 2025-January-29, 21:07, said:

My style of reverse promises a stronger hand than what I have here. Give me QJx,AK63,3,AQ872 I may upgrade and bid 2♥ over a 1♠ response.
It's looking much more like a chunky 2 suiter, with 3 card support for partner.

I didn't notice at first that your second hand had 16 HCP vs 17 HCP for the first hand. I agree that it's borderline but I'd still do it. But if a 1NT opening fits your and your partner's style, that's fine too.

[mikeh]

Late to the thread but I consider opening 1N to be insulting to partner.

Wtf is wrong with actually telling your partner your distribution?

Admittedly, methods count and if I was stuck playing up the line bidding, I might mastermind with 1N. But playing even moderately ok methods,1C 1R 1S shows 4+ spades and longer clubs, 11-18 hcp. Wow…isn’t it amazing? I have a hand that matches what I’ve announced.

Now partner can make a bid that describes his hand…if he passes 1S I very much doubt we’ve missed a game. I concede Stephen is right on one point…I have to raise 1N to 2N….showing…oh god how can we survive this….4=2=2=5 16-18 hcp! Wow…imagine having the exact hand one has shown in the bidding! How can we ever trust partner to know what to do? Compare this bizarre, descriptive auction to the ‘perfect’ description afforded by grabbing the hand with our 1N opening bid! /sarcasm

Ok, not ending sarcasm. I guess nobody ever wants to play 5C making when 3N fails, or 6C making rather than 3N, or even getting to a spade partial when partner is too weak to use stayman over our 1N

Look people….I know almost everyone who posts here is ‘the captain’ in their partnerships…partner is just a dullard with whom we have to put up….but let me let you into a little secret…shared by every expert in the world when playing with another expert. Good things generally happen more often in auctions in which you describe your hand than in auctions in which you mastermind

/end rant

[mw64ahw]

mikeh, on 2025-January-30, 00:57, said:

Late to the thread but I consider opening 1N to be insulting to partner.

Wtf is wrong with actually telling your partner your distribution?

Admittedly, methods count and if I was stuck playing up the line bidding, I might mastermind with 1N. But playing even moderately ok methods,1C 1R 1S shows 4+ spades and longer clubs, 11-18 hcp. Wow…isn't it amazing? I have a hand that matches what I've announced.

Now partner can make a bid that describes his hand…if he passes 1S I very much doubt we've missed a game. I concede Stephen is right on one point…I have to raise 1N to 2N….showing…oh god how can we survive this….4=2=2=5 16-18 hcp! Wow…imagine having the exact hand one has shown in the bidding! How can we ever trust partner to know what to do? Compare this bizarre, descriptive auction to the 'perfect' description afforded by grabbing the hand with our 1N opening bid! /sarcasm

Ok, not ending sarcasm. I guess nobody ever wants to play 5C making when 3N fails, or 6C making rather than 3N, or even getting to a spade partial when partner is too weak to use stayman over our 1N

Look people….I know almost everyone who posts here is 'the captain' in their partnerships…partner is just a dullard with whom we have to put up with….but let me let you into a little secret…shared by every expert in the world when playing with another expert. Good things generally happen more often in auctions in which you describe your hand than in auctions in which you mastermind

/end rant

Great rant

[helene_t]

jillybean, on 2025-January-29, 09:42, said:

---

I almost always open 1NT with 5m(422), regardless of notrump range.

This hand may be a tad too strong for 1NT but let's say we evaluate as within range, which is obviously not crazy.

The hand doesn't have an immediate rebid problem but I am concerned about my third bid. I may end up in an uncomfortable 3red or 2NT if partner has the usual 5-6 points. If partner bids FSF I don't have a full stopper in the fourth suit, and besides I will have to jump to 3NT to show my strength which takes away a lot of space.

Basically, I cannot show specifically a semi-balanced hand with a specific range while preserving the option to play 1NT. So I prefer to open 1NT. We could easily lose a clubs fit but then maybe opps have lost a red suit fit.

[DavidKok]

If you were tempting me to continue my balanced hand document, it was working. Thankfully mikeh commented, though I think he was holding back out of politeness. I don't like 1NT at all.

Instead I will focus briefly on one other point: many people here have raised the issue that they may have issues describing the hand with a 1♣ opening. I think this is an excuse to justify some masterminding. To me, if I want to score well, the choice is clear: I will show my two long suits (or exact shape), then the strength of my hand, and then leave it to partner. Opening 1NT makes life much more difficult for partner and denies them eve opportunity to evaluate their hand.
Don't hide behind not being able to show clubs with spades. I think this is not only false and most systems, including all standard ones, have ways to show this hand, but also 1♣ into some spade bid or double gains in competition (so much for your system).

I really struggle to find a system that handles this hand type so poorly that a 1NT opening would be justified. Are you all sure that you are playing something that inconvenient?

[P_Marlowe]

smerriman, on 2025-January-29, 17:48, said:

I would also open 1♣ due to it looking a bit too good for 1NT, and having a 1♠ rebid.


I don't follow this. If you open 1♣, you're extremely likely to hear a 1♦ or 1♥ response. How are you making a reverse bid to show the shape and strength - neither 1♠ nor 2♠ is a reverse. I'd still do it, just don't see how it's related to reversing. With hearts instead of spades, definitely.

The issues with regards to being forced to make decision between reverse / no reverse shows up, when the suits are touching.
I mentioned this in my 2nd post in the thread.
My comments were meant to describe the set of 5422 hands, that you may consider opening 1NT instead of bidding your suits.
Just to be clear, with the given hand, I would always start with clubs, followed by bidding spades.

