Study 9X00 Main |
| by Richard Pavlicek |
This study compares opening-bid choices in 72 major events from 1996 to 2014. Source data consists of 40,069 deals (80,138 results) from vugraph archives of the Vanderbilt, Spingold, U.S. Championship and World Team Championship widely considered to be the four strongest team events each year.
Open Pass | 1 1 | 1 1 NT | 1 1 NT | 1 1 NT | 1 1 NT | Suit 2 NT | One 2 | One Two | One Four |
The basic idea is to consider only cases where a hand was opened differently at one table than the other, then determine which of these two actions was the long-term winner. Results are broken down by table position (first, second or third seat) and HCP where appropriate. Results based on minimal data may be unreliable but otherwise should be meaningful, because all participants were experts, including the worlds best.
In this study the meaning of a bid is not considered, however, choices within the same comparison have a like relationship in the great majority of cases. For instance, if a hand is opened 1 at one table and 1 NT at the other, it is almost always a balanced hand with five hearts. Similarly, if a strong hand is opened 1 at one table and 2 at the other, it is invariably a big-club versus standard system.
The winning choice for each comparison is tinted gold to aid recognition. To view the actual deals for any comparison, click on the number in the Cases column.
Study 9X00 Main | Top Opening Bid Comparisons |
The following table compares cases where a hand was opened at Table 1 but passed at Table 2. Essentially this is an assessment of light opening bids, which are broken down by position and strain. (Fourth seat is ignored, as passouts were rare.)
The general picture is that opening light in a minor or notrump fares better than passing. In a major, however, this is true only in first seat, though the numbers for 1 are very close.
Most remarkable is that opening light in hearts scored 61+ percent in first suit, but in second or third seat its a complete turnaround favoring the pass. Go figure.
Seat | HCP | Cases | Table 1 | IMPs | Percent | Table 2 | IMPs | Percent |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
First | any | 376 | 1 | 808 | 49.60 | Pass | 821 | 50.40 |
First | any | 605 | 1 | 1592 | 55.30 | Pass | 1287 | 44.70 |
First | any | 242 | 1 | 693 | 61.49 | Pass | 434 | 38.51 |
First | any | 231 | 1 | 617 | 51.94 | Pass | 571 | 48.06 |
First | any | 188 | 1 NT | 465 | 53.82 | Pass | 399 | 46.18 |
Second | any | 153 | 1 | 404 | 61.59 | Pass | 252 | 38.41 |
Second | any | 280 | 1 | 731 | 57.70 | Pass | 536 | 42.30 |
Second | any | 133 | 1 | 266 | 40.00 | Pass | 399 | 60.00 |
Second | any | 88 | 1 | 193 | 48.13 | Pass | 208 | 51.87 |
Second | any | 83 | 1 NT | 174 | 55.06 | Pass | 142 | 44.94 |
Third | any | 107 | 1 | 239 | 59.60 | Pass | 162 | 40.40 |
Third | any | 164 | 1 | 341 | 55.63 | Pass | 272 | 44.37 |
Third | any | 92 | 1 | 156 | 37.41 | Pass | 261 | 62.59 |
Third | any | 76 | 1 | 154 | 50.00 | Pass | 154 | 50.00 |
Third | any | 9 | 1 NT | 28 | 66.67 | Pass | 14 | 33.33 |
Study 9X00 Main | Top Opening Bid Comparisons |
The following table compares cases where a hand was opened 1 at Table 1 and 1 at Table 2, subdivided by position and HCP range. In many cases this was dictated by system (e.g., nebulous 1 because 1 is strong) so its not clear whether this provides any useful evidence but interesting nonetheless.
