black 2 suiter

[catatonic]

as dealer ,playing sayc [ supposedly :) ] I held

 

♠ KJxxx ♥x ♦Jx ♣AKxxx

 

and opened 1 ♣ ,as I would at any vulnerability

 

with any other equal 2 suiter I would of course open the higher suit , but with the black suits you can frequently bid both by rebidding the spades even with a minimum hand like this...much easier for partner to judge the contract

 

the players at the table , ops sayc as well , told me that in sayc you must open the major as it is 5 cards ; not being strong enough to make a high reverse you rebid the spades ; to me this is ridiculous

question is , are they correct ...and if so , why ?

[the hog]

Not just in sayc, but in any system you should open 1S. Only open 1C if you are happy to bid over the opp's 4H if that is what comes back to you.

[rogerclee]

For a long time it was in style to open 1♣ on black two-suiters. Now I think generally it is more common (and better) to open these 1♠.

 

I personally almost always open 5-5 in the blacks 1♠. It is only when the spades are really awful and the clubs really good that I deviate.

[matmat]

i think some top pairs still open these 1♣. if you have this agreement, you can pattern out at 2♠ instead of 3♣; otoh, without discussion doing that will lead to p thinking you're 6-5

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

1S, but a matter of agreement.

 

But simply speaking, the 1S opening won the war.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Flameous]

With opening 1C you have easy rebid after either of red suits. (And of course after 1S) When neither of these occur or when opps bid, you are losing. I tend to randomize or more like it, which ever gives the better lead direct.

[the hog]

With opening 1C you have easy rebid after either of red suits. (And of course after 1S) When neither of these occur or when opps bid, you are losing. I tend to randomize or more like it, which ever gives the better lead direct.

This is very foolish as your partner will have no idea what is going on.

[kenrexford]

Whatever you do, be very precise with partner.

 

A partner of mine from years ago was a very humorous man. We laughed more than we talked about the hands, and we talked about the hands a lot. He was also quite flamboyant; we often compared at the half to note a 65-63 2-point advantage going into the second half.

 

So, he liked opening clubs first. 1♣-1♥-to me. We were red on white, and my RHO looked suspicious, especially with my AKQJxxxx in hearts. So, I just went for BW 4NT. LHO confirmed the foolishness by bidding 5♥. Partner showed two Aces with D.O.P.1.5♠.2. Heck, 7NT!!!

 

LHO did not find the diamond lead, so we made 7NT rather than going set eight tricks.

 

The point is to not say that you open clubs and then rebid spades no matter what.

[inquiry]

Not just in sayc, but in any system you should open 1S. Only open 1C if you are happy to bid over the opp's 4H if that is what comes back to you.

Well "any system" is a quite a statement. Thanks to fellow yellow (and a gold star) ritong, I play a system where we would open this hand 2♠. Of course this is not SAYC or "normal" 2/1, but it is a system. (2M shows that major 5+, plus 4+ clubs and a "minimum" normal opening bid).

[jillybean]

I would always open this 1♠

[neilkaz]

Not just in sayc, but in any system you should open 1S. Only open 1C if you are happy to bid over the opp's 4H if that is what comes back to you.

Agreed unless playing some sys where 2♠ shows 55 or 54 and this strength.

 

♠ is the dominant suit in the game ! Why not show that you have 5 of them and make it harder for the opps to come into the auction ? KJxxx surely wants a 3 card raise and may not mind a pref back to 2♠ with 2 card support. It also may want a ♠ lead and that could be more important than a ♣ lead.

 

It would be nice if the opps would never enter "our" auctions and let us bid how ever we wanted, but WTP ? If we open 1♠ we may be able to pattern out with 2 ♣ calls anyhow.

 

Given our holdings ♠ is more likely to be the dominant and most important suit in this hand so lets fire the first salvo in that suit.

