[Flame]

This isnt news, sometimes you bid 1nt without a stop in the opponents suit and you call it, a small lie. I'm asking if its wise to make this a rule rather the a small lie, 1nt in competition doesnt show a stoper.
The resson to bid 1nt without a stop, is that you dont need a stoper to make 1nt, you can lose 6 tricks.
The problem with bidding 1nt without a stop, is that partner will assume you have a stop, and might get you to 3nt, where you need a stoper.
The solution i suggest is agreeing that 1nt doesnt show a stoper and partner will never take it to 3nt unless he has the stopr or he asked about it and found i got it.
There is a probelm with this idea is that sometimes it will get you to wrong sided contacts, therefore i suggest the rule , a bid of 1nt show a stoper in a suit of rho, and not showing stoper in a suit of LHO. This will get you to declarering NT when the stronger hand is on the lead which is good.

[jtfanclub]

My opinion, poor as it is, is that it's good to bid NT with a HALF stop, like Qx or Jxx, but you should avoid bidding NT without a stop whenever possible. If partner assumes I have a half stop and has a cue bid available to ask if I have a full stop, that's enough information for him to place the contract.


One of the reasons I feel this way is because I often find the guy who has the length doesn't have the strength in the suit. People around me seem more eager to interfere with poor suits, and more willing to X or wait with strong suits. Maybe that's just me.

[pclayton]

There are issues that become trendy in the bridge world. Bidding NT with a 4 card major, bidding NT without a stop, and opening balanced 11 counts. My comments on previous threads make my opinion pretty clear.

I think all of these largely constitute Bad bridge.

If you are going to bid NT without a stop, go ahead and do it if you feel there isn't a choice. For pard to have a checkback to see if you really have a stopper seems silly to me. Presumably, you had a tactical reason to do it; why tip off your opponents that you don't have a stopper?

Time will tell if these are winning tactics.

[HeartA]

pclayton, on Oct 21 2004, 02:58 PM, said:

If you are going to bid NT without a stop, go ahead and do it if you feel there isn't a choice. For pard to have a checkback to see if you really have a stopper seems silly to me. Presumably, you had a tactical reason to do it; why tip off your opponents that you don't have a stopper?

Time will tell if these are winning tactics.

Totally agree.

[nikos59]

There is at least one case in competitive bidding, where
bidding 1NT does not show a stop in French Standard and
I believe it is sensible.
Say you open 1D, LHO overcalls 1S and pard doubles negative.

You hold
xxx
Kxx
AKxx
Kxx

The French solution is to bid 1NT. No 2H on 3 cards or other distortions.
In fact, after a neg double the 1NT rebid is known as "enchere
poubelle", the call for all hands that don't fit to other calls. Obviously,
if pard wants to play 3NT he has to cue 2S/3S and ask for stopper.

Jeff Rubens has also suggested the stopperless 1NT reply to t/o doubles after 1x - dbl - pass - ? His arguments are valid.

That said, I don't know other cases where a stopperless notrump
makes sense.

[the hog]

pclayton, on Oct 22 2004, 05:58 AM, said:

There are issues that become trendy in the bridge world. Bidding NT with a 4 card major, bidding NT without a stop, and opening balanced 11 counts.  My comments on previous threads make my opinion pretty clear.

I think all of these largely constitute Bad bridge.

If you are going to bid NT without a stop, go ahead and do it if you feel there isn't a choice. For pard to have a checkback to see if you really have a stopper seems silly to me. Presumably, you had a tactical reason to do it; why tip off your opponents that you don't have a stopper?

Time will tell if these are winning tactics.

Phil, while I certainly agree with your comment re having a checkback mechanism, if I read you correctly regarding your other examples of bad bridge, I certainly disagree.

a) Bidding NT without a stopper.
I suppose you mean (3S) P (P) 3N or similar. Geez, what is the most likely game? What else are you going to bid on the hand below or similar?
xx Ax Axx AKQJxx
A few years ago no one would have bid 3N, but experience has shown that 4C gets you nowhere and X will get you 4H

Bidding NT with a 4 card M.
I suppose you mean 1C 1H 1N with xxxx xxx xx xxxx or similar? I disagree with you here too. Balanced hands should be treated as balanced hands. Again collective experience has shown it is far more important to show hand type. Interestingly old style Acol players always did this - have a look at some of the old Reese Shapiro auctions, or better still some of the auctions of the Sharples twins. You may remember that the Sharples twins are still regarded by many as the best natural bidders ever.

c) Opening 11 point hands.
Well there are 11 point hands and 11 point "hands". All I want to say here is that it is a bidder's game. I trust you would not pass
KJxxx AQxx Jxx x but would pass QJxx Qjx Kxx Qxx. If so then we are in agreement here.