Seat | HCP | Cases | Table 1 | IMPs | Percent | Table 2 | IMPs | Percent |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
First | 10-11 | 122 | 1 | 251 | 54.33 | 1 | 211 | 45.67 |
First | 12-13 | 659 | 1 | 1270 | 54.13 | 1 | 1076 | 45.87 |
First | 14-15 | 126 | 1 | 226 | 43.71 | 1 | 291 | 56.29 |
First | 16-17 | 122 | 1 | 333 | 60.00 | 1 | 222 | 40.00 |
Second | 10-11 | 73 | 1 | 124 | 47.51 | 1 | 137 | 52.49 |
Second | 12-13 | 349 | 1 | 697 | 51.52 | 1 | 656 | 48.48 |
Second | 14-15 | 102 | 1 | 227 | 57.04 | 1 | 171 | 42.96 |
Second | 16-17 | 77 | 1 | 134 | 41.49 | 1 | 189 | 58.51 |
Third | 10-11 | 38 | 1 | 94 | 81.03 | 1 | 22 | 18.97 |
Third | 12-13 | 154 | 1 | 295 | 53.15 | 1 | 260 | 46.85 |
Third | 14-15 | 57 | 1 | 153 | 66.23 | 1 | 78 | 33.77 |
Third | 16-17 | 33 | 1 | 93 | 54.71 | 1 | 77 | 45.29 |
Study 9X00 Main | Top Opening Bid Comparisons |
The following table compares cases where a hand was opened 1 at Table 1 and 1 NT at Table 2, subdivided by position and HCP range. In most cases the differences relate to system, i.e., with balanced hands (and some nearly so) 1 NT would be routine if the range fits your system.
Results suggest that the weaker the hand, the more desirable it is to open 1 NT, with a few anomalies thrown in related to position. Party time for weak notrumpers? Maybe, but being in the opposite camp Ill pass on hosting the occasion.
Seat | HCP | Cases | Table 1 | IMPs | Percent | Table 2 | IMPs | Percent |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
First | 10-13 | 350 | 1 | 628 | 44.04 | 1 NT | 798 | 55.96 |
First | 14-15 | 423 | 1 | 882 | 52.22 | 1 NT | 807 | 47.78 |
First | 16-17 | 318 | 1 | 660 | 59.35 | 1 NT | 452 | 40.65 |
Second | 10-13 | 180 | 1 | 304 | 47.20 | 1 NT | 340 | 52.80 |
Second | 14-15 | 248 | 1 | 446 | 47.00 | 1 NT | 503 | 53.00 |
Second | 16-17 | 227 | 1 | 493 | 56.21 | 1 NT | 384 | 43.79 |
Third | 10-13 | 40 | 1 | 59 | 38.06 | 1 NT | 96 | 61.94 |
Third | 14-15 | 138 | 1 | 244 | 48.41 | 1 NT | 260 | 51.59 |
Third | 16-17 | 132 | 1 | 228 | 47.40 | 1 NT | 253 | 52.60 |
Study 9X00 Main | Top Opening Bid Comparisons |
The following table compares cases where a hand was opened 1 at Table 1 and 1 NT at Table 2, subdivided by position and HCP range. Except for a few narrow losses, 1 NT has the clear edge.
Seat | HCP | Cases | Table 1 | IMPs | Percent | Table 2 | IMPs | Percent |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
First | 10-13 | 386 | 1 | 732 | 44.58 | 1 NT | 910 | 55.42 |
First | 14-15 | 307 | 1 | 584 | 45.88 | 1 NT | 689 | 54.12 |
First | 16-17 | 66 | 1 | 127 | 47.39 | 1 NT | 141 | 52.61 |
Second | 10-13 | 156 | 1 | 284 | 48.22 | 1 NT | 305 | 51.78 |
Second | 14-15 | 185 | 1 | 263 | 40.34 | 1 NT | 389 | 59.66 |
Second | 16-17 | 53 | 1 | 115 | 51.57 | 1 NT | 108 | 48.43 |
Third | 10-13 | 60 | 1 | 112 | 50.68 | 1 NT | 109 | 49.32 |
Third | 14-15 | 90 | 1 | 151 | 47.63 | 1 NT | 166 | 52.37 |
Third | 16-17 | 29 | 1 | 56 | 40.88 | 1 NT | 81 | 59.12 |
Study 9X00 Main | Top Opening Bid Comparisons |
The following table compares cases where a hand was opened 1 at Table 1 and 1 NT at Table 2, subdivided by position and HCP range. Except for third seat (and the highest range in second suit) it follows the general expert consensus that balanced hands with five hearts are better opened 1 NT if in range. One reason is to avoid rebid problems, and another is to shut out a 1 overcall.
