Some years ago at our local sectional, my friends Bill and Ed opened 1NT with a singleton on two boards in a row. Their opponents called Sid the director, who explained that although it was not illegal to open 1NT with a singleton, the laws prohibited having an agreement to do so. Sid ruled that two in one round constituted an implicit agreement and adjusted the result.
The discussion became rather loud, with Bill arguing that they had good bridge reasons for their bids. It finally ended when an exasperated Sid announced to the entire room that this pair was barred from opening an off-shape 1NT for the rest of the tournament.
Several rounds later, they came to my table and Bill opened 1NT. When he showed out of a suit at trick two, he immediately looked up and said, “I’m testing our friendship."
It was easy to pass this test, as 1NT had hidden his diamond suit and caused them to miss a good slam.
Bill’s 1NT opening was no doubt prompted by a desire to engage in a bit of civil disobedience, but was it also a sound bridge decision? He held ♠K ♥AJ64 ♦AJ753 ♣QJ10. Would you have opened 1D?
In the past, many good players would occasionally open 1NT with this type of hand. They did it to avoid rebid problems, but that choice had to be rare enough that partner wouldn’t expect it. It was also illegal to structure your system to cater to the possibility (agreeing to refuse a transfer to your singleton, for example).
Bill would have had an awkward problem if he had opened 1D and partner responded 1S or 1NT, so his decision was reasonable and practical. On this deal, it happened that 1D would have worked better. On many other layouts, though, starting with 1NT would have been the best way to describe this strength and get to the right contract.
Those are the “good bridge reasons” that finally prompted ACBL to lift the prohibition on a systemic opening of 1NT with a singleton. Since 2016, this agreement has been permitted, although there are still some restrictions. The exact wording of the rule is:
"A notrump opening or overcall is natural if, by agreement, it contains no void, at most one singleton which must be the A, K or Q, and no more than two doubletons. If the hand contains a singleton, it may have no doubleton.”
This means your distribution must be 5-4-3-1, 6-3-3-1 or 4-4-4-1 and the singleton must be a queen or higher. There is no leeway in this rule; most directors will enforce it to the letter. If you open 1NT with a singleton jack or a 6-4-2-1 pattern, your bid is illegal and the result is likely to be adjusted in your opponents’ favor.
The repeal of the no-singleton rule is a continuation of a trend toward evaluating more types of hands as suitable for notrump. It started with the adoption of lower point ranges (15-17 instead of 16-18) and wider acceptance of opening 1NT with a 5-card major or a hand with two doubletons. Now, if you judge that a hand with a singleton is a notrump hand, you have more freedom to advertise it as such, as long as it fits the requirements.
This change is not a license to “psych” 1NT or use it just to try to shut out your opponents. It’s an option that allows you to bid more accurately in a constructive auction. There are, of course, some risks, as partner will usually expect you to hold at least two cards in every suit. If you play a notrump contract, your singleton honor may not provide the partial stopper you hoped for.
To be successful with this “extra” opening bid, you’ll want to use it only with hands that are otherwise (almost) perfect for 1NT. Those decisions may require you to rethink old ideas about notrump bidding and learn new ways to evaluate your strength and distribution.
In the next issue, we’ll look at the factors that affect your choice and the types of hands with singletons that are right, wrong and ideal for opening 1NT.
© 2021 Karen Walker