[jillybean]

Yes, but you omitted this part

jillybean, on 2023-January-24, 21:57, said:

The Director came to the table, shook her head at the 1nt bidder and said to me "It's good that you know the rules" but when asked for a ruling responded "there is nothing I can do".

[jillybean]

mikeh, on 2023-February-27, 02:32, said:

Unless specifically either 3=1 or 1=3 majors, with a stiff high honour, and the other well stopped, I don’t think 1N makes a huge amount of sense. Otherwise, I’d want to stay away from it, especially with 54 minors, and thus an easy 2C rebid in most cases.

It’s not as if these 5431 hands with a four card or longer major are difficult to bid, after opening one of the five card suit. Meanwhile, the whole foundational assumption underlying most constructive methods in response to 1N is that opener has at least two card support for all suits. It’s why we love AQJxxx suits opposite 1N. At worst we have a decent play for 6 tricks….whereas we have to be lucky to get five opposite a small stiff. Hand evaluation, for game and slam, becomes truly difficult.

I'm still masterminding and had no bridge logic for my action. With a hand that could play 1NT, knowing that it's unlikely that we can stop in 1NT if I open 1 of a suit, I'm trying to preempt the opps and my partner. Back to boring 4324 1NT openings , and doing so will make the rest of my system easier.

Now this makes more sense.

akwoo, on 2023-February-25, 11:47, said:

You now have to be more careful about the possibility that opener rebids 1M with an unbalanced hand and you have a misfit, so some sequences that were game forcing should no longer be so.

Note we routinely open 1N with (42)(52) hands in range.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2023-February-27, 10:49, said:

Yes, but you omitted this part

That means you hit an inadequate TD, which happens.
Try to prod her into doing better, appeal the next time, complain about her if no other option remains.

It doesn't give you an excuse to bend the rules or take advantage of her weakness.