[mikeh]

I have always been a 2♣ bidder here, and all my partners are as well, but I am increasingly coming around to the view that perhaps 1N is best.

I am not al lthe way there yet. In part because I see real issues with responder no longer being entitled to expect xx at a minimum in terms of support. While I appreciate that the 4th suit sequence 1♦ 1♠ 2♣ 2♥ 3♥ is a problem so is the idea that responder with AKQxxx in ♠s cannot count on a 68.5% or better chance of no losers and 6 winners! And that is only one example of many issues that arise when opener can be 1=4=4=4 for 1N.

Another, and more prosaic issue, relates to when responder should pass 1N with a 5 card ♠ suit and a weak hand.

My almost invariable rule, opposite a 1N opening bid, is to get to the major. I only depart from that on hands such as 9xxxx Q10x Qx Kxx.. where all my stuff is in the short suits...

Admittedly, one of the upsides to that approach is that once in a while we get to a 9 card fit, which is no longer an issue in the given auction.

But I still like to bid 2♠ on most 5332 hands after a 1N rebid, and experience suggests that this style is a consistent, altho not an assured, winner. In part because the long ♠s will usually score tricks while controlling side suits at a suit contract and be unusable in notrump and in part because of the preemptive effect.. compared to 1N being passed to 4th chair may be able to compete (opener is not USUALLY 1=4=4=4 even when that style is permissible).

If we rebid 1N on 1=4=4=4 hands, we will play 1N with 18-22 hcp and a 5-3 ♠ fit with, say, a combined ♥ holding of xx opposite Qx on occasion.... or play a 5-1 Qxxxx opposite x ♠ contract, with 4+ trump losers, when 1N was on ice.

For me, this is a work in progress: I have to convince my partners to experiment and, at our age, our urge to experiment has diminished

[cherdano]

Mike, I think the style that allows 1N rebids with singletons only works well if you often raise with 3-card support and, say, any xx doubleton. Then you can feel much better passing 1N with your weak 5 spades.

The 1N rebid with a singleton is actually even more useful with the well-known (in all bidding forums) 1435 shape, so that your 1C-1x-2C really shows 6 cards.

[han]

1NT for me.

I suspect that some of the people who object to 1NT here would rebid it on some 1-4-5-3 shapes anyway.

[Winstonm]

Quote

Wtf is everything an age thing? Are you really implying that I do not like my opponents to guess?

Chill, Dude - I am implying something about me as far as the age thing - it is harder to break the mold and do things differently after a number of years.

And no, I am not implying that you do not like the opponents to guess; what I have said is that a more scientific approach leaves less guesswork for the opponents - however, that doesn't mean bashing is the right thing but one should be aware of the tradeoff involved when using a more scientific approach, and that tradeoff is more information is given to the opponents as well as to partner. If you personally use a scientific approach, it means your system is giving more information to the opponents, not that you want to do so.

It may well be worth the tradeoff, and your arguments are persuasive.

Besides, MikeH said the same thing basically that I did. Go pick on him for awhile.

[mikeh]

Winstonm, on Jan 24 2007, 06:27 PM, said:

Besides, MikeH said the same thing basically that I did.  Go pick on him for awhile. 

I briefly met Justin in Hawaii... and he is bigger than me and much, much younger (altho not better looking, I should add for the benefit of our female readership) so i don't want him picking on me, thanks

[temp3600]

I rebid 2♣ with a small singleton and 1NT with an honor singleton.

[whereagles]

I like 2♣, but there are definitely some advantages to 1NT.

[jtfanclub]

Just curious to see if I'm on drugs...

I notice that not one person has said...'Hmmm, a 12 count, no 5 card suits, I may get stuck for a rebid, and in a competitive auction I'm probably going to lose because I'm missing the boss suit. If the hand gets thrown in, it probably won't be a bad result."

It's the drugs, isn't it?

Edited to add: And as long as I'm hallucinating, as long as I'm planning to rebid 1NT over 1♠, why am I opening 1♦ anyways? If I open 1♣ I've greatly increased the odds of getting a response I like, I won't miss a nice club fit if partner is weak, and I've decreased the odds of partner rebidding 2♠ with 5, or at least I think I have. What advantage is there to opening 1♦ if I'm not going to rebid 2♣?

