[jillybean]

---

[smerriman]

If you open no trumps you will virtually *never* play in hearts. There are plenty of hands partner can have where I want to play in hearts.

That leaves 1♥ planning to jump shift into 3♣, or 2♣ planning to show hearts.. the latter for me.

[shyams]

Agree (mostly) with smerriman.

I would open 1♥, then jump shift to 3♣, instead of opening this a strong 2♣. I think the choice is influenced by partnership style --- mine opens 2♣ with even stronger hands.

[Douglas43]

I ran out of fingers and had to use my other hand, so 6. Suspect there may be more to the question though. I used to play Acol Twos; here I wish I still did. Close between 1!H and 2!C (if not played as FG).

[mw64ahw]

1♥-1X-3N is 6 if you open all balanced hands with 5 via different routes

[pescetom]

I dislike the idea of 2NT, but dislike the idea of 2♣ even more.
So 1♥ and then jump shift it is.

[jillybean]

As I expected, none here treats this as a 2nt opener.
Give this hand to some club players and they open 1H and keep bidding hearts, or open 2nt.
The players and/or their partners are not at the stage where they are ready or willing to consider jump shifts.
Do we just chalk these hands up to 'lucky' when we have an awful auction to game (1H:1S 2H:2S 4S) and 'bad luck' when we miss a cold game/slam.

While 2NT totally miss describes the shape, it does convey the strength. Is 1H then some number of hearts better or is it jump shift or nothing.

[johnu]

IIRC, I read a summary article where a world class player opened 2NT with a 6 card major headed by AKQ with around 17-18 HCP. This was in the 4th quarter of a major team event and his team was down an almost hopeless number of IMPs, so he was trying to manufacture a swing.

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean, on 2024-May-16, 16:11, said:

<snip>
While 2NT totally miss describes the shape, it does convey the strength. Is 1H then some number of hearts better or is it jump shift or nothing.

I would not do it, but I also have the tools to show a 6+ suit with game forcing strength (after a simple response from p).

But if you play something like Puppet Stayman, that allowes you to show 5 hearts, than 2NT is not the worst bid, if you dont
like your follow up bids. You show a (semi) bal. hand, partner has to expect 5 hearts and you protect the diamond tenance.
And 2NT showes 20-21, you only have 20, not even the best 20, so the added strength, due to the length does, not make it super heavy.

Make your bidding plan before you make your opening bid, and if, considering your options, a particular bid looks best,
although not perfect, go for it.

[Cyberyeti]

We have the advantage that 1♥-1♠-2N is GF not necessarily balanced.

Easy 1♥ here.

[johnu]

P_Marlowe, on 2024-May-16, 23:35, said:

And 2NT showes 20-21, you only have 20, not even the best 20, so the added strength, due to the length does, not make it super heavy.

K&R hand evaluation rates the hand at almost 22 points. Now, I don't think anybody actually evaluates K&R points at the table, and there are plenty of other point count systems out there, but AK9xxx opposite a small doubleton is the favorite to make 5 tricks which makes this look like a hand with a lot of potential.

[P_Marlowe]

johnu, on 2024-May-17, 02:51, said:

K&R hand evaluation rates the hand at almost 22 points. Now, I don't think anybody actually evaluates K&R points at the table, and there are plenty of other point count systems out there, but AK9xxx opposite a small doubleton is the favorite to make 5 tricks which makes this look like a hand with a lot of potential.

Ok it is a max., but not a huge over max.

[jillybean]

P_Marlowe, on 2024-May-16, 23:35, said:

I would not do it, but I also have the tools to show a 6+ suit with game forcing strength (after a simple response from p).

But if you play something like Puppet Stayman, that allowes you to show 5 hearts, than 2NT is not the worst bid, if you dont
like your follow up bids. You show a (semi) bal. hand, partner has to expect 5 hearts and you protect the diamond tenance.
And 2NT showes 20-21, you only have 20, not even the best 20, so the added strength, due to the length does, not make it super heavy.

Make your bidding plan before you make your opening bid, and if, considering your options, a particular bid looks best,
although not perfect, go for it.

Unfortunately, these players are not ready to add Puppet.

Your point about planning the bidding before you make your opening bid is key but when you don't have a bid to describe your hand you are stuck. (to be polite)

When I started playing I added all sorts of conventions to my card, didn't understand them, misused them, didn't know follow ups etc but at least I
had something to go back, look at and think about after another bottom board.

With this hand I am tempted to say, you don't have a bid to show this hand yet but 1H:1S 2H can't be right.

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean, on 2024-May-17, 09:08, said:

Unfortunately, these players are not ready to add Puppet.

Your point about planning the bidding before you make your opening bid is key but when you don't have a bid to describe your hand you are stuck. (to be polite)

When I started playing I added all sorts of conventions to my card, didn't understand them, misused them, didn't know follow ups etc but at least I
had something to go back, look at and think about after another bottom board.

With this hand I am tempted to say, you don't have a bid to show this hand yet but 1H:1S 2H can't be right.

After 1S they should make sure to play in game, and if they cant bring it to themself to bid 3C,
they should either bid 3NT ( 20 + 6 > 25 ) or 4H.

[thepossum]

For me 2NT understates the strength of the hand and you could miss something

[pescetom]

thepossum, on 2024-May-17, 11:46, said:

For me 2NT understates the strength of the hand and you could miss something

Agreed, it understates the strength and could miss a hand that plays better in hearts.

Here is a more off-shape/HCP hand that I would be more happy to open 2NT (and indeed did so, given that it was Friday night).

