[jillybean]

all red, IMP

875, QJ6, AK92, KQ5

(1♥) ?

[mgoetze]

I guess it is but I could easily forgive someone who passed.

[TylerE]

Ugh, no way. 1NT overcalls in general rarely lead to good things happening, and I don't see any upside to overcalling with this AT all.

[helene_t]

Too weak for my taste. If p invites to game or if LHO doubles 1nt I would regret having overcalled.

w/w at matchpoints I think it is probably a winning style to bid 1NT with this hand. r/r IMPs I think 1NT should be reserved for slightly better hands.

[pooltuna]

I would make a, what most people consider weird, TOX.

[JLOGIC]

pooltuna, on 2011-January-02, 12:57, said:

I would make a, what most people consider weird, TOX.

I consider it normal to double with this shape and a hand too weak to overcall 1N. I consider this hand too weak to overcall 1N.

If we have game we will usually (but not always) still find it after we double, and doubling is much safer than overcalling 1N obviously. If partner competes in a partial it will often be right.

QJx is a very bad holding for declaring a light 3N, if RHO has AKxxx which is not that unlikely we will be in trouble immediately.

That said overcalling 1N is not horrible and I see guys like helgemo and meckstroth (aka winners) overcall 1N on this type of hand all the time.

[cherdano]

JLOGIC, on 2011-January-02, 13:21, said:

That said overcalling 1N is not horrible and I see guys like helgemo and meckstroth and hanp (aka winners) overcall 1N on this type of hand all the time.

FYP.

[jillybean]

Here's the full hand

---

Heart lead of course.

I'm not sure where we end up if I double.

[gwnn]

double for me, a while back I think I passed with something like this but I don't like it anymore. I guess I should just vote jlogic's post up since I will not be able to phrase what he had to say any better, but I'm sure it means a lot to him to know that I agree with him so there.

[nigel_k]

It's a good contract, needing only the ♦Q with the opening bidder. The play is very interesting. Naturally you noticed the diamond blockage so played high from dummy at trick one on the heart lead and then unblocked the queen and jack of hearts to create an extra entry to dummy. Of course all your good work was wasted when the ♦Q was wrong.

In the bidding, you have 4333 shape and no tens so the hand is only worth about 14 HCP. Just bid whatever you would normally bid with 14 HCP and this hand type, i.e. pass or double. Normally double with 4333 is ok if you have some extra values to compensate for the lack of shape, but with this particular hand the three little spades and QJx of hearts mean I would probably pass.

[han]

Believe it or not cherdano, I would pass. I wouldn't even double!

[Fluffy]

I would pass, the hand is right on values for a double, but QJx in hearts (and to some extent, the bad spades) is very low ODR, partner will very often overcomepete over the double.
I mean, compare this hand with a typical 4135 hand, there might be about 3 total tricks difference. Partner is probably going to the 3 level over 2/3 hearts and we will table a dummy that is down 2 without a play, but would easilly defeat their partscore.

1NT is awful IMO, I play 16-18 overcalls, wich means I can sometimes overcall with 15, but that has to be good 15, we don't have any tenaces to upgrade, we have 4333, our heart stopper is very weak and we don't even have intermediates!. I we deal 100 random 15 balanced counts with a heart stopper, this one would be into the 10% worse ones to overcall.

[paulg]

JLOGIC, on 2011-January-02, 13:21, said:

That said overcalling 1N is not horrible and I see guys like helgemo and meckstroth (aka winners) overcall 1N on this type of hand all the time.

I made a similar point in a recent blog post. Should we aspire to make the same bids as selected by 'the expert panel', or the bids that Meckstroth makes even though he scores poorly on the panel?

[jschafer]

I would bid 1NT because I Double way too agressively and on too many shapes already so I need to take some pressure off the Double. Double is my second choice but I really don't like passing these hands.

[hrothgar]

paulg, on 2011-January-03, 02:57, said:

I made a similar point in a recent blog post. Should we aspire to make the same bids as selected by 'the expert panel', or the bids that Meckstroth makes even though he scores poorly on the panel?

Depends (to some extent) on whether we declare like Meckstroth...

Going back to the original hand, I know players far better than I who would choose 1N, Double, and Pass with the hand in question.