Ron

P.S. It should still read "Don't pat burning dogs", not "Don't pet burning dogs". "Pet" is not a verb, but is a noun.

[Flame]

nikos59, on Oct 22 2004, 01:17 AM, said:

There is at least one case in competitive bidding, where
bidding 1NT does not show a stop in French Standard and
I believe it is sensible.
Say you open 1D, LHO overcalls 1S and pard doubles negative.

You hold
xxx
Kxx
AKxx
Kxx

The French solution is to bid 1NT. No 2H on 3 cards or other distortions.
In fact, after a neg double the 1NT rebid is known as "enchere
poubelle", the call for all hands that don't fit to other calls. Obviously,
if pard wants to play 3NT he has to cue 2S/3S and ask for stopper.

Jeff Rubens has also suggested the stopperless 1NT reply to t/o doubles after 1x - dbl - pass - ? His arguments are valid.

That said, I don't know other cases where a stopperless notrump
makes sense.

I like your examples, and as you can see they all fit into my rule, they all bid without a stoper of LHO's suit.
Its just that you dont need a stoper to play 1nt so why not bid it without it?
1c (1s) p ?
you have a strong balance hand with a stop, you will oviouskly bid 1nT, imo its best to bid 1nt even without the stop, the stoper just make no difference to the chances of the NT to make, so if its better with the stop , its better without it.

[mikestar]

The_Hog, on Oct 22 2004, 07:20 AM, said:

P.S. It should still read "Don't pat burning dogs", not "Don't pet burning dogs". "Pet" is not a verb, but is a noun.

Ron, PB is from the US, where pet is also a verb.

[pclayton]

The_Hog, on Oct 21 2004, 11:20 PM, said:

pclayton, on Oct 22 2004, 05:58 AM, said:

There are issues that become trendy in the bridge world. Bidding NT with a 4 card major, bidding NT without a stop, and opening balanced 11 counts.  My comments on previous threads make my opinion pretty clear.

I think all of these largely constitute Bad bridge.

If you are going to bid NT without a stop, go ahead and do it if you feel there isn't a choice. For pard to have a checkback to see if you really have a stopper seems silly to me. Presumably, you had a tactical reason to do it; why tip off your opponents that you don't have a stopper?

Time will tell if these are winning tactics.

Phil, while I certainly agree with your comment re having a checkback mechanism, if I read you correctly regarding your other examples of bad bridge, I certainly disagree.

a) Bidding NT without a stopper.
I suppose you mean (3S) P (P) 3N or similar. Geez, what is the most likely game? What else are you going to bid on the hand below or similar?
xx Ax Axx AKQJxx
A few years ago no one would have bid 3N, but experience has shown that 4C gets you nowhere and X will get you 4H

Bidding NT with a 4 card M.
I suppose you mean 1C 1H 1N with xxxx xxx xx xxxx or similar? I disagree with you here too. Balanced hands should be treated as balanced hands. Again collective experience has shown it is far more important to show hand type. Interestingly old style Acol players always did this - have a look at some of the old Reese Shapiro auctions, or better still some of the auctions of the Sharples twins. You may remember that the Sharples twins are still regarded by many as the best natural bidders ever.

c) Opening 11 point hands.
Well there are 11 point hands and 11 point "hands". All I want to say here is that it is a bidder's game. I trust you would not pass
KJxxx AQxx Jxx x but would pass QJxx Qjx Kxx Qxx. If so then we are in agreement here.

Ron

P.S. It should still read "Don't pat burning dogs", not "Don't pet burning dogs". "Pet" is not a verb, but is a noun.

Hi Ron:

1. I think I said balanced 11's; not the shapely stuff, which I think are stronger than a lot of 13 counts people open.

2. As far as responding NT with a 4 card major, I'm referring to responder skipping the suit at the 1 level. I have a big issue when the Bergenites are telling the newer players to respond 1N to 1♣ on hands like: Qxx, Qxxx, KJx, xxx. I don't have a problem with opener skipping a 4 card major on the way to 1N, although I tend to show 4 spades most of the time after 1 minor - 1♥.

3. No problem with lying about a stop when we are jammed at the 3 level. I was referring to a lot of the "posts - du- jour" where opener is rebidding 1N without a stop because its convenient, and ignores the other aspects of the hand.

Phil

(I'll change my tagline to something grammatically correct later )

[luke warm]

i wasn't aware that bergen advocated responder bypassing a 4 card major, this must signify a change in his thinking... his earlier 'better bidding' books are very strong advocates for responder bidding a 4 card major unless it is hopelessly weak in an otherwise balanced hand

he even advocated bypassing 5 and 6 card diamond suits to bid the major, if the hand was worth one bid only