 

Now give me

 

♠65432

♥ xx

♦x

♣AKQJT

 

and..well, call me a 1♣ opener, but the hand needs to be nearly this extreme (for those who don't find my example good enough to open, add a red honor)

 

.. neilkaz ..

[pclayton]

When the opponents weren't overcalling on ♥KQxxx and out, opening 1♣ was better. You frequently had a free run at the one level to get your suits in.

 

1♣ hasn't been right in at least 10 years.

[Echognome]

On top of opponents preempting, there's also the fun part of the auction where it goes:

 

1♣ - 1NT

?

 

I'd much rather have it go:

1♠ - 1NT

2♣

[pclayton]

On top of opponents preempting, there's also the fun part of the auction where it goes:

 

1♣ - 1NT

?

 

I'd much rather have it go:

1♠ - 1NT

2♣

2♠ wasn't a reverse when I played this way with Harvey.

[the hog]

Not just in sayc, but in any system you should open 1S. Only open 1C if you are happy to bid over the opp's 4H if that is what comes back to you.

Well "any system" is a quite a statement. Thanks to fellow yellow (and a gold star) ritong, I play a system where we would open this hand 2♠. Of course this is not SAYC or "normal" 2/1, but it is a system. (2M shows that major 5+, plus 4+ clubs and a "minimum" normal opening bid).

Well thats a convention you play, Ben, not a system. Iow its an adjunct to the system you play.

[catatonic]

to cover some of the points

 

1♣ 1NT guarantees a club fit and not 4!S so you are now better placed than after 1♠ 1NT , you can bid 2♣ , if opps come in to balance you can bid 2♠ and pt knows exactly what you have ; if opps go on and pt doubles you can pass in sleep , he knows all

 

if the system is that you open black 2 suiters 1♣ your pt will know as much as he/she would if it went 1♠ 4♥ , if the vulnerability allows you can rebid 4♠ if pt has passed ; if you opened 1♠ and he passes you have no option but to pass , you could have a big ♣ fit and never find it , missing a cheap sacrifice or even a game

 

in any case the incidence of an auction like 1♣ 4♥

is very low ; if you ever write a bidding system from scratch you will soon realise that bid frequency is all when you decide which way to construct it ; wonderful sequences that come up twice a year are losers not winners in the long run

 

when opponents make a simple overcall you have , in reality , an easier rebid when you open 1♣ ; this only applies when you hold ♠ 's of course , hence the black 2 suiter stipulation

 

with regard to mixing it up , too confusing for pt ; of course , if the disparity of the suits is great you should be re-evaluating the hand anyway ; to me ♠ AKQxx ♣Txxxx is 5-4 anyway , and bid as such

 

anyhow , looks to me this is another of those situations would where top players do it one way by opening1♣, and the others 1♠ ; maybe I have just been lucky enough to play with real experts

 

it's a bit analogous to the 1♣ 1♠ overcall 2♥ sequence where many players tell me 2♥ is forcing ; now I haven't played that as forcing since the introduction of negative doubles ......at the last world championships I was kibbing and this sequence happened in the open pairs...one of the commentators said that to his surprise there was a pair in the competition who actually played 2♥ as forcing in this sequence ; maybe he had missed someone , but it gives you an idea of the proportions

 

thanks to all for your thoughts

[Finch]

anyhow , looks to me this is another of those situations would where top players do it one way by opening1♣, and the others 1♠ ; maybe I have just been lucky enough to play with real experts

You aren't looking very hard.

 

The vast majority (I would say close on 100%) of top players who are playing a natural-based system open these hands 1S, particularly when minimum (as in your example).

 

Some people open 1S on a minimum and 1C on a good hand.

 

p.s. making a comment that implies 'real experts' open 1C and anyone else opens 1S is actually pretty insulting. Luckily most good players aren't insulted by such statements, they just laugh and carry on winning.

