[jillybean]

Playing 14-16nt and lamenting the loss of opening this hand 1nt.

---

I like to bid 1nt here; no support for partner, a minimum hand, I would have opened 1nt playing 12-14
We can use 1♠ to show a more distributional hand, not extras but less suitable for 1nt.

Over 1nt responder can show an invitational + hand via xyz to find a 44 spade fit, 53 heart fit, "correct" to 2H and so on.

I caused the confusion on this hand when I made the mistake of bidding 2nt/2♦,the correct bid was 2♠.

What is your approach?

[awm]

I like to bid my suits, and would open 1♦ and rebid 1♠ as opener.

The modern style seems to be to open 1♣ and rebid 1NT (or accept a 1♦-transfer-to-1♥) thereby showing neither of the four-card suits. It makes me very happy that many of my opponents play this way!

[jillybean]

With a weak opening opposite a minimum raise, often the best place to play is 1nt. Don't you want to bid 1nt immediately, telling partner you have a weak nt hand and protecting your spade holding?
If partner is unable to bid 1nt you will be playing in an often inferior contract at the 2 level. I am of course playing MP

[jillybean]

Here is the full hand

---

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

if you can bid 1NT, do it, this is a bal. hand, if you cant, dont do it.
What you should not do, is changing the system during running.

In case it matters: I prefer to show the bal. nature of the hand, and you limit
the hand as well, you are finished.
Also I try to eliminiate judgment calls in early rounds, it seems to be a judgmenet
call, if you bid 1S or 1NT in your system.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: Looking at your auction, I dont understand 3D, even in the context of the 2NT
misbid. 2NT denied 3H, 4S, but 4423 with 44 in the minors was still possible?
I dont know XYZ, but I would assume, that 3D was fit showing? What was wrong with
3C over 2NT, as long as it is forcing?
Not bidding spades with the West hand is also not really understandble.

[smerriman]

jillybean, on 2024-December-15, 13:28, said:

With a weak opening opposite a minimum raise, often the best place to play is 1nt. Don't you want to bid 1nt immediately, telling partner you have a weak nt hand and protecting your spade holding?
If partner is unable to bid 1nt you will be playing in an often inferior contract at the 2 level. I am of course playing MP

It's 6 years old but I like Kit Woolsey's comment here (including his followup comment about IMP vs MP) for the pros and cons, where his conclusion was that he thinks bidding 1♠ is probably better when playing MPs, though he bids 1NT because it's better at IMPs and he prefers not having two systems.

But both are perfectly playable systems.

[awm]

smerriman, on 2024-December-15, 14:45, said:

It's 6 years old but I like Kit Woolsey's comment here (including his followup comment about IMP vs MP) for the pros and cons, where his conclusion was that he thinks bidding 1♠ is probably better when playing MPs, though he bids 1NT because it's better at IMPs and he prefers not having two systems.

But both are perfectly playable systems.

I also refer to my response to Kit Woolsey's comment (linked above) for the reasons I prefer to bid 1♠ (even at IMPs).

[pescetom]

smerriman, on 2024-December-15, 14:45, said:

It's 6 years old but I like Kit Woolsey's comment here (including his followup comment about IMP vs MP) for the pros and cons, where his conclusion was that he thinks bidding 1♠ is probably better when playing MPs, though he bids 1NT because it's better at IMPs and he prefers not having two systems.

But both are perfectly playable systems.

In Italy it's still standard to bid 1♠ in this situation and as I have to play with many partners and mainly play MP anyway then that is fine by me.
I can see the pros of the 1NT style, particularly at IMPs, but as Responder I do like to know about the spades and XYZ gives us a solid route forwards.

[pescetom]

P_Marlowe, on 2024-December-15, 13:37, said:

PS: Looking at your auction, I dont understand 3D, even in the context of the 2NT
misbid. 2NT denied 3H, 4S, but 4423 with 44 in the minors was still possible?
I dont know XYZ, but I would assume, that 3D was fit showing? What was wrong with
3C over 2NT, as long as it is forcing?
Not bidding spades with the West hand is also not really understandble.

I quote this.
Assuming West really is asleep, then in XYZ the artificial 2♦ bid was unconditionally game forcing and after 2NT a bid of 3♣ followed by 3NT seems obvious.