---

The difference is that we are well within our methods (even if with this partner we do not find the dual fit).
My only qualm was that it looked a tad too strong for 20-21 despite 19 HCP.
Admittedly, it's only chance that spades play better than hearts.

[Cyberyeti]

 pescetom, on 2024-May-18, 14:59, said:

Agreed, it understates the strength and could miss a hand that plays better in hearts.

Here is a more off-shape/HCP hand that I would be more happy to open 2NT (and indeed did so, given that it was Friday night).

---

The difference is that we are well within our methods (even if with this partner we do not find the dual fit).
My only qualm was that it looked a tad too strong for 20-21 despite 19 HCP.
Admittedly, it's only chance that spades play better than hearts.

The problem with this is KQxxx, Kxx, x(x), xx(x) is cold for a slam, and partner won't envisage this

[DavidKok]

Having a sound notrump ladder is the back bone of a bidding system. Hand evaluation is very different facing a balanced or an unbalanced hand, and to get to good contracts reliably it is important to inform partner about the nature of the hand. I think folding unbalanced hands into your NT ladder is a poor idea - instead put effort into having ways to show balanced and unbalanced hands of all ranges.
It is unclear where exactly to draw the line. These days quite a few semibalanced hands are considered sufficiently balanced for NT. To me the critical consideration is whether or not partner's hand evaluation will be somewhat accurate if they imagine a balanced hand instead of the one we have. For that reason some of the comments in this thread strike me as missing the point.

 jillybean, on 2024-May-16, 16:11, said:

While 2NT totally miss describes the shape, it does convey the strength. Is 1H then some number of hearts better or is it jump shift or nothing.

 P_Marlowe, on 2024-May-16, 23:35, said:

But if you play something like Puppet Stayman, that allowes you to show 5 hearts, than 2NT is not the worst bid, if you dont
like your follow up bids. You show a (semi) bal. hand, partner has to expect 5 hearts and you protect the diamond tenance.
And 2NT showes 20-21, you only have 20, not even the best 20, so the added strength, due to the length does, not make it super heavy.

 johnu, on 2024-May-17, 02:51, said:

K&R hand evaluation rates the hand at almost 22 points.

 thepossum, on 2024-May-17, 11:46, said:

For me 2NT understates the strength of the hand and you could miss something

 pescetom, on 2024-May-18, 14:59, said:

Here is a more off-shape/HCP hand that I would be more happy to open 2NT (and indeed did so, given that it was Friday night).

[...]

The difference is that we are well within our methods (even if with this partner we do not find the dual fit).
My only qualm was that it looked a tad too strong for 20-21 despite 19 HCP.

Emphasising the 'strength of the hand' is too simplistic. Hands have many features - defensive and offensive values in each of five strains, suitability opposite partner's potential long suit(s), positional values, quick tricks/cover cards and many more. Focus on showing your hand type, shape and then strength. Attempting to compare semibalanced or unbalanced hands against your NT ladder is mistaken, in my opinion.

Lastly I think specifically volunteering to upgrade into 2NT is often a poor idea. You are preempting your own constructive auction while misdescribing your hand.

[awm]

While I'm a lot more freewheeling with the notrump bids/rebids than David Kok, it wouldn't occur to me to do this with a six-card major suit. It's too frequent that four of a major is the best contract on these hands; give partner something mundane like ♠xxx ♥xxx ♦xxx ♣Axxx and your chances at 4♥ are quite good even if the hearts are 3-1, whereas 3NT on a spade or diamond lead will probably fail unless hearts break 2-2. I'm pretty sure partner just bids 3NT with this and doesn't look for a 5-3 fit. For another example, take ♠xxxx ♥xx ♦Axx ♣Jxxx. To make 4♥ you just need hearts 3-2 (and there might even be play if hearts are 4-1 and they don't lead a spade); 3NT seems like much more of a struggle.

Beyond the normal 4333/4432/5332 hands, I tend to open in notrump when I have either:
1. A weak six card minor and (322) in the other suits, where I'm not comfortable opening 1m and rebidding 3m due to suit quality. These hands typically play better than a balanced hand with equal "points" (so I will upgrade a little bit) but I don't want to emphasise the minor suit by bidding 1m...3m or the like.
2. (4225) type patterns where the five-card suit is a minor (but not so much 2254 in that order). Here I'll sometimes be stuck for a rebid if my four-card suit isn't spades, and even if it is spades the auction 1m-1♥-1♠-1NT/2m/2♥/2♠ doesn't fill me with joy (very unclear whether to bid on with some 15/16 points).

[pescetom]

 DavidKok, on 2024-May-19, 06:19, said:

Emphasising the 'strength of the hand' is too simplistic. Hands have many features - defensive and offensive values in each of five strains, suitability opposite partner's potential long suit(s), positional values, quick tricks/cover cards and many more. Focus on showing your hand type, shape and then strength. Attempting to compare semibalanced or unbalanced hands against your NT ladder is mistaken, in my opinion.

I agree with you to some extent, in particular on the importance of a clear NT ladder and the inopportunity of bundling unbalanced hands into an NT opening merely on 'strength of the hand'. But I think the tide of history is that people put ever more shapes through NT - both systemically and by judgement - and mutate the NT subsystem to be able to deal with this. There are people reading here who still prefer not to put 5M332 through 1NT, but they are no longer a majority and we both think they are wrong. The question it seems to me is rather where the line will eventually be drawn. I have no experience of putting 6M332 through 1NT (it would be an illegal agreement at pairs in Italy) but it looks to me like a bad idea, for instance. There are many 6m332 and 4M4M41 hands I would put through NT by judgement.