[pecohen]

I was told the other day that the Standard American Bridge criteria for a balanced hand had changed recently to allow a hand with a singleton to qualify so long as there is not a singleton or doubleton in another suit. My question is what other changes have been made to accommodate this one.

The situation that puzzles me is if I open 1N with a singleton ♥ and my partner responds with 2♦ then traditionally I was required to bid 2♥. That seemed a reasonable requirement under the traditional meaning for a balanced hand, but now this could leave me playing a heart contract with our opponents holding seven hearts. How is this to be avoided now?

[ggwhiz]

pecohen, on 2016-August-13, 15:02, said:

How is this to be avoided now?

Just because you can open 1nt doesn't mean you have to.

I'll open 1nt with a stiff and a suitable hand but (almost) never with a stiff in a major and try to avoid it when partner is an unpassed hand too.

[Stephen Tu]

This was an ACBL rule change to explicitly allow opening NT with singleton A/K/Q. Typically one does this intending to accept the transfer and play a 5-1 fit if partner passes, and just do the best you can. Sometimes partner doesn't pass. Sometimes partner has 6+. Sometimes opps misdefend. Sometimes it actually is the best spot.

I do this most often with a stiff spade, where other potential auctions are flawed in some way, underbids(1nt rebid over 1s) or overbids (reverse, or jump rebid minor with bad suit). The hope is that partner will get the level right more often and compensate for the occasional bad result playing the 5-1 or 6-1.

The reason for the rule change is because the previous rule was kind of vague and stupid, and experts were routinely doing this anyway. The old rule was that you could do it based on "judgement" but it couldn't be "systemic". I always thought this was a self-contradictory position since if one has consistent judgment, and say always opened 1444/1345 stiff A/K in range with 1nt, it becomes implicitly systemic.

[SteveMoe]

It wasn't the Standard American criteria for a balanced hand that changed. A balanced hand is still a hand with no singleton or void and not more than 2 doubletons (7222 is defines as unbalnaced).

What changed was that a Notrump opening bid is natural if it contains a singleton Honor Card (A, K, or Q), and no doubleton or shorter second suit. If a no trump opening bid is natural we are permitted to use artificial responses.

Since the rule change expands the hand patterns we can include (444H, 543H) in No Trump openings, there is no mandatory change to anything else. Yes we will stumble sometime to deal with that singleton honor. Some may define new ways to rebid so that the singleton H is identified. We'll see.

Here is the text of the proposed change:
Item 162-06: Notrump Opener
The ACBL General Convention Chart be modified as follows:
DEFINITIONS
…
2. A notrump opening or overcall is natural if, by agreement, it is balanced (generally,no singleton or void and no more than two doubletons) it contains no void, at most one singleton which must be the A,K or Q and no more than two doubletons.


Here's the text of the change as adopted at teh Summer 2016 BoD meeting in Washington DC:
Item 162-06: Notrump Opener
The ACBL General Convention Chart is modified as follows:
DEFINITIONS
Staff: Weinstein
2. A notrump opening or overcall is natural if, by agreement, it is balanced (generally, no singleton or void and no more than two doubletons) it contains no void, at most one singleton which must be the A, K, or Q, and no more than two doubletons. If the hand contains a singleton it may have no doubleton.

Effective August 1, 2016
Carried
Nay: 1, 5, 7 Abstain: 13 Absent: 15

Edited to include full text of resolution as passed by the ACBL BoD.

[mikestar13]

SteveMoe, on 2016-August-13, 22:32, said:

It wasn't the Standard American criteria for a balanced hand that changed. A balanced hand is still a hand with no singleton or void and not more than 2 doubletons (7222 is defines as unbalnaced).

What changed was that a Notrump opening bid is natural if it contains a singleton Honor Card (A, K, or Q), and no doubleton or shorter second suit. If a no trump opening bid is natural we are permitted to use artificial responses.

Since the rule change expands the hand patterns we can include (444H, 543H) in No Trump openings, there is no mandatory change to anything else. Yes we will stumble sometime to deal with that singleton honor. Some may define new ways to rebid so that the singleton H is identified. We'll see.

Here is the text of the change:
Item 162-06: Notrump Opener
The ACBL General Convention Chart be modified as follows:
DEFINITIONS
…
2. A notrump opening or overcall is natural if, by agreement, it is balanced (generally,
no singleton or void and no more than two doubletons) it contains no void, at most one
singleton which must be the A,K or Q and no more than two doubletons.

<retracted>Can the ACBL write a regulation that says what they intend it to? A literal reading would suggest 5521 shape is an acceptable 1NT opening if the stiff is a high honor, which I seriously doubt is the intent. Also, one might argue that 7321 shape is allowable with a stiff high honor, even though 7222 shape is disallowed.</retracted>

Edit I looked this up on the ACBL website and there is an additional sentence which does indeed disallow the above shapes--I had erroneously assumed I was reading the full regulation.

