1NT opening with a singleton
#1
Posted 2008-June-17, 12:11
#2
Posted 2008-June-17, 12:18
#3
Posted 2008-June-17, 12:20
Bridge should be fun!
SHAPE!
"And no matter what methods you play, it is essential, for anyone aspiring to learn to be a good player, to learn the importance of bidding shape properly." (MH)
#4
Posted 2008-June-17, 12:21
It is not something I would encourage, and it is not something I would want my partner to be encouraging.
#5
Posted 2008-June-17, 12:22
♠ K
♥ KQT3
♦ KJT9
♣ AQT9
and
♠ K
♥ AJT3
♦ AK9
♣ Q7653
would probably be considered prototypical examples.
I tend to be a bit over enthusiastic about 1NT openings.
#6
Posted 2008-June-17, 12:37
A lot of this depends on how light you are willing to reverse -- if you want your reverses to be super sound then you will be "stuck" with a lot of hands and have to choose some "least of evils" option like opening 1NT.
I also think there is a difference between 1NT openings and 1NT rebids.
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#7
Posted 2008-June-17, 13:34
xxx
AKJx
A
Axxxx
#8
Posted 2008-June-17, 13:40
wyman, on 2012-May-04, 09:48, said:
rbforster, on 2012-May-20, 21:04, said:
My YouTube Channel
#9
Posted 2008-June-17, 13:48
-P.J. Painter.
#10
Posted 2008-June-17, 13:49
It would be better if their rule was that "it's OK as long as it occurs less than x% of the time & no system to find out about the stiff".
OTOH routinely opening 1nt with a small stiff isn't allowed under ACBL GCC, unless you play it as 16+ forcing ala Romex.
#11
Posted 2008-June-17, 14:53
you could make a case for opening 1NT
with 4441 shape.
The singleton being an Ace or a King, but
even this requirement is no must be.
Because there is no real difference between
such a hand a a hand with 4432 shape, the
doubleton being two smalls.
But be aware, that not all systems after a 1NT
opening bid will work, if you do this.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#12
Posted 2008-June-17, 15:44
"There is not now, nor has there ever been, any regulation which prohibits a player from opening (or overcalling) a natural NT with a singleton if sound bridge judgment dictates doing so. What IS
prohibited is any agreement that such bids do not promise balanced hands."
You have to be careful here: the above assumes your *agreement* is that 1NT is natural. An agreement that 1NT is artificial is permitted on the GCC, provided it conforms with "FORCING 1NT OPENING BID indicating a balanced or unbalanced hand and a minimum of 16 HCP." IOW, it must be forcing and have a minimum of 16 HCP.
The bottom line is that to agree that a 1NT opening is ostensibly natural (i.e. balanced), but may contain a singleton, is illegal. OTOH, it *is* permissible to open 1NT with a singleton, provided that it is not done often enough to constitute an implicit agreement, and provided it makes "bridge sense" to do so. Burden of proof on that is on the bidder, btw.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#13
Posted 2008-June-17, 23:16
♠Q
♥KQX
♦QXXX
♣AKXXX
I bid 1♣, and partner bid 1♠, What should i bid now, 2 Clubs or 1NT or 2 Diamonds?
And I think even if I open 1NT with a singleton, quite often it will be 1=4=4=4 or 1=3=4=5 or 1=4=3=5 (opposite to Helene's view)
With a minor singleton I often dont have a rebid problem. say it goes 1C-1S, with 3-4-1-5 i am happy to make a reverse, whereas 1-3-4-5 makes me think
#14
Posted 2008-June-18, 00:16
#15
Posted 2008-June-18, 03:10
dbsboy, on Jun 18 2008, 06:16 AM, said:
With a minor singleton I often dont have a rebid problem. say it goes 1C-1S, with 3-4-1-5 i am happy to make a reverse, whereas 1-3-4-5 makes me think
Yes that's right, with a 3-card spades you can either reverse (with something like a max 1NT) or raise spades (with a min). With a stiff spade you may have a more serious rebid problem.
OTOH the stiff minor is less likely to be an issue.
#16
Posted 2008-June-18, 03:38
'ACBL GCC' said:
Going with this definition, a hand with a singleton (or void!) would be considered unbalanced. However, a NT opening is natural if it "generally has no singleton, etc". Note that it says the opening is natural/balanced if you "generally" don't have a singleton, not that you can never have a singleton.
If I open 2NT with a singleton half the time when I've got a 4441 hand, my 2NT opening will still "generally have no singleton, etc." In fact for that case, over 95%+ of the time 2NT would show a balanced hand, and hence be natural/balanced as an opening, even if a few % of the time you actually had an unbalanced 4441 hand. The point here is that 4441 is a very rare shape compared to the classic balanced hand shapes (4432, 4333, 5332) so almost always when I open 2NT I have a specific hand that is balanced.
blackshoe, on Jun 17 2008, 04:44 PM, said:
"There is not now, nor has there ever been, any regulation which prohibits a player from opening (or overcalling) a natural NT with a singleton if sound bridge judgment dictates doing so. What IS prohibited is any agreement that such bids do not promise balanced hands."
