[MrAce]

Deleted

[Zelandakh]

 akwoo, on 2012-December-01, 21:44, said:

Back when I last played a 12-14 1nt in a regular partnership, we agreed to systemically open 2425 hands in range with 1nt. (In fact, our 12-14 1nt specifically allowed any 5422 hand with 5 in a minor; in practice this was unusual with a 4 card spade suit and usual otherwise.)

As far as I can tell, noone is suggesting that opening 1NT with a 2425 hand is a problem per se. Rather it is whether xx/AKxx/xx/AKxxx falls into the 12-14 range. It is a separate question again whether you actually want to treat such a hand as balanced or as 1.5 suited.

Also, I do not think anyone is suggesting that 2 doubletons are as good as a singleton once a fit has been found. It is possible for 2 hands not to have exactly the same evaluation and yet still to qualify for the same bid. For example, I assume both xx/KJxx/Ax/KTxxx and x/KJxx/Axx/KTxxx would be 2♥ raises for (almost) everyone? Similarly, if you judge xx/AKxx/xx/AKxxx to be a minimum 3♥ raise, then I do not see any problem with x/AKxx/xxx/AKxxx being a (better) 3♥ bid. The question is merely where you draw the line. I would be happy bidding 3♥ on both (but I do come from Acol-land and play a weak NT, if that makes a difference). If I had a problem with the range of the 3♥ raise then I would probably try to use the 3♦ rebid to cover some of these hands.

[helene_t]

 the hog, on 2012-December-01, 19:00, said:

So after a 1C opening and a 1S response you would reverse to 2H on this hand?

90% of club players here in Northern England would open 1♣ and rebid 2♣ with that hand. It has merits. After all, 3NT is probably best played by partner.

[Nabooba]

Did not one poster post this: "As for the difference between x xxx and xx xx, it may not be as much as you think and could even be a trick weaker"?

[PhilKing]

 Nabooba, on 2012-December-03, 18:13, said:

Did not one poster post this: "As for the difference between x xxx and xx xx, it may not be as much as you think and could even be a trick weaker"?

Could.

If partner has KQx QJxx xxxx xx, we have reasonable play for for hearts, yet when partner has x AKxx xxx AKxxx we have four top losers. On average the hand with the singleton is stronger (as I stated in the same paragraph), but it ain't necessarily so. Maybe you simply misunderstood, but the partial quotation does you no credit.

♠xx ♥AKxx ♦xx ♣AKxxx is a 3♥ bid because we usually have a decent play for game opposite a mundane 8 or 9 count that will pass 2♥. Try this hand with less, including a wasted queen:

♠Axx ♥Jxxxx ♦Qxx ♣xx

Hardly, cherry-picking. By the way, where can I get your book?

[Trinidad]

 the hog, on 2012-December-02, 03:36, said:

Would the naysayers bid 4H on [x AKxx xxx AKxxx], or do you think this hand has the same value as
xx AKxx xx AKxxx ? It doesn't for me.

No, I would bid 3♥ on both and no, I do not think they have the same value.

Surprise: I would open a strong NT on 15HCP and on 17HCP, despite the fact that 17>15.

Hands do not have the same value, just because I use the same bid for them. There is such a thing as "range".

Rik

[MrAce]

 Trinidad, on 2012-December-04, 03:23, said:

No, I would bid 3♥ on both and no, I do not think they have the same value.

Surprise: I would open a strong NT on 15HCP and on 17HCP, despite the fact that 17>15.

Hands do not have the same value, just because I use the same bid for them. There is such a thing as "range".

Rik

Exactly, imo xx AKxx AKxxx xx or xx AKxx xx AKxxx looks like lower range of a 3♥ bid much more than higher end of a 2♥ bid.

Let me put it this way, we could have a different debate (and of course choices) if the hand was xx AQxx Jx AQJxx and this is still the high end of 2♥ range despite the Jx ♦ imo, still way too weak compared to the hand we are discussing.

Untill we are allowed by bridge laws to bid 1/2 bids (2.5 ♥), i am afraid this debate between absolute hcp followers and others will continue forever.