[awm]

Scoring: IMP

---

Partner opens 1♦ and RHO passes. What's your call?

If you'd bid 2♦ (natural NF) please also mention what you'd do if playing inverted minors.

[hrothgar]

I'm comfortable passing with the hand in question

[SoTired]

even if not playing inverted minors, I pass. I am not going to raise a minor with J10x and I won't bid 1N with only 5 HCP.

[pclayton]

You have to bid 1N, but all of my regular pards pass. Perhaps our area doesn't balance as much as other places.

[TimG]

Wasn't there a poll hand recently where the opening bid options were 1♦, 2N, and 2♣? Is this partner's hand?

I agree with jlall, an Ace plus JTx in partner's suit is too much to pass. 1NT.

EDIT: Found the poll thread. I hope the 1♦ openers aren't passing here.

[skjaeran]

With JTx and an ace I'll bid 1NT. It's hard for opps to enter the auction if they have the highest contract, and I won't miss game when partner has a "monster". You can't pass with this in a standard system with wide range openings.

[Fluffy]

easy pass, don't wanna go too high.

[mike777]

easy 1nt, don't wanna go too low.

[Apollo81]

1NT since we are white.

[pbleighton]

1NT.

This is purely a style question.

Peter

[kenrexford]

I really don't get 1NT unless the range is 5-11

Sure, it's easy to argue for 1NT on the basis of preemption, which is a valid point. However, if the base for 1NT is 5, then the high-end 1NT must seem to be 9. That puts us down one quite a bit when Responder has 10-11 and must make a trashy 2/1.

If the 1NT range is 5-11, which I actually play, then this call works.

Alternatively, if the 10-11 hands are freely handled with a 2/1, whether 2♣ or 2♦, then I suppose you must tighten up the 1♦ opening, which is a style I definitely do not like, personally.

So, as my style is to enable more free opening of 1♦ and to avoid shady 2/1 calls after 1♦, I'd only bid 1NT if partner allows a 5-11 agreement. Otherwise, pass.

[the hog]

A very comfortable pass.

[helene_t]

Pass or 1N, no strong preference.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

either pass or bid 1NT, 2D would never
have crossed my mind, even playing a
style where 1D promises 4.

I think I pass at the table, but believe 1 NT
better.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Echognome]

Pass avoids the issue. Change it to xx xxx QTx Axxxx if you must.

[Gerben42]

If the issue is to bid 1NT without stoppers in both majors, I bid it anyway.
If the issue is "should you ever pass partner's opening bid with an Ace", I say yes.

[SoTired]

STOPPERS? Is this what this is all about? How many stoppers are you expected to have with 6 HCP?

If you want to upgrade J10x and bid 1N, fine by me. But don't bid 2D because you don't have major suit stoppers. [sorry - too many negatives.... but too incredulous to fix it]

[hrothgar]

For what its worth, I also assumed that the primary issue on this poll was a question of strength rather than stopper.

My impression is that a majority of experts prefer to treat a balanced hand as a balanced hand. They will (typically) prefer to use a NT bid to clarify shape rather than promising stoppers. For example, see Frances' comments about 1♠ versus 2N in the thread regarding 18-19 balanced hands. There are certainly exceptions to this rule. Many players prefer to open 1M with a 5332 shape and the appropriate strength for a NT opening. Equally significant, it becomes a lot more important to clarify stoppers in late rounds of an auction.

Accordingly, it never even occured to me that this thread was focusing on major suit stoppers. I assumed that this was a (simple) matter of hand evaluation. Admittedly, the split between responses would make it appear that this is far from simple.

[awm]

I think there are multiple legitimate questions here. One is whether you should pass; we have seen a lot of people open 1m with very strong hands on these forums, and you do have a fit plus an ace. Bidding also potentially makes it harder for opponents to get into the auction.

The second question is, if you decide to bid, whether you should bid 1NT. There are certainly downsides to this, including wrong-siding the contract if partner has extras, playing in a likely non-best partial (do you really think you'll make 1NT opposite 12-14 balanced), and perhaps overstating your values (people like to respond 1M or raise partner with bad hands all the time, but a 1NT response to 1m usually shows a real hand). I like 2♦ natural if available, for what it's worth.

In any case, what happened on the actual hand doesn't bear directly on the merits of these actions. The hands were something like (spots approximate):

Scoring: IMP

---

At one table:

1♦ - Pass - 1♥ - 1♠
X(1) - Pass - 2♦ - Pass
2♠(2) - Pass - 3♣(3) - Pass
3NT

(1) Support double.
(2) Unclear, but shows extras; probably an overbid.
(3) South "bidding his shape" but north thinks this shows a decent hand.

Three notrump didn't make. South claimed that 1♥ was the "textbook bid" but none of the other players at the table or the kibitzers seemed to have read this book.

At the other table:

1♦ - Pass - 1NT - 2♠
Pass - Pass - 3♣

The 2♠ call was quite aggressive but seemed to work out here. Actually 2♠ is a very interesting single-dummy play problem but didn't actually play out when south balanced with 3♣ and proceeded to go down four (undoubled).