Strong 2C?

[Rossoneri]

[hv=d=e&v=b&s=saqhak53dakt9875c]133|100|Scoring: IMP

You are dealer and you pick up this hand.[/hv]

 

Would you open 2C? If you do, partner bids 2D. What would you bid now?

 

How would your choice of action be different if LHO doubles and partner and both RHO pass it back to you?

[bid_em_up]

Yes, I open it 2C.

 

Partner bids 2D, I raise to 3D.

 

LHO doubles and it goes pass-pass, I bid 2D and thank LHO for giving us the opportunity to show diamonds one level lower.

 

Is there really a problem here?

[hrothgar]

Doubt that I will have much company, but I would open this 1♦

 

1. I hate opening 2♣ with two suited hands.

2. I hate opening 2♦ with two suited hands with primary Diamonds most of all

3. I need more strength to open a minor oriented hand 2♣ than a long major

4. There are limits to everything and even I won't open 5♦ with this 7-4

 

Change the suits around such that I have a 7=2=4=0, maybe even a 4=7=2=0 and I might very well open 2♣. Here I'm opening a simple 1♦.

[rogerclee]

1♦.

[neilkaz]

Yes, I open it 2C.

 

Partner bids 2D, I raise to 3D.

 

LHO doubles and it goes pass-pass, I bid 2D and thank LHO for givinig us the opportunity to show diamonds one level lower.

 

Is there really a problem here?

We agree after 2♣, but there is a problem as quite a few players will prefer to try to keep the bidding lower with 1♦, however, I open 2♣ here also.

[Guest Jlall]

Doubt that I will have much company, but I would open this 1♦

Really? I think you would be in a huge expert majority. I would open this hand 2C though.

[P_Marlowe]

#1 No, 1D, if I get another chance, I have a brilliant rebid in hearts,

but I dont mind a 2C opener. Having opened 2C, I bid 3D.

 

#2 2Cxed comes back? 2D, what else.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[BobElliott]

3H...4M & longer D

[analysismi]

Q: Do you know where to play game if your partner has a flat 4 or 5 (or 6 or 7) pointer?

A: No. You may or may not have 7 or 8 hearts. You may not have a club stopper. Partner might have a floppy 5 or 6 card suit that gives spades play. You might not have a diamond game.

 

I don't think you can afford to get to the three level before hearing partner's distribution.

I'd open this 1D. If you switched the diamonds and a major, I would open 2C. You know you can push to game in your major across from any nonnegative response.

 

Or make the ♥K5 into ♣K5. Then you know you can bid to 3N across from random 4-5 points.

 

What happens after 2C-2D-3D-3S?

 

OTOH its hard to picture things going wrong with a diamond opening reversing into hearts.

[mr1303]

1D for me, for the reasons that Hrothgar gave.

 

I have opened 2C on this hand far too many times, and had an auction like:

 

2C 2D

3D 3NT

 

and I put this dummy down, partner has a few scattered values including Jxx of clubs, and I roll off with 5D on ice.

 

Or the alternative, when I play in a ropey 5D contract when I should be in 3NT etc.

[cnszsun]

I know there is a special treatment to handle such kind of hands.

2C-2D*

3M* = 4 majors plus 6 diamonds.

But, i don't know how many expert players did play it.

[brianshark]

There is more danger of this going 1♦-P-P-P than if, for example, your void was in a Major. But I would still open 1♦ I think. I just find it hard to see an intelligent auction after 2♣ without playing neat methods.

[mike777]

3H...4M & longer D

ditto.

 

 

2c=2d

3h

[mcphee]

1D for me. 2C is nice if you have a treatment like the jump to 3H as per EKO.

[the hog]

1D for me - I agree with Richard.

 

" 3H...4M & longer D"

Eh, 2C 2D 3H does not show anything like this hand in any system I know.

[SoTired]

2C for me.

 

To me, this is NOT a 2-suited hand. It is a one suited hand. I do not want to play in a 4-4 heart fit. If you play in hearts on a 4-4 fit rather than diam in a 7-1 fit and either suit breaks badly, the play of the hand will go poorly.

 

Also, this is a 3-loser hand. If partner has as little as ♦Qx, you want to be in game, and if partner has only that, s/he may pass out 1D. As a matter of fact, we could pass out 1D when 6D is cold.

[Finch]

I don't feel particularly strongly about whether to open this hand 2C or 1D. If 1D doesn't end the auction I will be pleased I opened at the 1-level, but there is a real risk of playing in 1D when cold for slam - partner isn't obliged to respond on xxxx Qxxxx xx xx when 7H is pretty good.

 

If I open it 2C, however, the subsequent auction is easy:

 

After 2C P 2D P I rebid 3D, and bid 4H over partner's next bid (unless he raises diamonds or bids hearts). Personally I don't think this is forcing (see long thread started by fred on this subject) but even if it is, I'll play in 5D. I strongly doubt that 3NT is the only making game.

 

After 2C x P P I bid 2D, thanking opponents for the chance to bid my suit at the 2-level.

[blackshoe]

One of the problems George Rosenkranz set out to fix with Romex was precisely this one — a game forcing hand with a primary minor suit. In Romex, such hands are bid:

 

with primary diamonds: open 2♦ and rebid: 3♦ with a one suited hand, or 3♣ with a two suiter. 3♦ now asks for the second suit.

 

with primary clubs: open 2♣ and rebid 3♦ with a one suited hand, or 3♣ with a two suiter. 3♦ now asks for the second suit.

 

After showing the single suiter, responder's bid in a major shows a stopper, and denies a stopper in the other major.

