[jillybean]

WasWinM, on 2026-November-08, 12:36, said:

This is a hand where it seems that serious 3NT could make a difference.

I have no agreements at this level. Serious, Non Serious, Fast arrival

[mw64ahw]

For me
1♠-2♣
2♥ 54xx may have extras, but not if 55xx
and
1♠-2♣
3♥ 55xx extras

So the decision is whether the 65 playing shape counts as extras or needs more hcp.
I'd tend towards the first sequence, but don't yet have detailed enough responses to establish strength after that.

[jillybean]

65 counts as extras.

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2026-November-09, 09:08, said:

65 counts as extras.

You wouldn’t have opened were you the same honours and 5=4. So claiming that you have extras because you are 6=5 is counting the same values twice. That’s a common mistake…I see club players doing it all the time, and it rateltpy ends well. Of course they typically blame the result on bad luck or their partner, lol.

[jillybean]

Excellent point.
I am not claiming I have "extras" in hcp but the shape makes this hand a full opening bid. As Winston said

WasWinM, on 2026-November-08, 12:41, said:

Aces and kings are undervalued as is shape and interior sequences. This hand is as good as most random 12 counts that are routinely opened so I, as a conservative opener, open it.

I'll open on a 65 with less.

---

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2026-November-09, 13:54, said:

Excellent point.
I am not claiming I have "extras" in hcp but the shape makes this hand a full opening bid. As Winston said


I'll open on a 65 with less.

---

I think you are missing the point. Hand evaluation is a complex issue that, imo, doesn’t lend itself to any algorithm that any human could routinely apply at the table. A non exhaustive list of the things I think about as an auction unfolds (much of this is below conscious thought, but I’ve been playing for a long time):

My hcp

The location within my suits of my hcp

The texture of my suits, especially 9s and 10s

My shape

The nature of my hcp…I love aces, like kings but tolerate Queens and jacks, enhancing them only when accompanied by higher honours or when partner shows that suit

As the auction progresses….have I described my hand or do I have unexpressed values?

As the auction progresses, what have I learned about the other players’ hands and how does that affect my valuation…on most auctions our hand valuation changes with every round of bidding, sometimes in a very marked degree


Extra values are not one or two more hcp than the worst hand you could hold. In constructive auctions, partner should never play you for the worst hand you could hold unless the auction makes it clear. For example, in my preferred 22N structure the auction
1S 2N 4S says ‘I’m embarrassed I opened. If you need anything beyond a godawful opening bid, I don’t have it’


Remember, partner is deducing your hand, and slam chances, based on what you say. Tell me, how would you bid were you AJ10xx KJ10xx Ax x? Now, that’s extras, even though it’s ’only 13 hcp’

If you think the OP hand and this are both 4D cuebids, I pity your partner. More to the point, I think that if you think you have extras then you are one of those players, frequent on BBF, who don’t respect partner. You need to drive every auction. I’ve known good but not great players like that. I once made the mistake of playing a regional event with Kenny Gee when he was at the (not very high) height of his pro career (I was most definitely not a client, lol). It was the single most frustrating event I’ve ever played in. He tried to make every decision and, not surprisingly, it turned out that masterminding wasn’t a good idea. We got too high early on before I realized that he was bidding my hand for me…his clients were trained never to exercise judgement.

[mike777]

 jillybean, on 2026-November-09, 13:54, said:

Excellent point.
I am not claiming I have "extras" in hcp but the shape makes this hand a full opening bid. As Winston said


I'll open on a 65 with less.

---

Many may agree with you.

Please compare this to another recent thread that I opened with three first round controls.i think I said something like three first round controls but not much else..

[pescetom]

shyams, on 2026-November-08, 19:21, said:

Yes, me neither.

However, I cannot see South not exploring for slam.

I can visualise many partnerships settling in 5♥

I sympathize with those advocating North putting on the brakes after speeding, particularly at MP.
But if South ignores that, I find it hard to imagine settling in 5♥.
At IMPs or with South feeling frisky it might go:
1♠ - 2♣
2♥ - 3♥
3♠ (non serious) - 3N (spades)
4♣ - 4♦
4♠ - 5♣
5♦ - 6♥
P

[jillybean]

---

As I no longer need to pretend I am one of the great bidding theorists, or accomplished players, I have no hesitation in asking this next question.

For those who do not have the agreement of fast arrival or non-serious, are you not committed to showing your first cue-bid? Your partner is unlimited.
If it’s a train wreck, then perhaps you need to either a) stop opening these ultra-low HCP shapely hands, or b) add a gadget that warns partner of what you have.

