Open 1D or pass in 4th hand?

[kgr]

IMPs

W/-

Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

Would you open this hand after 3 passes at IMP's? (Partner will open most 12 pts and some 11 pts with 5 card Major).

[rogerclee]

Yes. People pass out too many hands in general, I think.

[andy_h]

In 3rd seat, definitely. Who says partner can't have a bal 11 or 12 count, or we could have a major fit - don't want to be giving up a part score if your side holds the majority of the deck!

 

Edit: Realised it's after 3 passes, but yes in 4th seat also. Not 1st/2nd due to 4333

[han]

I would open in 3rd or 4th (the OP said 4th), not in 1st or 2nd.

[helene_t]

Rule of 15 ... but this is quite a bad 12-count. OTOH I have a comfortable pass over anything p might respond.

 

I think it's close. Without any specifics about p's opening style, I would open.

[Guest Jlall]

Why is this a bad 12? I would be happy to open it in all seats.

[655321]

Do people really pass these hands in real life? I mean, you have 12HCP including 2 Aces.

I can't help thinking that even people who post that they would pass these hands would open them at the table. :)

[Trinidad]

I would only pass if my opponents are considerably better players then I am.

 

Rik

[P_Marlowe]

I would open, but we open fairly sound, if you open

light as it seems, than pass is certainly an option.

 

You wont have game, and the worst which may

happen is they make 110-140 on the other table.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[skjaeran]

I'd definitely open this in 1st, 2nd and 3rd seat.

 

In 4th seat it's marginal IMO, but I'd open most of the time, not always.

[kgr]

I would only pass if my opponents are considerably better players then I am.

 

Rik

I hesitated between passing and opening 1♦, but that is a good reason to open 1♦ :)

Partner did bid 1♠ showing ♥ and I did bid 1NT.

Partner had:

Kxx=Jxxxx=Jxx=Kx

Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

1NT did go -1

[Guest Jlall]

I would only pass if my opponents are considerably better players then I am.

 

Rik

I hesitated between passing and opening 1♦, but that is a good reason to open 1♦ :)

Partner did bid 1♠ showing ♥ and I did bid 1NT.

Partner had:

Kxx=Jxxxx=Jxx=Kx

Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

1NT did go -1

You should stop playing this system imo by a passed hand so you can try to bid 1D-1H-p.

 

Similarly I don't play kaplan inversion on by a passed hand so that I can play 1S.

[Codo]

Even if you play this system, why don't you play 2 Heart? Isn't that a much better spot?

[foo]

I would only pass if my opponents are considerably better players then I am.

 

Rik

I hesitated between passing and opening 1♦, but that is a good reason to open 1♦ :P

Partner did bid 1♠ showing ♥ and I did bid 1NT.

Partner had:

Kxx=Jxxxx=Jxx=Kx

Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

1N did go -1

I agree w/ justin that you should not play Kaplan Inversion opposite a passed hand.

 

Also, looking at your pard's hand you have answered your own question.

 

Whether you open this hand or not depends on how "heavy" your pard will pass in 2nd seat. Roth-Stoner's must open such 12 count 4333's in 4th lest they risk missing a game. Rule of 20 Bergenites should pass the hand out quickly. etc.

 

In short, there is no universal correct answer to your OP question.

[effervesce]

Open 1D. Wtp? There are still hands in which game is stone cold, for example opposite

 

Kx KQxxx Kxx xx

 

unless you open such hands 1M in 1st/2nd. I think probability-wise you and partner have better chances for a positive partial score than the opps; however even if you and the opps have similar probabilities of partial scores, the odds are tilted due to you and partner having chances for game and the opps close to zip.

[foo]

Open 1D. Wtp? There are still hands in which game is stone cold, for example opposite

 

Kx KQxxx Kxx xx

 

unless you open such hands 1M in 1st/2nd. I think probability-wise you and partner have better chances for a positive partial score than the opps; however even if you and the opps have similar probabilities of partial scores, the odds are tilted due to you and partner having chances for game and the opps close to zip.

The OP hand for clarity Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

 

If you expect your passed hand pard to have such a perfect fitting hand as your example whenever you hold the OP hand, you are not playing odds on Bridge.

 

...and let Us note that your Opponents on this board you have constructed have a double fit in the Pointeds and a profitable "4 over 4" at any vulnerability.

 

So, the =real= question is: if you open this, how often do you think you and your pard will make the correct X, pass, or bid 5 over 4 decision?

 

You better be right considerably more than 50% of the time, or you will have a difficult time getting and keeping teammates.

[effervesce]

Open 1D. Wtp? There are still hands in which game is stone cold, for example opposite

 

Kx KQxxx Kxx xx

 

unless you open such hands 1M in 1st/2nd. I think probability-wise you and partner have better chances for a positive partial score than the opps; however even if you and the opps have similar probabilities of partial scores, the odds are tilted due to you and partner having chances for game and the opps close to zip.

The OP hand for clarity Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

 

If you expect your passed hand pard to have such a perfect fitting hand as your example whenever you hold the OP hand, you are not playing odds on Bridge.

 

...and let Us note that your Opponents on this board you have constructed have a double fit in the Pointeds and a profitable "4 over 4" at any vulnerability.

 

So, the =real= question is: if you open this, how often do you think you and your pard will make the correct X, pass, or bid 5 over 4 decision?

 

You better be right considerablt more than 50% of the time, or you will have a difficult time getting and keeping teammates.

Then it simply becomes a matter of yours and your opponent's competitive judgement. If you and partner have terrible competitive judgement/agreements, then sure of course opening a hand would be more likely a loss.

