do you open 1 Spade with this hand?

[bill1157]

♠ A K Q 7 5 4 3

♥ 4

♦ 8

♣ 8 4 3 2

 

you are south favorable vulnerability: East passes. Do you open this hand 1♠?

 

Bill

[Cyberyeti]

♠ A K Q 7 5 4 3

♥ 4

♦ 8

♣ 8 4 3 2

 

you are south favorable vulnerability: East passes. Do you open this hand 1♠?

 

Bill

Favourable, second in, 4♠.

[mck4711]

♠ A K Q 7 5 4 3

♥ 4

♦ 8

♣ 8 4 3 2

 

you are south favorable vulnerability: East passes. Do you open this hand 1♠?

 

I think that you have two options:

1) 4♠, you should have 7 playing tricks, you have one long suit, no (little) defense. perfect description of your hand. a bit disturbing is the 4-card-♣: you might miss a good ♣-contract.

 

Edit: in case you have with your p a clear understanding about this kind of opening (s)he can perfectly well judge any further steps. in case that the bidding goes something like 1♠ - 2♥, 2♠ - 3♦, 3♠ - how do you feel as p with a eg 1543-hand, a lot of guess-work

 

2) a tactical pass: it is very likely that you have another chance to bid.

[jmcw]

Looks like a ♠ pre-empt to me!

 

My choice is between 3 or 4. Either could be right, but I go for 4♠. It might make or it might get the opponents too high.

[daveharty]

Favourable, second in, 4♠.

Agree.

[nige1]

♠ A K Q 7 5 4 3 ♥ 4 ♦ 8 ♣ 8 4 3 2

you are south favorable vulnerability: East passes. Do you open this hand 1♠?

IMO 4♠ = 10, 1♠ = 7, Pass = 5. 1♠ is in the frame because it is just conceivable that you have a slam in clubs opposite say ♠ - ♥ xxx ♦ Axx ♣ AKQxxxx

[Phil]

I think I would open this 4♠ in nearly all seats at all vulnerabilities. Perhaps 2nd r/w I might pull back with 3♠.

 

The hand is all spades and has some shape, so I would not open 1♠.

[gwnn]

4♠ always.

 

With some partners/in some universes 3♠ is alright.

 

However, I would like to note that I will open 1♠ with some hands not unlike this one (but less shape and not so sharp concentration).

[wyman]

4♠ for me as well.

[VM1973]

You didn't mention the scoring.

 

I think you should pass. As you have the master suit, it's hard to imagine how you could get shut out of the bidding. Additionally with solid spades like that, 3NT could be a possibility - rating to outscore 4♠ which is important at MPs. In 3rd seat a preempt would be almost automatic but even then I see no reason to go beyond 3♠.

 

Pass - 10

2♠ - 8 (Especially if playing Ogust)

1♠ - 6

3♠ - 6

4♠ - 2

[Phil]

You didn't mention the scoring.

 

I think you should pass. As you have the master suit, it's hard to imagine how you could get shut out of the bidding. Additionally with solid spades like that, 3NT could be a possibility - rating to outscore 4♠ which is important at MPs. In 3rd seat a preempt would be almost automatic but even then I see no reason to go beyond 3♠.

 

Pass - 10

2♠ - 8 (Especially if playing Ogust)

1♠ - 6

3♠ - 6

4♠ - 2

 

Passing with a hand like this is a fundamental error, and I see so many intermediate players trying this strategy.

 

Getting 'shut out of the bidding' is exactly what you are trying to get your opponents to do, not vice versa.

 

Opening 2♠ demonstrates a lack of hand evaluation.

[VM1973]

Passing with a hand like this is a fundamental error, and I see so many intermediate players trying this strategy.

 

Getting 'shut out of the bidding' is exactly what you are trying to get your opponents to do, not vice versa.

 

Opening 2♠ demonstrates a lack of hand evaluation.

My opponent has already passed accordingly I see no reason for me to take Herculean measures to shut him out of the bidding.

 

Unless LHO is gripping his cards so tightly that I can see how white his knuckles are, I see no point in preempting with a hand that contains 2 defensive tricks.

 

It's just as likely that the person I am shutting out of the bidding is my partner rather than my opponent.

 

Assuming my partner's shape is:

 

♠xx

♥xxxx

♦xxxx

♣xxx

 

and a smattering of points, you're still looking at barely 17 trumps on the deal. You're going to feel really stupid when you're in 4♠ doubled -1 and the one lonely pair that managed to play hearts was in 3♥ -100

 

That doesn't even count the possibility that partner has ♥KJ10x or some other very unattractive holding.

 

If you bid 3♠ and partner has 3-card support, isn't he going to raise you to 4 anyway? Why are you trying to bid your partner's hand for him?

