All News

No idea!

Making the best of it.

Sometimes you have various ways to describe your hand. On other occasions, you have no way! Yet, it is still your bid…and passing is not an option. So, there you are. The clock is ticking:

 

1 promised at least 3 clubs and your system is that an opening 1NT is 15-17.

So, when you are stuck for a bid, then call on the Panel!

Michael Cornell “1NT:  Every bid is a lie. I think this is the least of the evils. At least I get across my shape ( or lack thereof ) and my minimum hand.

Not a “lie”, Michael. Just not the whole truth!

Pam Livingston “1NT:  Aargh, I hate this.  It is a downside of strong no- trump systems.  But hey, if there was a perfect system everyone would be playing it and how boring!

I am old fashioned and like my no- trump bids to have a stop but the alternatives look unappealing. Partner might have something useful in spades and its only 1NT at Pairs.  Even though partner has promised 4 hearts I'm not keen to bid 2. It is not as though my hand has any ruffing values.  On a good day partner will take another bid and I can confess that I have 3 hearts.  She might have something in spades. And if everyone passes now that is ok too.

Me, too, Pam. Old fashioned or not, it seems just sensible that 1NT should show a stop and 764 will not win many tricks!

However, no other bid seems better. Indeed, not everyone is worried about our lack of spade holds:

Nigel Kearney “ 1NT: We don't need a stopper at the one level when the suit is bid on our left. I prefer to play that this double guarantees hearts, so 2 is possible, but I still prefer 1NT.”

Peter Newell “1NT: sure, it would be good to have a stopper, but alternatives to 1NT are very ugly. While 1NT looks bad, the opponents haven't raised spades which suggest partner has some, and we may put off a spade lead by bidding 1NT.

At Pairs no-trump part-scores without a stopper can still score well. We may not have an 8-card fit, and even if we do we may not find it.

 Bidding hearts risks getting raised and playing a 4-3 fit may not play well (say if partner has a doubleton spade, then you are going to be forced in the long hand, if partner has 3 spades, a spade ruff is highly likely.)”

However, there are heart supporters:

Andy Braithwaite “2: I will have to bid 2 which will at least guarantee a 7-card fit!”

Bruce Anderson “2: I am not bidding 1NT for obvious reasons, and bidding 2  must show a single suited hand. Partner is likely to  have hearts, probably 4 only, but on a lucky day greater length without the strength to bid 2 over 1 . If partner has a hand with long diamonds but not the strength to bid at the two level, I think they should bid now 3 as it is very unlikely I have length in hearts after opening 1.

If partner has the minors, 2NT over the 1 could show that hand by agreement. If partner has 4 hearts and only one spade stop, he/she would  start with a negative double and then bid no-trumps at an appropriate level. With values and a strong holding in spades partner would pass, waiting for a reopening double, particularly at this vulnerability. There is the risk of playing a 4-3 fit when I bid 2 if partner has a balanced hand  but I can’t see how to avoid that.”

Lots of options with surely the last the most likely. The real danger of bidding 2 here is not in playing that contract but a higher number of hearts with an uncomfortable trump suit. Another not happy with 1NT but saw it this time as the best option was:

Stephen Blackstock “1NT: Not my usual style, but I know that a “stopperless” 1NT is the action strongly recommended by American experts (Kokish, Woolsey et al), whose basic method is what we are presented with here. Their reasons seem to be:

• Better to bid your hand-type immediately than something else (2? 2?) that is a distortion and will make it difficult for partner to imagine this holding;
• West should not pass with shape and short spades, so we should not play no trumps when it is very wrong;
• If West is strong there is now ample room to enquire if East has a real stopper, and look elsewhere if not; 
• With no weak jump and no spade raise, there is reason to hope that West has some spade length and perhaps a useful card;
• If we play 1NT, lose the first five tricks and take the rest, +120 is likely to be an excellent Pairs result.

And of course, South may now be reluctant to lead a spade from say AQJxx, and choose another suit to East's advantage!

So, 1NT it was at the table.  South decided to bid 2 and now West, no doubt on the basis of our spade hold, decided on a natural 2NT. If there was nowhere to go after the double, there were even less places after 2NT! So, hopefully our partner would come to the rescue with a spade hold.

That did not happen but Stephen Blackstock’s final bullet-point came true:

 

South did take the first 5 tricks but declarer took the next 8.

With South unable to lead hearts against a diamond part-score, +130 was possible to beat 120 but otherwise, that was a good score for East-West. Perhaps lucky for East that South did not have 6 cashing spade tricks though one can understand West’s initial double even with 5 diamonds and their 2NT call.

We may not like 1NT though there really was nothing better.

More for our JIN Club players tomorrow.

Richard Solomon

 

Go Back View All News Items