Under the GCC definition of an opening being balanced, I think you can still agree to open 2NT with a singleton on a reasonable fraction of 4441 hands for example, since your agreement is still that your 2NT bid "generally has no singleton, etc" (to some appropriately high level of probability) and hence is natural/balanced as required.
#17
Posted 2008-June-18, 04:00
P_Marlowe, on Jun 17 2008, 09:53 PM, said:
you could make a case for opening 1NT
with 4441 shape.
The singleton being an Ace or a King, but
even this requirement is no must be.
Because there is no real difference between
such a hand a a hand with 4432 shape, the
doubleton being two smalls.
no real difference?
of course there's a difference.
Compare partner's
xxx
KQx
Axx
Kxxx
which will raise an opening 1NT to 3NT
opposite
(i)
xx
Axxx
KQxx
AQx
or
(ii)
x
Axxx
KQxx
AQxx
on (i) 3NT is cold 33% of the time, and if you assume LHO will lead their longest suit with a preference for a 4-card major, will make about 66% of the time
on (ii) 3NT is cold roughly 1% of the time, and if you make the same assumptions about the lead, will make maybe 20% of the time.
also,
on (i) 3NT looks to be the best game
on (ii) you would rather be in 5C or 6C than 3NT
#18
Posted 2008-June-18, 05:37
dbsboy, on Jun 18 2008, 12:16 AM, said:
♠Q♥KQx♦Qxxx♣AKxxx
I bid 1♣, and partner bid 1♠, What should i bid now, 2 Clubs or 1NT or 2 Diamonds?
And I think even if I open 1NT with a singleton, quite often it will be =1444 or =1345 or =1435 (opposite to Helene's view)
With a minor singleton I often dont have a rebid problem. say it goes 1C-1S, with =3415 i am happy to make a reverse, whereas =1345 makes me think
You hold a =1345 or =3145 shape and it goes 1C-1S;??
Any of 1N, 2C, or a reverse might be right. Depends on the strength and texture of the hand.
Let's say the hand is x-KQx-Qxxx-AKQxx. (or x-Qxxx-KQx-AKQxx)
Unless you think this hand is strong enough for a reverse, and having a stiff in partner's suit argues that you should downgrade these hands, a 2C rebid stands out as the best description of your hand's trick taking strength. Frankly, I'd probably reverse with either of these. Take away a Q, or change a Q into a J, and I'd probably rebid 2C.
OTOH, just about any =3145 or =3415 with those values,
KQx-Q-Qxxx-AKxxx, Qxx-x-KQxx-AKQxx, etc, =is= worth seriously considering a reverse with because the odds are good that you and partner have a ♠ fit.
It's having 3 cards in Responder's suit that matters, not whether the stiff is in ♥'s or ♦'s.
Now give yourself a =1345 or =1435 where most of your points are in your short suits. The extreme example is something like A-KQx-KQxx-Qxxxx. This hand has far less trick taking strength than one where the HCP are in the long suits
(ie x-Qxx-KQxx-AKQxx). While I would reverse with the 2nd of these, the first of these is the classic hand you may be forced to open 1N= 15-17 with as the least lie.
BTW, if you do open 1N with A-KQx-KQxx-Qxxxx, you should also treat it as a =minimum= 1N opening. Decline any invites responder makes if you hold such a hand and open 1N with it.
In fact, if you have a =1345 or =1435 with 15 HCP containing a stiff honor, downgrade it to below 15 HCP and bid it like a minimum. Such hands are best described with either a 1N or 2C rebid depending on exactly where the values are.
Frances' excellent post gives the practical reason why.
#19
Posted 2008-June-18, 05:51
FrancesHinden, on Jun 18 2008, 05:00 AM, said:
P_Marlowe, on Jun 17 2008, 09:53 PM, said:
you could make a case for opening 1NT
with 4441 shape.
The singleton being an Ace or a King, but
even this requirement is no must be.
Because there is no real difference between
such a hand a a hand with 4432 shape, the
doubleton being two smalls.
no real difference?
of course there's a difference.
<snip - valid examples>
First of all, I dont do it and of course you are right,
"no real difference" is an oversimplification.
But 4441 shapes occur how often? 3% of the time?
And the described scenarios do occur how often as a
portion of those 3% of time?
I would not worry too much, and if all comes together,
I would hope that the x% chance of success holds.
And if it does not hold, I know it was not may day.
The advantage would be, that I dont need to worry
about the 4441 shape in other bidding sequences.
Actually it is not uncommon to pretend, that 4441 does
not exist.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#20
Posted 2008-June-18, 06:14
P_Marlowe, on Jun 18 2008, 06:51 AM, said:
not exist.
Yup. I've played in more than one partnership where we agreed that 4441's break System. Any bidding done with them was agreed to be a case of telling the least lie.
I've even played in partnerships where We agreed to pass all 4441's with less than 14 HCP and a rebid problem (so we'd pass all =1444 13 counts for instance).

Help
