What do you open?

[Hanoi5]

No-one Vulnerable, after 2 passes you hold:

 

♠Q9xxx

♥

♦

♣KQJxxxxx

 

It's imp's, you can:

 

Open 1♣ 3+, 1♠ 5+, 2♠ 5♠'s 4+ in a minor (less than 10) or a club pre-empt at the level you choose.

[helene_t]

5♣ is fine. Second choice 6♣.

 

When a similar hand came up in the bidding poll of a Dutch Bridge magazine, one of the panel members said "a junior advised me to open 4♥ but I am too old for that".

[Jlall]

Finally a hand I would open 5m with!

[lmilne]

It's imp's, you can:

 

Open 1♣ 3+, 1♠ 5+, 2♠ 5♠'s 4+ in a minor (less than 10)...

Just because its imps doesn't come remotely close to justifying a 2♠ opening with this hand :)

 

5♣ looks very normal to me.

[manudude03]

I've opened 2♠ with 5 spades and a bad 7 card club before, 5♣ for me.

[dake50]

I anticipate 5C leads to X and 5N(2-places) -> 6-red or 5N ->6-red immediate. Try 6C. Way ups the chances opponents' one guess where-to-play is wrong for the price -200 more.

 

Besides those little counting numbers 1,2, .. 4,5 levels are for children!? As colors were suggested for children by someone famous.

[P_Marlowe]

5C.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Codo]

I open 1 Club. I hate bidding 5 club with a 4 card major, but there are exceptions. But I cannot do it with a 5 card major.

[andy_h]

5♣. Why am I considering to play in spades. We have two voids with an 8 count and the auction has gone pass-pass! Gl opps.

[bluecalm]

5clubs for me. Not many hands play better in spades even wit solid support.

We can miss a slam or maybe we are preempting too low. I don't know. 6clubs seems like good alternative but I have absolutely no intuition/knowledge/feeling about it being a good gamble or not.

[Cyberyeti]

5♣. Why am I considering to play in spades. We have two voids with an 8 count and the auction has gone pass-pass! Gl opps.

Agreed, I posted a hand where I opened 5♦ on x, 9xxxx, AKxxxxx elsewhere, so I'm going to do the same sort of thing here too.

 

If opps think I'm an idiot, I might consider bidding like an idiot (start with 3♣ then bid 5♣) and I bet I'll get to play 5♣x.

 

You probably only want to play in spades if partner has 4 or 5 of them and no clubs, which is certainly pretty unlikely given what partner and I habitually open at the one or two level with, but this inference is less safe for others. Yes it's possible partner has ♠J10xx and the spade ruff puts you one further off in clubs, but that's not a big consideration.

[Phil]

5♣ looks normal, but I would be tempted to open 4♣ and compete to 4♠ over the likely 4♥ by RHO or LHO.

[jjbrr]

5♣ looks normal, but I would be tempted to open 4♣ and compete to 4♠ over the likely 4♥ by RHO or LHO.

This was my initial reaction.

[hanp]

4C did not enter my mind I must admit.

[andy_h]

I think 4♣ is kinda in no man's land. It's a bid that isn't so destructive as it lets them in at the 4 level for the purpose of a hopeful constructive 4♠. It pretty much defeats the purpose of the preempt.

[Apollo81]

I think 4♣ is ill-advised. This hand is not about us trying to find the best fit, as we know who has the high cards at this table (LHO).

 

I'd either open 5♣ or 1NT.

[655321]

Yes, it seems to me the only possible reason for bidding something other than 5♣ is that you want to try a psyche.

[Phil]

I think 4♣ is ill-advised. This hand is not about us trying to find the best fit, as we know who has the high cards at this table (LHO).

 

I'd either open 5♣ or 1NT.

Yes, but, 4♣ provides 80% of the preemption 5♣ does, and it helps partner evaluate his cards for the five or six level decision.

 

I think I've convinced myself I like 4♣ :P

 

The 3rd seat 1N psyche is an old, tired joke now. I'd rather open 1♥ or even 2N :(

[jdonn]

Phil who says the effect of preemption is a linear function? I bet it's a lot closer to exponential...

[Echognome]

Phil who says the effect of preemption is a linear function? I bet it's a lot closer to exponential...

Depending on which way you parameterize your exponential that could mean that either 4♣ captures most of the preemptive value that 5♣ does or quite a bit less than 80%.

[jdonn]

Sorry for being unclear in my random assumption. I mean to say each increased level or preemption probably something-like doubles the preemptive value.

[helene_t]

What does it mean to "double" the preemptive value?

 

Say opps will make the wrong decision 10% of the time if you pass, 20% of the time if you open a natural weak 2♣, 40% of the time if you open 3♣ and 80% of the time if you open 4♣. Surely there is a point of diminishing return somewhere, it's not like they will go wrong 160% of the time if you open 5♣ (ok, maybe they go more badly wrong so it could be counted as 160%, but .... )

[jonottawa]

I'm not in any rush. LHO might have a 10 count. 1♣ for me. 1N if midnights.

[jdonn]

What does it mean to "double" the preemptive value?

It could mean a lot of things. Maybe something like what you suggest but with a much lower starting value. Or maybe a doubling of our imp expectation. Or maybe a measure of how many of LHO brain cells die. :(

[lamford]

There are people that it would be better to walk the dog against, but assuming we have no information on the opponents, 5C is middle of the road. If it goes (5H) - P - (Pass) I think I just float and try to go plus. Partner may have an unexpected two tricks with QJTx in diamonds.