 

It's not perfect, but it's better than nothing. :lol:

[mikeh]

I don't feel particularly strongly about whether to open this hand 2C or 1D.  If 1D doesn't end the auction I will be pleased I opened at the 1-level, but there is a real risk of playing in 1D when cold for slam - partner isn't obliged to respond on xxxx Qxxxx xx xx when 7H is pretty good.

 

If I open it 2C, however, the subsequent auction is easy:

 

After 2C P 2D P  I rebid 3D, and bid 4H over partner's next bid (unless he raises diamonds or bids hearts).  Personally I don't think this is forcing (see long thread started by fred on this subject) but even if it is, I'll play in 5D.  I strongly doubt that 3NT is the only making game.

 

After 2C x P P I bid 2D, thanking opponents for the chance to bid my suit at the 2-level.

I agree with all of this, except that most sequences that have me opening 2♣ then showing diamonds and then bidding 4♥ are, imo, better (by a narrow margin) played as forcing.. see the same thread.

 

BTW, if playing that a jump to 3M over 2♦ response to 2♣ is 4 cards and long diamonds, I wouldn't use it here: 7-4 is too extreme for my taste... partner will rarely consider xx in diamonds as a reason to support the suit if any other bid appealed. And there will be many, many layouts where 7-3 or even 7-2 diamonds play as well as or better, for slam purposes, as 4-4 hearts.

 

Imagine KJxx Qxxx Qx xxx..... I prefer 7♦ to 7♥.

[kenrexford]

1D for me - I agree with Richard.

 

" 3H...4M & longer D"

Eh, 2C 2D 3H does not show anything like this hand in any system I know.

Giorgio Belladonna suggested that 2♣-P-2♦-P-3M show that major (four cards) and diamonds. Not that unusual, really.

 

That said, I think that this solution is inadequate. 2♣ sequences are extremely difficult, as many know. Some little tweakings here and there, like Belladonna's 3M rebid, help patch up some recurring holes, but the entire approach seems flawed. There is simply insufficient space to work out strain, let alone with time to explore level competently, unless the 2♣ opening is based on a five-card major and Responder happens to have a fit. Just about any other sequence is messed up.

 

I am not advocating Precision or other approaches when I say this. I think natural bidding can be fixed without resorting to a strong club system, which has its own problems.

[ArtK78]

I don't understand why anyone would open 1♦ on these cards.

 

I am very conservative in my 2♣ openings. I will open one on many hands on which others open 2♣. But one rule of thumb that I have is that if partner has a 4333 zero count and I am a heavy favorite to make game, then I have to open 2♣.

 

If partner is 4333 in any order, I expect to make 5♦. If his 4 card suit is hearts, 4♥ is a heavy favorite and so is 5♦. Opposite a 4333 hand with the ♥Q, I am a strong favorite to make 6♦. But if I open 1♦, I may play it there.

 

I don't see any problem opening 2♣ and rebidding 3♦. Pard knows that a strong 2♣ opening based on a long diamond suit is a very strong hand. This hand qualifies.

[kenrexford]

I don't understand why anyone would open 1♦ on these cards.

 

I am very conservative in my 2♣ openings. I will open one on many hands on which others open 2♣. But one rule of thumb that I have is that if partner has a 4333 zero count and I am a heavy favorite to make game, then I have to open 2♣.

 

If partner is 4333 in any order, I expect to make 5♦. If his 4 card suit is hearts, 4♥ is a heavy favorite and so is 5♦. Opposite a 4333 hand with the ♥Q, I am a strong favorite to make 6♦. But if I open 1♦, I may play it there.

 

I don't see any problem opening 2♣ and rebidding 3♦. Pard knows that a strong 2♣ opening based on a long diamond suit is a very strong hand. This hand qualifies.

The problem with opening 2♣ with this hand is not so much that partner will be in the dark about this being a strong bid. The problem is one of strain and then value identification.

 

Suppose, for example, that you open 2♣. hear 2♦, and then bid 3♦. Presumably partner's 3♥ and 3♠ bids are natural, seeking strain. However, do these calls show four-card suits or five-card suits? If four-card, what does Opener bid with 3361 shape? If five-card, how does the heart fit get established, if that matters?

 

Suppose, instead, that partner has diamond support. What does he bid? 4♦ with anything? 4♦ with anything not meriting a 5♦ call?

 

Suppose he bids 4♦ to show promising values, whatever that means. What are your calls now? 4♥ as a cue? A suit? RKCB? Any ability to know or show anything useful here? Do you end up in quantitative punting if you are lucky enough to agree strain?

 

Suppose he bids 3NT. Now what? 4♦ as a quantitative punt?

 

The idea to opening 1♦ is not that the person cannot evaluate the hand. The problem is the inability to describe the evaluated values to partner effectively with a 2♣ opening, at least as most play strong openings these days.

[dbsboy]

How about...

 

2H=Ekrens

2S=Weak 2 Spades

2D=Weak 2 Hearts or FG DIAMONDS

2C=FG without DIAMONDS

 

rightsiding the contract + able to show your FG hands better

[skjaeran]

How about...

 

2H=Ekrens

Why would you have Ekrens in your arsenal?

It's more than ten years since I quitted playing that convention, because the bad results was vastly more frequent than the good ones. (Of course around here everyone and their mother knows how to defend against Ekrens...) Btw, if I ever would agree to play Ekrens (abroad), I'd not use 2♥, rather 2♦. Then we can play there on some hands.

[Echognome]

Btw, if I ever would agree to play Ekrens (abroad), I'd not use 2♥, rather 2♦. Then we can play there on some hands.

It has been discussed on these forums a few times before, but I seem to remember that there was some discussion whether 2♥ or 2♣ for Ekrens was better (I think a few more 2♥ supporters than 2♣, which was my preference), but that most everyone felt that both were better than 2♦.