[Echognome]

Actually probably the biggest concern for the 1N openers (and please feel free to disagree) is to play there when hearts is a better contract.

E.g. opposite Jxxx Jxxx Qxx xx

Although the upside of this is that it's harder for opponents to overcall 2m since most NT defensive systems are focused around the majors.

To me the hand feels like a suit oriented hand and I also want a heart lead if we happen to be defending. The other example hand with more scattered values makes me much more comfortable opening 1NT.

Quote

but it works both ways and time has shown in the long run 1NT will pay off.

I agree that allowing 5cM in 1NT has been useful. I imagine this poll is questioning whether one will change that style if the hand is suit oriented enough. Let me give you a different example.

AKQxx xx xxx AKx

Are you still opening 1NT?

What about xx AKQxx xxx AKx where you have a rebid problem opening 1♥, but you also may worry about partner transferring you to spades if you open 1NT?

These are of course awkward hands.

Let me ask a different question. Suppose you didn't have to worry about the rebid problem since you were playing, e.g. a relay system. And you were allowed a choice of which to open (i.e. your system allowed a 5M332 shape to either open 1M or 1NT), which would you prefer to open then?

N.B. When I say "you", I do not mean Josh in particular, I mean anyone.

[zasanya]

Echognome, on Mar 17 2007, 06:47 PM, said:

When it goes 1NT - 3NT and partner turns up with Kxxx JTx xxx AKx and they rattle off the first 5 diamond tricks, how will you feel?

Why cant they rattle off 5 tricksin ♣?
The issue here is not "whether to open 1NT with 15-17 and 5 card major".The issue is "whether to open 1NT with 15-17 and 5 card major AND 2 wide open suits."
While most if not all, would open 1NT with 15-17 and 5 card major and 1 open suit some of us think its too risky with no compensating gain.
Over 1♥ if responder bids forcing NT,opener bids his 3 card minor and bids 3 NT if P invites.Dont see which game we might miss by opening 1♥.

[han]

Although I always open 1NT when I have a balanced hand with a 5-card major (and the appropriate strength of course), I am not nearly as confident as Josh is. Is it really true that time has proved that opening 1NT on EVERY balanced hand with a 5-card major is a winner in the long run?

[Rossoneri]

At the actual table, I opened 1NT, immediately overcalled by 3D, then partner bids 4S.

We agreed fit showing jumps in competition after suit openings. Here, I have no idea what it meant.

(And I forgot to add, we agreed 2/1 GF)

Partner said I should have opened 1H, which I am not entirely in agreement with.

My only argument is, with the great 5 card heart suit and AQx in spades, would it be better in a general situation if I opened 1H instead of 1NT? (as opposed to say if my other values were in the minors)

[mike777]

Never ending debate. I have settled on do not open 1nt with 2 flaws
1) one 5 card major.
2) small xx in side suit.

[zasanya]

mike777, on Mar 18 2007, 12:28 AM, said:

Never ending debate. I have settled on do not open 1nt with 2 flaws
1) one 5 card major.
2) small xx in side suit.

Mike your nt is 16-18 isnt it? So this hand is a clear 1♥ for you .

[awm]

I like a 1♥ opening. I will bid 2♣ over the forcing notrump, 2♠ over a 1♠ response, and try for game over a single raise. I admit that there are occasional "problem" hands where partner has exactly nine and we miss a game. However it is also very possible that partner has a heart fit and a little shape and we miss a game by opening 1NT. When it's a partscore deal I expect to reach a better partial opening 1♥, and on the many hands where we will reach game regardless, I expect to have some wins by letting partner declare the 3NT or 4♠ contracts. To back up this reasoning, I generated a few random hands for partner (these are completely random with the constraint that opener has the specified hand):

---

The normal 4♠ should be reached regardless of opening, but playing from partner's side after a 1♥ open (protecting the club king) should be marginally better.

---

Both openings are fairly likely to reach a club partial if unobstructed (transfer to clubs over 1NT, something like 1♥-1NT-2♣-Pass over a 1♥ open). Opening 1♥ might be more likely to let the opponents get in with spades or diamonds.

---

Reaching the good 4♥ is likely after a 1♥ opening. It will be substantially more difficult after a 1NT open (I suppose a really aggressive bidder might try stayman planning to pass 2♦ and raise 2♥, but it's easy to imagine 1NT openings like AKx AKxx xxx Kxx where even 3♥ is likely to fail).

---

A spade partial is likely opposite either opening bid. This is likely to play better from partner's side where the minor suit kings will be protected.

---

Most likely 3NT will be reached regardless of the opening, since this hand is good enough to invite game opposite a 1♥ open (or force game opposite 1NT). This may play mildly better from partner's side with the club king protected, but it probably won't matter (the club spots are helpful).

---

It will be pretty easy to reach the cold 4♥ opposite either opening bid.

---

Game will likely be reached regardless, but opening 1♥ is fairly likely to lead to playing 4♥ whereas opening 1NT will reach 3NT. Neither of these contracts seems all that good to me, but 3NT is probably a bit better.

