[Walddk]

awm, on Apr 29 2005, 03:30 PM, said:

Walddk, on Apr 29 2005, 01:02 AM, said:

2♣. A 1444 hand can't be bid accurately if the response is the likely 1♠. Even those who bid 4-card suits up the line would open 1♦, planning on rebidding 2♣. Telling a lie regarding your length in the minors is not a major crime.

If anyone rebids 1NT on the hand, I recommend that she contacts Wayne (cascade) immediately and applies for private lessons.

Roland

This seems pretty extreme -- while the majority is for 2♣, several people have commented that this is a hard problem and 2♥ and 1NT are both getting some support. I can accept that bidding 1NT is not your style, but I think suggesting that anyone who bids 1NT needs lessons is a bit extreme.

The way I look at it, 1nt distorts your shape by one card. But it describes your exact values, keeps 1nt in play as a possible contract, and allows the use of what are probably very accurate checkback methods. On the other hand, 2♣ also distorts your shape by one card (partner will assume 5-4 minors and you just might end up in 3♦ on a 4-3), does nothing to convey the values (range of 11-18), and forces you to use much less accurate bidding methods.

Okay, I see 2♣ is Roland's choice, maybe even the standard choice (although with the notrump ranges given this is far from a standard system). But suggesting it's the only choice seems a tad offensive.

I am neither extreme nor offensive, but try to read the initial post again. On this deal we are playing 13-16 NT, so a 1NT rebid would show 11-12. Please tell me how that rebid can ever be an option?

1. I have a 17 count.
2. I don't have a balanced hand.

Posters who suggest 1NT must have forgotten that in this case we do not play 15-17 NT. Are you really serious about rebidding 1NT now? Showing 11-12 when you have 17? If you do I really mean what I said in my first post:

You need private lessons on bidding immediately. This is not offensive at all, on the contrary. I live up to my signature about being nice. I am merely trying to make you improve your bidding instead of telling partner:

"I know my 1NT rebid shows 11-12 balanced, but it could perhaps also be a 17 count with 1444. Do something intelligent".

Roland

[pbleighton]

Um, Roland, microcap wrote:

"Oops my bad--as usual, we were playing our 13-16 NT, so a 1NT rebid would show 17-18 HCP. Sorry for leaving that out."

Apparently they pass 11-12 balanced hands.

I would bid rebid 2C, but 1NT isn't that bad.

Peter

[Elianna]

Actually, Roland, Microcap stated (see his second post) that for them, a 1NT rebid shows 17-18.

May I suggest that you read the posts more closely before dispensing vitriol.

[Walddk]

I don't go through all posts before I respond to what is essential: The first one. I don't want to be influenced by suggestions from others, since I will give my opinion. That's why I wasn't aware of the correction. My apologies.

That being said, I think it's a bad idea if you read all posts before you reply. In another thread it is being suggested that we establish a Masters Solvers Forum. It is hardly appropriate if you know what other panelists think before you post your choice.

Roland

[Elianna]

In that forum, it's going to be locked for a time, so that people can give an answer without seeing what others say.

May I suggest that it's a good policy then to simply state what one would bid, without insulting others, then read the posts and insult people if one still feels the need? (And this is not just addressed at any specific person, as I have noticed previous arguments of this type in other threads).

[the hog]

Playing a weak NT, I would rebid 1N here to get this hand off my chest.

Regarding the argument as to whether 1D 1S 2C is forcing or not: you will find that many modern players play 2C as a forcing bid. To make a blanket statement that it is "non forcing" is incorrect.

[beatrix45]

Jlall, on Apr 29 2005, 03:38 PM, said:

This being said I think 1N is a reasonable bid, but lets at least be realistic when weighing the pros and cons.

Rebidding 1NT with a singleton in partner's suit seems to me to be a matter of style subject to partnership agreement. Some do it gleefully; others abhor it. I happen to think that Justin's opinion is about right.