[jdiana]

mikeh, on 2025-January-30, 00:57, said:

I concede Stephen is right on one point…I have to raise 1N to 2N….showing…oh god how can we survive this….4=2=2=5 16-18 hcp!

This addresses a question I raised upthread. 1x-1y-2NT = 18-19 HCP; 1M-1NT(forcing or semi-forcing)-2NT=18-19 HCP; Larry Cohen says 1m-1NT-2NT=18-19 HCP.

But 1♣-1♥-1♠-1NT-2NT shows 16-18? Is this standard? Should 1m-1NT-2NT also show 16-18?

mikeh, on 2025-January-30, 00:57, said:

But playing even moderately ok methods,1C 1R 1S shows 4+ spades and longer clubs, 11-18 hcp. Wow…isn’t it amazing? I have a hand that matches what I’ve announced.

I didn't want to bring up "Walsh style" earlier because JB specified plain vanilla standard bidding, but I think rebidding 1♠ rather than 1NT would be consistent with that style.

[jillybean]

Good questions , Jim.
I look forward to some expert responses.

[mikeh]

jdiana, on 2025-January-30, 07:02, said:

This addresses a question I raised upthread. 1x-1y-2NT = 18-19 HCP; 1M-1NT(forcing or semi-forcing)-2NT=18-19 HCP; Larry Cohen says 1m-1NT-2NT=18-19 HCP.

But 1♣-1♥-1♠-1NT-2NT shows 16-18? Is this standard? Should 1m-1NT-2NT also show 16-18?



I didn't want to bring up "Walsh style" earlier because JB specified plain vanilla standard bidding, but I think rebidding 1♠ rather than 1NT would be consistent with that style.

IC 1M 2N shows a balanced hand, rarely not some 5332 or 4432 or 4333…..yesterday, playing pairs, i rebid 2N after 1D 1S with Jx Kx AK108xx AQx but that’s a low frequency sort of hand…it’s useful to protect the heart holding should we end up in 3N….and even the club holding might benefit

The auction doesn’t deny 4 hearts. Any decent bidding agreements include ways to find hearts after 2N. Similarly 1m 1H 2N doesn’t deny 4 spades.

Flat hands, virtually by definition, play slightly less well, on average, than hands with shape…either because you have a fit and can score ruffs or control losers or ruff a long side suit good or simply run the side suit, after pulling trump or using it to tap the defenders, etc


In contrast, 1m 1R 1S 1N 2N often, not always of course, offers the potential of long suit (clubs) winners with low cards that don’t get accounted for in the 4321 count that underlies 1m 1x 2N

Finally, the terror that so many posters/readers have that 2N on 16 opposite 6-7 hcp is, imo, playing scared bridge. The only way to never fail in a contract is to never bid. Good luck with that.

So yes, once in a while partner goes down in 2N. Omg…what a hideous prospect. Meanwhile those very same terrified bidders routinely miss good games, slams and partscores in one of the black suits.

Qxxx Kxxx xx Qxx This is, imo, a routine pass of 1N. Ok, after they run both red suits against you, you rate to take the rest of the tricks. Down anywhere 2-4 tricks in 1N, cold for a spade partial. And if the heart Ace is onside, wow…you will probably make 1N….but you’ll often make 4S. Yet the ‘oh god…let’s never go down in 2N’ crowd seem oblivious to this very real problem.

Now, if partner is an awful declarer, open 1N and mastermind away. Of course, partner will either never notice your masterminding or think it normal….and do it himself at every opportunity. But that means that your partnership is doomed to play mediocre bridge forever. It’s silly but reflective of human nature. Players seek advice but only accept the advice that accords with their existing views. Good players are the exception. Why? Because they truly want to get better and they’re very happy when someone explains why they should change their views, if the explanation is sensible. The way to get better is to unlearn bad thinking and learn better thinking, yet few people are prepared to do that….even those who claim that they do. Long time readers of this forum should be all too familiar with that….we see the same questions posted with slightly different hands. Using keycard as a slam try is probably the most common, but it’s not the only one.

Years ago, I was one of the players who wore a big ‘ask me’ button at regionals. The idea was for experts to answer questions by non-experts. The practice didn’t last long. I and my friends stopped offering to do it because on the times we were asked for and gave advice, the questioner, more often than not,was actually asking in the hope that we’d tell him or her that they were correct….so they could go off and tell their partner that he or she was wrong. And on hearing that the expert didn’t agree (often didn’t think either player got it right) the questioner started arguing. It’s a human characteristic but it basically ensures that the people who exhibit it never get better.

[mikeh]

Put my previous post in a different way. Why are you posting questions when you have no intention of following the advice given by posters with a detailed understanding of bidding theory?

[jdiana]

mikeh, on 2025-January-30, 15:10, said:

Put my previous post in a different way. Why are you posting questions when you have no intention of following the advice given by posters with a detailed understanding of bidding theory?

Is this directed at me?

I was just asking a simple question regarding the correct point range of a 2NT rebid in different situations. Maybe "But 1♣-1♥-1♠-1NT-2NT shows 16-18? Is this standard?" came across as challenging your opinion in some way, but it wasn't meant like that. It was an honest question. Not sure on what basis you've concluded that I have no intention of following anyone's advice. I appreciate the advice given by you and others on here. Just trying to learn like everyone else.