[luckyloser]

cherdano, on Jan 24 2007, 05:51 PM, said:

Mike, I think the style that allows 1N rebids with singletons only works well if you often raise with 3-card support and, say, any xx doubleton. Then you can feel much better passing 1N with your weak 5 spades.

The 1N rebid with a singleton is actually even more useful with the well-known (in all bidding forums) 1435 shape, so that your 1C-1x-2C really shows 6 cards.

after reading all your comments I want to give my own opinion.

i see several good arguments for either alternative:

for 1nt
the only way to play 1nt and scoring much better at mps
at the time of decision 1nt is the most likely optimum contract
limiting the hand to 12-14
not implying a minor 2-suiter (5-4 or longer)
must be bid anyway with 1-4-5-3 and bad D, so it does not promise 2 s
makes it easier to find a h fit at a low level (p with Qxxxx,Jxxx,J,Kxx will pass 2c but bid 2h -nonforcing - over 1nt!!)
2c may land us in 4-2 d "fit" (Qxxxx,Jxxx,Ax,xx)

for 2c
shows another possible trump suit
does not promise 2 s (and with a AKQxxx a running suit)
1nt may land us in a 5-1 s fit
is the correct bid
1nt may be bad when p has very weak s and a 2nd suit

my conclusion is that at mps it is very important to be able to play in nt, especially 1nt as this scores best and defense is toughest. to bypass 1nt only to bid "correctly" may keep one happy but is loosing bridge strategy. at mps the partscore-battle is much more important than anything else. also a 4-2 d fit seems even worse than a 5-1 s fit.

the hand in question may be constructed to look even even more awkward:
x,KQxx,Jxxxx,AQx (2d or 2c here would be very awkward!)
x,KQxx,AQJx,xxxx (2c here is even worse)
so, in effect we cannot guarantee 2 s cards when bidding 1nt as there are hands that simply become unbiddable. so maybe we should drop that "promise".
that however can only be done if you raise frequently with 3-card s support here, so after a 1nt rebid responder can be sure you either have less than 3 s or a very nt-ish hand and will not insist on his 5-card suit.

all in all: 1NT, by far!

[SteelWheel]

Quote

Just curious to see if I'm on drugs...

I notice that not one person has said...'Hmmm, a 12 count, no 5 card suits, I may get stuck for a rebid, and in a competitive auction I'm probably going to lose because I'm missing the boss suit. If the hand gets thrown in, it probably won't be a bad result."

It's the drugs, isn't it?

Edited to add: And as long as I'm hallucinating, as long as I'm planning to rebid 1NT over 1♠, why am I opening 1♦ anyways? If I open 1♣ I've greatly increased the odds of getting a response I like, I won't miss a nice club fit if partner is weak, and I've decreased the odds of partner rebidding 2♠ with 5, or at least I think I have. What advantage is there to opening 1♦ if I'm not going to rebid 2♣?

I was just thinking the same thing as I read through this topic...

I just know that Al Roth would have passed this hand without a moment's hesitation; he always cautioned against opening when minimumish in high cards and lacking spade length.

As another sort of sub-topic here: What about those who play weak NTs? It appears they are pretty much forced to open 1♦ and rebid 2♣ with this hand type....

Long ago and far away, in an old Bridge World issue somewhere, there is a brief write-up of a gadget called the "Noisicerp 2♦ opening" (You go figure out the derivation of the name on your own for extra credit). This toy was aimed at weak notrumpers; the idea was that this opening showed 4441 hands with HCP strength equal to that of the notrump opening range--but ♦ was guaranteed to be one of the long suits. Gets the hand off your chest in one bid, and partner is well placed to do the right thing. Additionally, it has the advantage of being a fairly frequently passable bid, so it may have some tactical advantage when the situation arises.

In the case of this hand as presented: I suppose I'm a 2♣er with many reservations. I also used to be a 1NTer with this hand type. But Berkowitz and Cohen constantly make reference to this topic whenever it pops up in Master Solvers Club, and they insist that systemically rebidding 1NT when partner hits your singleton is "nuts". And that's one of the nicer things they had to say about it....

[mike777]

',,,,,,I just know that Al Roth would have passed this hand without a moment's hesitation; he always cautioned against opening when minimumish in high cards and lacking spade length......"

why say sorry....rs is not silly.....ok?