 

Such a concern, however, doesnt contribute to whether or not it is correct to open the bidding. Assume all players are good at competitive bidding such that the par spot is reached. I believe opening this as 1D is a long-term winner.

Sure, you and your partner may have such bad judgement that making any bid at all will make you lose, and that it would be best for you to take any chance to passout a hand to not lose on that board. That does not change the fact on whether or not it is technically correct to open a hand or not.

 

A more relevant question is, is it more likely you and your partner own the partial, or the opponents. A simulation could probably be run to see which pair is more likely to 'own the hand'.

[foo]

You are not still understanding the situation here.

 

pa-pa-pa-?? and you hold Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

 

What is pard's most likely hand?

 

They are limited to 11- or a very bad 12.

 

Their expected number of ♠'s is 10/3. ♥'s 10/3. ♦'s 9/3. ♣'s 10/3.

IOW, a flat hand like yours.

 

Their expected number of honors in ♠'s is 1, 2/3 it is an A or K.

♥'s 1, 1/3 it is an A or K.

♦'s 2/3, 1/3 it is the K.

♣'s 4/3, 2/3 it is an A or K.

IOW, GOP rates to have 3-4 honors and the suit that rates the highest to have A's or K's is ♣'s. Where they do you little good.

 

We usually need an 8+ card fit and 7+ controls to make a game.

You have 4 controls. We need 3 from GOP.

GOP rates to have 2 controls. IOW, an A =or= 2 K's.

 

IOW, that perfect hand you constructed is optimistic in the extreme.

 

ATT passed hand pard had Kxx=Jxxxx=Jxx=Kx

4th hand got unlucky mirror distribution in ♠'s but lucky that GOP had a 5th ♥.

IOW, just about what the odds say you should expect.

 

The actual hands found ATT rate to take 7 tricks, but are not 100% to do so.

[jdonn]

This is definitely a wtp opener.

[foo]

This is definitely a wtp opener.

4th hand at IMPs playing a mainstream style you consider

Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

a "wtp opener"?

 

Ah, the days of being a Junior...

[Guest Jlall]

This is definitely a wtp opener.

4th hand at IMPs playing a mainstream style you consider

Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

a "wtp opener"?

 

Ah, the days of being a Junior...

Foo,

 

You are such an idiot.

 

Love,

 

Justin.

[jdonn]

This is definitely a wtp opener.

4th hand at IMPs playing a mainstream style you consider

Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

a "wtp opener"?

 

Ah, the days of being a Junior...

I think I opened 1NT with 14 at some point today too. Then I got arrested for riding my skateboard in a parking lot, which made me late for teeball.

 

Ah, the days of being a bridge player...

[jchiu]

This is definitely a wtp opener.

4th hand at IMPs playing a mainstream style you consider

Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

a "wtp opener"?

 

Ah, the days of being a Junior...

Foo,

 

You are such an idiot.

 

Love,

 

Justin.

Justin should stop posting the obvious. Think of the server storage space.

[foo]

Gentlemen, this is a teaching site.

 

Telling people that 8 loser 4333 12 counts are "wtp" 4th seat opener's playing IMPs opposite the average aggression now standard in 2nd seat playing NA Standard or 2/1 GF is simply not good Bridge advice.

 

...and if the pair is enamoured with Light Initial Action as in the Rule of 20, it rates to be a mine waiting to explode.

 

The Roth Stoners can consider the likes of Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx a "wtp" 4th seat opener playing IMPs. That's because they systemically pass just about every 13 count in 2nd seat. Maybe the old style Goren folks as well since they systemically would pass many 13 counts.

 

But any pair more aggressive than that in 1st or 2nd should be more cautious about opening this. Anyone who considers JT=QJxxx=KJxx=Kx or the like a "normal" 1st or 2nd seat opening had best be passing out the board when holding the OP hand ASAP.

 

The more aggressive your action is systemically in 1st or 2nd, the more sound it has to be in 3rd or 4th. Especially playing IMPs.

 

I'll fire up Dealmaster Pro and see if I remember enough of what my friends have taught me to get and post some pertinent results.

 

Or perhaps you folks should be forced to open all of these opposite standard aggression and then play or defend the resulting contracts XX. If that doesn't drive the point home perhaps you should be forced to put a month's wages at risk while doing it.

[Trinidad]

Gentlemen, this is a teaching site.

 

Telling people that 8 loser 4333 12 counts are "wtp" 4th seat opener's playing IMPs opposite the average aggression now standard in 2nd seat playing NA Standard or 2/1 GF is simply not good Bridge advice.

It is fairly obvious that the answer to the question whether to open this hand in fourth seat depends on partner's aggressiveness in 2nd seat. Well, partner's aggressiveness was given in the OP:

(Partner will open most 12 pts and some 11 pts with 5 card Major).

But what is at least as important is: How aggressive are the opponents in 1st and 3rd? I would say that there is general concensus that 1st and 3rd seats are the positions where you would want to be aggressive while one would take a more conservative approach in 2nd seat. If you have reasonably 'modern' opponents, the odds are that your side has more power than they do.

 

The given hand (Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx) has the advantage that it can pass any response by partner (unless you play inversions ;)). After my 1♦ opening and subsequent pass, I expect to score +110, +90, +80, +50 or -50, each about 20% of the time with +140 and -110 as outsiders. I would expect to gain 0.2*3+0.2*3+0.2*2+0.2*2-0.2*2 IMPs = 1.6 IMPs if they pass at the other table.

 

If I have to make 24 decisions like this in a 24 board match, I will win by 24*1.6=38 IMPs. That is 22-8 in VPs on a set of horribly boring hands.

 

Rik