---

This hand is a pass of either opening. I'd expect 1♥ to make and 1NT to fail.

---

Again a pass of either opening. This time both one-level partials will probably make.

---

This hand is headed towards 3NT regardless; this may play slightly better from partner's side (protecting the diamonds).

[jdonn]

Consider all the hands where you will play 3NT after either opening. Do you think you have a better chance of receiving a favorable lead after 1NT 3NT or 1♥ 1NT 2♣ 3♣ 3♠ 3NT (or similar)?

The hands you gave where partner passes your 1♥ opening, the opponents make 2♠ or 3♦, which will be much easier to find after 1♥ than 1NT.

The rightsiding advantage works both ways. You do have an AQ after all, and they will fairly often even lead a heart into you if they don't know you have them.

The xxxx Jxxx Axxx J is a good advertisement for 1♥. But switch the hearts and clubs and tell me if you will enjoy 1NT or 2♠ more.

Are you sure it was random? 6 of the first 7 gave partner specifically K or AQ as his club holding.

I still maintain the 'occasional' hands where partner has 'exactly 9' and we miss game is more like a lot of 8 9 and 10 point hands where we miss game, and much more often than just 'occasional'. Since you have 15 high card points there are 25 remaining, 25/3 = 8.33, so partner's 1st 2nd and 4th most likely high card totals are 8 9 and 10.

[mike777]

zasanya, on Mar 18 2007, 01:11 AM, said:

mike777, on Mar 18 2007, 12:28 AM, said:

Never ending debate. I have settled on do not open 1nt with 2 flaws
1) one 5 card major.
2) small xx in side suit.

Mike your nt is 16-18 isnt it? So this hand is a clear 1♥ for you .

Yes with pick up partners on bbo. But even with 14-16 I have adopted this rule. Again many disagree.

[mhais]

bid 1nt

[awm]

The hands responder has 8-9 hcp and 0-2 hearts versus the hands where responder has 5-7 hcp and 3-4 hearts with side shortness are roughly in a 5:2 ratio (again via random simulation). So if the whole story is that we miss game on these hands and we want to be in game, then 1NT is somewhat superior.

However, the "8-9 hcp and 0-2 hearts" hands seem not to always offer the best play for 3NT. Here are five random ones, ignoring those with five spades and some shape which might well reach game after 1♥-1♠-2♠:

---

---

---

---

---

3NT seems rather iffy on these hands. On some of them (i.e. the fifth) it is downright bad. On others I'd be happy to be there red at IMPs, but it feels like it's close to even odds. Certainly the opponents might make a bad lead on a few of them.

Here are five random hands of the "5-7 with hearts and a side singleton" variety:

---

---

---

---

---

These have the feel of better games to me as a whole.

In general I've found that opponents lead the "suit where they have the most cards" fairly frequently against 1NT-3NT, especially when this suit is a major. I think protecting the tenaces in the minors from an opening lead will help me more in the long run than blasting 3NT from the wrong side and betting on the lead disadvantage. A fair number of these auctions also won't necessarily go 1NT-3NT -- they may go 1NT-2♥-2♠-3NT-4♠ or 1NT-2♣-2♥-3NT or many other possibilities which could make a minor suit lead seem favorable and/or allow opponents the chance to double a stayman bid, etc.

A big part of my reasoning on this particular hand is that partner holding three hearts is a big upgrade. If partner has three hearts, then my hearts are usually 5 tricks. This puts me pretty close to the nine I need to make 3NT. If partner has three hearts and shortness then I could easily score some trump tricks and make 4♥. I think opener's hand is worth a lot more opposite a "random partner hand with 3-4 hearts" than opposite a "random partner hand with 1-2 hearts." If I open 1NT, partner will tend to judge his hand mostly on points and/or long minors. He will make the same invite or pass with 1-2 hearts and 3-4 hearts.

[pclayton]

Late to this, sorry.

1♥ for me, but I don't have a big problem if pard opens 1N. Its when I play a semi-forcing NT that I'm most concerned, but I'm OK with the 1♥-1N-2♣-2♥-2N sequence sequence in a forcing NT.

I've waffled on this over the years, but my current thinking is that there is nothing automatic about a 1N opening with a 5 card major and a 5332. Its all judgment oriented, but some of the factors I look at are:

1. How strong is my doubleton?
2. With 5 spades, I'm more apt to open the major, but with 5 hearts, I'm more apt to open 1♥.
3. With specifically a 2533, I need a real good reason to open 1♥.
4. I was originally taught a very strong or a very weak suit is a good reason to open 1N. I discount this knowledge now.
5. Intermediates make me lean toward NT.
6. A good 5 card major and a 17 gets upgraded to a 2N rebid.
7. Quacks are better for NT.
8. Concentration of values in 2 suits make me lean toward the major.

[han]

pclayton, on Mar 18 2007, 11:44 AM, said:

2. With 5 spades, I'm more apt to open the major, but with 5 hearts, I'm more apt to open 1♥.

Presumably you meant that with 5 hearts you are more apt to open 1NT.

