[pescetom]

MP

---

Fourth seat both vulnerable, playing vanilla 5cM 2/1 1NT 15-17 with a new partner, here I decided to open 1♠ rather than 1♦ which would be systemic in first seat.
Do you consider this choice strange or unreasonable, might you do the same?

[apollo1201]

I see no obvious reason to open 1S in this position and vul with this 14 HCP hand. But I ve seen bids much much much worse.

I d say why not but be prepared to take the blame if things turn bad.

[DavidKok]

I would not do the same, and I think it is likely not a good decision. However, I have also seen plenty much worse actions, and I wouldn't consider it a gross distortion.

[pescetom]

apollo1201, on 2026-April-06, 14:33, said:

I see no obvious reason to open 1S in this position and vul with this 14 HCP hand. But I ve seen bids much much much worse.

I d say why not but be prepared to take the blame if things turn bad.

Certainly prepared to take the blame from partner if things turn bad due to my choice.
My thinking was that Fourth position is tricky, we need to go positive if at all.
My plan was to push my strong spades and pass any response, with concern only about 1NT.
The cons I saw:
- will miss 2♦ in 4-5 if that is the sweet spot (but it looks like landing on a dime)
- may lead to an awkward discussion with at least one of partner/opps/Director.
The pros I saw:
- leads straight to 2♠ if partner has a 3+ card raise
- will preempt 1♥ by LHO
- should be ok in a red suit of partner in misfit
- reduces risk of playing 1NT.

Looking at it from another point of view, I imagine this bid would have been automatic half a century ago.
Systems have changed since then, but maybe not with this situation in mind.

[DavidKok]

When holding spades there is less of a need to preempt hearts. Also the 4-3 misfit might play poorly here as you could well be forced in hearts and then have to ruff on the long side. You also have a balanced hand, I don't see the issue with playing in 1NT if partner suggests this.

[mike777]

I suppose some risk not playing in 4-4 spades, if that's your style, if you open 1D at MP.

[Zelandakh]

With this shape and a little less, I happily open 1♠ planning to pass any response even playing a Weak NT. With a good 14 though, I think it's too important to know if we have a 4-4 or 4-3 fit should partner be at the upper end, and playing 5 card majors would therefore prefer to make the systemic call.

[mw64ahw]

An old school approach suggested opening a good 4-card Major when playing 5-card Majors. Fine if that's your agreement, but I wouldn't suprise a new partner. Also in 4th position I would expect opener to have Spades or a good 2nd bid.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I would open 1D.

Especially when playing with a new p.
You can take this hand, ask, what he thinks about 1S.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[pescetom]

 P_Marlowe, on 2026-April-07, 05:38, said:

I would open 1D.

Especially when playing with a new p.
You can take this hand, ask, what he thinks about 1S.

Maybe. We discussed afterwards of course, but he wasn't disturbed and agreed that otherwise we would not have played in spades. Other players made a fuss about it.

[pescetom]

 Zelandakh, on 2026-April-06, 18:04, said:

With this shape and a little less, I happily open 1♠ planning to pass any response even playing a Weak NT. With a good 14 though, I think it's too important to know if we have a 4-4 or 4-3 fit should partner be at the upper end, and playing 5 card majors would therefore prefer to make the systemic call.

That was on my mind too, but I felt that the odds of finding a 10 HCP 4 card fit were low. Maybe that was over pessimistic, agreed.

[P_Marlowe]

pescetom, on 2026-April-07, 05:58, said:

Maybe. We discussed afterwards of course, but he wasn't disturbed and agreed that otherwise we would not have played in spades. Other players made a fuss about it.

I could not care less, what other players said, and if he is not disturbed, this is also an information that is useful to know.
In my regular p, we have a really good structure after 1M openings, and I dont see, why I should disturb this structure, but
you argue, that I should try reach it, as often as possible..
I guess, if 1D showes only 3+, there is a biggern incentive to open 1S, although I still would not do it.
I could also see an argument for selling the hand as 15-17, again I usually dont do this.

[pescetom]

 DavidKok, on 2026-April-06, 15:36, said:

When holding spades there is less of a need to preempt hearts. Also the 4-3 misfit might play poorly here as you could well be forced in hearts and then have to ruff on the long side. You also have a balanced hand, I don't see the issue with playing in 1NT if partner suggests this.

On the actual layout the 4-3 (mis)fit made, not sure if NT would have done (will check).

I agree that playing NT with a balanced hand and a probable decent dummy would be no concern at all if the rest of the room was in the same boat: but again we are in fourth seat and who knows if one of the other three hands will have opened at other tables. I didn't want to be the only one in NT on a clubs Q lead where dummy holds Kx, but maybe that is over pessimistic.

[DavidKok]

Stop worrying about the field, please.

[mikeh]

Let me expand on David’s point. While there are times to be concerned about the field when playing matchpoints, when it comes to bidding decisions trying to play with the field, instead of taking an action you consider best but think the field won’t take, is trying to place average

If you are hoping to score well, it’s either because you think your pair is magically lucky or because you think that your skill level is superior to that of the field. In which case, intentionally choosing an action, in bid or play, that you consider to be inferior but popular is abandoning your superior skill.

As for when to go with the field:

Most common is when you’re in an off beat contract. Say 3N where you expect the field to be in 4S. 4S is cold but making 10 tricks in notrump risks going down when cold for nine tricks. If you expect a very bad score for making exactly 3N, then risk the contract. Obviously you need a sense of ‘the field’ to make that choice.

But in bidding, unless deliberately seeking a swing, because you need luck more than skill at that point in the event, use your skill, agreements and judgement rather than trying to discern what the field would do and trying to emulate it.

[pescetom]

Points taken about the field, mikeh. I am not the type to try to emulate what the field would do, if anything I am too keen to discern a better alternative.


Anyway this was a useful reflection, thanks to all who contributed. FWIW I posed this on that other site as a bidding problem (with only the system as comment) and about 20% chose to open 1S rather than 1D.