[Echognome]

luke warm, on May 18 2005, 09:23 AM, said:

Echognome, on May 18 2005, 07:55 AM, said:

<snip> I am assuming we aren't opening 5332 hands with a five card major as 1NT. <snip>

that would be a wrong assumption, playing the system under discussion

I'm confused. In BBO advanced opener can have a 5 card major and open 1NT? We aren't playing any methods to find a 5 card major.

[flytoox]

cherdano, on May 18 2005, 02:32 PM, said:

luke warm, on May 18 2005, 03:23 PM, said:

hongjun said:

However, if we have 5d4c, then 3c would be very difficult and yet we cannot risk to change 3c to 3d.

that's true.. but so it's also true that partner could be 4432... where do you want to be after 2nt, vulnerable at imps?

Partner may be able to judge that pass is best.

Arend

I agree. My 2N has to promise some strength and some shape, but not exceptional. Otherwise, I would transfer to minors or bid 3C showing weak minors after 1N.

If pd has 4432, he will pass my 2N.

I think richard's dbl follow by 2N is best solution. This caters to all possible problem and gives pd a chance to pass the dbl.

[han]

Assuming that their double showed the majors, it is very likely that they have found their major suit fitt, and that we have a decent minor suit fit. 2NT for the minors for me too.

I agree that this would be much more obvious if we were playing matchpoints.

[Chamaco]

Quote

I'm confused.  In BBO advanced opener can have a 5 card major and open 1NT?

Yes

Quote

We aren't playing any methods to find a 5 card major.

The underlying assumption is that most of the times, even with a 5-3 major fit (which cannot be found anymore without specific methods), the hand will play at least equally well in NT.
So basically the idea is: "don't bother of the possibly lost 53 major fit".

Of course we can find plenty of examples supporting this and its opposite :-)

[hotShot]

I'll pass!

I could have shown majors using (weak) stayman, i could show ♠ probably with X over 2♥. So partner will expect me to have the minors.
I don't want to be on the 3 level.

[Echognome]

Opening a 5332 hand as 1NT without methods to find the 5 card major is perfectly fine if it's just a matter of judgment. Yesterday I opened this hand 1NT:

♠ 98642
♥ AK6
♦ KJ5
♣ J6

We were playing 11-13 NT and I thought "What five card spade suit?"

I'm just saying that opening ALL 5332's in the NT range is different. A lot of pairs do this and then play 5 card stayman. I was just making the point that we aren't opening these hands as 1NT by agreement.

[beatrix45]

Jlall, on May 17 2005, 12:57 AM, said:

I think 2N is best because our side has a majority of the HCP and we likely have a fit given that pard is unlikely to have 5 spades, and unlikely to have 4 hearts. If his max likely major suit holdings are 4-3 then we have 8 card fit in some minor. I think selling out to 2H is usually a losing option when you have a fit and half the deck. If 2H is making and 3m is down it doesnt matter. If 3m is making and 2H is down it doesn't matter. If 2H and 3m both make you need to bid. If 3m is down but they take the push to 3H, you need to bid (more likely in practice than theory). If 2H and 3m are both down you need to pass. The first 2 in my experience are much more likely than the last option, especially with a pure hand. Also consider they could have 9 hearts, or you could have a 9 card minor fit quite easily in which case bidding will definitely be right.

Brilliant analysis as to why you ought to bid. We already know what 3 ♣ or 3 ♦ shows. The issue is the meaning of 2 ♠ and 2 NT. The overwhelming majority of a high level panel is willing to bid 2 NT on the grounds that their partner will work out this newly invented convention on the spot, at the table.

This situation comes up often enough that it might be worth an agreement. So, 2 ♠ advertises four, seems right, but what (if anything) else, a second suit? 2 NT is for minors, why not?

Comparable situations crop up in similar auctions. What about RHO bidding 2 ♣ or 2 ♦? Here, the permutations and combinations of possible bids get a little complicated. What am I supposed to do?

[awm]

Here's my analysis for pass.

Since it's IMPs, there's no difference between +110 and +100, or -110 and -100. So bidding only wins if opponents were making 2♥, and we are also making 3-minor. The law of total tricks indicates one side should have a nine-card fit for this to happen. But if opponents have nine hearts, partner will probably balance with a double. In fact the opponents may have only seven hearts, in which case bidding will be disastrous and 2♥ may be down multiple tricks.

Even in the case where we have nine in a minor and opponents have eight in hearts, we have the majority of the strength and it may be 10 tricks for us in the minor versus 7 for them in hearts.

Obviously the law of total tricks is not a hundred percent accurate, but with our relatively balanced shape opposite partner's balanced hand, a downward adjustment seems more likely than an upwards one.

[HeartA]

awm, on May 22 2005, 07:10 PM, said:

Here's my analysis for pass.

Since it's IMPs, there's no difference between +110 and +100, or -110 and -100. So bidding only wins if opponents were making 2♥, and we are also making 3-minor. The law of total tricks indicates one side should have a nine-card fit for this to happen. But if opponents have nine hearts, partner will probably balance with a double. In fact the opponents may have only seven hearts, in which case bidding will be disastrous and 2♥ may be down multiple tricks.

Even in the case where we have nine in a minor and opponents have eight in hearts, we have the majority of the strength and it may be 10 tricks for us in the minor versus 7 for them in hearts.

Obviously the law of total tricks is not a hundred percent accurate, but with our relatively balanced shape opposite partner's balanced hand, a downward adjustment seems more likely than an upwards one.

Agree.