[Dinarius]

---

Playing 5CM, 2/1, 2+ Clubs.

Partner opens 1C as dealer.

What do you bid?

D.

[DavidKok]

1♦. What's the issue?

[Dinarius]

Glad you asked.

Isn’t it the case that playing 5CM/2+ clubs, that an opening of 1♣️ denies four diamonds, unless opener is 4/5, or longer in the minors?

If that is correct; then isn’t 1NT better than 1♦️? It takes up space, denies four of a major, and hinders Opps finding a major fit.

Maybe at Imps, 1♦️ is more correct. But, at MPs, I want to bid 1NT.

Thanks.

D.

[Dinarius]

Deleted.

[P_Marlowe]

Take your pick, 1D or 1NT.

If you agreed to play, that 1NT showes 8-10, the decision was already taken care of.

The adv. of 1D is, that a bal. weak NT opener will right side the contract, the downside,
you let the 4the player easier in.

[DavidKok]

There are lots of different "2+ clubs" systems. Personally I would open 1♣ even with, say, 4=3=4=2 outside my notrump range, in which case we might well have a diamond fit.
But mostly that is irrelevant. The goal in bidding diamonds is not to discover a possible fit. The goal is to give partner the opportunity to bid NT, especially with an 18-19 hand. It is a really bad idea to attempt to hog the hand when partner might be very strong and balanced. On the actual example partner will always have a stronger hand and our hearts are lousy. Despite the positional spade holding I would not want to become declarer in notrump. If we are playing a Walsh style we additionally get the benefit of showing partner that we don't have a major and uncovering possible 5-3 club fits at a comfortably low level.

Having to bid 1NT on this hand is a significant downside. There is a serious chance that partner holds 18-19 balanced and we just wrongsided 3NT, but even if partner holds some unbalanced hand we have consumed valuable bidding space (and given partner quite a tough decision, though I imagine almost everybody would bid on, assured of the club fit). I can't understand bidding 1NT voluntarily when we have a perfectly fine alternative.

[mycroft]

Yes, well. What does 2+♣ mean?

If 2 only if 4=4=3=2, and the standard agreement that 3=3 bids clubs and 4=4 bids diamonds, then yes, you won't find a diamond fit unless partner is 4=5+.

If 2 if balanced, then there are a lot more hands that could have 4 diamonds (but many now play transfer responses, so you can't bid 1♦ to show diamonds, and don't want to bid your diamond bid with 3=3=4=3).

But in any case, in NT (which is likely), you don't really want to be declarer, and the stronger partner is, the less you want to be. So if you can avoid bidding 1NT you should.
And by and large, the weaker hand should be explaining to the stronger (at least to start). So avoid bidding 1NT too.

There's a reason that standard flight A where I play is 1♣-1NT is 8-10 (with 1♦-1NT being 6-9. Another reason people start moving more balanced hands into 1♣).

Having said that, if you're playing K/S U, this is an automatic (if maximum) 1NT call. But that's because if balanced, 1♣ is minimum 15, and the 1NT response is limited to "not interested in game opposite balanced 17". But you weren't including "12-14 NT" in your "5cM, 2/1, 2+♣", right?

[Dinarius]

Thanks for the replies.

Strong arguments for staying out of opener's way by not bidding 1NT.

On the given hand (it was MPs) if you bid 1NT you almost certainly buy the contract for +90 (or +120 if they mis-defend).

If you bid 1♦, they find their nine card spade fit and you chalk up -110 (or -140, if you mis-defend).

But, I totally accept that that's bridge and you have to suck it up.

D.

[Cyberyeti]

Dinarius, on 2023-March-20, 10:40, said:

Thanks for the replies.

Strong arguments for staying out of opener's way by not bidding 1NT.

On the given hand (it was MPs) if you bid 1NT you almost certainly buy the contract for +90 (or +120 if they mis-defend).

If you bid 1♦, they find their nine card spade fit and you chalk up -110 (or -140, if you mis-defend).

But, I totally accept that that's bridge and you have to suck it up.

D.

This sounds like the sort of hand which people play weak NT for, 1N-P-P-P

[mycroft]

Wait, we opened, and responded, and let them play 2-of-a-(nine card!)-fit - partner has a singleton! - all white at MPs? Where was our fit, and is it -50 or +110?

Sure, +50 in 3♠-1 (assuming we don't mis-defend) isn't +90, and this time partner isn't going to rebid 1NT over 1♠, but still.

1♣-p-1♦-1♠;
whatever-2♠-p-p;
X-p-3♣

seems pretty normal here.

And as to the Yeti - even the weak NTers aren't opening 1NT with a stiff small spade. At least not in the ACBL...

[Dinarius]

Since I wanted an answer to the issue of the bid only, I ignored the vulnerability. My bad.

We were red, they weren't. So, they buy the contract in 2♠. 3♣ would be doubled for -1/-200 and 0%.

D.

[mycroft]

Okay. I will say that's a pretty nice dime to try to land on. I would suggest that this hand is an anomaly if:

• 1NT makes from your side
  
• The spades are 5-4 and not 6-3
  
• Fourth hand has a 1♠ call but nothing over 1NT
  
• They have a 9-card spade fit (so we have at least one at least 8-carder), and there are exactly 16 total tricks
  
• And the opponents can work that out from the auction.

