[jillybean]

I'm sure this question has been asked many times before.

---

1nt or 1♠?

[pescetom]

What is your rebid with 4=2=4=3, 4=3=4=2?
And if they are both 1NT, then what is 1♠ if not this?

[Just asking... the way we play the rebid is always 1♠, but I know that is no longer mainstream, for valid reasons.]

[mikeh]

Hard to believe this is a question. Hint: one call describes your hand. The other doesn’t. Guess which I’d choose.

[mycroft]

All the above arguments apply, but my question: when does partner bid 2♥ over your 1NT rebid?

If there is any thought about any 6-card suit, or a decent 5-card suit, because you might have a singleton (even 3154, or 1444 after 1♦-1♠) then okay, maybe think about it here. And then don't, because we bypass a major to rebid 1NT when your hand actually is a balanced hand, not because we like to hide majors, as said above.

If there is a thought to not rebid on a decent 5-card suit because you'll frequently/habitually raise on 3, then you're more likely to rebid NT on 1 rather than find a safer rebid. But even so, see above for this hand.

Because I play a weak NT in a strong NT world, and all the people I am scoring against are playing 2♥ on the 5-2 fit, I want partner to rebid a 5-card suit "automatically" - at least, as often as the strong NT pairs are. Yes, we don't have the advantage of "maybe opener has 4", but when "even opposite 2, the suit plays better" enough to do it all the time, I see no reason to gamble that "well, maybe not this time". When playing strong NT, hey, "even opposite 2, frequently the suit plays better" with 12-14 opposite 6-8 just by having that one more stopper against their suit running. So that's my choice. But I don't "frequently" raise on 3 (pretty much have to be 4432 or 5m332 with a weak doubleton, or a singleton and no better rebid, like 34(15) after 1m-1♠), so partner will catch 3-card support often.

[mike777]

1S automatic
Please post the responder hand that you have concerns...

[helene_t]

1NT would be weird but it certainly has merits if playing that it doesn't deny spades, and that it could be 3145 so that partner won't usually rebid their 5-card hearts, as Mycroft says.

Edit: sorry, nonsense, for some reason I thought the hand was 4144. No, 1NT has no merit.

[DavidKok]

I think 1♠ is clear.

[jillybean]

There was much ado over this hand. North was worried about the opening bid and a new suit over 1♠, South was wanted to play in the 5-2 heart fit and was not happy in a 5-1 fit.

---

mikeh, on 2024-December-08, 10:46, said:

Hard to believe this is a question. Hint: one call describes your hand. The other doesn’t. Guess which I’d choose.

Aren't you busy playing in Vegas?

[DavidKok]

The more you mess with your NT ladder, the more accidents like this you get. I've repeated this ad nauseam, I think there is a huge difference between balanced hands, semibalanced hands and unbalanced hands.

[jillybean]

DavidKok, on 2024-December-08, 15:32, said:

The more you mess with your NT ladder, the more accidents like this you get. I've repeated this ad nauseam, I think there is a huge difference between balanced hands, semibalanced hands and unbalanced hands.

Amen - the line between balanced, semi and unbalanced is getting very fuzzy

[pescetom]

DavidKok, on 2024-December-08, 15:32, said:

The more you mess with your NT ladder, the more accidents like this you get. I've repeated this ad nauseam, I think there is a huge difference between balanced hands, semibalanced hands and unbalanced hands.

I retain an open mind about messing with shapes when within NT range, given appropriate methods and agreements.
But here we outside range and it seems hard to miss spades whatever the methods with more balanced hands.

[Cyberyeti]

This one is a no brainer 1♠.

I don't mind bidding 1N with the majors reversed and 1♦-1♠ auction.

[mike777]

pescetom, on 2024-December-08, 15:54, said:

I retain an open mind about messing with shapes when within NT range, given appropriate methods and agreements.
But here we outside range and it seems hard to miss spades whatever the methods with more balanced hands.

agree, well said.

[DavidKok]

pescetom, on 2024-December-08, 15:54, said:

I retain an open mind about messing with shapes when within NT range, given appropriate methods and agreements.

I'd love to hear more about those agreements. The tools I have on NT auctions all work very well when opener is balanced, and are at best guesswork when opener is not. I think it's very difficult to have a set of gadgets that is both optimised for all the times you have a balanced hand and also works well when opener includes other hand types in the NT rebids.

Or, being less subtle about it, maybe people just need more appropriate methods on their non-NT auctions.

[pescetom]

DavidKok, on 2024-December-08, 16:25, said:

I'd love to hear more about those agreements. The tools I have on NT auctions all work very well when opener is balanced, and are at best guesswork when opener is not. I think it's very difficult to have a set of gadgets that is both optimised for all the times you have a balanced hand and also works well when opener includes other hand types in the NT rebids.

Or, being less subtle about it, maybe people just need more appropriate methods on their non-NT auctions.

We agree on the second point, I will be happy to open a thread on the first when I find a new partner who gives me more experience playing those agreements designed for unorthodox hand shapes (and simulated with Dealer, before BBO broke the tricks function). For now, as said, I retain an open mind.

[mycroft]

"North was worried about the opening bid and a new suit over 1♠,"

Ah, so after hearing the absolutely expected 1♥ from partner, he suddenly decided his aceless 13 wasn't an opener and tried to get out as quickly as possible. I guess that's better than the alternative, that North thinks he's a better declarer than partner and mastermindes, so he could play the hand in the expected 1 or 3NT.

The time to think about this was *before* bidding 1♣ (and then to decide it is an opener, even when partner as expected has hearts). Having chosen to open, bid your hand. Sometimes partner surprises you (as here!) Sometimes you get the bad score your opening decision deserved. Sometimes, everything's just fine and all roads lead to 3NT (but maybe you won't get to play it. Sorry.)

[awm]

DavidKok, on 2024-December-08, 15:32, said:

The more you mess with your NT ladder, the more accidents like this you get. I've repeated this ad nauseam, I think there is a huge difference between balanced hands, semibalanced hands and unbalanced hands.

Despite having a very different style from David here, I very much agree that:

DavidKok, on 2024-December-08, 14:24, said:

I think 1♠ is clear.

This is not so much because I want 1NT to always be balanced, but rather because I believe in bidding my suits when I have them.

[bluenikki]

jillybean, on 2024-December-08, 15:28, said:

There was much ado over this hand. North was worried about the opening bid and a new suit over 1♠.

If you decide your bid was an error, do not attempt to fix it. Even if it manifestly _was_ an error, do not attempt to fix it.

Well, maybe you could think about doing something if there's a penalty pass

[jdiana]

bluenikki, on 2024-December-09, 16:10, said:

If you decide your bid was an error, do not attempt to fix it. Even if it manifestly _was_ an error, do not attempt to fix it.

Couldn't agree more. Nothing good ever comes from trying to fix a bidding mistake.