[Finch]

it's a bit analogous to the 1♣ 1♠ overcall 2♥ sequence where many players tell me 2♥ is forcing ; now I haven't played that as forcing since the introduction of negative doubles ......at the last world championships I was kibbing and this sequence happened in the open pairs...one of the commentators said that to his surprise there was a pair in the competition who actually played 2♥ as forcing in this sequence ; maybe he had missed someone , but it gives you an idea of the proportions

Lots and lots of people play this as forcing, even those playing in the world open pairs (and don't forget: the word 'open' means what it says - anyone can enter so there's no guarantee that just because they are playing they are any good).

 

It reads from your comment as if you don't even understand why playing 2H as forcing is a good idea (and don't take me wrong, I play it as non-forcing in one regular partnership, but at least I know what the disadvantages are).

[the hog]

to cover some of the points

 

1♣  1NT guarantees a club fit and not 4!S so you are now better placed than after 1♠ 1NT , you can bid 2♣ , if opps come in to balance you can bid 2♠ and pt knows exactly what you have ; if opps go on and pt doubles you can pass in sleep , he knows all

 

if the system is that you open black 2 suiters 1♣  your  pt will know as much as he/she would if it went 1♠ 4♥ ,  if the vulnerability allows  you can rebid 4♠ if pt has passed ; if you opened 1♠ and he passes you have no option  but to pass , you could have a big ♣ fit and never find it , missing a cheap sacrifice or even a game

 

in any case the incidence of an auction like 1♣ 4♥

is very low ; if you ever write a bidding system from scratch you will soon realise that bid frequency is all when you decide which way to construct it ; wonderful sequences that come up twice a year are losers not winners in the long run

 

when opponents make a simple overcall you have , in reality , an easier rebid when you open 1♣ ; this only applies when you hold ♠ 's of course , hence the black 2 suiter stipulation

 

with regard to mixing it up , too confusing for pt ; of course , if the disparity of the suits is great you should be re-evaluating the hand anyway ; to me ♠ AKQxx ♣Txxxx is 5-4 anyway , and bid as such

 

anyhow , looks to me this is another of those situations would where top players do it one way by opening1♣, and the others 1♠ ; maybe I have just been lucky enough to play with real experts

 

it's a bit analogous to the 1♣ 1♠ overcall 2♥ sequence where many players tell me 2♥ is forcing ; now I haven't played that as forcing since the introduction of negative doubles ......at the last world championships I was kibbing and this sequence happened in the open pairs...one of the commentators said that to his surprise there was a pair in the competition who actually played 2♥ as forcing in this sequence ; maybe he had missed someone , but it gives you an idea of the proportions

 

thanks to all for your thoughts

roflmao

 

So 1C 1NT guarantees a C fit eh? Well a number of players will bypass D here on balanced hands and bid 1NT; in fact this is standard practice in Polish Club. But I guess the top Poles are not real experts. (And "yes" I realise this is the sayc 2/1 forum, but some 2/1 experts play this style as well.

 

Secondly the vast majority of experts WILL open 1S rather than 1C, for the reasons many have already stated.

 

Thirdly, so the incidence of 1C and high H intervention is low eh? Well, I guess you don't play against many "real experts" because the modern tendency is to get in and get as high as quickly as possible. By the way, many posters here have designed their own systems.

 

Fourthly, So you play negative free bids, so what? It might interest you to know that -ve free bids were a real vogue about 15 years ago and are now nowhere near as popular as they once were. I suspect most experts would actually play 2H as forcing here, or else play some form of Rubens Advance whioch you do not even mention.

 

So before you insult posters here, I would look to your own game if I were you.

[Codo]

As always opinions are stronger then facts here.

 

You can win World champion titles with with the approach that 1 Club shows any black two suiter. But it is true that most expert who compete for a world championship do open 1 Spade on most black 5/5 hands. (Some do always opne 1 Spade and some make it depending on overall strength.)

 

They will have their reasons.

 

But to me, this was not convincing.

 

There is simply no preempt where I am better placed after a 1 Spade opening then after a 1 Club opening with the intention to show my spades later.