If this happens frequently, well, then, you're in a much tougher game than I play in.

I will also say that in my experience, even with the Matchpoint Death Score right there for the taking, players who double for -200 with a 9-card spade fit and half the deck, rather than take the push, are rare. After all, if you're presenting misdefence as an option on all the other contracts, here it's -200 (or +730 if they misdefend).

[TylerE]

mycroft, on 2023-March-20, 08:30, said:

But in any case, in NT (which is likely), you don't really want to be declarer, and the stronger partner is, the less you want to be. So if you can avoid bidding 1NT you should.
And by and large, the weaker hand should be explaining to the stronger (at least to start). So avoid bidding 1NT too.

Maybe, in theory. In practice it as my experience is that the very weak hidden hand often does quite a bit better than it really should, especially if the opponents aren't really alert to negative inferences.

I'm probably in the minority here, but I *strongly* prefer 1N to 1D. If anyone has a major suit fit, it's odds are to be them, and I don't want to give them a chance to find it for free at the one level. 1D responses I prefer to be strongly polarized. Either Inv+ (and probably not balanced, unless my NT ladder is something weird) or very weak with looooong diamonds.

This style makes competing much easier, for sure, since you're not trying to conduct invitational auctions really. If you bid 1 more it will be with expectations to have good odds at a make, or is virtually guaranteed to be a sane sac.

[jillybean]

1♦, anything else is masterminding or overthinking

[Cyberyeti]

mycroft, on 2023-March-20, 10:49, said:

And as to the Yeti - even the weak NTers aren't opening 1NT with a stiff small spade. At least not in the ACBL...

I didn't see another hand posted, but now seeing they had a 9 card spade fit, even if my partner did respond 1N to 1♣, with what looks like a 9 card club fit and at best a 3-1 spade fit I'm not playing 1N vulnerable, has 2-300 written all over it

[Dinarius]

---

b

For the record, here is the hand.

Par is 2♠ E/W, -110.

Both N/S can make 1NT.



D.

[mycroft]

I should resist, but I can't. I'm surely setting myself up for "why directors shouldn't play", part N+1...

Well, I guess the Yeti might be opening that 1NT after all. At least in the ACBL, it would be legal. I certainly wouldn't, but I'm a conservative when it comes to major-suit singletons.

Okay, I was almost right about the dime we're stopping on.

• 1NT makes from either side (and 3♣ does not) because of the stiff spade Q. Which is 5-1 odds on to be the ♣Q. Or not there at all, I guess, but then -140.
  
• The spades are, in fact, 5-4, and empty.
  
• After 1♣-1NT, it's at least arguable that someone that would bid 1♠ (or double) over 1♦ will double the "club raise" 1NT call. Or they would if they weren't A-out, A-out.
  
• The fits are 8-7-7, and all-but-one card is wrong; the diamonds split, but the only entry to them is in "their suit". Which we know, but South doesn't.
  
• Double, even an "optional" double, after
  

  ---

  is to me not-automatic. High-level BAM? Yeah. Standard, even Flight A matchpoints? Not sure, especially when you haven't shown the ninth spade (which could mean that your fifth trick is getting ruffed, never mind your ninth trick coming in).

Basically move any of the ♣Q, the ♠Q, a diamond honour, even some of the heart spots, or even slightly different shape, and either par isn't -110, or you're never going -200 - or you're not making +90.

[Cyberyeti]

mycroft, on 2023-March-21, 09:40, said:

I should resist, but I can't. I'm surely setting myself up for "why directors shouldn't play", part N+1...

Well, I guess the Yeti might be opening that 1NT after all. At least in the ACBL, it would be legal. I certainly wouldn't, but I'm a conservative when it comes to major-suit singletons.

Okay, I was almost right about the dime we're stopping on.

• 1NT makes from either side (and 3♣ does not) because of the stiff spade Q. Which is 5-1 odds on to be the ♣Q. Or not there at all, I guess, but then -140.
  
• The spades are, in fact, 5-4, and empty.
  
• After 1♣-1NT, it's at least arguable that someone that would bid 1♠ (or double) over 1♦ will double the "club raise" 1NT call. Or they would if they weren't A-out, A-out.
  
• The fits are 8-7-7, and all-but-one card is wrong; the diamonds split, but the only entry to them is in "their suit". Which we know, but South doesn't.
  
• Double, even an "optional" double, after
  

  ---

  is to me not-automatic. High-level BAM? Yeah. Standard, even Flight A matchpoints? Not sure, especially when you haven't shown the ninth spade (which could mean that your fifth trick is getting ruffed, never mind your ninth trick coming in).

Basically move any of the ♣Q, the ♠Q, a diamond honour, even some of the heart spots, or even slightly different shape, and either par isn't -110, or you're never going -200 - or you're not making +90.

Similarly 10♣ with the long clubs makes a massive difference to what makes.

You also have to guess the hearts correctly to make 1N.