[y66]

r/w MPs 3 passes to you

AKT97 AQx xx KJ7

Edit: 1N=15 to 17

[Gerben42]

1♠ and rebid 2NT. This hand is very good.

[kenrexford]

It depends on your range. If the range is 15-17, then yes.

[hrothgar]

Agree with Gerben

Clear 1♠ opening, planning to show a balanced hand too strong for 1NT and too weak for 2NT

[rogerclee]

I think it is too strong but don't have any real problem with opening 1NT. KJx is not a great holding.

Edit: Oh, I was reading this without glasses on and didn't see the spade spots (thought it was AKxxx). Yes, this is very clearly too good to open 1NT. Would you ever open AKxxx AQx Jx KJx 1NT? Isn't this hand better?

[han]

Too strong for 1NT, open 1S.

[mikeh]

This hand is far, far too good for 1N. I would open 1♠ with the same shape and no spade stops... the typical 1N hand holds 4 or 5 controls, this hand holds 6. Add a point for the 5 card suit headed by 2 top honours, and add something for the effect of the 1097 of spades, and this is closer, in my book, to 19 than it is to 17.

To illustrate: AKxxx opposite Jxx or Jx compared to AK1097 opposite Jxx or Jx. The latter holdings are far more powerful than the former, and yet our 4321 count method values them the same. Does that tell us something?

[FrancesHinden]

First unanimous poll?

[andy_h]

1S - love the controls and the 5card suit

[jdonn]

You should upgrade a lot of 17s with a 5 card major, since the bonus of bidding your major is extra reason. This hand would easily be good enough to upgrade even if the long suit was a minor.

[han]

FrancesHinden, on Mar 28 2008, 10:40 AM, said:

First unanimous poll?

Nope.

[Cascade]

I am usually reluctant to upgrade. So much so that in our partnership upgrades are affectionately know as "Pam-upgrades"

This hand is not a super 17 so I would bid it like a maximum 15-17 hand.

AKT97 AQx xx KJ7

We have 6 controls which is slightly above average (5.811109123) - incidentally my rule of thumb (rounded linear regression best fit) for controls which works quite well for about 5 to 30 hcp is average controls = 0.4 * hcp - 1 e.g. 0.4 * 17 - 1 = 5.8.

About 42% of 17 counts have six controls, 23% have more and 35% have fewer controls.

As I see it our extras are the fifth spade and the 10-9 of spades.

I don't think this is enough to upgrade.

I do however superaccept with this sort of hand on Stayman auctions.

1NT 2♣

3Major = maximum (17 hcp) with a five-card major. (I don't make a similar superaccept with a minor as partner might not be prepared for a minor response to Stayman).

[cherdano]

Cascade, on Mar 28 2008, 03:00 PM, said:

As I see it our extras are the fifth spade and the 10-9 of spades.

Sorry, a suit of AKT97 is worth a lot more than the upgrade for a 5th spade plus the upgrade for T9 plus the upgrade for 3 controls. This suit has very good odds to produce 4 tricks opposite xx (and in fact some chance for 5 tricks).
Your whole discussion is completely ignoring the fact that our honors and spot cards are perfectly placed where we want them, in our long suit, much more than to be expected in an average hand. Also, all our minor honors live in combination with top honors, which makes them more useful.

This hand is worth a lot more than an average "17 count with 5 spades, T9, and 6 controls". If you don't upgrade this one, you should downgrade a lot of 18 counts.

[jtfanclub]

Sorry, Cascade, I still don't buy these.

I don't care about upgrading, I care that my five card major is extremely powerful, while I also have a small doubleton.

If partner has a random balanced 9 count, he's going to bid 3NT. If the opponents find the lead of my doubleton, and they usually do, I don't expect to make it. In contrast, if I open 1 spade across a random balanced 9 count, I expect to be in 4 spades, and I expect to make it....or at the very least, I think my odds are better.

I know, I've already been ridiculed for a dislike of bidding 1NT with a small doubleton (I'll do it if nothing else looks good). But surely most people at least agree that it should be considered a negative. In this hand, not only IMHO is 4♠ going to be superior more often than the usual 5332 1NT opener, but I think it's very likely that 3NT will play better from partner's side, to protect his diamonds.

Move one spot...AKT97 AQ xxx KJ7 or AKT97 AQx xxx KJ, and now I'd want to open 1NT, to protect the doubleton honors. As it is, if they lead clubs or hearts and my partner has as little as Tx I feel very safe. Or even if he doesn't and the opponents think he might.

[ArtK78]

I find the idea of upgrading a hand for no trump purposes due to extra controls to be backwards.

Controls are an indication that a hand should be played in a suit contract, not no trump. A hand with more high cards but less controls typically plays better in no trump than in a suit contract.

These concepts can be taken to extremes, so I don't need any examples of how well QJx QJxx QJxx QJ plays in no trump.

When I have a balanced or semi-balanced hand with a lot of controls, I strive to find a suit fit and avoid no trump contracts. Aces are all well and good, but they are only one trick each.

[Ant590]

Cascade, on Mar 28 2008, 04:00 PM, said:

We have 6 controls which is slightly above average (5.811109123)

Woah, 9 decimal places... how many hands did you simulate to get this figure? Or is it an arithmetical calculation?

[han]

Cascade, tell me you're joking. You honestly don't upgrade this monster?

[the hog]

Well at least Wayne is consistent - not downgrading 9-11s in Nuno's post and not upgrading this 15-17 (virtual 19 count). I guess 15-17 means 15-17HCP just as 9-11 means 9-11HCP

Certainly I would open this 1S and rebid 2NT

[CSGibson]

Cascade, on Mar 28 2008, 01:00 PM, said:

3Major = maximum (17 hcp) with a five-card major. (I don't make a similar superaccept with a minor as partner might not be prepared for a minor response to Stayman).

Warning: Thread hijacking in progress at the upgrading 1NT discussion!

This idea of a superaccept response to stayman is new and interesting to me. Do other people play it, and with what results? Any downside to the idea? Do people who play it demand a full 17, or would they bid it with any hand that would accept an invitation to 3NT?

[Cascade]

Ant590, on Mar 29 2008, 10:58 AM, said:

Cascade, on Mar 28 2008, 04:00 PM, said:

We have 6 controls which is slightly above average (5.811109123)

Woah, 9 decimal places... how many hands did you simulate to get this figure? Or is it an arithmetical calculation?

No simulation just pulled it out of a spreadsheet.

You are right it is probably overkill since the calculation is based on all 17 counts not those restricted by the 1NT opening.