Glad I didn't actually have this problem...

[helene_t]

Mike, didn't you swap E and W?

[Keeper1]

No, he swapped N and S :)

 

...and E dealt

[mikegill]

Yes, E/W were inadvertently swapped.

 

I talked with several people after the game and apparently 3♠ was not the field opening on the West hand but it looks auto to me.

[ArtK78]

A few words of defense of my choice of pass.

 

My partner is a passed hand. I am used to aggressive one opening bids. I find it hard to believe that my partner could have passed the hand in this example. Seriously, how many of you would pass --- AJxx KQxxx xxxx in second seat?

 

If one factors in that partner will open aggressively at the one level, a pass becomes more desirable. You may still choose to act over 3♠, but taking an action over the 3♠ opening becomes more dangerous if partner is aggressive at the one level.

 

Of course, you could flip that argument on its head if your LHO is an aggressive bidder. His failure to act coupled with the third seat preempt makes bidding far more attractive.

[jdonn]

I find it hard to believe that my partner could have passed the hand in this example. Seriously, how many of you would pass --- AJxx KQxxx xxxx in second seat?

I would.

[Jlall]

I find it hard to believe that my partner could have passed the hand in this example.  Seriously, how many of you would pass --- AJxx KQxxx xxxx in second seat?

I would.

Ditto

[eyhung]

A few words of defense of my choice of pass.

 

My partner is a passed hand. I am used to aggressive one opening bids. I find it hard to believe that my partner could have passed the hand in this example. Seriously, how many of you would pass --- AJxx KQxxx xxxx in second seat?

If you play aggressive openers, that's fine, but then don't expect people who aren't as aggressive to draw your conclusions. My simulation opens at the 1-level if the hand fits the rule of 24 : HCP + longest two + quick tricks * 2 = 24. Not perfect but I think "good enough" for simulating lots of hands.

 

void AJxx KQxxx xxxx is a clear 2nd seat pass to me -- you have no spades! If the opponents have 8+ spades, they are going to be able to outbid you cheaply and partner will probably misjudge what to do. If partner has enough spades to stop the opponents, your hand does not fit his and is thus worth less than it might appear -- the auction 1D 1S 2C XS seems likely and your hand doesn't have the extras to compensate for the trump void.

[ArtK78]

This is kind of funny.

 

--- AJxx KQxxx xxxx is a hand that Charles Goren would have opened. 2 quick tricks, 10 HCP plus 3 distributional points, 2 biddable suits (remember "biddable suits?" Boy, do I feel old). But already two of our most esteemed posters say they would not open the hand in second seat.

 

Also, the idea that holding no spades is a reason for not opening is exactly the opposite of what I would have thought. Given that I have no spades, I want to get into the auction now since I may not be able to get back into it later at a safe level. If you hold spades you can usually afford to pass borderline hands because you can often back into the auction later.

 

I always find it interesting when I would bid on hands that members of these Fora would pass, given that the others tend to be more aggressive than I am. But that is a subject for another thread.

[jdonn]

If I open this hand, partner will respond 1♠ (or the opponents but pretend partner beats them to it). I then have to rebid my xxxx of a minor (see I care about biddable suits too), ignore my AJxx of a major where we could still have a fit, and if he places us in notrump I have a 10 count and nothing in a suit I have bit. If I pass and the opponents bid spades I can almost always double for takeout next round, giving a perfect description.

 

As far as competing, if it goes P 1♠ p 2♠ back to me, I can easily double without worrying. If it goes 1♦ 1♠ P 2♠ back to me, now if I double partner is guaranteed to assume I have more than this.

[Jlall]

This is kind of funny.

 

--- AJxx KQxxx xxxx is a hand that Charles Goren would have opened. 2 quick tricks, 10 HCP plus 3 distributional points, 2 biddable suits (remember "biddable suits?" Boy, do I feel old). But already two of our most esteemed posters say they would not open the hand in second seat.

What does that mean? The fact that Charles Goren would have opened it 60 years ago means that it should still be an opener? Bridge has evolved from Charles Goren. Charles Goren likely would not be able to win a flight A regional if he were to play now.

 

Your theory about whether or not to open with spades or not is backwards. You want to stretch to open with hands that have spades. With this hand you can pass and make a takeout double of spades at any level.

 

Anyways, I would obviously open this if my system permitted. For the purpose of these threads I assume a relatively expert standard system, ie 2/1 with normal stuff. In that framework I would not open. My preferred system is light openers in a strong club framework and I would definitely open in that type of system.

