TylerE

4♠ easy

+1 for control asks. The scheme I prefer is as follows: A=2, K=1 2♦ = 0-1 controls 2♥ = 2 controls 2♠ = AK 2N = KKK (Likely right siding any NT contract) 3♣ = 4+ controls, 3♦ relays for count if desired, then 3♥=4,3♠=5, etc 3♦-3♠ show a decent 6 card with no more than one control. Something like KQxxxx xx xx xxx type hand. After 2♣, we are 99% GF...the only passable auction is 2♣-2♦-2N, and then only with 0 controls.

That actually makes a certain kind of sense, as there is a decent chance you're actually right siding the contract.

This is dumb and terrible for the 2N response alone.

E's double is penalty. W has a relatively quacky hand with slow tricks. He wants to move, why, exactly?

Listen to the auction! Unless one of the opps is psyching, partner doesn't have whatever hand y'all seem to be playing him for. The top end of his range is something like KKJ, and opponents know how to play all the suits after you gave them the roadmap.

Why is that? Why I am wanting to open a suit oriented 11 count a 12-14 NT exactly?

Why? Do you expect -500 or -800 to score well on a board where the par is likely -450 or -480?

5♣ is a dumb bid. About all it will accomplish is talking opponents into bidding slam when it's right.

Because for the kind of pairs for whom this sort of thing is an issue, they're opening 11 counts with 5M in 1st/2nd so that's a pretty tiny sliver of their range and less they are using Drury really light.

I'd open 1♥ as south and 1♣ as west. Clear 3rd seat non-opening for N, even clearer 4th seat passout for E.

GF for me, not necessarily because I think it's best for any hand I would bid it on, but because I don't want to have a bunch of meta-rules for when 4SF does or does not apply.

Actually... From the GCC

AKxxx x Axxxx Ax, which coincidentally makes that grand pretty alright. Even AKxxx K Axxxx Ax is only 18.

If you want any of hope of this succeeding, drop the BS about skill levels that always derails everything.

Seems obvious that GIB "knows" W must have the ♦ honors and thus your points "must" be in aces.

That approach might have worked 50 years ago. These days those pesky opponents have learned how to overcall a strong opening.

The thing I've never quite understood is this discussion - what exactly does "doing it regularly" mean? Once a session? Once a month? Twice ever?

At MP I would consider it. If it's a good slam the field isn't finding we're booked for a zero already....but if we don't double 6♦-1 or -2 might push with 3N down the same.

The key difference, is that generally 2♣ isn't a contract you actually want to play, whereas 1N frequently is, and 1N actually has a fairly serious pre-emptive effect, even if it isn't normally thought of in those terms, so 1a-1b-1N auction may leave you much worse off than those opening 1N.

Let me rephrase that, then. I'm not sure it's really possible to "overstate my strength" after opening 1♣ or 1♠, considering it's a 2 loser hand.

I prefer to not live in a police state, personally.

I'm not sure it's really possible to "overstate my strength" considering it's a 2 loser hand.

Depends on if "both majors" could be 5-4 or not.

Don't knock it, necessarily. We had an older couple here (both were over 90) that played 4 card majors, staymen, transfers, and blackwood, and generally bid like Charles Goren after a few bottles of wine. Suffice it to say their auctions were....erratic at the best of times. Yet they still would manage a respectable placing (e.g. top 3 in Flight A) about one session out of 4...the wife especially could play the spots off when on her game.