opening?

[MFA]

I would not open.

[Phil]

Since we have a clear winner...for those who entered "Yes," how critical is it to your decision that the hand has both majors? If you switched the red suits, so the hand only had one major, would you still open it? If "Yes," again, how about if you switched both the red and the black suits?

I open it.

 

I'd still open it if I had spades + a minor.

 

I'd pass it otherwise.

[gwnn]

If I can open 1H (or 1S) I open, if I have to open 1C I pass.

That's strangely backwards, IMO. I open this because I can open 1♣.

 

IMO, there are reasons favoring a range spread of 11/12/13/14 for 1♣/1♦/1♥/1♠ respectively when there is rebid impurity or other problems.

He was talking about lead directional considerations I would think. That's the reason I'd be more content opening in a 4cM system than a 5cM system. That said, I'd probably open it anyway.

[P_Marlowe]

No.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[mikeh]

I would pass. This hand type is why I usually play a weak notrump. But absent that, it seems to me that this hand is a trap.

 

Our opening bids in standard methods are very wide range, and the wider the range, the more imprecise our auctions. Adding this type to the range makes it even more difficult.

 

I do not think that there is any significant risk of missing a decent game after we pass... yes, we will miss a few, but not many. And for every making game we miss, we will win more imps by staying low, when opening would get us too high or attract a poor opening lead by partner.

 

Consider.. in most methods, our opening bid is either 1♣ or 1♦, with 1♦ being the more common. In either case, if LHO interferes, we are in the strange position of dreading a raise or a lead of the suit we bid.

 

And if partner responds a major, we have to raise. Now, given that we are red, partner should be aggressive both in bidding game and in inviting game. He will upgrade for a double fit if he fits my minor.

 

Thus we will often play 3M, going down, or 4M going down, when we would stay at least a level lower had I passed.

 

Arguing that 'partner knows I open this hand' is no answer outside of a limited opening method, because you also open real hands, don't you? If partner pulls in to cater to this, then you miss a lot of good contracts when you hold a real opener.

[mike777]

I thought the purpose of playing lite openers besides getting the first bid in was to bid lite games. Granted we still need to learn to make them in the play.

[jdonn]

I think the risk of missing game on this hand is reasonably large if we don't open. Even more importantly, the chance of missing out on a partscore is huge. If almost any auction comes back to me in which the opponents open a major, or open a minor and rebid a major, it will be very very difficult for us to find the other major.

[TimG]

Since we have a clear winner...for those who entered "Yes," how critical is it to your decision that the hand has both majors? If you switched the red suits, so the hand only had one major, would you still open it? If "Yes," again, how about if you switched both the red and the black suits?

I didn't vote, for me it really comes down to partnership style and I am comfortable with either an approach that calls this an opening bid or one that does not.

 

But, if I am playing a standard sort of system where this is an opening bid, I would be more comfortable if one of the suits were a minor (or I was playing four-card majors). I'd prefer to open in a beefy four-card suit than xxx.

[ggwhiz]

Close BUT I refuse to start the bidding with 1♣ on three petunias and 1♥ in first seat doesn't appeal either.

 

Third or even fourth, count me in for 1♥.

[mikeh]

I think the risk of missing game on this hand is reasonably large if we don't open. Even more importantly, the chance of missing out on a partscore is huge. If almost any auction comes back to me in which the opponents open a major, or open a minor and rebid a major, it will be very very difficult for us to find the other major.

we are all conditioned by our experiences and biases. mine is to a different effect altogether. i don't think there is any way to simulate this in any meaningful way.