[mikl_plkcc]

---

6♦ was rock solid but 7♦ was not makeable, and I lost 11.9 IMP as a result.

I didn't open 2NT because of my unstopped ♥, and the robot pushed me to die without even checking all 5 keycards were held.

[smerriman]

7♦ is ridiculous, of course, and comfortably the worst bid, but those that play with the robot quickly learn it will almost always jump to slam when it has values and you show a strong one-suited hand as you did. (Usually an immediate 6NT when it doesn't have a fit).

But I don't understand the appeal of emphasising the diamonds to begin with - the only reason I might not open 2NT is if I thought it was a little too strong, in which case I'd open 2♣ - 2♦ - 2NT instead.

[HardVector]

You asked who's fault, it's your fault. 2c followed by 3 of a minor show a very different hand than what you had. Once you misdescribe your hand, you are responsible for every bad decision your partner makes as a result.

[mw64ahw]

HardVector, on 2025-February-12, 23:23, said:

You asked who's fault, it's your fault. 2c followed by 3 of a minor show a very different hand than what you had. Once you misdescribe your hand, you are responsible for every bad decision your partner makes as a result.

Yep - the clue is 23+ total points plus you need to know your notrump ladder by rote and bid accordingly.

[mikl_plkcc]

smerriman, on 2025-February-12, 15:44, said:

7♦ is ridiculous, of course, and comfortably the worst bid, but those that play with the robot quickly learn it will almost always jump to slam when it has values and you show a strong one-suited hand as you did. (Usually an immediate 6NT when it doesn't have a fit).

But I don't understand the appeal of emphasising the diamonds to begin with - the only reason I might not open 2NT is if I thought it was a little too strong, in which case I'd open 2♣ - 2♦ - 2NT instead.

Doesn't a 1NT opening require 3 suits stopped, and a 2NT or natural 3NT opening all suits stopped?

[mw64ahw]

mikl_plkcc, on 2025-February-13, 10:38, said:

Doesn't a 1NT opening require 3 suits stopped, and a 2NT or natural 3NT opening all suits stopped?

Maybe old-school, but what's your definition of a stop Txxx?

[mikl_plkcc]

mw64ahw, on 2025-February-13, 11:03, said:

Maybe old-school, but what's your definition of a stop Txxx?

I will say that as partially stopped - my main concern is the doubleton containing xx, especially if it is a major suit.

I don't want opening 2NT holding ♠xx, partner raising to 3NT with ♠xxx and get set immediately on the first 5 tricks.

[smerriman]

 mikl_plkcc, on 2025-February-13, 10:38, said:

Doesn't a 1NT opening require 3 suits stopped, and a 2NT or natural 3NT opening all suits stopped?

No, absolutely not. A NT opening requires a balanced hand, nothing more. I believe stoppers got dropped as a requirement over 50 years ago.

[mw64ahw]

mikl_plkcc, on 2025-February-13, 11:22, said:

I will say that as partially stopped - my main concern is the doubleton containing xx, especially if it is a major suit.

I don't want opening 2NT holding ♠xx, partner raising to 3NT with ♠xxx and get set immediately on the first 5 tricks.

Do you know the probability of this flaw?
Do you know how the rest of the field will be bidding?

In your auction, responder could bid 3♠ and you still have the same issue for 3N if you're not comfortable playing in a Moysian, but you've lied about shape!

[smerriman]

 mikl_plkcc, on 2025-February-13, 11:22, said:

I don't want opening 2NT holding ♠xx, partner raising to 3NT with ♠xxx and get set immediately on the first 5 tricks.

I do. Most of the time partner will have a spade stopper. If they don't, they may break 4-4, or the person on lead doesn't have the long spades to lead, and in both cases we're likely to have 9 runnable tricks if we hold 25+ hcp in three suits alone. And if all that fails, sure, we go down, but everyone else goes down too. And a lot of those times, there wouldn't have been a better game contract in another suit anyway.

Meanwhile, every time we decide to open something else, we've messed up our auction big time, since there is no longer any way to show our shape and strength. Modern systems are designed to show balanced hands as balanced hands.

[jillybean]

smerriman, on 2025-February-13, 11:59, said:

No, absolutely not. A NT opening requires a balanced hand, nothing more. I believe stoppers got dropped as a requirement over 50 years ago.

Just over 20 years ago I was taught 1nt balanced, never 2 doubletons, all suits stopped.
So much dead wood remains in this game, being taught as rules.

The definition of balanced has also shifted