[fred]

Quote

In my experience, AJx is a poor holding relative to its high card count.  Do you agree with this? 

I can't say I ever really thought about this before, but my instinctive reaction is "no".

I have heard it said that Aces are undervalued and Jacks are overvalued in the 4321 point count. If the degree is roughly the same maybe this cancels out and AJx is really worth 5 points

But the presence of the Ace adds value to the Jack (AJx is better than Axx and Jxx) and it is the case that this holding combines well with any honor card(s) opposite.

So I suppose I like AJx just fine

Quote

If so, do the tens and nines in this hand really not only make up for that, but push the hand's total playing value into the 15-17 range?  Is this the sort of hand you would only open 1NT if playing 14+-17?  Would you contend that most people (mostly referring to non experts) that play '15-17' are really playing 14-17 value wise?

Yes I think the 109 of hearts and the 1097 of diamonds are at least as valuable as the difference between AQx and AJx.

I do put 14+ to 17 on my convention card, but my impression is that the vast majority of experts who write 15-17 really should write 14+ to 17. No doubt a much larger % of non-experts are more or less religious when it comes to point count and bidding notrump hands.

I consider myself serious about the + by the way. Among players in my normal circles I am more conservative than most when it comes to opening 1NT with 14 HCP.

But IMO this hand is worth it. I have been out to lunch before.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[NickRW]

fred, on Jun 16 2008, 07:48 PM, said:

Dealer: East Vul: N/S Scoring: IMP

♠ AJ3 ♥ AQ7 ♦ A765 ♣ 765

Presumably having not read this thread, he failed to downgrade his hand and opened a 15-17 1NT.

Hopefully your reaction to that was "how silly - this is an obvious 15-17 1NT".

My reaction is that this is a poor 15-17 1NT, too weak.

FWIW, this hand opposite the same sort of balanced 9 counts that I would punt 3N as above, makes in only 3 cases out of 20 double dummy. OK, mega small sample size - but it does rather suggest that this hand is worse than the original example.

Nick

Edit: or perhaps I should say, worse for the purposes of NT play. Nines, tens and even jacks don't count for so much in a suit contract.

[kenrexford]

Apollo81, on Jun 16 2008, 03:59 PM, said:

Fred,

In my experience, AJx is a poor holding relative to its high card count. Do you agree with this? If so, do the tens and nines in this hand really not only make up for that, but push the hand's total playing value into the 15-17 range? Is this the sort of hand you would only open 1NT if playing 14+-17? Would you contend that most people (mostly referring to non experts) that play '15-17' are really playing 14-17 value wise?

I'd sure say that AJ9 or AJ8 beats the Hell out of AJ2. AJ2 does always seem to go awry somehow.

Kind of funny how some holdings do that.

Qx seems to carry a lot more weight than expected.

KQ tight often means a stack. Usually with transportation problems and someone ruffing in on me.

AQxxx seems to catch Jxx or Kx. If Jxx, the hook always fails, but if Kx they split.

Weird.

[pclayton]

Its gratifying to see that some of the top players are actually 'downgrading' hands like this.

Maybe we all need to be changing our mindset.

[655321]

pclayton, on Jun 16 2008, 09:32 PM, said:

Its gratifying to see that some of the top players are actually 'downgrading' hands like this.

Maybe we all need to be changing our mindset.

Isn't Fred's point that Duboin didn't downgrade the hand?

And, FWIW, I doubt you will ever see top players downgrading a hand out of their NT range.

[mike777]

655321, on Jun 16 2008, 09:46 PM, said:

pclayton, on Jun 16 2008, 09:32 PM, said:

Its gratifying to see that some of the top players are actually 'downgrading' hands like this.

Maybe we all need to be changing our mindset.

Isn't Fred's point that Duboin didn't downgrade the hand?

And, FWIW, I doubt you will ever see top players downgrading a hand out of their NT range.

funny you mention this but in fact the "only" downgrade of any hand types I remember from true wc players downgrading are 15 or "accepted strong nt range" hcp 4333 hands.

I do not have a source but hopefully the annual world championship books might have some examples.

[NickRW]

655321, on Jun 17 2008, 02:46 AM, said:

pclayton, on Jun 16 2008, 09:32 PM, said:

Its gratifying to see that some of the top players are actually 'downgrading' hands like this.

Maybe we all need to be changing our mindset.

Isn't Fred's point that Duboin didn't downgrade the hand?

And, FWIW, I doubt you will ever see top players downgrading a hand out of their NT range.

Fred may well have intended to imply that - or maybe merely observe.

Anyway, while I think that which of these hands is better than the other for the purposes of NT play is quite clear, where a partnership puts the dividing line between what is good enough and what is not is a matter for agreement.

I would suggest that *if* you think the 15HCP example is OK, then you need to be upgrading a lot of 14s and you won't be trying many punts at 3N on 9HCP. *Or* you could think the 15HCP is not good enough - in which case you won't upgrade many 14s and will take punts as responder with 9. In other words it is a matter of both accurate evaluation *and* partnership agreement.

Nick

[fred]

655321, on Jun 17 2008, 02:46 AM, said:

pclayton, on Jun 16 2008, 09:32 PM, said:

Its gratifying to see that some of the top players are actually 'downgrading' hands like this.

