[hrothgar]

Here's an odd little question that might prove an amusing diversion...

Assume for the moment that you are not using a highly artificial NT opening (for example, once upon a time, MOSCITO used 1NT to show 4-4 in the majors. Romex uses the dynamic NT opening)

What is the primary purpose of your NT opening?

"Type 1" NT openings are intended to show a specific hand type. For example, a 1NT opening shows between X and Y HCP, and promises either 4432, 4333, or 5332 shape with no 5 card major.

"Type 2 NT" openings are intended to discipline the rest of your opening structure. Accordingly, the 1♣/1♦/1♥/1♠ openings deny certain hand types.

From my perspective, I think that there is a subtle but noticable shift from from "Type 1" to "Type 2" occuring. Many top pairs are significantly loosening their requirements for 1NT openings; incorpating non-traditional patterns like 5332 hands with a 5 card major, 6322s, and 5431/4441 patterns. So far as I can tell, the primary goal in doing so is adding clarity to auctions like 1m - 1M - 2M and 1m - 1M - 1N.

Its entirely possible that I'm making much ado about nothing and that I'm creating a false dichtomy. However, this separation does explain the evolution in my own thinking about NT openings.

[whereagles]

My objectives for the 1NT opening are (by order of importance):

1. Show a fairly balanced hand within the given range.
2. Help simplifying other auctions.
3. Preempt opponents out of the 1-level.
4. Allow a 5-card NV weak 2 to be made on a half-decent suit (only if the 1NT opener is 8-11). With broken suit open 1NT, not 2x.

Accordingly, my requirements for a 1NT opener have become very loose. I now open a 15-17 1NT on a regular basis on

- 4441, 6m322, 5M332, any 5422 except 54 in majors, 6m331, 5431. (Singleton usually A, K or Q, though.)
- Open on 14 or 18 hcp (18 less frequently) if opener is 3rd/4th in hand and has only 2 cards in a major.

[Chamaco]

"From my perspective" (for once, let me use a sentence overused by Richard ), I do not see much of a difference from oldstyle NT openers and the "type 2".

As far as I can see, even oldfashioned systems were build based on a skeleton founded on how to bid balanced hand-types: as a result, other sequences denied certain hands.

It seems to me that the modern tendency to open NT with apparently offshape hands (4441, 5M332, 5422, 6m332, hands with stiff honors, etc) is just a result of the experts acknowledging that more often than not these shapes have the well-known characteristics of balanced hands (low ODR, etc etc), and has nothing to do with a phylosophycal shift in approaching NT openers.

So, IMO, it's practicality, not phylosophy :-)

[Fluffy]

The first objective to open 1NT is to rightside the contract.

[whereagles]

You mean.. hog the hand?

[david_c]

I think Richard has a good point. It seems that the 1NT opening bid doesn't necessarily promise a balanced hand; it just says "I don't want to lay claim to any of the four suits". And you get the advantage that your high-card strength is very well defined.

Personally I'm happy bidding 1NT on the the 5422s and 6322s, and I'm tempted to use it on Precision-2♦ hands, but I think you start getting into trouble when you open 1NT with a singleton in a major suit. I was considering opening a weak no-trump on (14)35 hands, so that my Precision-like 1♦ and 2♣ openings would be better defined, but this loses badly on the hands where partner has five cards opposite the singletion. So I decided that this idea was going a bit too far.

[mike777]

Thanks for posting this topic Richard.

It seems systems are based on one, maybe 2 basic ideas and the rest of the system falls into place by default. Below are 2 very different examples, one built around nt structure the other where the nt structure ends up being a default bid.

1) Old buddy built system based on Barry Crane openers and where all 14+ hcp balanced hands and many semi-balanced 14+ hcp hands where shown at bid one.
1nt=14-16, mexican 2d=17-19. This leads to their other auctions being much more constructive.

2) In Weiss Club, the system is built around 1D, 1H and 1S being 2-suited limited openings. In this case 1nt became default bid of 12-15. Again this leads other auctions to be more constructive.

[Antoine Fourrière]

Your question is excellent. A system buff should try to explain the reasons behind his choice of openings and answers, not simply jot down the sequences on a Word file. The system buff has his own prejudices, and the casual reader needs more disclosure to come to a conclusion.

When it comes to general range, e.g. strong notrump vs. weak notrump, my answer is type2. The strong notrump enables you to get rid of your intermediate balanced hands, or, to put it in another way, intermediate intermediate openers. You will not need to double in competition to show a strong notrump. I guess it is the primary purpose.

When it comes to width, e.g. 16-17 vs. 15-17, my answer is type1. A two-point range gives you a lot of extra bids. 1N, which anyway is kind of a relay opening, becomes much more effective. In my system, I have bids which usually disclose responder's exact pattern before 3N and let opener place the contract without revealing anything. (But it is incompatible with weak Stayman.)

When it comes to pattern, my answer is type1, since relaying is all right when you don't have a singleton, I include 5422 and 6322 into my notrump openings, and so do you all, because it works. Here again, the strong notrump wins, because it is nicer to open an offshape hand when you have more undisclosed assets. Still, I also open 1N with a bare king, sometimes with a bare queen.