 

When you open these hands 1 Spade you win, when the opps are not aible to bid 2 red but had bid 1 red and you win when you have a spade fit and partner can raise quicker.

 

If you open 1 Club, you win w/o competetion or in the hands where you can show both suits and partner happens to have a good club fit and the defence in club is cheap enough.

 

 

P.S. The argument that 1 ♣-1 NT is a problematic bidding is not valid.

You rebid 2♠ and even if pd decided to bid 1 NT on a 2353 hand, you can play your club fit in 3 Club, outbidding their possible 2 Heart partial.

[andy_h]

1S all the way

[jtfanclub]

Not just in sayc, but in any system you should open 1S. Only open 1C if you are happy to bid over the opp's 4H if that is what comes back to you.

So if I open 1 spade and it comes back to me at 4♥, I'm sure I'll know when it's right to bid 5♣. Or not. In fact, I'd say that it coming back to me at 4♥ would be a darned good reason to have opened it 1♣.

 

I would think a lot of it would depend on your continuations. For example, in a non-competitive auction, does

 

1♠ 2♣

1♠ 1NT 2♣

 

and similar auctions show a club suit? Or does it show nothing extra to show? If you can't find your club fit after opening a spade, but you can find your spade fit after opening a club, seems pretty obvious what to open.

[whereagles]

There are good arguments for opening it either 1♣ or 1♠, so anything you pick will probably work out ok.

[mikeh]

This is an old, old argument, that was won decisively, in terms of popular votes, 30+ years ago. There are still some very good players who like 1♣ with 5=5 blacks, but they are a tiny minority. I actually play this with one partner, an ACBL Grand Life Master.

 

There are pros and cons for either approach, so even tho the 1♠ camp is far larger than the 1♣, I don't think this is a situation where one approach is clearly far superior.

 

For me, the main advantage of 1♠ is that it eliminates many overcalls, where the opps can afford to bid at the 1-level but not the 2-level.

 

But there is little doubt that our own constructive auctions will sometimes be smoother after 1♣.

 

Playing both, I prefer 1♠, but it's not something I feel strongly about.

[catatonic]

well , it's more than 20 years since I earned my corn as a professional bridge player , pay to play and rubber , so I am certainly no longer so expert ...not that I ever considered myself out of the top drawer ; more perspiration than inspiration perhaps

 

nevertheless , what most people do is not , and never has been , an argument which influenced me , although you need to know that for a pick up partner ; as I said earlier it is all about bid frequency ...which way wins the most is my attitude

 

with regard to the 1 club- 1NT point , it seemed to me to be axiomatic so I didn't elucidate , so thanks to codo for doing so better than I could have ; I must admit to being somewhat amused by the parallel to top Polish players bidding 1club -1NT and bypassing 1 diamond , seeing as both bids are artificial and 1club doesn't show clubs any more than 1 Diamond show diamonds in polish club !

 

with regard to the 2 heart forcing or not bit , I am sure there are arguments on both sides , it has to be taken in the context of your overall system ; but when a player of international calibre expresses surprise in his commentary that anyone should play this as forcing , I am inclined to take his word for it [ admittedly NF is my preference so am biased ] ; it always seemed to me inconsistent to argue for aggressive bidding , then shutting out bidding on a weak single suiter

 

but to return to the original question , posed because I am trying to learn and understand the logic of sayc ; I will refer you to one of the finest card players and tacticians who ever lived , terence reece ; as a young player I kept coming up against him in the major events , and , for some reason he generally got the best of us ! [ can't think why javascript:add_smilie(":P")

biggrin.gif ]

after one event he took me to one side and said .....you would be a better player if you didn't talk so much with your bidding ..like most youngsters , too busy of course ; and what bid gives the opponents more opportunity to disclose their hands than 1 club?

jtfan , can't quite follow your argument but 100% with your conclusion , so that's good enough for me !

 

amazed that anyone should feel insulted by my comments ....not my nature nor my intention I assure you