[mtvesuvius]

Nobody Vul. at IMPs you hold:

Q
AK9x
Q9xxx
A9x

You deal:
1♦ - (P) - 1♠ - (P)
?

What's your poison?

[jdonn]

I would open 1NT and avoid this. I very rarely do it with a singleton but I'm not against it in principle. This hand has obvious rebid problems and looks fine for a 5-1 spade fit with the top tricks and the queen of spades.

Btw you could condense your last 3 poll options.

[Lobowolf]

2♣ for me. Twice in the last 10 years I've played in a 3-3 club fit instead of a 4-4 heart fit because of taking this action. The upside is, my partners can always rebid 5-card spade suits without worrying about a singleton. So we don't miss 5-3 spade fits, and we don't play 5-1 spade misfits.

Back in the day, I asked Max Hardy about a similar hand (unfortunately, one of those 3-3 club fits occurred while playing with my girlfriend), when we were standing in line for a drink at the Vegas Regional during a break between rounds. His response was, "2 clubs. That's an easy one." Granted, we're all in the 21st century now, and Max was codifying a system developed long before the yellow book laid it all out, but all things considered, I still like 2♣ here. Having partners who take false preferences in the minors helps mitigate the downside (though, it admittedly, it does create other downside for those 4-diamond, 5-club hands I open 1♦, but that's for another thread.

[ArtK78]

It would not occur to me to open 1NT, but I would have no qualms about rebidding 1NT.

Having said that, a 2♣ rebid does have merit. But if partner passes 1NT, we are probably in the right spot.

[Apollo81]

I'd rebid 1NT, and am pretty happy with it. I don't like my singleton, nor do I like my 5-card suit; I'm cool with calling this a good 14 count.

[Fluffy]

1NT rebid makes me sick, opening 1NT had some merit though. Now I would happily bid 2♦, the book bid can't be so wrong.

[mikeh]

This is an easy 2♣ rebid. I don't like opening 1N with a stiff, even when it is the A/K, altho I have done it and will do it again.. but not with the Queen. As for rebidding 1N: ugh.... a huge underbid, even if by agreement you may hold this shape.. and if you don't have that agreement, it is a shape distortion as well as a strength distortion.

2♣ has been the mark time bid for decades, and the reasoning behind it is as valid now as it was in years past..... personally, I don't recall ever being dumped in a 3-3, but that may be because I try to forget bids that don't work out

[Lobowolf]

mikeh, on Jun 24 2009, 02:45 PM, said:

This is an easy 2♣ rebid.

That you, Max?

[mike777]

mtvesuvius, on Jun 24 2009, 01:22 PM, said:

Nobody Vul. at IMPs you hold:

Q
AK9x
Q9xxx
A9x

You deal:
1♦ - (P) - 1♠ - (P)
?

What's your poison?

prefer opening 1nt but I open alot of offshape hands 1nt....


Given OP will rebid 2c, easy.

[Jlall]

I'd hanp this one.

[jdonn]

Jlall, on Jun 24 2009, 05:46 PM, said:

I'd hanp this one.

Open 3♦ in third seat?

[andy_h]

I'd open it 1NT and haven't had (m)any troubles with it. If I play in the 5-1 spade fit at least the singleton is the queen. If you made me open 1♦ then I would rebid 2♣ because everything else seems a much worser distortion.

[TylerE]

2♣ is a wtp on this for me. 1NT opening = lol.

[Phil]

So I have the choice of bidding a three card suit or downgrading a 15 count with a stiff Q and my long suit is Q9xxx? You can't be serious. If you don't downgrade a hand like this, you'll never downgrade.

In spite of this I have no strong feelings opening this 1N in the first place, however if your hand evaluation tells you this isn't a 15 then it still isn't after partner's mostlikely response.

[Lobowolf]

Phil, on Jun 24 2009, 10:50 PM, said:

So I have the choice of bidding a three card suit or downgrading a 15 count with a stiff Q and my long suit is Q9xxx? You can't be serious. If you don't downgrade a hand like this, you'll never downgrade.

In spite of this I have no strong feelings opening this 1N in the first place, however if your hand evaluation tells you this isn't a 15 then it still isn't after partner's mostlikely response.

I'm not sure I'm taking your point here. Once you opt to open 1♦ (OP condition) granted, you have to downgrade to rebid 1NT, and as you suggest, that's not hard to do.

But the downgrade question seems to call into question the first bid, not the second; both 1♦-1♠; 1NT and 1♦-1♠; 2♣ are sequences that would encompass a 14 point hand. It's about whether (and in what circumstances, e.g. stiff honor) you rebid 1NT with the stiff (or what lengths you're willing to go to in order to avoid it).

The whether-to-downgrade question is sort of a question for a different OP, or at least one with an additional answer choice: "I would have opened 1NT"

[mike777]

I sort of hate opening 1d and rebidding 1nt geez.

Granted this is winning overwhelmingly in the poll.

[jdonn]

Phil, on Jun 24 2009, 10:50 PM, said:

If you don't downgrade a hand like this, you'll never downgrade.

! Partner bid the stiff queen, you have a 5 card suit, AK A, and we were even gifted with 9 9 9. Are we looking at the same hand?!?

[the hog]

TylerE, on Jun 25 2009, 09:57 AM, said:

2♣ is a wtp on this for me. 1NT opening = lol.

2C = lol. A 1Nt rebid = wtp.

[Codo]

I had bid 2♦ like Gonzalo, but I guess 2♣ is the better choice.

[Fluffy]

mikeh, on Jun 24 2009, 07:45 PM, said:

This is an easy 2♣ rebid. I don't like opening 1N with a stiff, even when it is the A/K, altho I have done it and will do it again.. but not with the Queen. As for rebidding 1N: ugh.... a huge underbid, even if by agreement you may hold this shape.. and if you don't have that agreement, it is a shape distortion as well as a strength distortion.

2♣ has been the mark time bid for decades, and the reasoning behind it is as valid now as it was in years past..... personally, I don't recall ever being dumped in a 3-3, but that may be because I try to forget bids that don't work out

You exagerate with the huge underbid thing, stiff Queen is to be downgraded, singleton in partner's suit is to be downgraded as well.

I like the 2♣ option, but sadly I have that bid overloaded already with 4♦-5♣ hands, not gonna bid it with this too.