[helene_t]

As for passing this hand: I think it's marginal, I would certainly pass in 3rd/4th seat and in 1st/2nd I would pass without the intermediates and might still do it when playing against conservative opps that are likely to let the board pass out. Then again, add one HCP and opening is a no-brainer allthough the issue of this thread is still the same.

As for opening 1♣: If not playing Walsh, it's a good idea. If playing T-Walsh it's even a very good idea since your 1NT rebid then denies 3 spades so partner won't rebid a 5-card. One reason for opening 1♦ with 2344 is that you have a 3♣ rebid if partner doubles a 2♠ overcall. This is less of an issue with 3244 and with 1444 it's not an issue at all.

As for the 5-1 fit in spades: my IRL partners don't rebid 5-card suits in this situation. With a pick-up I know it could be an issue but I would still rebid 1NT without second thoughts. To me it's not close at all.

To me, this 1NT rebid is the principal case for playing strong notrump. If partner insists of rebiding 2♣ with four diamonds, I would prefer playing a weak notrump.

[SoTired]

Changed my mind about rebidding 1N... was against, now for. IMHO, rebidding 1N solves more problems than it causes.
Pros:
+ limits hand
+ 1m 1M 2m more likely 6
+ 1D 1M 2C more likely 5-4 and unbalanced
+ 1N is likely best contract with 1444 after 1S response
+ allows 1D 1S 1N 2H
+ allows open 1C with 1444 to improve chances of finding minor fit
Cons:
- Responder with weak hand and 5M cannot rebid 5M to improve contract
- Responder with 6M cannot count on 2-card support
- hidden singleton will play in 3N rather than 5m when 5m right

Have I missed anything?

BTW, I recall Roth-Stone once passed out a slam hand in a world championship

[mike777]

yep i rest my case on r/s/////they lost ?


////if we are losing a slam hand here at the other table...tell us.....////

[whereagles]

SoTired, on Jan 25 2007, 11:43 AM, said:

Changed my mind about rebidding 1N... was against, now for. IMHO, rebidding 1N solves more problems than it causes.

I rebid 1NT on a regular basis if the singleton is A,K or Q.

By the way, responder can keep rebidding 2♠ with 5 cards because opener will have 2 spades 98% of the time. (Probability of 1444 is about 2%.)

[Winstonm]

I, too, am beginning to see the light. 1N does solve a lot of the headaches of the rebids, and if you play something like x,y, z there should be no problems whatsoever in the continuations.

MikeH - I've not only met Justin but played against the turkey. He plays damn good and he is a nice guy - until you say something about age - then he sucks.

[luckyloser]

congratulations!

this is a very civilized discussion. the fact that some participants admit they have changed their minds is even more promising!

in other forums people only write and never read, they shout and do not listen...

hope it remains like that!

by the way, i never thought this problem would attract that many responses; some of them hit the bulls eye!

congratulations!

[awm]

SoTired, on Jan 25 2007, 06:43 AM, said:

Changed my mind about rebidding 1N... was against, now for. IMHO, rebidding 1N solves more problems than it causes.
Pros:
+ limits hand
+ 1m 1M 2m more likely 6
+ 1D 1M 2C more likely 5-4 and unbalanced
+ 1N is likely best contract with 1444 after 1S response
+ allows 1D 1S 1N 2H
+ allows open 1C with 1444 to improve chances of finding minor fit
Cons:
- Responder with weak hand and 5M cannot rebid 5M to improve contract
- Responder with 6M cannot count on 2-card support
- hidden singleton will play in 3N rather than 5m when 5m right

Have I missed anything?

BTW, I recall Roth-Stone once passed out a slam hand in a world championship

I agree with SoTired, but have a couple more positive comments on rebidding 1NT:

This solves a pretty serious problem on patterns like 1435/1453 when the minor is weak. If we're going to bid 1NT on such hands anyway, it doesn't really cost to do the same with 1444.

If we raise fairly frequently on 3-card support (even when balanced) then responder's inability to correct to a 5-card major is less of an issue. If the five-card suit is pretty strong (which is when the 5-2 fit really plays well anyway) then it's still okay to rebid it.

There is plenty of space to explore on GF hands over the 1NT rebid. Playing 2-way checkback leaves a lot of sequences available. It's not hard to work out ways to discover opener's singleton (or even exact shape if you want it) or to distinguish hands with good/bad six card suits so opener can make an informed choice of games.