Codo, on Jan 6 2010, 09:18 AM, said:
1eyedjack, on Jan 6 2010, 12:30 AM, said:
Codo, on Jan 5 2010, 01:32 PM, said:
1eyedjack, on Jan 5 2010, 05:54 PM, said:
The hand to my mind demonstrates the value of opening 1NT with a 5 card spade suit when in range (which I assume is 15-17). Those who open 1S are under pressure to raise 1N to 2N with these hands which contract would be at risk opposite a minimum end of the wide range 1N response. If your practice is to open these hands 1N then a 1N response on this occasion is certainly safe.
This hand proves exactly nothing. If partner with a 15-17 NT invites you via 2 NT you simply accept.
What part of "which contract would be at risk opposite a minimum end of the wide range 1N response" did you miss?
I did not miss anything, thank you, but maybe your translating computer failed? Or what did you like to tell us with "The hand to my mind demonstrates the value of opening 1NT...."?
Please enlighten me and show me why an opener with a 5332 and 15-17 has any problem in reaching 3 NT opposite this hand after any sensible opening.
If you regard opening 1
♠ as falling within the set of "any sensible opening", then as opener you have to make a decision following a 1N response, whether or not to invite. If you assert that opener has no problem in reaching 3 NT it can only result from your decision that it is appropriate to invite game. Responder cannot accept an invitation that opener does not profer.
If you invite to game with such an opener following a 1NT response then you will have no problem reaching game on this hand. Your problem will come on the next occasion that a similar hand arises, when you again invite and responder declines the invitation having responded on a 5-6 count and you now languish in 2NT when you had an opportunity to play in 1NT (but at the risk of missing game had responder had a 10 count).
You can't have it both ways, is all I am saying. Either you "easily" find the game when responder is max (and play in a dismal 2N when responder is min), or you miss 3N when responder is max and play in a reasonable 1N when responder is min.
Well, you can in fact have it both ways: by opening 1N, having a narrower range than the 1N response to 1
♠. Hence this hand demonstrates one of the merits of opening 1N. There are of course other gains and losses, such as the likelihood of finding or missing a Spade fit.
As many responders have pointed out, this is a "wtp" hand and some have wondered why jb posted it. I can only speculate, but a common reason why some intermediate players regard this as a problem hand is because they do not want to raise a 1N response to 2N on a 15 count (and rightly so in my opinion, although clearly not in yours, as you say you would find 3N), which in turn causes them concern about responding 1N on this hand and thereby missing game. That problem disappears if you open 1N rather than 1
♠
Perhaps you will suggest that playing Gazzilli or something similar affords you the best of both worlds and allows for a 1
♠ opener. That may well be an option but not one that I would suggest in this forum, nor is it a panacea. For one thing it still denies you the opportunity to play in 1N, which may yet be the best spot, as well as denying some optimal 2-minor contracts.
Psych (pron. saik): A gross and deliberate misstatement of honour strength and/or suit length. Expressly permitted under Law 73E but forbidden contrary to that law by Acol club tourneys.
Psyche (pron. sahy-kee): The human soul, spirit or mind (derived, personification thereof, beloved of Eros, Greek myth).
Masterminding (pron. m

s

t

r-m

nd

ing) tr. v. - Any bid made by bridge player with which partner disagrees.
"Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts." 9th battalion, King's own Yorkshire light infantry,
2000 years earlier: "morituri te salutant"
"I will be with you, whatever". Blair to Bush, precursor to invasion of Iraq