Hanoi5 Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 ♠AKJxxx♥Axx♦AKx♣K You're the dealer, both sides vulnerable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 1♠. I think 3NT over partner's 1NT response shows something like this, but if I am not confident about that, 3♦ is ok, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 I'd open 1♠ Swap the King of Clubs for a Queen in any other suit and it looks like a 2♣ opener Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barryallen Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 I'd open 1♠ Swap the King of Clubs for a Queen in any other suit and it looks like a 2♣ opener I am not happy about 2♣ either, but to open 1♠ is fraught with danger. Just how would partner know that ♠xxx and ♦Q equates to game? The other advantage I would add to the 2♣ bid is the implications of a positive response from partner. Compare a 1NT response to 1♠ and a positive response to 2♣, which position would you prefer to be in? This hand may well fail the MLTC, but that system would singularly fail you for partner to respond accordingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 1NT. Artificial, forcing, 4-5 losers, 6+ controls, usually 18-21 HCP, or balanced, 6 controls, 19-20 HCP. Strong club systems also deal well with this kind of problem hand. This hand is not good enough for 2 :c:, unless your 2 :c: opener follows the "I don't want to open at the one level; partner might pass" rule — which I think is a very bad misuse of the 2 :c: opening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickRW Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 Er, play strong twos anyone? Or Benji? Or Multi with strong twos in the majors? What about a strong 1C system? Or a multi way club system? No. OK then. Forced to choose between 2C and 1S - well it is a horrible choice - there are some quite minimal responding hands on which we could have a slam that partner will tend not to want to be in unless forced. Equally there are some near busts where we will be in a dodgy game if we start with 2C. Personally my poison is 2C - but I quite see why others would argue the other way. Nick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtK78 Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 This is probably one of the best hands that I would not open 2♣. I open 1♠ with some trepidation, knowing that opposite xxx xxx Qxx xxxx I have very good play for game, and that opposite xxxx xxx Qxx xxx game is virtually cold. My criteria for a 2♣ opening on an unbalanced hand is 3 or less losers using MLTC. This hand has 4 losers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 ♠AKJxxx♥Axx♦AKx♣K You're the dealer, both sides vulnerable. 1s...max Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 2♣ - min. I don't like my stiff K, but I have 9 controls and a good six card suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 I open 2♣, I could only justify opening 1♠ if I ignore the king of clubs which I'm not prepared to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 This hand is not good enough for 2 :c:, unless your 2 :c: opener follows the "I don't want to open at the one level; partner might pass" rule — which I think is a very bad misuse of the 2 :c: opening. What if you follow the "I have 22 hcp and a good 6 card suit" rule? What if you follow the "Qxxxxx of diamonds and out in partner's hand is probably a slam" rule? What if you follow the "About a million different 6 counts make slam and we can hardly bid any of them after 1♠ even after partner responds" rule? I'm not trying to be too critical of 1♠, just pointing out there are lots of rules someone could use to justify 2♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanp Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 2C. I like the rule about the 22 HCP and the good 6-card suit best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manudude03 Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 2♣ for me, game is good opposite xxx xxx xx xxxxx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 2♣, or a polish style 1♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenrexford Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 2♣. The more these hands come up, the more I am convinced that it makes sense to open 2♣ is I have six spades and a hand that I could treat as a balanced 22-23 if I wanted to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winstonm Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 2C. I like the rule about the 22 HCP and the good 6-card suit best. How original. ;) The hand is the classic example hand used to show the difficulties with "standard" systems and how strong 1C systems solve this problem. IMO there is no right or wrong or even "best" answer - there is just varying opinions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old York Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 I am quite happy to open 2♣ on this hand, but I would prefer to treat it as an Acol Strong 2 if possible (Benji) I have a very good 6 card suit, 4+ losers, 5++QT and a good 22 count. It is far too good to devalue to 1♠, too easy to miss game or slam (maybe 4♥/6♥) imho Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonottawa Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 2♣, showing 22+ points or 8.5 tricks, luckily I have both, WTP? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanp Posted May 17, 2009 Report Share Posted May 17, 2009 2C. I like the rule about the 22 HCP and the good 6-card suit best. How original. :rolleyes: The hand is the classic example hand used to show the difficulties with "standard" systems and how strong 1C systems solve this problem. IMO there is no right or wrong or even "best" answer - there is just varying opinions. You open 2C, then bid 2S. Where is the problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winstonm Posted May 18, 2009 Report Share Posted May 18, 2009 2C. I like the rule about the 22 HCP and the good 6-card suit best. How original. :rolleyes: The hand is the classic example hand used to show the difficulties with "standard" systems and how strong 1C systems solve this problem. IMO there is no right or wrong or even "best" answer - there is just varying opinions. You open 2C, then bid 2S. Where is the problem? It is fine to hold strong opinions about the best approach, but to infer that there is no other way or no problems in that approach is something else indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double ! Posted May 18, 2009 Report Share Posted May 18, 2009 I'd open it 2♣ which I play as being forcing only to 2NT or 3M, not game. (How archaic and K-S'ish) DHL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtvesuvius Posted May 18, 2009 Report Share Posted May 18, 2009 2♣, I'll put my K♣ into Hearts to justify it if partner really hates it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerclee Posted May 18, 2009 Report Share Posted May 18, 2009 2C. I like the rule about the 22 HCP and the good 6-card suit best. How original. :rolleyes: The hand is the classic example hand used to show the difficulties with "standard" systems and how strong 1C systems solve this problem. IMO there is no right or wrong or even "best" answer - there is just varying opinions. You open 2C, then bid 2S. Where is the problem? It is fine to hold strong opinions about the best approach, but to infer that there is no other way or no problems in that approach is something else indeed. Better stick to the Water Cooler, Winston. Anyway, I don't understand opening 1♠ with a hand this good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pirate22 Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 we play so i would open 2cl we play 2d (auto) if pard has a positive no rush,when pard rebids 2spades now pard can show his fine feathers :) if sequence goes 2cl again 2d(auto) and pard rebids 2n/t not applicable to hand shewn---------over 2n/t rebid many widgets available to show positive to open 1 spade can prove awkward later esp if opps come in we vuln they not also you have a 5 loser opening----2cl every time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtvesuvius Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 Repeat posting: Bad. Repeat posting about how 2♣ relays 2♦: Even worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.