This post has been edited by mikestar13: 2016-August-13, 23:12

[The_Badger]

Hi Pecohen,

Welcome to the forum.

The American commentators have already explained the ACBL regulations. I'm British, and whilst opening 1NT with a singleton is not something we usually do, in Acol, it does occur more frequently these days. The Fantunes system also advocates opening 1NT with certain 4-4-4-1 shapes. (And both are lower point counts than the standard 15-17 no trump.)

As ggwhiz says: I'll open 1nt with a stiff and a suitable hand but (almost) never with a stiff in a major and try to avoid it when partner is an unpassed hand too.

[ By the way, stiff is the urban dictionary alternative for singleton before anyone gets the wrong idea ]

And I agree wholeheartedly with that statement too. I will sort-of-kind-of-happily-if-it-is-prudent open 1NT with a minor suit singleton, but very, very rarely with a major suit singleton. (With a major suit singleton you can invariably open 1♣ or 1♦.)

The important thing with any opening bid is to have in the back of your mind a possible rebid if partner responds, or if partner responds and the opponents get involved, too.

I won't ask if the ACBL have endorsed opening 2NT with a singleton, as plenty of players do that these days, too. [ No problem with the original Roman Club system as 4-4-4-1 hands from 11-24 HCPs were covered by the 2♣ and 2♦ opening bids ]

[FrancesHinden]

pecohen, on 2016-August-13, 15:02, said:

I was told the other day that the Standard American Bridge criteria for a balanced hand had changed recently to allow a hand with a singleton to qualify so long as there is not a singleton or doubleton in another suit. My question is what other changes have been made to accommodate this one.

The situation that puzzles me is if I open 1N with a singleton ♥ and my partner responds with 2♦ then traditionally I was required to bid 2♥. That seemed a reasonable requirement under the traditional meaning for a balanced hand, but now this could leave me playing a heart contract with our opponents holding seven hearts. How is this to be avoided now?

You don't have to open 1N with a singleton just because the rules ay that you are allowed to. The rules haven't changed standard american, what they have done is changed the rules on what you are allowed to play if you want to. You can continue never to have a singleton if that's what you want, but just be aware that your opponents may be bidding differently.

Players (particularly outside the US) have been opening 1NT with a singleton for years; sometimes it is just the best description of the hand. If partner transfers to your singleton, you accept the transfer and hope for the best.
An opening 1NT is by far the best description with, say,

K
KJ9x
KQ10x
KJ10x

If you open 1 of a minor and reverse into hearts, you are lying about the length of the minor (and arguably the strength of the hand)
If you open 1D and rebid 2C you are lying about the diamond length, may miss a heart fit, and will not know whether to bid again if partner gives preference to diamonds (either missing game opposite a good 9-count or getting too high)
If you open 1NT you have told partner a lot about your hand. It is not free of risk, because partner might have xxx Axx Axxxx Qx and 5D is right, but on percentage grounds it's likely to be the winning action long term.

[The_Badger]

FrancesHinden, on 2016-August-14, 04:31, said:

Players (particularly outside the US) have been opening 1NT with a singleton for years; sometimes it is just the best description of the hand. If partner transfers to your singleton, you accept the transfer and hope for the best.
An opening 1NT is by far the best description with, say,

K
KJ9x
KQ10x
KJ10x

That's not a 1NT opener for me The big difference with opening a weak 1NT in Acol or Fantunes with a (major suit) singleton is that it is pre-emptive. I accept FrancesHinden's arguments that it is unsuitable to reverse, and bidding suits skews the length of them, but the only things in its favour, in my opinion, is that it can prevent the opponents competing in ♠, and it gives an immediate point count to partner.

But each to their own, I say.
I'd personally rather open 1♦ on that hand. (Boring I know.)

[msjennifer]

It was okay for fan tunes since they could easily find out if/ which suit is singleton.

[barmar]

msjennifer, on 2016-August-14, 10:49, said:

It was okay for fan tunes since they could easily find out if/ which suit is singleton.

One of the corollaries of the old rule that you couldn't have an agreement to open NT with a singleton was that you couldn't use a convention to find out if this was done.

I'm not sure if the rule change now allows such methods.

[barmar]

The_Badger, on 2016-August-14, 02:08, said:

I won't ask if the ACBL have endorsed opening 2NT with a singleton, as plenty of players do that these days, too.

The rule is not specific to the level of opening. It's about the definition of "balanced", which typically applies to any natural NT opening.

[Caitlynne]

I am wondering where you got this from. My understanding of a balanced hand is any hand without a singleton or void and not more than one doubleton. That is, 4333, 4432, and 5332 patterns.

