rhm, on 2019-March-14, 08:02, said:
I think Jxx is a minor downside. AQ doubleton is not, because the AQ combination is a good one to start with.
So I think "major downside" is an overbid.
lamford, on 2019-March-15, 06:41, said:
Axx KQJTx AKx xx is far too good, at 18.3. Axx KQJTx AQ Jxx is a full 2.2 K-Rs less at 16.1. Both hands are 5-3-3-2, so your arguments can be challenged.
Of course my arguments can (and should be) challenged.
When I am uncertain I use
http://bridge.thomas...XX,KQJTX,AQ,JXX
as a second opinion.
According to this site K & R for the original hand is not 16.1 but 16.45.
Sure your second hand is better, but again 1.85 points better, it is at best only better for suit play not for notrumps.
Even for suit play Thomas Andrews double dummy analyzer considers the second hand only 0.32 tricks better for suit play, which suggests 1.85 points difference is too much.
For notrump play your second hand increases on average only by 0.16 tricks, which translates to about 0.3 more points for notrump play.
See what I mean when I observed "Trouble with upsides and downsides is that people usually attach too much correction to these."
However, I agree with you that the second hand clearly should be upgraded, while the actual hand is borderline.
lamford, on 2019-March-15, 06:36, said:
Partner had Qx xxxx Kxx KQxx
I admit, it would never occur to me to use Stayman on this hand. I bid 3NT and go down on a spade lead, when the king is wrong.
Rainer Herrmann
I had an interesting discussion with the London expert Phil King yesterday as to whether to open this hand a strong NT. I thought the K-R evaluation would be below 17, but Phil offered to buy at 17.5. In his match both dealers upgraded it. What do readers think?'
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
FWIW, using WTC: Total winners = 6++ (1.5 (♠A), 1.5 (♥KQ), 2 (♦AQ, ♦-doubleton = 1).
It's close but, after reading the comments, I think I'd open 1N