[mike777]

 jillybean, on 2026-November-10, 07:35, said:

---

As I no longer need to pretend I am one of the great bidding theorists, or accomplished players, I have no hesitation in asking this next question.

For those who do not have the agreement of fast arrival or non-serious, are you not committed to showing your first cue-bid? Your partner is unlimited.
If it’s a train wreck, then perhaps you need to either a) stop opening these ultra-low HCP shapely hands, or b) add a gadget that warns partner of what you have.

Agree with your points.

[jillybean]

mike777, on 2026-November-10, 08:19, said:

Agree with your points.

Geeze, could you manage an upvote?

Anyway, this hand appeared on my BBO Table just when I continue to be challenged with shapely weak openings and subsequent auctions, and lack
of discussion/gadgets. I have one partner playing the FG3NT, but even then this hand a challenge.

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2026-November-10, 07:35, said:

---

As I no longer need to pretend I am one of the great bidding theorists, or accomplished players, I have no hesitation in asking this next question.

For those who do not have the agreement of fast arrival or non-serious, are you not committed to showing your first cue-bid? Your partner is unlimited.
If it’s a train wreck, then perhaps you need to either a) stop opening these ultra-low HCP shapely hands, or b) add a gadget that warns partner of what you have.

Fast arrival is simple bridge logic, once you accept that game force is unconditional and fit below game invites control-bidding: if you bid a direct 4♥ here then either you have no (!) control in any of the three suits, or something else is badly wrong. I would avoid using it without discussion all the same, but obviously it's a low hanging natural fruit.

Non-serious 3NT is a well known gadget that can be either an alternative or some kind of complement: if (like me) you are uncomfortable with a generic use of fast arrival, it makes sense to discuss and use 3NT (although I have often been tempted to use 3NT for a higher frequency issue instead, such as a Kickback of keycard parity or lack of Queen).

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2026-November-10, 08:50, said:

Anyway, this hand appeared on my BBO Table just when I continue to be challenged with shapely weak openings and subsequent auctions, and lack
of discussion/gadgets. I have one partner playing the FG3NT, but even then this hand a challenge.

It's not terrible to have no brakes and just control-bid and see what happens, joint lack of control tends to emerge in time (so long as both are telling the truth, up the line). The problem is not so much pushing to an impossible contract as blabbering information to the opponents unnecessarily.

[mike777]

A quick summary

Fast arrival=a hand you are embarrassed you opened, you could certainly argue this is one.

Non serious=most hands
Serious=clearly non minimum.
_-------+-------

I just control bid with two keys out of five, so this one had two.
Otherwise fast arrival with one or zero

This approach seems to work fine.
_

[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2026-November-10, 09:10, said:

Fast arrival is simple bridge logic, once you accept that game force is unconditional and fit below game invites control-bidding: if you bid a direct 4♥ here then either you have no (!) control in any of the three suits, or something else is badly wrong. I would avoid using it without discussion all the same, but obviously it's a low hanging natural fruit.

Non-serious 3NT is a well known gadget that can be either an alternative or some kind of complement: if (like me) you are uncomfortable with a generic use of fast arrival, it makes sense to discuss and use 3NT (although I have often been tempted to use 3NT for a higher frequency issue instead, such as a Kickback of keycard parity or lack of Queen).

Undiscussed, Simple Bridge Logic is not universal. Perhaps you are fortunate that both you and your partners have developed this SBL

[pescetom]

 mike777, on 2026-November-10, 09:58, said:

A quick summary

Fast arrival=a hand you are embarrassed you opened, you could certainly argue this is one.

Non serious=most hands
Serious=clearly non minimum.
_-------+-------

I just control bid with two keys out of five, so this one had two.
Otherwise fast arrival with one or zero

This approach seems to work fine.
_

I think any though out approach will work reasonably well, the important thing as always is that you are both singing off the same page.
My current approach is below.

--------------

I dislike the unilaterality of Fast Arrival and prefer to reserve it for hands that are genuinely short of controls, but also unpromising for play in trumps: so essentially a picture bid of a quacky balanced minimum. I would indeed be embarrassed about opening this hand, but with an Ace, a King and two singletons this is nowhere near a candidate for Fast Arrival in my scheme.

On insistence of one partner I have reverted to playing Non-serious as either embarrassing HCP or feeble trumps, rather than just the latter. I would be grateful for that with this hand at least.

No promises of any specific number of keycards by either side: we sort that out at the beginning of 4 level.

-------------