Personally, I think that I'd pass unless I was playing matchpoints in a weak field.

The hand looks a hair too weak for 1NT and I'm too old fashioned to fell comfortable with a double.

[cherdano]

paulg, on 2011-January-03, 02:57, said:

I made a similar point in a recent blog post. Should we aspire to make the same bids as selected by 'the expert panel', or the bids that Meckstroth makes even though he scores poorly on the panel?

In case you are talking about the ACBL bulletin panel, I think the answer is easy - go with Meckstroth.

[mcphee]

I do like to get in fast, however 1NT is going to be really bad should they double me, which also leads to very bad when partner tries to run some place as there will be no place safe. Double is a decent option, yet carries risk as well (if they can hit 1N there is no safe haven), yet passing seems a bit like being an easy target for weak opening bidders. I am not fond of this sort of t/o dble but I suppose I would and just close my eyes.

[JLOGIC]

paulg, on 2011-January-03, 02:57, said:

I made a similar point in a recent blog post. Should we aspire to make the same bids as selected by 'the expert panel', or the bids that Meckstroth makes even though he scores poorly on the panel?

Hey Paul, I have a lot of thoughts on this question. But basically:

I think that we often notice when Meckstroth, Helgemo, or Zia do certain things because their style is more unique and, well, fun and exciting. People are trained to notice the unusual not the mundane. For instance, few people would say "well Hamman or Bobby Levin took slightly conservative action X" even though they also seem to win a lot. They are more of the make no mistakes and grind it out in non flashy ways group, but they are also great of course. So we are biased in the sense that we think these guys are always doing something more aggro than we would do because we notice the ones who do, and ignore the ones who don't.

On top of that, the hands that get discussed the most are very marginal decisions. Should we open or pass? Overcall 1N with this 15 or X? Preempt or open at the 1 level? I have long maintained that in reality these decisions do not matter very much, and do not affect whether you are winning or losing very much. If the decision was clear, people wouldn't like to discuss the hand since there wouldn't be much room for discussion (which is why there are a ton more bidding problems than play problems on here, even though play problems are much more important for almost everyone if they want to improve. Someone posts a play problem, and someone answers it, and that could be the end. Or someone else takes a shot and answers it and is proven wrong and feels bad.) So that is the paradox, the close decisions are the ones people want to discuss, but because they are close and reasonable, there is little difference between them and what results you get with them. Thus someone might X and someone might bid 1N, and the 2nd guy will have more variance in terms of looking like a genius when he makes a 23 HCP 3N, or looking like an idiot when he goes for 800, but in reality the imp differential of these actions is probably within .02 imps or something long term.

Now if you add in the fact that Meckstroth plays the hands very well, Rodwell is able to field the auctions well, the overall meckwell pressuring of their opponents grinding them down (even top opponents pretty much agree that it is a nightmare to play vs Meckwell), blah blah then perhaps it is right for Meckstroth to overcall 1N and for me to X. Or perhaps I am doing something suboptimal, or perhaps Meck is (remember this is possible if it is a marginal decision). Bridge is a great game because Levin/Weinstein and Meckwell are both so successful right now, and they play pretty much an opposite style of possible winning styles.

So to answer your question, if a panel of super successful players is split on what to bid, I would pick what works best in my overall partnership, or even what I think is best theoretically. If there is a panel of super sueccessful players that has a huge majority in what they would do and it's different than me, I would think for a long time about if I have a flaw in my game and strongly consider trying out what they suggest for a while, or thinking about if my partnership is playing a bad style that doesn't allow me to make this bid. Depending on ones level (not talking to you now, I know you are very strong), I might not worry about it because they are on a much higher level playing vs much better opps that maybe their bid is good only if partner understands it, but partner won't (or I myself won't get the followup auction right...eg responding with xxx xx xxxx xxxx to 1S w/r then passing the jumpshift to 3D or whatever).

Sorry for rambling/hijack.

[Gerben42]

I would simply pass. For me 1NT shows 15+ to 18. The plus is there for a reason. Perhaps you should add a second + to make sure.
A double with this hand is just weird I think.

[wank]

i would pass and wouldn't consider anything else. i have been described as the most conservative player in england though lol