minor two suiter-which minor to open?

[Ayjay]

Say you're playing 2/1, holding 12-14 HCP and a hand with 5-4 in the minors. You're opening strong NT so 1NT is out of the question.

 

The standard 'book' opening is 1♦

 

My question is, are there any exceptions, considering suit quality for example?

 

For instance I would be strongly inclined to open 1♣ with the following extreme hand:

 

♠42

♥J6

♦Q642

♣AKQ83

 

I know of many people wouldn't.

 

My apologies if the level of the question is too basic.

 

Regards

 

Ayjay

[whereagles]

I don't like the book opening, so I'd open 1♣ even with minors qualities reversed :)

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

The standard 'book' bid is certainly 1C, you

open your longest suit, period.

 

You may or may agree to change this, because

of rebid problems, but this is certainly a specific

partnership agreement.

 

And if I have agreed to play it that way, I would

open 1D, ... and try to change the agreement as

fast as possible, claiming I was drunk during the

time I agreed to play this particular agreement.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: My plan is to make a 1NT rebid, except partner

bids diamonds.

[gwnn]

very few people open this hand or any hand with 4-5 in the minors 1♦.

 

it's a bad idea. open 1♣, rebid 2♣.

[helene_t]

I think most SA books recommend opening 1♦ with this shape. In the Netherlands beginners learn to open 1♣ but most advanced players open 1♦ I think. Not sure how extreme the quality difference must be for a 1♣ opening. Personally I prefer to open the longer suit most of the time. Obviously I would open 1♣ with this hand.

 

If you open 1♣, plan a rebid in advance. Are you going rebid 2♣ or 1NT?

[awm]

I'd open 1♣ and plan to rebid 1NT over partner's major suit response.

 

Basically you will lose precision in one of these three situations:

 

(1) The 1♣...2♣ rebid will not necessarily promise six clubs.

(2) The 1♦...2♣ sequence will not necessarily promise diamonds >= clubs.

(3) The 1NT rebid might be slightly off-shape.

 

Varying your approach a lot based on suit quality can really lose in all three cases since partner effectively can't trust any of your rebids anymore (you could be "off shape" on any of the three sequences). It seems better to limit the problem to one of the three cases. I have a strong preference for the off-shape 1NT rebid, because (like many people) I play a lot of checkback methods over 1NT that might help with this, and because I like to raise 1M response to 2M with three-card support a lot (which makes the 1NT rebid a lot more constrained, so adding a few extra hands in here is not costly).

[han]

I will almost always open 1C and rebid 1NT with this strength and shape.

[helene_t]

I think Adam makes a good point, but there is no policy that allows p to trust two of the three rebids 100%:

WIth a 1435 you must either rebid 1NT with a singleton or bid your 5-card twice.

WIth a 1444 you must either rebid 1NT with a singleton or rebid 2♣ suggesting 5 diamonds.

With a 0445 you must either bid your 5-card twice or rebid 2♣ suggesting 5 diamonds.

[whereagles]

Prefer bidding the 5 card suit twice if necessary. With 1444 prefer bidding both minors.

[jdonn]

I must not read the same books, I think it's always standard to open in your longest suit, and I don't make exceptions when it is headed by AKQ.

 

Prefer to rebid 1NT whenever possible. Your results will thank you.

[pclayton]

I will almost always open 1C and rebid 1NT with this strength and shape.

Me too.

 

I suppose this is an off-shoot of the 'raise with 3' mentality.

[Cascade]

Say you're playing 2/1, holding 12-14 HCP and a hand with 5-4 in the minors. You're opening strong NT so 1NT is out of the question.

 

The standard 'book' opening is 1♦

I haven't read that book.

 

For me the standard is open your longest suit.

 

Occasionally i will be willing to vary that with great diamonds and poor clubs.

[the hog]

With 5422, (5Cs), shape open 1C and rebid 1NT.

 

With a M s/t I'd certainly open 1D and rebid 2C unless the suit was as good as this one posted.

 

Yes you are correct, many people play this as standard notwithstanding the comments of some doubting Thomases above.

[Cascade]

Yes you are correct, many people play this as standard notwithstanding the comments of some doubting Thomases above.

"...many people play this as standard ..." is quite different than this is standard.

[mike777]

1c..rebid 2c wtp?

With a pickup p I pass.

 

 

oppps I guess great post....forum says wrong.

[fred]

There are some leading players in North America who advocate opening 1D with most minimum hands with 4-5 in the minors. but their's is definitely a minority view. My sense is that rebidding 1NT with offshape hands has become more common in USA expert circles in recent years, but likely 2C would still be the majority choice on this particular hand (only because of the strong clubs).

 

Eric Kokish, one of our leading bidding theorists, is a strong believer in opening 1D and rebidding 2C with 4-5 minimum hands.

 

Kokish likes to play that the 2C rebid promises a 6+ card suit (I agree) and apparently prefers the 1D opening distortion to the 1NT rebid distortion (I disagree). However, Kokish is also a passionate weak notrumper and this changes the equation (because rebidding 1NT is not an option). Kokish would sometimes open 1NT (weak) with 2245, but with 3-1 in the majors he would almost always open 1D.

 

In some parts of the world (notably Italy) I believe it would be considered strange to even think about opening 1D because 1C then 2C does not suggest a 6-card suit.

 

I would certainly open 1C. I would normally rebid 1NT with the pattern, but I personally don't mind 2C with this particular hand even if that "promises" a 6-card suit.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[finally17]

I used to do the 1♦-2♣ thing, and a while back decided it was silly. I do 1♣-1N/2♣ depending on the hand now. I've been told several times however (but only once by someone I respect) "2♣ promises 6!!"

 

 

People definitely seem to have this idea.

[jchiu]

The standard 'book' opening is 1♦

That's bullshit.

[655321]

The standard 'book' opening is 1♦

That's bullshit.

Yes, but I think you misspelled "That turns out not to be the case."

:unsure:

 

Also a 2♣ rebid is pretty gross - 1NT looks normal.

[Gerben42]

The problem with 2245 is not so big, but the real problem is 1345 and 3145 with partner bidding your singleton. You do NOT want to rebid 1NT now and to prepare for this I regularly open 4-5 in the minors with 1♦. If the ♣ suit is good as in your example I'd bid 1♣ 2♣, which doesn't promise a 6-card suit, but shouldn't be K7432 when it can be avoided.

[the hog]

Yes you are correct, many people play this as standard notwithstanding the comments of some doubting Thomases above.

"...many people play this as standard ..." is quite different than this is standard.

Oh you little pedant, you. ;)

[Cascade]

Truscott "The Bidding Dictionary" commenting on the auction 1♦ 1♥; 2♣ notes "Four strong diamonds and five weak clubs is just possible..."

 

This is not the language one would use to describe something that is standard.

[Flame]

the book opening you are talking about is when both suits are 4+ card and of same length.

[skjaeran]

Very few (if any) Norwegians are followers of this "book" referred to in the OP.

 

Around here both 1♣..1NT and 1♣..2♣ is common with 2245. I normally open 1♣ and rebid 1NT.

 

1♦..2♣ is not for me, ever.

[the hog]

Very few (if any) Norwegians are followers of this "book" referred to in the OP.

 

Around here both 1♣..1NT and 1♣..2♣ is common with 2245. I normally open 1♣ and rebid 1NT.

 

1♦..2♣ is not for me, ever.

Ever??

x

Axx

AKJx

23456