No one has mentioned how vulnerability, the form of scoring or the 17-19 HCP 1NT rebid might affect the question. When I first encountered the '1NT rebid with a singleton' some years back, my first impression was that one big argument for it was that it won the race to 1NT at matchpoints. Getting to 1NT first is a big winner at matchpoints when non-vul, but less so (if at all) when vul and against good defenders. If I rebid 12 HCP with 1NT opposite a partner who advertises 6+ HCP, we might have as few as 18 HCP. Non-vul going down one or two tricks is -50 or -100 versus -90 or -120.

In this problem, we ought to be playing at least 17 HCP opposite 6+ HCP. It should be our hand, and we are more likely to be safe at the 2NT level. I feel more comfortable opening one ♦ and rebidding 2 ♣ here than I would were I using the strong NT range with the 12-14 HCP 1NT rebid.

I also think that the upside from bidding 1♦ followed by 2♣ is greater at IMPS or rubber bridge. You are more likely to find the occasional slam. The extra overtricks you get at 3NT when you rebid 1NT don't mean much.

[microcap]

There are lots of great replies and I thank all of you. I should add two comments to Mike777 and the others. I (Jay, not Rex) am not enamored of the light opening style in 1st and 2nd, so not bidding bad or even mediocre 11-12 counts does not faze me. Also, with a good 12, we will stretch to open 1NT---though we have constant arguments about what constitutes a "good 12!" You should see those! LOL For 11-12 hands that we do open, we just suffer with a simple suit rebid at the 2 level. I hope that ends the confusion.

I am total agreement with AWM. I have spent my whole life rebidding 1NT with singletons in partner's bid suit, and I never recall it causing much trouble. When I played a more normal 15-17, I found it much more valuable to limit my values quickly (11-14 in that case) rather than show my distribution in a likely misfit anyway. And as I argue with Rex, about the only hand this causes problems with is when I have EXACTLY 6 spades, and not very good ones at that. As someone mentioned, if I have g/f values and 6 lousy spades, I should bid differently anyway.

Rex is in 100% strenuous accord with the 2 club bidders for all the reasons cited and really hates the 1NT rebid as much as I like it!! LOL

Like some posters, I suggested opening 1♣ and reversing to tell a different lie about the length of your suits. Rex felt that was even worse than a 1NT rebid!

So here's the denouement: I held

Scoring: MP

---

When Rex rebid 2♣, i simply passed. I figured if he had 11-15 points, that was as good a spot as any (He MUST have 4 clubs for this bid in our system BTW, and there is a possibility he is 4♦,5♣ to avoid reversing with a minimum.) I knew there was a risk if he had 16-17. We got a low score as 3NT ends up making with every card under the sun on side. However, if you merely switch the East and West cards, 3NT will go down 2!!

Rex feels strongly that I should bid 2♦ as a false preference instead of pass. He is usually right about these technical matters so I appreciate comments on that.

Isn't it amazing how such a simple question can generate a great debate? That's what makes bridge fun. Best and thanks to all!!

[mike777]

As I mentioned in my post this is why many experts play 3C as a "courtesy raise".

So your partnership agreement is really (12+) to 16 if I understand your post. You may not agree what (12+) means but you open most (12+) as 1nt. You may wish to change your CC to let opp. know that.

[inquiry]

I woud bid 2♦ with this hand. There is no great debate here.. 2♣ bid clear (not 1NT, not 2♥), and 2♦ is clear.

[Gerben42]

The last time I saw this particular problem one opened 1♦, The other bid 1♠ and since it was MP opener tried 1NT. He was not punished in the usual way, the 5-1 ♠ misfit, as this time responder had Kxxx in ♠.

Heart fit missed? Also no such thing. More good news?

But responder had 5 cards in Clubs. Clubs make an easy 9 tricks (some tables even managed 10 on not so good defence). 1NT was a tough affair, losing 4 tricks in ♠ but declarer managed 7 tricks nevertheless. Reward for making his contract: 2 out of 24.

[Fluffy]

Missing a 24-25 HCP game is not that bad (specially with the honnors in opponent's suits), instead playing with 7 trumps instead of 9 is, I would pass.