Seat | HCP | Cases | Table 1 | IMPs | Percent | Table 2 | IMPs | Percent |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
First | 10-13 | 64 | 1 | 88 | 36.07 | 1 NT | 156 | 63.93 |
First | 14-15 | 114 | 1 | 203 | 46.67 | 1 NT | 232 | 53.33 |
First | 16-17 | 21 | 1 | 29 | 43.94 | 1 NT | 37 | 56.06 |
Second | 10-13 | 28 | 1 | 69 | 43.40 | 1 NT | 90 | 56.60 |
Second | 14-15 | 71 | 1 | 109 | 36.31 | 1 NT | 192 | 63.79 |
Second | 16-17 | 18 | 1 | 33 | 66.00 | 1 NT | 17 | 34.00 |
Third | 10-13 | 16 | 1 | 32 | 62.75 | 1 NT | 19 | 37.25 |
Third | 14-15 | 32 | 1 | 57 | 52.29 | 1 NT | 52 | 47.71 |
Third | 16-17 | 10 | 1 | 38 | 61.29 | 1 NT | 24 | 38.71 |
Study 9X00 Main | Top Opening Bid Comparisons |
The following table compares cases where a hand was opened 1 at Table 1 and 1 NT at Table 2, subdivided by position and HCP range. Unlike the previous scenario with hearts, opening 1 is the overall winner, though not without a few curious twists.
Seat | HCP | Cases | Table 1 | IMPs | Percent | Table 2 | IMPs | Percent |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
First | 10-13 | 39 | 1 | 91 | 61.07 | 1 NT | 58 | 38.93 |
First | 14-15 | 70 | 1 | 150 | 57.03 | 1 NT | 113 | 42.97 |
First | 16-17 | 22 | 1 | 17 | 30.36 | 1 NT | 39 | 69.64 |
Second | 10-13 | 26 | 1 | 69 | 75.00 | 1 NT | 23 | 25.00 |
Second | 14-15 | 40 | 1 | 61 | 38.85 | 1 NT | 96 | 61.15 |
Second | 16-17 | 15 | 1 | 53 | 70.67 | 1 NT | 22 | 29.33 |
Third | 10-13 | 12 | 1 | 19 | 43.18 | 1 NT | 25 | 56.82 |
Third | 14-15 | 17 | 1 | 25 | 55.56 | 1 NT | 20 | 44.44 |
Third | 16-17 | 12 | 1 | 18 | 50.00 | 1 NT | 18 | 50.00 |
Study 9X00 Main | Top Opening Bid Comparisons |
The following table compares cases where a hand was opened one of a suit at Table 1, and 2 NT at Table 2. Typically this compares a staid one-bid with an aggressive 2 NT, usually based on a 5+ card suit to offset the high-card deficiency except for 1 , which in most cases was strong and artificial (dictated by system) so not a useful comparison. In second suit 2 NT fared better than any suit opening, but in first and third its a mixed bag.
Seat | HCP | Cases | Table 1 | IMPs | Percent | Table 2 | IMPs | Percent |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
First | any | 165 | 1 | 360 | 50.21 | 2 NT | 357 | 49.79 |
First | any | 43 | 1 | 84 | 35.15 | 2 NT | 155 | 64.85 |
First | any | 10 | 1 | 20 | 83.33 | 2 NT | 4 | 16.67 |
First | any | 11 | 1 | 25 | 58.14 | 2 NT | 18 | 41.86 |
Second | any | 111 | 1 | 127 | 29.40 | 2 NT | 305 | 70.60 |
Second | any | 15 | 1 | 37 | 48.05 | 2 NT | 40 | 51.95 |
Second | any | 9 | 1 | 13 | 20.97 | 2 NT | 49 | 79.03 |
Second | any | 7 | 1 | 2 | 40.00 | 2 NT | 3 | 60.00 |
Third | any | 77 | 1 | 111 | 45.31 | 2 NT | 134 | 54.69 |
Third | any | 15 | 1 | 43 | 61.43 | 2 NT | 27 | 38.57 |
Third | any | 6 | 1 | 13 | 61.90 | 2 NT | 8 | 38.10 |
Third | any | 4 | 1 | 1 | 33.33 | 2 NT | 2 | 66.67 |
Study 9X00 Main | Top Opening Bid Comparisons |
The following table compares cases where a hand was opened one of a suit at Table 1, and 2 (strong) at Table 2. For 1 , 1 and 1 this is almost always a borderline 2 opening decided differently at the two tables. For 1 , however, the comparison is biased, because it also includes strong-club openings.
I was surprised to see 2 fare better than 1 (except for a narrow first-seat loss) as the reduced bidding space should be a disadvantage or at least thats the hype of most big-club advocates. The comparison isnt fair, however, because when the two bids coincide the strength of 2 is more narrowly defined. No doubt 1 forcing would fare much better than one of a suit on the 16-21 HCP range.
