[cnszsun]

Scoring: IMP

1♣-(1♠)-ps-ps
?

---

At balanced seat, if you have a hand with 4 cards in unbid major and also within your NT range (like here 1NT shows 18-19hcp).
Which one do you perfer, double or NT?

[han]

Good question, it feels like double is best but I'm looking forward to other opinions.

[Codo]

With Kx 1 NT is totally wrong for me, clear X.

Give me f.e.
AK, AQxx,xxx,AJxx
and 1 NT is in the picture, but I would still double.

[P_Marlowe]

1NT.

I can understand X, but the adv. is,
that we play one level lower.
and we will reach game more often
(with possibly no chance of making)
than after X.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

With Kx of spades I feel like hogging 1NT.

[pclayton]

Double was my first reaction, but I think I like 1N a little better. Pard isn't barred from bidding 2 of a minor here over 1N, with the right hand.

1N might be the best spot, and there has to be an advantage to playing the hand from my side.

[Walddk]

Double would likely be my first impulse at the table, but the more I think about it, the more I like 1NT better.

1. Partner does not have four hearts and 5-6 hcp.
2. Partner rates to have some length in spades (not even a weak raise by my RHO).
3. In the event that partner has 5+ cards in diamonds or hearts, he can still pull 1NT. *

* Double would also get us there, but there is no way back to 1NT when that is right. The downside of bidding 1NT is that we won't get to 2♥ when partner has exactly four and less than 5 hcp. But even then 1NT may play as well as 2♥. Perhaps he has a 4432 shape.

Roland

[FrancesHinden]

ON this particular hand, I don't really feel very strongly.

I'm not concerned about the 'right-siding' issue: if we play in a red suit it's going to be played by partner whether we double or bid 1NT; if partner bids NT voluntarily we probably don't need to play it our way up.

1NT gets us to 3NT quickly on values when it's right.

I would probably double because the hand looks very crisp for suit play. And you never know, perhaps partner is going to pass....

p.s.

Quote

1. Partner does not have four hearts and 5-6 hcp.

Obviously there is a partnership style issue. But I would not expect partner to double 1S looking at xxxx Kxxx xx Qxx where I'd rather play 2H than 1NT, even wrong-sided.

[bid_em_up]

Walddk, on Jul 11 2007, 11:34 AM, said:

Double would likely be my first impulse at the table, but the more I think about it, the more I like 1NT better.

1. Partner does not have four hearts and 5-6 hcp.

True, but then again partner is equally likely to have a weak hand (or even a bust) with 5-7 diamonds.

Doubling may allow you to play 2 diamonds, whereas 1N will force you to be at 3D to play in that strain.

Double may also get you to 2C if this is the right spot as well.

If partner manages to bid 1N, it should play equally as well from his side (and gives you a chance to raise to 2N/3N, whether you should or not is debatable).

Or....you may get to defend 1S x'd as well.

Overall, I think double is the most flexible option and prefer it strongly over 1N.

jmoo.

[helene_t]

bid_em_up, on Jul 11 2007, 07:50 PM, said:

Doubling may allow you to play 2 diamonds, whereas 1N will force you to be at 3D to play in that strain.

Double may also get you to 2C if this is the right spot as well.

No, 2♣ and 2♦ should be natural over this 1NT bid. If partner want's to Stayman he can bid 2♠.

[bid_em_up]

helene_t, on Jul 11 2007, 12:52 PM, said:

bid_em_up, on Jul 11 2007, 07:50 PM, said:

Doubling may allow you to play 2 diamonds, whereas 1N will force you to be at 3D to play in that strain.

Double may also get you to 2C if this is the right spot as well.

No, 2♣ and 2♦ should be natural over this 1NT bid. If partner want's to Stayman he can bid 2♠.

Sure, a broke hand is going to force the bidding to the 3 level.

Right.

You may have this agreement if you choose, but I think most people would interpret 2C as stayman, and 2D as transfer in this situation.

I agree that it would be better for all bids to be natural in this sequence though.

[pclayton]

bid_em_up, on Jul 11 2007, 09:50 AM, said:

(snip) jmoo.

Quote

Doubling may allow you to play 2 diamonds, whereas 1N will force you to be at 3D to play in that strain.

Why? Pard can bid 2♦ over either x or 1N.

Quote

Double may also get you to 2C if this is the right spot as well.

See above.

Quote

Or....you may get to defend 1S x'd as well. 

Dream on

Quote

If partner manages to bid 1N, it should play equally as well from his side.

In theory, yes. In practice, no. Watch how pard's Txxx becomes a stop when LHO leads an honor from AQJ9x. Or pard has Qxx.

