[han]

AK9x
AJxx
Axx
Jx

What do you open in first seat?

[Phil]

1♦?

[gnasher]

1NT. It may have a lot of aces, but it has no tens and the honour distribution isn't anything special.

If we open 1♦, presumably the main reason is to avoid missing game in a major. To decide how likely that is, try constructing some hands that would pass 1NT. xx Kxxx KJxx xxx is a very well-fitting 7-count, and game is just good enough for us to want to be in it. xx Kxxx xxx KJxx is rather more likely, and game is awful. And there's no reason to assume he'll have either a 7-count or a 4-card major.

[Fluffy]

I feel agressive today, I will open my systemic opening for 17 balanced

[han]

gnasher, on 2013-January-08, 05:06, said:

If we open 1♦, presumably the main reason is to avoid missing game in a major. To decide how likely that is, try constructing some hands that would pass 1NT. xx Kxxx KJxx xxx is a very well-fitting 7-count, and game is just good enough for us to want to be in it. xx Kxxx xxx KJxx is rather more likely, and game is awful.

The second hand is less likely since we also have the club jack.

I would have given J10x K10xx Kx xxxx as my candidate for a well fitting 7-count.

[han]

Andy, how often would your partner bid Stayman with a balanced aceless 8-count that has 1 four-card major?

[gnasher]

han, on 2013-January-08, 06:14, said:

I would have given J10x K10xx Kx xxxx as my candidate for a well fitting 7-count.

Yes, you're better at making miracles than I am. That has a two fitting kings, a fitting jack, two fitting tens, and a fitting doubleton. Even with this, game is merely decent, especially if it's played from responder's side so that we can't benefit from a spade lead away from the queen.

[andy_h]

I open 1m (whichever is systemic). These aces are too good especially when they're coupled with a nice honour combination in both majors. The stray jack of clubs is a negative feature, but not enough to persuade me not to upgrade. I guess on average partner will have 7 highs and he will never be stayman-ing my 1NT opening (sometimes with 8 highs too). I guess it's not about wanting to "upgrade this to an 18-19NT" but rather hoping for the auction 1m-1M-3M-4M when partner will be passing a 1NT opening. Yes I may get to bad 4M game, but sometimes it gets us to a good game, or a bad one that makes, and I'm willing to risk it rather than to play in 1NT.

As a side note, last two times I opened 1m with these type of hands, one it got us to a cold game when partner had the exact hand type I described (balanced 4234 with 7 highs) when the rest of the field played in 1NT+3, and second time partner had a complete yarborough and opponents bid to an aggressive 3NT doubled for one off - take it for what you will.

[gnasher]

han, on 2013-January-08, 06:18, said:

Andy, how often would your partner bid Stayman with a balanced aceless 8-count that has 1 four-card major?

Usually, if it had a doubleton. In any of the examples we've seen, if you add a jack to one of the long suits I'd respond. I'd expect partner to pass a lot of aceless 4333s, but unless it fits very well we won't miss anything. Qxx Kxxx Kxx xxx is a good but not cold game, but xxx Kxxx Kxx Qxx is awful.

This is a chicken-and-egg thing though. If we make a habit of upgrading 4432 17-counts, we should be less inclined to respond on 8-counts. I don't think one should often upgrade a balanced 17-count, because 1x-1y;2NT or 1x-1NT;2NT isn't a good start to an auction, so that affects my views on what you need to respond to 1NT.

[helene_t]

Playing 15-17 I would be very surprised if partner opened anything but 1NT. But maybe we play 14+ to 17- ?

[the_clown]

andy_h, on 2013-January-08, 06:41, said:

I open 1m (whichever is systemic). These aces are too good especially when they're coupled with a nice honour combination in both majors. The stray jack of clubs is a negative feature, but not enough to persuade me not to upgrade. I guess on average partner will have 7 highs and he will never be stayman-ing my 1NT opening (sometimes with 8 highs too). I guess it's not about wanting to "upgrade this to an 18-19NT" but rather hoping for the auction 1m-1M-3M-4M when partner will be passing a 1NT opening. Yes I may get to bad 4M game, but sometimes it gets us to a good game, or a bad one that makes, and I'm willing to risk it rather than to play in 1NT.