Seat | HCP | Cases | Table 1 | IMPs | Percent | Table 2 | IMPs | Percent |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
First | 16+ | 132 | 1 | 274 | 50.46 | 2 | 269 | 49.54 |
First | 16+ | 12 | 1 | 5 | 7.35 | 2 | 63 | 92.65 |
First | 16+ | 6 | 1 | 24 | 50.00 | 2 | 24 | 50.00 |
First | 16+ | 14 | 1 | 58 | 65.91 | 2 | 30 | 34.09 |
Second | 16+ | 85 | 1 | 160 | 36.61 | 2 | 277 | 63.39 |
Second | 16+ | 12 | 1 | 23 | 21.30 | 2 | 85 | 78.70 |
Second | 16+ | 6 | 1 | 3 | 15.00 | 2 | 17 | 85.00 |
Second | 16+ | 10 | 1 | 1 | 2.56 | 2 | 38 | 97.44 |
Third | 16+ | 72 | 1 | 112 | 32.56 | 2 | 232 | 67.44 |
Third | 16+ | 5 | 1 | 24 | 60.00 | 2 | 16 | 40.00 |
Third | 16+ | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 17 | 100 |
Third | 16+ | 10 | 1 | 29 | 44.62 | 2 | 36 | 55.38 |
Study 9X00 Main | Top Opening Bid Comparisons |
The following table compares cases where a hand was opened one of a suit at Table 1, and two of the same suit at Table 2. The choice between 1 and 2 is almost always based on system (Standard vs. Precision) since the 9-15 HCP range precludes strong hands.
In the other three suits the choice was typically between a light one-bid and a weak two-bid, but the auctions are not individually screened, so various anomalies slip through such as two-suited two-bids (including 2 Flannery).
It is curious how position plays a significant role (except for hearts). Who would have thought that a natural 1 beats 2 only in second seat? Further, there is no consistency among the suits, as each has a unique pattern regarding position.
Seat | HCP | Cases | Table 1 | IMPs | Percent | Table 2 | IMPs | Percent |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
First | 9-15 | 312 | 1 | 702 | 46.99 | 2 | 792 | 53.01 |
First | 9-15 | 75 | 1 | 171 | 58.76 | 2 | 120 | 41.24 |
First | 9-15 | 177 | 1 | 311 | 41.80 | 2 | 433 | 58.20 |
First | 9-15 | 138 | 1 | 250 | 44.56 | 2 | 311 | 55.44 |
Second | 9-15 | 150 | 1 | 379 | 52.20 | 2 | 347 | 47.80 |
Second | 9-15 | 27 | 1 | 52 | 34.67 | 2 | 98 | 65.33 |
Second | 9-15 | 82 | 1 | 127 | 41.37 | 2 | 180 | 58.63 |
Second | 9-15 | 63 | 1 | 160 | 56.34 | 2 | 124 | 43.66 |
Third | 9-15 | 57 | 1 | 68 | 29.44 | 2 | 163 | 70.56 |
Third | 9-15 | 18 | 1 | 30 | 36.59 | 2 | 52 | 63.41 |
Third | 9-15 | 50 | 1 | 102 | 38.49 | 2 | 163 | 61.51 |
Third | 9-15 | 25 | 1 | 48 | 54.55 | 2 | 40 | 45.45 |
Study 9X00 Main | Top Opening Bid Comparisons |
The following table compares cases where a hand was opened one of a major at Table 1, and four of the same major at Table 2, which obviously compares going slow versus preempting. Except for the cases in second seat, preempts show a profit. Data is sparse, however, so its too early to bet the farm.
Seat | HCP | Cases | Table 1 | IMPs | Percent | Table 2 | IMPs | Percent |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
First | any | 29 | 1 | 53 | 33.33 | 4 | 106 | 66.67 |
First | any | 29 | 1 | 51 | 35.92 | 4 | 91 | 64.08 |
Second | any | 7 | 1 | 17 | 89.47 | 4 | 2 | 10.53 |
Second | any | 8 | 1 | 25 | 80.65 | 4 | 6 | 19.35 |
Third | any | 7 | 1 | 8 | 16.67 | 4 | 40 | 83.33 |
Third | any | 14 | 1 | 33 | 47.14 | 4 | 37 | 52.86 |
Study 9X00 Main | Top Opening Bid Comparisons |
© 2014 Richard Pavlicek