Maybe we all need to be changing our mindset.

Isn't Fred's point that Duboin didn't downgrade the hand?

More than that, I doubt it even occurred to him not to open 1NT.

There seems to be some kind of fundamental disconnect going on here. IMO 3 Aces are good - a reason to upgrade as opposed to downgrade.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[fred]

I just sent me regular partner (Brad Moss) an e-mail asking him to describe in 1 word how he would characterize a 1NT opening with the hand in question.

His word: indicated

Shortly after that he changed his word to: obvious

Of course this doesn't really prove anything, but I thought it was interesting. It should be noted that Brad is probably the single most aggressive 1NT opener among leading USA players (with the possible exception of Joe Grue).

He also happens to be an extremely gifted natural player. When Brad has an opinion about what a hand is worth, I have learned over the years that he is usually right

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[TylerE]

Thanks for all the responses folks. Had no idea this simple hand would generate so much interest

I did open 1N at the table, 2♣-2♦-3NT, and partner flopped a decentish 12 count so bringing home 10 or 11 tricks was no real challenge.

Wasn't 100% on my judgement at the time, since I don't play much 15-17 in serious partnerships any more. (Usually some sort of mini or weak with a big ♣ system).

[pclayton]

TylerE, on Jun 17 2008, 08:13 AM, said:

Thanks for all the responses folks. Had no idea this simple hand would generate so much interest

I did open 1N at the table, 2♣-2♦-3NT, and partner flopped a decentish 12 count so bringing home 10 or 11 tricks was no real challenge.

Wasn't 100% on my judgement at the time, since I don't play much 15-17 in serious partnerships any more. (Usually some sort of mini or weak with a big ♣ system).

My partners usually open "decentish" 12 counts in 2nd seat. My sense if you open 1 of a minor that you will get to 3N anyway.

Still I appreciate Fred's views and I will factor them into future decisions.

[bid_em_up]

I'd open the hand in question 1N in all seats.

So what if its a point shy? It has only 3 cards that are 6 or below, these are great filler cards and more than make up for the missing point. It has 3 cards in both majors (you dont care if you get transferred into either major suit, it will be 5-3 fit). 1N is the most accurately descriptive bid (balanced hand, so what if you're missing a jack) and is also the bid MOST likely to get you to a makeable game when there is one. 3N isn't necessarily the only makeable game, 4M is certainly well within reason still.

jmoo.

[fred]

Jlall, on Jun 17 2008, 05:10 PM, said:

I don't understand why you think people are not opening this hand 1N because it's 14 HCP rather than people not thinking that it is worth 15 HCP.

I don't think that.

I actually think that most of the people who opted for 1D think the hand is not worth 15 HCP. The very fact that this hand was presented as a problem means that the OP was asking "is this hand worth 15 HCP?". I believe that is the question that everyone has been trying to answer.

I was surprised that so many strong thoughtful players opened 1D because (for me) this is a fairly simple hand-evaluation problem and (for me) it is pretty close to "obvious" (Brad's word) that this hand is better for notrump purposes than its HCP count suggests.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[pclayton]

fred, on Jun 17 2008, 09:34 AM, said:

Jlall, on Jun 17 2008, 05:10 PM, said:

I don't understand why you think people are not opening this hand 1N because it's 14 HCP rather than people not thinking that it is worth 15 HCP.

I don't think that.

I actually think that most of the people who opted for 1D think the hand is not worth 15 HCP. The very fact that this hand was presented as a problem means that the OP was asking "is this hand worth 15 HCP?". I believe that is the question that everyone has been trying to answer.

I was surprised that so many strong thoughtful players opened 1D because (for me) this is a fairly simple hand-evaluation problem and (for me) it is pretty close to "obvious" (Brad's word) that this hand is better for notrump purposes than its HCP count suggests.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Fair enough. The OP's hand is worth an upgrade to a 15 count. We all can appreciate that.

What bothers me is that in all the vugraphs that I ever watched, I don't think I have ever seen a 15 count get downgraded to a non-1N opening or even an 18 count get downgraded into a NT opening.

From an evaluation standpoint, if a 14 (or even some 13's) can get promoted, how come a stronger hand (from strictly a 4321 standpoint) is never downgraded?

In Nigel's post he mentions being slave to a Jack. If we all admit that evaluation is a qualitative process, then why isn't downgrading occurring more?

[MickyB]

Quote

What bothers me is that in all the vugraphs that I ever watched, I don't think I have ever seen a 15 count get downgraded to a non-1N opening or even an 18 count get downgraded into a NT opening.

I downgraded a 4333 15-count on vugraph - well, actually I miscounted my points, but it's near enough the same thing

[OleBerg]

pclayton, on Jun 18 2008, 05:16 AM, said:

From an evaluation standpoint, if a 14 (or even some 13's) can get promoted, how come a stronger hand (from strictly a 4321 standpoint) is never downgraded?

In Nigel's post he mentions being slave to a Jack. If we all admit that evaluation is a qualitative process, then why isn't downgrading occurring more?

An explanation could be, that playing a 15-17 nt we have decided that even the lousiest 15-count hand, is worth 1nt.
So we never have to downgrade. But for consistiency, we quite often has to upgrade a 14-count, and occasionally a 13-count.

The real thruth is, of course, that we are all overbidders.