[Elyk25]

When is it usually deemed "okay" to bid NT with 4-4-4-1 Hands (and other variations, like with 2 doubletons)? The other day at a club, with a passed partner (and a questionable pass by my RHO), I decided to bid 1NT with south's hand. Often in bridge situations come up where sometimes you have to pick the best "lie" to you partner in order to best describe my hand. Given I had two 4 card majors across a passed hand, the 3 most likely situations were: a) partner passes 1NT (where a singleton is likely trivial), b) my partner bids stayman (which now i am in a very appealing place to respond), or c) my partner transfers to a 6 card minor or major (which would allow at least a 7 card minor fit across from good stops in remaining suits, or lead to a likely game try in the majors). Is my bid logically agreeable or might it be classified as a "psyche"? Going by ACBL regulations, bidding NT with a singleton is alright as long as it is logically reasonable and isn't a regular informally illegally agreed upon kept secret from the opponents. (And just to note this method did get us to 4H, which was the contract everyone else who played it was in. The only difference present was we were the only declarer from the south because my partner transferred).

---

[ahydra]

The main reason you'd want to do this is avoiding a rebid problem. For example 2452 with poor diamonds is a common shape to open 1N rather than 1D because after p replies 1S, you don't want to repeat a ropey suit.

FWIW I've never had good results opening 1N on 4441. One example where you might want to is say 6432 A AKJ3 K875, since after 1m-1H you don't particularly want to mention those spades, and you have a solid stop in the singleton. But even then I think I would rather open 1D and rebid 2C.

ahydra

[eagles123]

I think occasionally 4441 with stiff K in a major or something should open 1N but I try to avoid it in general.

[Vampyr]

It sounds as though you wish to always open 1NT with 4=4=4=1 and perhaps also 4=4=1=4 in range, and apparently your jurisdiction does not allow this.

[lycier]

If it is regarded as a bid of system, it isn't allowed to open 1NT with 4441. According to ACBL regulations, it is allowed to open 1nt with 4441 only for the range of 10-12hcp weak notrumph system.

[helene_t]

Two doubletons is not a problem according to ACBL regulations, and as long as the 5- or 6-card suit is a minor it is generally a good strategy.

A singleton is only acceptable as a very rare and completely unexpected thing (for your partner). If you restrict it to hands with a singleton king (or ace?) as Rowland suggests, you may be OK with the regulations as long as you don't have bidding methods to reveal the singleton.

[eagles123]

the other situation maybe to open 1n with a singleton are certain 5431 type hands like idk

Qxx K KJxx AQxxx

[fromageGB]

The problem with 1NT is that you will often miss the major fit that you found. How strong would partner need to be to use Stayman? I would guess that you play his subsequent 2NT bid, after no fit, as invitational. Therefore many times he will not be strong enough to bid, and you will be playing in a poor contract compared to those opening 1♣. Maybe ACBL regulations are sensible for once?

[Vampyr]

fromageGB, on 2016-January-21, 06:08, said:

The problem with 1NT is that you will often miss the major fit that you found. How strong would partner need to be to use Stayman? I would guess that you play his subsequent 2NT bid, after no fit, as invitational. Therefore many times he will not be strong enough to bid, and you will be playing in a poor contract compared to those opening 1♣. Maybe ACBL regulations are sensible for once?

This has nothing to do with ACBL regulations. In countries where it is permitted to open1NT with a singleton, nobody is required to do it!

[kenberg]

Personally, I would not open that hand 1NT and I would not summon a director to complain if an opponent were to do so. I have, on occasion opened 1NT with a minor suit stiff, but typically I am something like 3=4=1=5 with the stiff a K or maybe a Q. A 15 count with a stiff K is not, imo, suitable for 1C-1S-2H. With a 17 count it is, and with a 16 count I would think about it. So, with 15, 1NT it is, what else? Here it seems easy to answer "what else?", 1C, so I do it. But I accept that different people see things differently.

I guess I would say that if you open this 1NT you would probably open just about any 4=4=1=4 with 1NT. I don't know what that leads to with acbl rules but, myself, I say be my guest if that is your choice.

[Zelandakh]

Whether it is deemed "okay" is a matter of regulation as well as partnership agreement. In the ACBL it is generally not allowed to have the agreement to open 1NT with a singleton. It is allowed to do this as a deviation, such as when holding a high singleton honour, but doing so systemically is frowned upon. Some other jurisdictions have different rules.

Online you can have the agreement to open some or all 4441s in range 1NT if you like but there are some good reasons not to do so in a natural system. One issue is that a common response from partner will be to transfer into your singleton, which will often lead to a poor contract. Having the singleton in a minor is less problematic but the case of 4=4=1=4 is fairly pointless, since the rebids after a 1♣ opening are easy. For 4=4=4=1 it can be worth considering although the negatives still usually outweight the positives.

In a strong club system it makes more sense still, since 4=4=1=4 hands can now pose a problem. Putting these hands into 1NT allows the system to avoid being pushed into the Precision-style 2♦ (or 2♥) opening, which can be a worthwhile trade-off. On the other hand, there are also other solutions available so even here you need to think about whether it is the right direction. As it happens I personally do choose to do this in a (strong club) system I play but it is not somethign I would recommend for most pairs.

[Elyk25]

Just as a clarification I'm not suggesting I would strongly consider opening 4-4-4-1 hand as 1NT. The main reason I thought it would be very strategic to do so in this odd situation (probably the only situation i would consider doing so without an that "1" being a singleton ace), was because I was across from a passed hand (that was very unlikely to invite to NT game in our system) where the only reason my partner was likely to bid was to find a major fit (which is very easy to find not only because of stayman and transfers, but because my partner knows almost exactly how many HCPs I have and what strain to stop at). Thank you for the responses so far!