When partner has 5 cards in the major, we can super accept to show a 4 card support and a maximum hand excellent 16 or 17 HCP. When partner has 8 points and a 4 card major he will stayman and we bid game. So we are left with the hands where partner has exactly 7 points and a 4 card major. I am not sure that partner will be routinely accepting with a balanced 7 count (or that game will be good more than 50% of the time). And when he doesnt accept I think 1NT is a lot safer than the 3 level in a 4-4 fit. Furthermore partner will never know if the hand is well fitting or not. You would bid the same way anytime you have say a 15 count with 5♦4M.

Now we come to the hands where partner doesnt have a major suit fit (and has less than 8 HCP). I dont think I want to be in game opposite some random 6-7 count.

[paulg]

1♣, my systemic opening for a balanced seventeen count. It will not be the first time that I am minimum for my bid.

[Free]

1NT. I'm quite sure that almost nobody would open 1m with AK9x-AJxx-Axx-Tx, but you can hardly call it a big difference. I have an easy superaccept after each Major transfer.

With AK9x-AJxx-AJx-xx I'd probably open 1m, because the ♦J is an asset as opposed to the ♣J from the original.

[gnasher]

Assuming standard methods, another argument against 1♦ is that whenever we play game we'll have the strong hand in dummy. If this were a 1♣ opening and we played transfer responses, that would make a suit opening more attractive.

[RSClyde]

I spent an entire partnership fighting about upgrades/ downgrades for balanced hands. My partner loved them: I tend to avoid them. Some may call my way "a lack of creativity". I call the alternative "mired in subjectivity". On that hand you are slightly more control rich than the run of the mill 17 count, but you have no 5 card suit, no T's and only one 9, and your honors are spread rather than touching. The question is "what do you notice when you look at the hand?" This will often simply depend on your mood. Hence whether you notice the good or the bad may not actually correlate with how strongly the hand really suggests an upgrade. Don't believe me? Dealmaster that hand opposite certain a hand with certain parameters and see how frequently 3nt makes. Now do the same for an arbitrary 17 count and see if there's a significant difference. Perhaps there will be but I would be very surprised. I would do it myself but it isn't installed on this computer yet.

[gwnn]

RSClyde, on 2013-January-08, 10:07, said:

I spent an entire partnership fighting about upgrades/ downgrades for balanced hands. My partner loved them: I tend to avoid them. Some may call my way "a lack of creativity". I call the alternative "mired in subjectivity". On that hand you are slightly more control rich than the run of the mill 17 count, but you have no 5 card suit, no T's and only one 9, and your honors are spread rather than touching. The question is "what do you notice when you look at the hand?" This will often simply depend on your mood. Hence whether you notice the good or the bad may not actually correlate with how strongly the hand really suggests an upgrade. Don't believe me? Dealmaster that hand opposite certain a hand with certain parameters and see how frequently 3nt makes. Now do the same for an arbitrary 17 count and see if there's a significant difference. Perhaps there will be but I would be very surprised. I would do it myself but it isn't installed on this computer yet.

Why 3NT and not 4M? That's what the upgraders are especially aiming for.

[nige1]

han, on 2013-January-08, 04:33, said:

What do you open in first seat with ♠ AK9x ♥ AJxx ♦ Axx ♣ Jx

Assuming 15-17 notrump is on your card then, IMO,

• If you rarely upgrade a 14 count and sometimes downgrade a 15 count, then open 1N.
• If (like many BBO players) you upgrade most 14 counts and never downgrade a 15 count, then open 1♦.

[rhm]

I think upgrading this hand to 18 HCP is okay.

Rainer Herrmann

[jogs]

RSClyde, on 2013-January-08, 10:07, said:

I spent an entire partnership fighting about upgrades/ downgrades for balanced hands.

I'm in the rarely make adjustments on the opening bid camp. Later in the auction may make adjustments based on info about other player's hands.
4333 and 4432. 15-17 HCP 1NT.
5332. 15-16 HCP 1NT.
5332 with 17. Now use judgment based on the quality of the 5-card suit.

[RSClyde]

gwnn, on 2013-January-08, 10:11, said:

Why 3NT and not 4M? That's what the upgraders are especially aiming for.

That's fine: compute both and condition on the probability of partner having a 4 card major vs not. Eliminating any hands where partner has 5+ since superaccepting a transfer would see you through on those. After that partner's probably 50-50ish to have a 4 card major. I'd still doubt that 4M in a 4-4 is that much better than it is on a random 17, probably a little but not that much and that would need to be balanced with the fact that 3nt is probably no better at all.