[jillybean]

P_Marlowe, on 2024-December-15, 13:37, said:

PS: Looking at your auction, I dont understand 3D, even in the context of the 2NT
misbid. 2NT denied 3H, 4S, but 4423 with 44 in the minors was still possible?
I dont know XYZ, but I would assume, that 3D was fit showing? What was wrong with
3C over 2NT, as long as it is forcing?
Not bidding spades with the West hand is also not really understandble.

Talk to my partner, I can only look at my own mistakes. We have agreed to show our suits rather than balanced hand, TBC
West was comatose during the auction.

As I mentioned to another BBF'er, every time I play seriously with a new partner I am adjusting style, it's complex and never ending.
smerriman, thanks for the link. I see it's another one of these never ending discussions in which top players have differing opinions, and often large ego's , leaving us lesser player's heads spinning as we navigate various partnerships.

Final edit; I don't have a strong opinion on either method, we just need to agree one or the other.

[mw64ahw]

I think playing with most pickup partners its a simple auction
1♦-1♥
1♠-3N

Playing with a regular partner is more convoluted, but ends up in the same place
1♣-1♠ GI or X if West bids
1N-2♦ Transfer
2♠-3N

[Zelandakh]

Playing English Acol, AUC or my system, open 1NT.
Playing SEF, Forum D or Precision, open 1♦ and rebid 1♠.
Playing SA or 2/1, open 1♦ and rebid 1NT.
Playing Transfer Walsh, open 1♣ and rebid 1NT.
Playing Polish Club, open 1m (usually 1♦ but at least one version requires 1♣) and rebid 1♠.

As a very general rule, Brits and Americans rebid 1NT; mainland Europeans prefer 1♠. In the end it matters less which auction you choose so much as having a firm agreement about it and good follow-ups.

[mikeh]

 awm, on 2024-December-15, 15:17, said:

I also refer to my response to Kit Woolsey's comment (linked above) for the reasons I prefer to bid 1♠ (even at IMPs).

an argument in favour of rebidding 1N on all balanced hands, an argument that very few seem to even know exists, is solving responder’s dilemma with something like 2=5=3=3, say xx KJxxx Jxx Qxx after 1C 1H 1S

When opener is say 4=2=2=5 we usually fare better in 2C than 1N, even at mps. Not only does the occasional 110 beat 90 but 90 beats -50/100. But running to 2C over 1S won’t do well when opener is 4333.

It’s weird….I’ve never seen any of the ‘I bid my suit’ posters even recognize this issue!

Fortunately, I don’t have these problems in my two (semi) regular partnerships. T-Walsh pretty much eliminates them.

As for the argument that, on slam and many game hands, we have ample space to work out patterns…I admit that you would on some hands but not all. Plus it’s simply basic bidding theory that the sooner one can narrow one’s strength and shape, the more efficient will your constructive auctions be. For example, if my partner’s 1S rebid promises 5+ clubs, as responder I can quickly establish a gf and set clubs as trump….1C 1H 1S 2D then 3C with as few as 3 clubs. Try doing that when opener could be 4333…..after 1C 1H 1S 2D 2H is opener 4315 or 4333? Etc.

There’s only so much bidding space available. The more you consume clarifying fit and shape, the less space you have for indicating ‘I like my hand’ or ‘I don’t like my hand’ via cuebids, etc.

[smerriman]

 mikeh, on 2024-December-16, 11:45, said:

It’s weird….I’ve never seen any of the ‘I bid my suit’ posters even recognize this issue!

Playing xyz, signing off in 2♣ isn't possible. Of course, that's a (well recognized) drawback of xyz, so you still lose out there, but it means it's not something to consider when looking at opener's rebid.

[HardVector]

I prefer to show the character of my hand right away. So, with balanced hands, I will either open nt, or rebid nt (if I can't support partner) as my first rebid. If I bid 2 suits, then I'm going to be unbalanced. This is to help partner decide where to put it with weak hands.

On hands like this, the only negative possibility is if partner has 4 spades and a weakish hand that can't bid after a 1n rebid. If partner can invite, or drive to game, then you can find the spade fit...as long as partner realizes that you could be bypassing a spade suit. You need to work that out. If you are playing with a traditional "bid your suits up the line" kind of player, then 1n is denying spades and you will never find those fits. I prefer to rebid 1n, however, and will try to talk my partner into playing that way.

In my experience, I have only gotten the negative result about 2 or 3 times in the 10 years of doing it this way. I've also gotten some good results playing nt when we have a spade fit when it makes the same number of tricks in either contract. Overall, I think the positives of showing balanced hands right away outweigh the negatives of possibly missing a 2s partial.