All the intangibles

[CSGibson]

Not vulnerable, 3rd seat, playing in the flight B GNTs (Not experts in opposition, but not complete scrubs, either). RHO has thought and fumbled with his bid box before eventually passing - not a real break in tempo, but enough that you noticed it, and think LHO might have also.

 

[hv=d=n&v=e&s=s4h7dat642caqt543]133|100|Scoring: IMP

P-(P)-?[/hv]

 

What would you normally do without the actions of RHO? Do you let your table feel change your normal action?

[mike777]

1c...risky

[JLOL]

1C and no.

[gnasher]

Against a moderate team, 1♣. Against a good team, 4♣. I'd do that regardless of what RHO does.

 

Preempting has more to gain after RHO fidgets, but not just for the obvious reason. The UI constrains LHO's actions, and that will have more effect after a high-level opening than after 1♣.

[Codo]

As the good players choose 1 or 4 Club, my choice of 4 NT must be wrong. But I will still give it a try at fav.

[OleBerg]

Voted 5♣.

 

1 or 4 is the alternative, but I dont like 4.

 

When I have a good 6-card suit, and a shaky 5-card suit, I take preference myself.

[whereagles]

I'll open 3♣.

[mtvesuvius]

1♣, but I do like the idea of 4♣.

[hanp]

I'm not opening 4C on a broken 6-card suit, it's 1C or 3C for me.

[jdonn]

Anything but 1♣ is far too creative and random for my tastes when I have an utterly normal bid to make.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

1D.

 

But if I have 4NT av., than the hand looks like a 4NT bid.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[skjaeran]

1♣ looks perfectly normal (and sane) to me.

[andy_h]

1C. We could be sacrificing in 5D afaic.

[hanp]

Some of these votes are really sick.

[Apollo81]

Anything but 1♣ is far too creative and random for my tastes when I have an utterly normal bid to make.

agree, although the thought of opening 3♣ did cross my mind

[fred]

I suspect I would usually open the normal 1C, but I have to admit that in some circumstances it might be difficult for me to resist the (admittedly somewhat sick) appeal of Pass. I find none of the other choices even remotely appealling.

 

The case for Pass: other than 1D (which is REALLY not my style), Pass is the only call that makes it likely you will get a chance to show both of your suits (via a later unusual notrump) without having to take a massively unilateral action.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[nick_s]

You've told us how good the opponents are, but not how good you are (apart from that you're playing in the B flight).

 

This is the sort of hand where I'd expect the experts to take the normal action - 1♣. There's no need for them to do anything outlandish. They expect to win by force.

 

I, OTOH, am looking for opportunities to go off-road. Accordingly, I'll try 3♣.

[whereagles]

(...) a massively unilateral action.

What's wrong with that? We do it all the time when we preempt.

 

I wouldn't dream of opening 3+♣ opposing a non-passed pard, but opposite a passed pard and this weakish a hand, chances for a game are minimal. Why not wreaking some havoc?

[kenrexford]

Call the director to point out the hitch. The rules call for that.

 

Then, open 1♣ like a normal person. The hitch will affect the opponents' options whether you open 1♣ or something else. Why take a risky action that may be bad rather than the normal action? You already have protection.

[Lobowolf]

(...) a massively unilateral action.

What's wrong with that? We do it all the time when we preempt.

Usually, we (as Philip Seymour Hoffman said in 'Charlie Wilson's War,' "Me and like 3 other guys," at least) don't have a 5-card side suit when we preempt.

[gwnn]

(...)other than 1D (which is REALLY not my style), Pass is the only call that makes it likely you will get a chance to show both of your suits (...)

Except a direct 4NT.

 

I don't think 4NT is the best bid with this hand but surely it's better than pass?

[jdonn]

(...) a massively unilateral action.

What's wrong with that? We do it all the time when we preempt.

Usually, we (as Philip Seymour Hoffman said in 'Charlie Wilson's War,' "Me and like 3 other guys," at least) don't have a 5-card side suit when we preempt.

Or opening hand strength.

[Fluffy]

This is an obvious 1♦ bid :P

[fred]

(...) a massively unilateral action.

What's wrong with that? We do it all the time when we preempt.

 

My statement was with respect to the concept of trying to show both your suits (say by opening 1C and later taking an action in a competitive auction that forces the partnership to the 5-level when you have no particular reason to expect the opps can make their game, that you can make 5 of something, or that 5 of something doubled will be a good sacrifice if the opponents can make their game).

 

That would be a "massively unilateral action" in my view.

 

But I do disagree with your basic point. There is nothing unilateral about making a preempt when your hand is close to what partner will expect you to have.

 

To me unilateral means taking partner out of the picture. A preempt is supposed to do just the opposite - put partner in a position to make an intelligent decision.

 

I wouldn't dream of opening 3+♣ opposing a non-passed pard, but opposite a passed pard and this weakish a hand, chances for a game are minimal. Why not wreaking some havoc?

 

I can think of 2 good reasons not to open 3C with this hand:

 

1) You give up on diamonds

 

2) There is a good chance your partner will misjudge as it will not occur to him that you have a hand like this

 

Sure 3C could work wonders, but it is far too random an action for my liking. You (and especially your partner) may not be impressed by the nature of the havoc you wreak.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[mikeh]

You've told us how good the opponents are, but not how good you are (apart from that you're playing in the B flight).

 

This is the sort of hand where I'd expect the experts to take the normal action - 1♣. There's no need for them to do anything outlandish. They expect to win by force.

 

I, OTOH, am looking for opportunities to go off-road. Accordingly, I'll try 3♣.

One reason non-experts are non-experts is that they have a propensity to make bad bids. You cannot improve your game that way.

 

Bid like an expert... if you are not one, then you will make enough bad bids as it is....don't intentionally add to your burden.

 

There is a reason the consensus of the expert opinion on this thread is heavily in favour of 1♣... their combined experience suggests that this is the most effective opening tactic. If it works for them, it should work for you.