[cwiggins]

Using a 15-17 HCP 1NT opening, is a 1NT rebid limited to 12-14 HCP, or has the range expanded to 11-14 HCP?

The range probably should be expanded. Unbalanced openings have gotten lighter over the last 20 years. As a result people are opening hands with 11 HCP that may be best suited for a 1NT rebid. For example, if you hold:
♠xx
♥KJxx
♦Axxxx
♣Kx
then after 1♦-1♠, 1NT seems attractive.

If that is happening, then the question is: why not open more 11 HCP balanced hands?

Opening more 11 HCP hands may be desirable: Precision bidders have been opening most if not all 11 HCP balanced hands for years and causing problems for their opponents.

But when I ask standard bidders, almost all resist and open balanced hands only if they have at least 12 HCP.

I'm curious whether the 12 HCP boundary is holding ground more than locally.

[the hog]

Chris, I remember when the original version of Symmetric was released. Roy Kerr did an analysis of several world championships looking at opening 1D on balanced 11 counts. His conclusion was that on average you lost IMPs opening on these hands.
I don't know whether that is still true or not.

[OleBerg]

cwiggins, on May 16 2009, 04:08 AM, said:

Using a 15-17 HCP 1NT opening, is a 1NT rebid limited to 12-14 HCP, or has the range expanded to 11-14 HCP?

The range probably should be expanded.  Unbalanced openings have gotten lighter over the last 20 years. As a result people are opening hands with 11 HCP that may be best suited for a 1NT rebid. For example, if you hold:
  ♠xx
  ♥KJxx
  ♦Axxxx
  ♣Kx
then after 1♦-1♠, 1NT seems attractive.

If that is happening, then the question is: why not open more 11 HCP balanced hands?

Opening more 11 HCP hands may be desirable: Precision bidders have been opening most if not all 11 HCP balanced hands for years and causing problems for their opponents.

But when I ask standard bidders, almost all resist and open balanced hands only if they have at least 12 HCP. 

I'm curious whether the 12 HCP boundary is holding ground more than locally.

Haven't voted.

I play 12-14 NT's and adhere to the interval.

If I should play 15-17 NT's, I think I would open some 11 hcp hands.

For instance:

♠ 832
♥ K743
♦ KQ102
♣ K2

I would never open this with a 12-14 1NT, but a 1♦ opening has more going for it (as opposed to passing it):

- Lead-directing value.
- If partner has hearts, my hand is easily worth a full opening.

Furthermore, the risk of conceding a large penalty is much smaller, when you open one of a suit.

Still, I would also pass many balanced 11 hcp hands, those that doesn't have anything special going for them.

I'd love to say, that I would also pass:

♠ Q32
♥ A432
♦ Q32
♣ A32

but I can't keep a straight face.

[Winstonm]

Your choices would not allow me to vote. My answer is simply No.

[helene_t]

If I evaluate it to 12 I open.

[Winstonm]

helene_t, on May 16 2009, 12:20 PM, said:

If I evaluate it to 12 I open.

That's why my answer was no. If I evaluate the hand to be worth 12, it is no longer a balanced 11-count.

[skjaeran]

Depends on who I'm partnering.

In a partnership where we agree to open any balanced 11-count, that's what I do.

[jdonn]

helene_t, on May 16 2009, 12:20 PM, said:

If I evaluate it to 12 I open.

Me too, which is more accurate than the options given. Kind of like option 1 except exceptional is too strong a word.

[Phil]

Maybe 25 - 30% of them.

- never 4333 unless I have an AK-A.
- never aceless.

Beyond that its pretty subjective, and might depend who I'm playing with, form of scoring, position and vulnerability. It might even depend on what I ate for breakfast or lunch LOL.

If I have good intermediates and a 5332 its probably an opener.

[hanp]

Agree with Phil except that it doesn't depend on what I ate.

[gnasher]

skaeran, on May 16 2009, 08:05 PM, said:

Depends on who I'm partnering.

In a partnership where we agree to open any balanced 11-count, that's what I do.

Me too.

It's probably true that more 14-counts are opened with a "15-17" notrump than they used to be, making it more practicable to open balanced 11-counts.

[NickRW]

In a teams context, I don't see the fascination of opening most bal 11s - you don't hold half the requirement for a game, so there is only tactical advantage in opening them if you can - and I don't see a great deal of that. And I think this is true whether you're playing your NT range as weak or strong.

In a matchpoint setting the part score battle is so much more important and you can make a good argument for opening bal 11s - well not vul anyway.

I might open a bal 11 - but I have to think it is worth 12 - and not a rubbish 12 either - quite a few of them are hardly worth bothering with for the same reason that bal 11s aren't.

Also, the observation that unbal openings have got lighter over the years, to my mind, does not justify lowering one's standards for bal openings - my thought on this is that, in the past, distribution was under valued and we're just experiencing a correction in that regard.

Nick

[fromageGB]

I can't vote as I refuse to put myself in this position. Solve all your problems by opening a mini 10-12 NT. With an 11 count I would not like to pass in first 3 seats. OK, if it was IMPs I would if I had a conservative partner.

[cwiggins]

The_Hog, on May 16 2009, 02:18 AM, said:

Chris, I remember when the original version of Symmetric was released. Roy Kerr did an analysis of several world championships looking at opening 1D on balanced 11 counts. His conclusion was that on average you lost IMPs opening on these hands.
I don't know whether that is still true or not.

Do you know roughly when Kerr did his analysis?

Simulation results discussed at http://crystalwebsit...s_flat_hand.htm says that on average, your side has a plus result when you have 11 HCP balanced and are (i) 4333 with 4+ controls or (ii) 4432 and 3+ controls.

One of the other responses says that matchpoints versus IMPS might make a difference on whether you open, and this might explain why Kerr's results and the theoretical results are different: at IMPs, people bid games almost on the hope that one might be there. When partner has a balanced 11 HCP, that is not going to work well.

Opening 11 HCP can win another way: the other side must bid defensively, and no pair bids more accurately defensively than after a constructive opening. (Of course, this must be offset by the increased accuracy of their declarer play if the opponents win the auction.)

[the hog]

cwiggins, on May 17 2009, 03:41 AM, said:

The_Hog, on May 16 2009, 02:18 AM, said:

Chris, I remember when the original version of Symmetric was released. Roy Kerr did an analysis of several world championships looking at opening 1D on balanced 11 counts. His conclusion was that on average you lost IMPs opening on these hands.
I don't know whether that is still true or not.

Do you know roughly when Kerr did his analysis?

Simulation results discussed at http://crystalwebsit...s_flat_hand.htm says that on average, your side has a plus result when you have 11 HCP balanced and are (i) 4333 with 4+ controls or (ii) 4432 and 3+ controls.

One of the other responses says that matchpoints versus IMPS might make a difference on whether you open, and this might explain why Kerr's results and the theoretical results are different: at IMPs, people bid games almost on the hope that one might be there. When partner has a balanced 11 HCP, that is not going to work well.

Opening 11 HCP can win another way: the other side must bid defensively, and no pair bids more accurately defensively than after a constructive opening. (Of course, this must be offset by the increased accuracy of their declarer play if the opponents win the auction.)

Not really. I do know it was when he was in the process of publishing symmetric, so I guess that would put it about 20 odd years ago.

[Fluffy]

I hate opening with 4333 11 counts, sometimes that's what the opponents need for a bad bidding to their 23 HCP game that is bound to make for your bad distribution.