[Zelandakh]

The problem with this line of reasoning is that opening 1NT makes it much less likely that your partner will investogate that major suit fit and a fit improves your hand enormously. Indeed, make the responding hand slightly weaker with only 4 hearts and it might pass 1NT with 4♥ being a fine contract. I do applaud your trying to think out alternative strategies for a third/fourth hand opening, an area that I feel is still a little under-developed in terms of theory, but suspect this is probably not the best way of proceeding in a 5 card major, strong NT system.

[kenberg]

Elyk25, on 2016-January-21, 09:10, said:

Just as a clarification I'm not suggesting I would strongly consider opening 4-4-4-1 hand as 1NT. The main reason I thought it would be very strategic to do so in this odd situation (probably the only situation i would consider doing so without an that "1" being a singleton ace), was because I was across from a passed hand (that was very unlikely to invite to NT game in our system) where the only reason my partner was likely to bid was to find a major fit (which is very easy to find not only because of stayman and transfers, but because my partner knows almost exactly how many HCPs I have and what strain to stop at). Thank you for the responses so far!

Are you playing a 13-15 nt? If you are playing 15-17 I cannot see why passed hand partner is unlikely to invite or force to game. But anyway, if he has the values to invite you will find any major suit fit that you have, It is when he passes, say with a 3=4=2=4 shape and a 6 count that you might regret the 1NT opening. Assuming 13-15 I think that I would be more likely, not less likely, to open 1C instead of 1N. But since I would open 1C with either range, it's a little hard to be sure about this.

As I say, I don't object to an opponent opening this 1NT but I am unsure of how the acbl would see it. Unfortunately, it probably varies with who is directing. I figure I will bid my way, my opponents can bid their way. Although at some point I am entitled to an alert.

[blackshoe]

lycier, on 2016-January-21, 03:59, said:

If it is regarded as a bid of system, it isn't allowed to open 1NT with 4441. According to ACBL regulations, it is allowed to open 1nt with 4441 only for the range of 10-12hcp weak notrumph system.

What ACBL regulation is this?

[blackshoe]

kenberg, on 2016-January-21, 09:59, said:

As I say, I don't object to an opponent opening this 1NT but I am unsure of how the acbl would see it. Unfortunately, it probably varies with who is directing. I figure I will bid my way, my opponents can bid their way. Although at some point I am entitled to an alert.

I don't think you can agree to open this hand 1NT systemically. So if they alert, the explanation would be "we have an illegal agreement". If they don't have an agreement, and this is a rare thing, then you're not entitled to an alert, nor will you get one, because opener's partner will not be any more aware than you are that his partner might do this. Unless you want an explanation of the sort "well, two years ago — I think it was a Tuesday — he opened 1NT with a singleton".

[Zelandakh]

blackshoe, on 2016-January-21, 11:14, said:

What ACBL regulation is this?

Advanced China Bridge League perhaps?

[kenberg]

blackshoe, on 2016-January-21, 11:23, said:

I don't think you can agree to open this hand 1NT systemically. So if they alert, the explanation would be "we have an illegal agreement". If they don't have an agreement, and this is a rare thing, then you're not entitled to an alert, nor will you get one, because opener's partner will not be any more aware than you are that his partner might do this. Unless you want an explanation of the sort "well, two years ago — I think it was a Tuesday — he opened 1NT with a singleton".

Yes, you are right here, or at least I think so. My own view, as to regs, is that as long as a person opens NT expecting to play in NT I don't much mind how he comes to that expectation. But I realize the acbl has a different view. Actually the acbl has had several views over time and the directors have held an uncountable array of views. I regard myself as very restrained when it comes to off shape NT openings but I have no interest in telling others what to do.

The hand presented by OP is not even close to a 1NT for my money, but it's his hand.

[SteveMoe]

See: http://www.acbl.org/...h-Singleton.pdf Sep 14, 2013.

[kenberg]

SteveMoe, on 2016-January-21, 20:08, said:

See: http://www.acbl.org/...h-Singleton.pdf Sep 14, 2013.

Added: I seem to have misunderstood here. just skip this. I am getting out of legal arguments.



The fact that this document was revised in September of 2013 says something. This discussion has been going on for approximately 35 years. Maybe longer. You might think that the acbl had come to something before 2013 that did not need revision.

In their current version they say that a big club system might require a 1NT opening on 4=4=1=4 shapes and 3=4=1=5 shapes. They also say that a partneship cannot have an agreement that a 1NT opening does not promise a balanced hand, where by balanced they seem to mean one without a singleton. They say it's ok if it does not happen often, no more than 1% of the time. I have not calculated what percentage of hands would be opened 1NT with a stiff if all hands of the shape mentioned above, with appropriate strenght, were to be opened 1NT. Maybe they have and maybe it comes out to less than 1% but they don't say. At any rate it seems to be to be an agreement that 1NT does not promise balance.

this was a big controversy years ago and the ACBL Bulletin ran some articles about it, some of which were in direct contradiction to some of the others. I think that most people just tired of the argument, certainly I did. One article, one I liked, was by Bobby Wolff. Wolff indicated, as the article cited above partly but only partly reflects, that the 1NT opening can be a matter of reasonable judgment.


The trouble arises when people have different ideas of reasonable judgment. I would not open the OP hand 1NT, not even close, as I have said. But some would. The OP, for example. My solution is to say let him. If, as I think, it is a bad choice then he will after a while give it up. If it is actually a good choice then who knows, maybe we will all be doing it. Not everything has to be a matter of law.