[ArtK78]

Charles Goren likely would not be able to win a flight A regional if he were to play now.

That is really funny.

 

Players of today tend to belittle the accomplishments and the skill of the old time players.

 

Goren was done playing shortly before I started playing, so I never had the pleasure of facing him at the table. But, from what I have heard, he was a giant, and the idea that he would have trouble winning Flight A Regionals today is laughable.

 

Reminds me of a story about another giant that I did play against - Barry Crane. Back in the days before computer scoring, it often took quite some time before results were posted. A well-known player had a huge game in the finals of a Qualifying and Final two session regional open pairs. Several players came up to congratulate him for his victory. "Don't congratulate me yet - Barry is in the field!" he told them.

 

And he was right. Barry Crane and his partner won by over two boards.

[Jlall]

Charles Goren likely would not be able to win a flight A regional if he were to play now.

That is really funny.

 

Players of today tend to belittle the accomplishments and the skill of the old time players.

I never belittled the guys accomplishments. What I said is the equivalent of saying that Rod Laver if he were to play today would never win a championship. It is just obvious. That is not belittling his accomplishments though, he was amazing.

 

I don't think its belittling his skills, nobody had a clue how to bid then. The theory of bidding has evolved greatly, and the theory of signalling has evolved greatly. More has been written, more has been thought about, more has been learned. This is the equivalent of technology and training and nutrition theory etc evolving in tennis. This is the natural evolution of the game.

 

I will say that having spoken to people that played WITH Goren regularly and were great players at that time, Charles Goren was not considered that great of a player. He was much better of a promoter, and did a lot for bridge.

 

Clearly quoting some expert of many many many years ago with respect to bidding and what they would have done is silly.

[MFA]

If it goes p-p-3♠-3NT I think north should try 4♠. No guarantees to work but I think it will much more often than not.

 

I would open 1♦.

 

A few words of defense of my choice of pass.

 

My partner is a passed hand.  I am used to aggressive one opening bids.  I find it hard to believe that my partner could have passed the hand in this example.  Seriously, how many of you would pass --- AJxx KQxxx xxxx in second seat?

If you play aggressive openers, that's fine, but then don't expect people who aren't as aggressive to draw your conclusions. My simulation opens at the 1-level if the hand fits the rule of 24 : HCP + longest two + quick tricks * 2 = 24. Not perfect but I think "good enough" for simulating lots of hands.

 

void AJxx KQxxx xxxx is a clear 2nd seat pass to me -- you have no spades! If the opponents have 8+ spades, they are going to be able to outbid you cheaply and partner will probably misjudge what to do. If partner has enough spades to stop the opponents, your hand does not fit his and is thus worth less than it might appear -- the auction 1D 1S 2C XS seems likely and your hand doesn't have the extras to compensate for the trump void.

 

If partner bids hearts or clubs voluntarily while the opps persist in spades, we have a monster :lol:. He might even have ♣AKxxxx + ♦A, why not?

[jdonn]

Charles Goren likely would not be able to win a flight A regional if he were to play now.

That is really funny.

 

Players of today tend to belittle the accomplishments and the skill of the old time players.

 

Goren was done playing shortly before I started playing, so I never had the pleasure of facing him at the table. But, from what I have heard, he was a giant, and the idea that he would have trouble winning Flight A Regionals today is laughable.

It's not laughable, it's true. In fact I would say it's obviously true. And to say that is not to belittle his accomplishments or his skills. Everything is contextual.

 

Justin mentioned a lot of factors, how about the internet for another. I bet bridge players today in their lifetimes can quite easily squeeze in 10x more hands than players of Goren's era. That is experience he simply can't match.

[Apollo81]

I find it hard to believe that my partner could have passed the hand in this example.  Seriously, how many of you would pass --- AJxx KQxxx xxxx in second seat?

I would.

Ditto

ditto

[mike777]

Comparing old, all time great players, with the modern world is always great fun.

 

I think if Goren were playing today he would play on the Internet and read up on all the modern bidding theory. OTOH if Goren was forced to play 1930-40's style bridge in 2009 he might have a tough time. Of course Goren played with many great partners, that helps.

[dake50]

As I play 4cM, and weak openings S-, H-AJxx, D-KQxxx, C-xxxx is 1H opener. Now what is the problem? To find grand with H-KQxxx known strain? To find 'fitting' D-stuff? Both are routine.