With hands which are a real nuisance in a system, like the three-suiter short in diamonds in Precision (although I don't like it much either in WJ), I think you should refrain from opening 1N or a lower bid, because you will end up asking yourself:
What if partner has that damn hand type?
Playing, say, a 3♣ opening to show 12-15 with 4=4=1=4 is admittedly ludicrous. But it is not necessarily stupid. Partner may be strong, or have a fit, or the opponents might suffer too. In return, you free another two-level opening, and your mind.
Now if you beef up your Precision 2♦ or (preferably!) 2♥ opening with the 4=3=1=5 and the 3=4=1=5, or with some other hands which have exactly four hearts and four spades, or with the Flannery hand type like Sontag-Weichsel's Power Precision (if you really insist on Flannery), or with some other uncommon hand type, that is another thing. But I wouldn't want to spoil a 1N opening, a five-card 1♥ opening or even a debatable either diamonds or balanced 1♦ opening with the three-suiters short in diamonds.

[Winstonm]

From my point of view, the move toward more NT type openings is a simple extension of the proven concept that bidding is much easier when one hand is narrowly defined; once that was a known, it became more and more obvious that balanced and semi-balanced hands were unwieldy to bid by opening 1 of the long or short suit, depending on style, so these hands sort of migrated naturally into the NT opening concept.

In my opinion, the fact that this change alters and better defines other bids is a side benefit coming as a result of the NT changes rather than a reason for the NT changes.

winstonm

[Cascade]

hrothgar, on May 24 2005, 12:28 AM, said:

From my perspective, I think that there is a subtle but noticable shift from from "Type 1" to "Type 2" occuring. Many top pairs are significantly loosening their requirements for 1NT openings; incorpating non-traditional patterns like 5332 hands with a 5 card major, 6322s, and 5431/4441 patterns. So far as I can tell, the primary goal in doing so is adding clarity to auctions like 1m - 1M - 2M and 1m - 1M - 1N.

Unfortunately in many jurisdictions this shift runs foul of the regulators e.g. locally I am not allowed to open 1NT with a singleton unless it is a "rare exception". In the ACBL I believe the requirement is that the 1NT opening can have a singleton about 1% of the time - there was at least one thread on here a while back that pointed to this fact. Expert practice open opening 1NT with say 4-4-4-1 with a singleton honour would exceed the 1% ACBL requirement.

I think it is sound to open 1NT on these otherwise hard to bid hands. It narrowly defines the range and keeps alive the most likely games - 3NT and 4-Major.

I also believe that the regulations that restrict a 1NT opening when it is a 'natural' offer to play in NTs is illegal. Sponsoring Organizations are only allowed to regulate conventional bids and very light openings according the laws L40D. A 1NT opening that is an offer to play does not meet the definition of a convention.

National Organizations have proven reluctant to accept this restriction imposed in the laws. My National Organization have stated that L40D was "NEVER" intended to constrain them. The capitalization and emphasis were theirs.

[Gerben42]

I think people are starting to appreciate the value of point 2) more in recent years. Get hands out of the way so the rest of your system works like a charm. Besides, 1NT is still very descriptive even if you include some more hands like 5M332 or 5m422.

[Fluffy]

The problem with getting hands out of the way of 1x openings is you overweight the 1NT opening and it becomes so unprecise opening at some point.

[Winstonm]

Quote

The problem with getting hands out of the way of 1x openings is you overweight the 1NT opening and it becomes so unprecise opening at some point.

Fluffy makes a good point. When 1N become the "catchall" bid for all the hands that don't fit the system then 1N becomes the problem bid and its precision is lost.

Better to adopt the attitude from Myogi-san in The Karate Kid: "Must learn balance. Without balance, nothing else matters."

[Free]

Well, with the standard description, you have at least a '3332'-distribution. Adding 5332's with 5M doesn't change anything, so no real loss in accuracy. Add a 6322 with 6m or 5422's and it becomes '3322'. Add a 4441 and it's completely messed up. Imo, as long as you don't really exagerate, the 1NT is still playable. Look at what some people open 2NT with (which is even a level higher)!

However, if you want to play some kind of relay system after 1NT, you have a limited space to explore exact shape. You want to stay below 3NT, and if you start off like stayman, then you can show just 31 shapes (3♣ relay after 2♠ response, 2♠ relay after 2♦/♥ response) which is 3 short to show all 6(m)322's exact. Btw, showing 5332's with 5♠ won't work this way, since there's not enough place to explore... If you make 2♣ GF you already have an edge because then you can show 55 distributions, more than enough: you can even include 5422's and 4441's in that case! If you use 2♦ as GF inquiry, then you still have exactly enough place to show 4333, 4432, 5332 and 6(m)322 apparently, 34 spots.

So you can see the problems don't come from constructive auctions. Imo the problems start when opponents intervene (as usual actually)...

[Fluffy]

I guess I might be biased cos my system is built on the assumption of no 5 card major opening, since it has really no way to recover the major fit afterwards.

We open 6322, 5422, 4441, 5431 and 6331 seldom, always with a honnor in shortness and with the will to receive the lead. Actually this is no big trouble except when playing in the 5-1 fit at the 2 level, because our system is based on RESPONDER to show its shape.

[whereagles]

Fluffy, on May 26 2005, 12:31 AM, said:

The problem with getting hands out of the way of 1x openings is you overweight the 1NT opening and it becomes so unprecise opening at some point.

True. But in my opinion the 1NT opening is still far from overloaded, even with all the "beating" it gets from 5M332, 54s, 6m322, 4441s, etc.. lol