As far as opening 1NT goes, hands with 2 doubletons or a singleton are permitted without private understandings and without methods to discover this.

[FrancesHinden]

Caitlynne, on 2016-August-14, 14:23, said:

I am wondering where you got this from. My understanding of a balanced hand is any hand without a singleton or void and not more than one doubleton. That is, 4333, 4432, and 5332 patterns.

As far as opening 1NT goes, hands with 2 doubletons or a singleton are permitted without private understandings and without methods to discover this.

The discussion is only about ACBL regulations. Much of the rest of the world has far more relaxed regulation. The official announcement from the ACBL started

"The ACBL Board of Directors removed a legal gray area surrounding semi-balanced notrump openers when it approved a change to the definition of a notrump opening in the General Convention Chart. The change allows players to open 1NT with hands that include a singleton ace, king or queen, as long as they do not also contain a doubleton."

[msjennifer]

Caitlynne, on 2016-August-14, 14:23, said:

I am wondering where you got this from. My understanding of a balanced hand is any hand without a singleton or void and not more than one doubleton. That is, 4333, 4432, and 5332 patterns.

As far as opening 1NT goes, hands with 2 doubletons or a singleton are permitted without private understandings and without methods to discover this.

I have seen the great bridge player Hamman opening 1NT with a singleton King and 444 in the remaining 3 suits.

[msjennifer]

FrancesHinden, on 2016-August-14, 15:47, said:

The discussion is only about ACBL regulations. Much of the rest of the world has far more relaxed regulation. The official announcement from the ACBL started

"The ACBL Board of Directors removed a legal gray area surrounding semi-balanced notrump openers when it approved a change to the definition of a notrump opening in the General Convention Chart. The change allows players to open 1NT with hands that include a singleton ace, king or queen, as long as they do not also contain a doubleton."

This rule modification is a most highly welcome change made till now.Hearty thanks to ACBL.

[The_Badger]

msjennifer, on 2016-August-15, 04:22, said:

This rule modification is a most highly welcome change made till now.Hearty thanks to ACBL.

The ACBL's ruling is a bit of a half-way house, I feel. Why are they designating that a top three honour be held as the singleton? Poor old jack

Answers on a postcard...Mmmm...I'd be interested in any logical explanation.

[kenrexford]

The_Badger, on 2016-August-15, 10:14, said:

The ACBL's ruling is a bit of a half-way house, I feel. Why are they designating that a top three honour be held as the singleton? Poor old jack

Answers on a postcard...Mmmm...I'd be interested in any logical explanation.

The ACBL doesn't know Jack.

[mycroft]

I have not been given official credence of this (note that I never speak online for the ACBL), but:

• The issue always was that "if it was your judgement that this is a balanced hand", you could do it as long as your judgement was reasonable.
  
• But, you could not have an *agreement* about it (express or implied). So, to be legal, you could never mention it to your partners, or notice when partner did it.
  
• That was impossible to not do, and so nobody didn't do it.
  
• So, effectively in Flight A, everyone was playing an illegal system, because they opened 1NT with certain "balanced with a singleton" hands, and were never really surprised when partner did it (they'd feign surprise when the opponents did, but yeah, not really).
  
• One of the ways we could determine if a pair had this illegal agreement was if they had any way to find out if partner had a singleton. That method was legal - *all* calls by responder to a natural NT opener are legal - but since the only reason to play it is that you had an agreement that the NT opener wasn't "natural", well, there you were.
  
• Now that the definition of "natural" for a balanced hand (note not 1NT - "balanced") is different (and the weasel word "generally" taken out¹), it's still legal to have a way of finding a singleton afterward (always was, just now the answer can be yes).

I, too, am surprised at "A, K, or Q". It was always "a high honour" in my book, and not a Q; I could see "A or K", I could see "A-J"; I guess this is just where they decided to draw the line. I think if you're required to open any 4441 or (13)(45) 1NT, it's not "balanced". I wouldn't gripe if that were legal, but that would be a *change* to the way things work, not just a legal recognition of what was already out there.

¹ So, yes, all you people who opened with 2227-to-the-9, sorry. You can't agree to do that anymore. Although we'll probably allow the odd "deviation" :-).

[barmar]

msjennifer, on 2016-August-15, 04:15, said:

I have seen the great bridge player Hamman opening 1NT with a singleton King and 444 in the remaining 3 suits.

The reason for the rule change is precisely because this has been common in expert bidding for years. There were even Bridge Bulletin articles in the past year where they advised intermediate players to do this when it seemed right. It was pretty hypocritical of ACBL to publish these in their membership publication while it was still considered an illegal agreement.

[nullve]

msjennifer, on 2016-August-15, 04:22, said:

Hearty thanks to ACBL.

Stockholm syndrome?