[jillybean]

Dealer: East Vul: EW Scoring: IMP

♠ AQ76 ♥ AKQ9 ♦ 852 ♣ 82

West North East South

 -     -     Pass  ? you are in 2nd seat 

1♦ or 1nt and why please.

[pclayton]

1N. There are some bridge authors that advocate 1♦ on these hands but its tough to catchup sometimes.

[jdonn]

jillybean2, on May 1 2008, 07:21 PM, said:

1♦ or 1nt and why please.

1NT because I have 15-17 balanced.

[han]

jdonn, on May 1 2008, 07:56 PM, said:

jillybean2, on May 1 2008, 07:21 PM, said:

1♦ or 1nt  and why please.

1NT because I have 15-17 balanced.

Must admit that this is as far as I got as well.

[Mbodell]

1♦ would be my 4th choice after 1NT, 1♥, and 1♣. I much prefer 1♦ to promise 4 and if you turn the ♠Q into the ♠T I'd still prefer 1♥ to 1♦ even if playing standard 3+ 1♣ openers.

[effervesce]

1♦ for me too. The hand doesn't seem no-trumpy. Will raise a 1M response to 3. Will pass a 1NT response, and bid 2♥ over 2♣ or 2♦ (inverted minors).

[jillybean]

Mbodell, on May 1 2008, 06:28 PM, said:

1♦ would be my 4th choice after 1NT, 1♥, and 1♣.  I much prefer 1♦ to promise 4 and if you turn the ♠Q into the ♠T I'd still prefer 1♥ to 1♦ even if playing standard 3+ 1♣ openers.

Im trying to break the 1♣ habit, it has been called 'strange' among other things in these forums.


btw I opened 1nt but our team mates got a 1♦ opening, I'm just wondering why some open these 1♦.

[rogerclee]

I would bid 1♦ at MPs and 1NT at IMPs.

[han]

Ack!

[cherdano]

I thought this would be unanimous, but since it isn't I will join the crowd that claims this is a 15-17 balanced.

Raising 1M to 3M after a 1D opening seems a serious overbid to me, btw, otherwise I had more sympathy for the 1♦ opening (but still wouldn't consider it myself).

[the hog]

Agree that this should be unanimous or close to it. This is a 1NT opener.

[effervesce]

cherdano, on May 1 2008, 09:03 PM, said:

I thought this would be unanimous, but since it isn't I will join the crowd that claims this is a 15-17 balanced.

Raising 1M to 3M after a 1D opening seems a serious overbid to me, btw, otherwise I had more sympathy for the 1♦ opening (but still wouldn't consider it myself).

Overbid? Opposite most 8 counts you want to be in 4.
For example,

JTxx
xx
Kxx
Axxx

Kxxx
xxx
KQx
xxx

The Kaplan and Rubens evaluator evaluates this hand as 16.2. On the ZAR front, it starts off as 30 ZAR, but if partner responds a major this goes up to 32 ZAR. By both bean-counting fronts it is worth an invitation.

Put succinctly: If partner responds in a major, your hand is upgraded. If partner responds in a minor, your hand isn't quite as good. That's why I prefer to open 1♦ on this one.

[Vilgan]

rogerclee, on May 1 2008, 08:52 PM, said:

I would bid 1♦ at MPs and 1NT at IMPs.

^

I used to just routinely open 1NT on hands w/ 15 hcp. However, when it goes 1NT p p p (hardly a rare occurrence) dummy will frequently hit with a 4 card major. Opening a minor on a hand like this increases our chances of finding that 4 card fit where we can do a trick better. If responder doesn't have a 4 card major, we likely don't want to be in game even if they have 9 or possibly 10 points.

At imps, I don't give a flip about the 20 points extra I might get from 110 over 90 and I'll just stick with the preemptive bid of 1NT.

I'm not what you'd call a HUGE believer, its something I've started to lean towards recently and will judge results as they come. However, opening that hand 1♦ is something I might do now whereas I NEVER would have a year ago. With more than 15 hcp I think I would open 1 NT as rebids become more of a problem.

Eric

[neilkaz]

I nice flat 15 count. If I open 1NT and PD bids Stayman we are in great shape. If he blasts 3NT he lacks a 4 card major (maybe unless 4333) and the opps know that and may harmlessly lead a major anyhow if we're in trouble.

If we are in the slam zone, I've told PD I have a flat 15-17 instantly.

If I open 1♦ and PD responds 1M it seem a bit of a stretch to jump to 3 yet a bit of an underbid to reply with 2M.

Opening a 3 card ♦ suit of xxx makes me gag so much, that I slightly prefer 1♥ to 1♦, but off course, there's always issues when you open a 4cM in a 5cM sys, and if I jump raise 1♠ to 3♠ PD may wonder why so many minor suit losers.

INT for me.. getting the hand off my chest in one bid.

[pclayton]

If you are looking for a hand where I would open 1 of a minor with a balanced 15-17, here's one:

♠AKxx ♥xx ♦xxx ♣AKQx

I think opening 1N is an error with this:

1. We should be able to get both suits in.

2. I want a club lead.

3. NT should be played from pard's side.

[P_Marlowe]

1 NT.

This opening bid describes your hand
best (shape - point count) and allows
your side to locate a possible mayor
suit fit in an easy way.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean2, on May 1 2008, 08:49 PM, said:

<snip>

btw I opened 1nt but our team mates got a 1♦ opening, I'm just wondering why some open these 1♦.

Did the other pair play a 15-17 NT?

It used to be an old style, which required
you to have at most one unstopped suit
(never played it), but if your HCP power
required for opening 1 NT goes down,
in the past 16-18 was standard, this
requiremen will get harder to fullfill,

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Gerben42]

If you play 15 - 17 NT, then you should open every hand that qualifies with 1NT. Not 1♣, not 1♦. 1NT.

Why? Because you have no other way to show the hand. You can upgrade very good 17s to 18 but that's basically your only way out.

About opening 4=4=3=2 with 1♣, that is something to be agreed with partner. But even if you do so, only outside of 1NT range!

[rogerclee]

jillybean2, on May 1 2008, 06:49 PM, said:

I'm just wondering why some open these 1♦

To find a 4-4 major fit to play in instead of 1NT when partner is too weak to bid stayman. This is important at MPs, not as much at IMPs.

[655321]

Balanced hand with 15 points, playing 15-17 I can't think of a reason to do anything other than open 1NT.

Don't know anything about Z points, except that I don't need to know any more.