[pclayton]

Hannie, on Mar 18 2007, 09:26 AM, said:

pclayton, on Mar 18 2007, 11:44 AM, said:

2. With 5 spades, I'm more apt to open the major, but with 5 hearts, I'm more apt to open 1♥.

Presumably you meant that with 5 hearts you are more apt to open 1NT.

Yes of course.

[Winstonm]

Put me in the 1NT camp - when I can show my shape and relative strength in a single bid I'd rather do that than improvise.

If I open 1H and partner bids 1S, I won't know what to do - 2S suddenly looks an underbid and 2C is too improvisational for my taste, although it could work well.

[gwnn]

Not so long ago I opened 1♦ on Axx Axxx Axxx Ax, remembering a "cool" tip from the club "don't open 1NT on 4 aces". Partner bid 1♠ and I was almost in tears: every rebid of mine seemed inappropriate and each seemed sillier than all the others (I bid 2♠ eventually and we got a good result, 3NT failing on a few evil breaks). I learned my lesson. I'm opening this one -and all 5M332's, for that matter- 1NT. Conventional wisdom on when and when not to open 1NT is very very overrated and is on par with an everyday masterminding.

[FrancesHinden]

Echognome, on Mar 18 2007, 03:04 AM, said:

Let me ask a different question. Suppose you didn't have to worry about the rebid problem since you were playing, e.g. a relay system. And you were allowed a choice of which to open (i.e. your system allowed a 5M332 shape to either open 1M or 1NT), which would you prefer to open then?

Funny you should ask that.
With my regular partners I play

i) A system that caters for 5332 15-17 hands with a 5-card major
ii) 1NT on such hands is allowed if the hand looks particularly suitable

I open this hand 1H. It looks wildly unsuitable for 1NT.

Quote

Is it really true that time has proved that opening 1NT on EVERY balanced hand with a 5-card major is a winner in the long run?

Of course it's not. Such an assertion is virtually unproveable, because it depends so much on the rest of your methods, and indeed on the rest of your opponents' methods.

Because there's been so much discussion, I've been keeping some sort of track over the last year or so of hands on which my team has opened 1M and their team has opened 1NT (and vice versa) and so far our approach of "use your judgement with appropriate system to back it up" is ahead. But it's hard to draw much of a general conclusion, never mind one that would apply for other people.

As it happens, the two biggest losses we've had from opening 1H (rather than 1NT) have been from allowing the cheap 1S overcall from LHO.

[1eyedjack]

Rightly or wrongly I would have opened 1NT, and on this particular deal I might live to regret it. One deal will not make me change my mind, and I open 1NT in the full forknowledge that a hand like this might arise. For me, no balanced hand is wildly unsuitable for NT. Having 2 unguarded suits is not an issue for me. Having spent half a lifetime playing a weak 1N (where 2 unguarded suits is commonplace) and the other half playing a mini (where it is almost obligatory), in both cases including a 5 card major in the 1N, my fickle memory does not recall enough disasters like this hand to make me change. It is possible that different issues come into play when playing strong 1N but I lack the experience in that arena to comment.

On this hand Rosserini's partner held
♠K87432
♥J543
♦-
♣AJ5

He might be exposed to the accusation of getting the first salvo in on the postmortem to divert attention from the inadequacy of his 4S bid, but it seems a practical sort of bid that I would have made at the table. Change one of Rosserini's small Hearts to an extra small Diamond and 6H is still a good spot, but presumably his partner would not have criticised the 1N opener then, and would have had no recourse but to blame himself or bad luck.

Do those who choose to open 1N have any suggestions about how this hand should have been bid to slam after the 3D? Or do you just chalk it up to a good preempt? For that matter, is slam trivial to find after a 1H opener (of course it is easier, but that is not the same thing)? Slam is only good because there are no wasted Diamond values. Having said that, opener is minimum in total HCP, and there is some evidence that he should not have too much stuffing in Diamonds, so perhaps responder is worth a full blooded slam try? As I say, I would not have found that.

[bid_em_up]

1eyedjack, on Mar 19 2007, 08:10 AM, said:

Do those who choose to open 1N have any suggestions about how this hand should have been bid to slam after the 3D?

Personally, I am a strong advocate for opening 1N even when holding a 5 card major, but even I would open this 1♥ (most of the time). The hand screams "suit play" (fairly solid major, concentrated values, weak doubleton, minimum NT opener, etc). That said, I think this is the kind of hand where you pick either 1H or 1N and don't worry about which is "correct". They both are, in a manner of speaking, as is fairly reflected with the poll being split exactly down the middle.


1N (3D) 4D (p) is a pretty good start...and so is
1N (3D) 3S (P) (this sequence is forcing).

There was absolutely no need for the "shut out" leap to 4S.

[Fluffy]

If system says open X, then open X.

But I don't play systems which doesn't let me open 1♥ and rebid 2♣