[bid_em_up]

pclayton, on Jul 11 2007, 12:55 PM, said:

bid_em_up, on Jul 11 2007, 09:50 AM, said:

(snip) jmoo.

Quote

Doubling may allow you to play 2 diamonds, whereas 1N will force you to be at 3D to play in that strain.

Why? Pard can bid 2♦ over either x or 1N.

Quote

Double may also get you to 2C if this is the right spot as well.

See above.

Quote

Or....you may get to defend 1S x'd as well. 

Dream on

Quote

If partner manages to bid 1N, it should play equally as well from his side.

In theory, yes. In practice, no. Watch how pard's Txxx becomes a stop when LHO leads an honor from AQJ9x. Or pard has Qxx.

If you swear to me, that you will never have a partner that will take 2D over 1N as a transfer to hearts, I will tell you that you are lying.

If you swear to me, that you will never have a partner that will take 2C over 1N as stayman, I will tell you that you are lying.

If you tell me it isn't possible that partner has a hand such as:

J10xxx Kx xx Kxxx

I will tell you that you are lying. (He probably doesn't, and I may be dreaming, but....if you don't allow for it, you will never defend this hand when he does.)

I also don't think partner will be bidding 1N on Qxx alone, as he will then have a four card suit somewhere.



All I am saying is X is more flexible than 1N. Feel free to do as you wish.

[helene_t]

OK, if playing with a p that might be capable of thinking system is on in this situation, I would double as well. In fact I would never bid notrumps with such a p, other than opening 1NT

[pclayton]

bid_em_up, on Jul 11 2007, 10:00 AM, said:

pclayton, on Jul 11 2007, 12:55 PM, said:

bid_em_up, on Jul 11 2007, 09:50 AM, said:

(snip) jmoo.

Quote

Doubling may allow you to play 2 diamonds, whereas 1N will force you to be at 3D to play in that strain.

Why? Pard can bid 2♦ over either x or 1N.

Quote

Double may also get you to 2C if this is the right spot as well.

See above.

Quote

Or....you may get to defend 1S x'd as well. 

Dream on

Quote

If partner manages to bid 1N, it should play equally as well from his side.

In theory, yes. In practice, no. Watch how pard's Txxx becomes a stop when LHO leads an honor from AQJ9x. Or pard has Qxx.

If you swear to me, that you will never have a partner that will take 2D over 1N as a transfer to hearts, I tell you that you are lying.

If you swear to me, that you will never have a partner that will take 2C over 1N as stayman, I tell you that you are lying.

If you tell me it isn't possible that partner has a hand such as:

J10xxx Kx xx Kxxx

I will tell you that you are lying. (He probably doesn't, and I may be dreaming, but....if you don't allow for it, you will never defend this hand when he does.)



All I am saying is X is more flexible than 1N. Feel free to do as you wish.

LOL - Are we playing a strong club and I wasn't aware of this? Then I might agree with you. Otherwise, I guess I'm a liar.

My pards are bright enough to know we don't play 'delayed' stayman or 'delayed' transfers here.

[Walddk]

FrancesHinden, on Jul 11 2007, 07:16 PM, said:

I'm not concerned about the 'right-siding' issue: if we play in a red suit it's going to be played by partner whether we double or bid 1NT; if partner bids NT voluntarily we probably don't need to play it our way up.

I disagree. Partner may well have 10xxx, and unless you peek, you are not going to lead ♠A followed by a small one from AQJ9x.

As to your comment regarding a possible penalty pass if you double, I really don't believe that you are serious.

Roland

[bid_em_up]

pclayton, on Jul 11 2007, 01:04 PM, said:

My pards are bright enough to know we don't play 'delayed'  stayman or 'delayed' transfers here.

Good for you.

I wish I could say the same and that it would always be the case.

[han]

2C as delayed stayman there? That wouldn't have occured to me either, I should play with Phil sometime!

[helene_t]

Why can't it be a trap pass? P could have six spades. Not very likely but if it's a narrow decision anyway you might as well take that into consideration.

[pclayton]

Hannie, on Jul 11 2007, 10:33 AM, said:

2C as delayed stayman there? That wouldn't have occured to me either, I should play with Phil sometime!

Actually I was going to ask Roland to play:

Quote

In theory, yes. In practice, no. Watch how pard's Txxx becomes a stop when LHO leads an honor from AQJ9x. Or pard has Qxx.

Quote

I disagree. Partner may well have 10xxx, and unless you peek, you are not going to lead ♠A followed by a small one from AQJ9x.

and:

Quote

Double was my first reaction, but I think I like 1N a little better.

Quote

Double would likely be my first impulse at the table, but the more I think about it, the more I like 1NT better.