[jdeegan]

Scoring: IMP

---

Your bid?
Would the form of scoring matter?
Would your position matter?
Would the vulnerability matter?

[pbleighton]

1NT, all the time. You don't have a 4 card major, and the hand is a very marginal reverse.

Peter

[Free]

1NT: right HCP range, almost the right shape, avoids any rebid problems, and has stops in almost every suit. You probably can handle 5-2 Major fits at 2-level as well.

[helene_t]

1NT. Not remotely close.A good hand for a 1NT opening and a terrible hand for anything else.

[blackshoe]

This is not a balanced hand. If the diamonds were chunkier, 1♦, but on this hand, 1♣. Too weak to reverse, so I'm planning to rebid 2♣. That ♠ Q isn't worth two points, either.

[Free]

blackshoe, on Jun 11 2006, 02:27 PM, said:

This is not a balanced hand.

Sorry but I disagree. Most hands without a singleton can be considered balanced without any problems at all.

Some people even think a 5M332 distribution is not balanced. But give them a 5m332 and they think it is (do you get the logic?)...

[david_c]

Hmm, is it balanced? I dunno, you can make the word mean whatever you want it to mean.

But is it a 1NT opener? Absolutely yes.

[P_Marlowe]

1C

A style issue.

1NT may be better, but a mayor consideration
is also, which response structure do you play
after a NT opening.

E.g. It will be great if you play garbage
stayman and end up to play 2M in a 4-2 fit.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[mcphee]

Hand types like this are best opened 1NT simply because it is the most accurate bid you can make. Opening 1C planning to reverse to 2D to indicate your strength is a poor choice, the D are not robust. Opening 1C and later rebidding 2C has 2 major flaws, the first of which is the lack of the 6th trump, the second being we have not really given partner a good indication of our values and could easily miss a game, perhaps even play in an inferior partscore.

When your side can open the bidding 1NT you are better placed. Sometimes we are not able to make a perfect choice for a bid. The players fuction under less than perfect conditions is to "make the best bid possible".

[blackshoe]

Free, on Jun 11 2006, 08:31 AM, said:

blackshoe, on Jun 11 2006, 02:27 PM, said:

This is not a balanced hand.

Sorry but I disagree. Most hands without a singleton can be considered balanced without any problems at all.

Some people even think a 5M332 distribution is not balanced. But give them a 5m332 and they think it is (do you get the logic?)...

I might get the logic - if there were any.

The balanced distributions are 4-3-3-3, 4-4-3-2 and 5-3-3-2. In the last case, I don't care which suit is longest, it's still a balanced hand. Note that 5-4-2-2 is not included.

As George Rosenkranz said "Balanced hands were made to bid NT" - and unbalanced or semi-balanced (5-4-2-2 or 6-3-2-2) hands were not. Yes, it may be that NT is the best strain when you are semi-balanced and partner is balanced, or at least has a stopper or two in your doubletons, but you have no idea what partner has when you're choosing your opening bid. Don't lie to him about your holding.

[blackshoe]

mcphee, on Jun 11 2006, 08:46 AM, said:

Hand types like this are best opened 1NT simply because it is the most accurate bid you can make.

All the potential opening bids on this hand have flaws. I don't agree that 1NT is "most accurate", though. As Marlowe says, it's a style issue.

A 2♣ rebid has a wide range. I don't see why a hand at the top of that range (and this hand is not, IMO, stronger than that) should not be bid to show that range.

[pbleighton]

"Don't lie to him about your holding"

This is a style issue. If you want to play that you and your partners never open 1NT with 5422s, then 1NT is a lie. If I (or most of the other posters here) choose to open 1NT with many 5422 hands, then 1NT is not a lie, as she will be prepared for it.

Peter

[blackshoe]

"This is a style issue."

On that, we agree.

"Democracy is based on the assumption that a million men are wiser than one man. How's that again? I missed something.
Autocracy is based on the assumption that one man is wiser than a million men. Let's play that over again, too. Who decides?" -- Robert A. Heinlein

[Free]

blackshoe, on Jun 11 2006, 02:47 PM, said:

Don't lie to him about your holding.

Ok, so you'll open 1♣. For example, now your partner responds 1M (anything except 1♦). How will you not lie to him about your holding?

These hands are meant to lie, the question (matter of style which we all agree to) is when you're going to lie, and how much.

[han]

I agree that this is a style issue. I also think that opening anything but 1NT with this hand is a terrible style.

[inquiry]

1NT... what else?

[Walddk]

I have no problem with opening this hand 1NT. It's off-shape, semi-balanced if you like, but it's the least of evils in my opinion. This hand, however, is much more difficult:

♠ xx
♥ AQ
♦ K10xx
♣ AK9xx

I would probably still open 1NT, but it's far from being as clearcut as the hand shown by jdeegan. 1♣ followed by 2♣ over a 1♠ response is not horrible, but 1♦ then 2♣ is something I would never do with that hand or the hand above.

♠ xx
♥ AJ
♦ AKQx
♣ Jxxxx

... and I might. But only "might"; 1NT is still an option. 1♣ followed by 2♣ is definitely not.

Roland

[Double !]

i used to bid these types of hands naturally, even using a prepared 1♦ opener, planning to rebid 2♣ if i felt that the hand wasn't worth a reverse, and then take further action if P showed life. I no longer feel that this is the better approach.

I, too, would now open this hand with 1NT for many of the reasons mentioned above.
However, there are some other reasons IMO for opening this hand with 1NT.
Response structures to 1NT openings are well-developed these days, and it is usually much easier for partner to 1) assess the potential of the combined hands, and 2) if partner transfers to 2M on a 5-card suit (that might not otherwise be rebiddable) and then passes, it is likely to be a good spot.

What fascinates me, and I am curious about others' opinions about this, is seeing some players (perhaps with some younger experts) opening 1NT holding 4-5 in the majors and 15-17 (like 4522 distro). Do you all believe that this is an advisable way to bid such hands and, if yes, are any adjustments in the response structure made? TYIA

DHL

[jdonn]

Any bid but 1NT on the hand in question is ridiculous to me. 1♣ then 2♣ on a 5 card suit with a 16 count is a MUCH bigger misdescription.

[kfgauss]

Double !, on Jun 11 2006, 04:42 PM, said:

What fascinates me, and I am curious about others' opinions about this, is seeing some players (perhaps with some younger experts) opening 1NT holding 4-5 in the majors and 15-17 (like 4522 distro).  Do you all believe that this is an advisable way to bid such hands and, if yes, are any adjustments in the response structure made?  TYIA

I wouldn't recommend this as something to do often. At best, you should only do it when your hand is very notrumpy. Given this (i.e. that it's so infrequent), I wouldn't change your notrump structure based on it.

Recently, my partner tried this on AQxx AK8xx Qx Qx to great effect when I showed up with KJ10x J9x A10x AJx and raised him to 3NT.

In contrast, I think that most 15-17 2-2-4-5 hands (all but those that are very suit-oriented) should be opened 1NT.

Andy