[whereagles]

never downgrade lol. 1 pt at most, but 2 is too much eheh

[neilkaz]

Jlall, on Jan 8 2010, 04:07 AM, said:

KQJ KQJ KQJ xxxx. MP. You play 14-16 NT. Would you?

I'll downgrade to the SAYC or 2/1 typical 15-17, but really don't want to downgrade by 2 pts if playing 14-16.

[fred]

If you had this hand in a Robot Reward Tournament would you open at all?

Would the vulnerability matter?

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[jdonn]

fred, on Jan 8 2010, 11:22 AM, said:

If you had this hand in a Robot Reward Tournament would you open at all?

Would the vulnerability matter?

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Yes I would only open vul. But I wouldn't open with 1NT since gib passes with 8..

I think downgrading by 2 points on a balanced hand is pretty ridiculous, not to mention the pleasure of opening in your xxxx isn't so good either! But if someone just wants a story then who am I to question?

[Jlall]

fred, on Jan 8 2010, 11:22 AM, said:

If you had this hand in a Robot Reward Tournament would you open at all?

Would the vulnerability matter?

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

I wouldn't

[bluecalm]

Double downgrade is close. C'mon I have a hand which can't make game opposite 3 aces of my choice

[jdonn]

bluecalm, on Jan 8 2010, 11:40 AM, said:

Double downgrade is close. C'mon I have a hand which can't make game opposite 3 aces of my choice

It can't?

[keylime]

Strong club here. If I hit pard with a positive, it'll likely be in a major.

[lamford]

Reminds me of a hand where someone opened 2NT on KQJ KQJ KQJ KQJT and all passed; declarer made five tricks.

I agree with Justin's downgrade, it has 16.5 Binkie points (deduct one sixth for each jack and one third for each queen, add half for each ace).

I was criticised for responding 1NT to 1S on QJ QJ xxxxxx KQJ, and was surprised to find that was only 8.5 KR points, and only 8 Kleinmann.

[matmat]

no aces, no 5 card suit... is this even an opener?

[aguahombre]

Jlall, on Jan 8 2010, 04:33 AM, said:

I think I partially did it just so I could say I downgraded by 2 points at some point in my life heh.

Understandable. I noticed that 14-16 is becoming a popular range among experts. Maybe it is because they want more frequency than 15-17 and more opportunities to upgrade and downgrade. feels like a bad 17 to me.

[dellache]

I would double downgrade without second thought. A bad 16 to me. KQJ is awful (if pard doesn't have the Ace, it's often on ly 2 tricks with 6 HCP, if he has Axx it's 3 tricks with 10 HCP). And 4333 is bad. So open 1NT, wtp ? (the only problem is the 25% of chances when it turns badly, your teammates might bug you at the end of the session. And so again, wtp ?)

[nigel_k]

I ran a simulation assuming partner has a balanced 6-8 HCP and no five card major. With less than 6, you'll play 1NT even if you show 17-19 and with more than 8, he'll invite opposite 14-16 so you always play 3NT. Obviously this doesn't include all relevant hands - if he has a five card major and a stiff club you are going to be sorry you downgraded. But it covers the most common hands where showing 14-16 vs 17-19 will make a difference. I did 10,000 hands for each of 6, 7 and 8 HCP.

6 HCP
-------
Less than 7 tricks: 9.72%
7 tricks: 45.54%
8 tricks: 37.54%
9 or more tricks: 7.20%

7 HCP
-------
Less than 7 tricks: 3.74%
7 tricks: 24.42%
8 tricks: 52.90%
9 or more tricks: 18.94%

8 HCP
-------
Less than 7 tricks: 1.79%
7 tricks: 11.87%
8 tricks: 44.54%
9 or more tricks: 41.80%

So if you show 17-19 and partner has 6 and invites you'll play 2NT, breaking even 45% of the time and losing the other 55%. If partner has 7 he might just bid game sometimes opposite 17-19 but let's say he always invites. Then you still play 2NT and break even on 71.84% and lose on 28.16%. Opposite 8, you'll play 1NT if you show 14-16 and 3NT if you show 17-19, so gain on 41.8% of hands and lose on the other 58.2%.

Even allowing for the usual caveats about declarer's advantage etc, I'd say that the 14-16 valuation looks like a clear winner. Even more so at matchpoints.

[jdonn]

nigel_k, on Jan 8 2010, 04:43 PM, said:

Even allowing for the usual caveats about declarer's advantage etc, I'd say that the 14-16 valuation looks like a clear winner. Even more so at matchpoints.

I don't think it's a clear winner at all.
- As you say, the usual caveats about declarer advantage.
- As you admit, not including 5 card majors, and if he has one you have a good fit for it.
- Partner will sometimes not invite with 6 (and this will probably tend to be the 6s that did the worst) and sometimes bid game with 7 (and this will probably tend to be the 7s that did the best).

[655321]

nigel_k, on Jan 8 2010, 04:43 PM, said:

and with more than 8, he'll invite opposite 14-16 so you always play 3NT.

As a general rule I don't invite with a balanced 9 opposite 14-16.

[Winstonm]

1NT. WTP?

[xcurt]

jdonn, on Jan 8 2010, 04:58 PM, said:

- As you admit, not including 5 card majors, and if he has one you have a good fit for it.

Which is why you should super-accept if partner transfers.

[dake50]

Always. But I don't Milton count for opener's, but A=5,K=3,Q=1, and J=1 if supported with A/K in 3+suit or J in 4+suit. Here that's 3x5=15.

[hanp]

I did this double dummy simulation:

I gave partner a balanced 9 HCP and us either this hand, a random balanced 16-count or a random balanced 17-count. These were the number of tricks in NT in 500 hands:

Original hand: 4,368

Random 16-count: 4,364

Random 17-count: 4,593

[helene_t]

Thanks Han, great analysis.

I would open 1NT if our range is really 14-16. If it means that we open 1NT with quite a few 13-counts and almost no 17-counts, I wouldn't, though.