 

If your partner holds:

 

♠xx

♥AKxx

♦Axxx

♣Axx

 

then you have an excellent chance of 3NT+5 = 460 which would be a definite top. Neither a 3♠ nor a 4♠ opening is likely to get you to any strain of NT. Your best matchpoint chance of reaching 3NT is either passing and having your partner open (or overcall 1NT) or to bid 2♠ and respond to Ogust 2NT with 3NT.

[wyman]

If you bid 3♠ and partner has 3-card support, isn't he going to raise you to 4 anyway?

 

No. He's going to pass and say "hey, my LHO is passed, is he really balancing at the 4 level?"

 

This is a hand with no defense (hence 1S is out) and enough offense to want to play 4S. In one bid, I can give an entirely accurate description of my hand to partner. I'll go ahead and do that.

[mikeh]

My opponent has already passed accordingly I see no reason for me to take Herculean measures to shut him out of the bidding.

 

Unless LHO is gripping his cards so tightly that I can see how white his knuckles are, I see no point in preempting with a hand that contains 2 defensive tricks.

 

It's just as likely that the person I am shutting out of the bidding is my partner rather than my opponent.

 

Assuming my partner's shape is:

 

♠xx

♥xxxx

♦xxxx

♣xxx

 

and a smattering of points, you're still looking at barely 17 trumps on the deal. You're going to feel really stupid when you're in 4♠ doubled -1 and the one lonely pair that managed to play hearts was in 3♥ -100

 

That doesn't even count the possibility that partner has ♥KJ10x or some other very unattractive holding.

 

If you bid 3♠ and partner has 3-card support, isn't he going to raise you to 4 anyway? Why are you trying to bid your partner's hand for him?

 

If your partner holds:

 

♠xx

♥AKxx

♦Axxx

♣Axx

 

then you have an excellent chance of 3NT+5 = 460 which would be a definite top. Neither a 3♠ nor a 4♠ opening is likely to get you to any strain of NT. Your best matchpoint chance of reaching 3NT is either passing and having your partner open (or overcall 1NT) or to bid 2♠ and respond to Ogust 2NT with 3NT.

 

 

Trying to place cards is truly a mistake on this kind of hand: I should know.....I have often talked myself out of what I saw as unilateral action, using exactly the type of approach you seem to be using....and if there is one thing I have finally learned, after years of frustration, it is that this is losing bridge.

 

This is a simple 4♠ bid. If you make the call, and end up down 1 when they can make nothing, I assure you that you will not be sitting there, in a decent field, with a lonely zero. If you don't believe me....look at all the votes here for 4♠!!!! Even if you think that 4♠ is wrong, surely you can see that a lot of people are going to make that bid, and so you will hardly be alone.

 

Now, at imps, there is only one other player to worry about...your seatmate on the other team, but as the vote here shows, he or she will usually be opening 4♠ anyway.

 

As for 2♠....colour me singularly unimpressed.....this is not even in the same time zone as any weak 2 bid I've ever seen white v red, even accepting that 2nd seat is the 'soundest' seat for weak two bids.

[Cyberyeti]

Passing with a hand like this is a fundamental error, and I see so many intermediate players trying this strategy.

 

Getting 'shut out of the bidding' is exactly what you are trying to get your opponents to do, not vice versa.

 

Opening 2♠ demonstrates a lack of hand evaluation.

Agreed, if you're going to pass, you need a more extreme hand than this, I passed 2 of the 3 10 card suits I picked up and got to a reasonable spot both times having found out far more about the hand than if I'd bid.

 

Opening 2♠ is beyond stupid.

 

You deserve partner to have a stiff spade and AKxx or KQJx of clubs, and for them to be able to find their fit over 2 or 3 spades, but not over 4. One of 4♥ and 4♠ is likely to make in this case, and you don't want to take the last guess (you're more likely to be doubled if you bid 4♠ in two parts and it's not making and they're less likely to bid 5♥).

[Phil]

(actual text deleted)

 

A few years ago, I criticized another player for passing an obvious preempt for nearly the same reasons as you give. The player had a respectable reputation on the forums, but somewhere in their training, they skipped class when preempts were taught. I called the tactics "typical of a low-level club player" and I got flamed for these remarks. whatever. I now see that I had not gone far enough, because people are still making ridiculous comments like this on the forums.

 

I have no idea where this style of of 'passing first', and then making the decision later comes from, but it is bad bridge, and more importantly, it is terrible partnership bridge. Somewhere, someone got clever and passed 7 solid. They came back in, got doubled and made the contract. Yay!

 

Suddenly, this style becomes standard bridge for a lot of bad players. EVERY time they pick up a hand like this, they PASS and relish the chance to tell another story. Its like the holdem player that flat calls every time with AA because once they slowed played it and crushed, completely ignoring the other times that they let five players see the flop and someone gets their four flush or two pair and hangs around just a little longer.

 

What these players seem to forget, or are just ignorant of are the times they passed and their opponents had an easy go about it. In their Bracket VII match, the other table opened 4♠, and their LHO (our teammate) doubled, their partner has a semi-balanced hand and passed and our opponents made 4♠, while our teammates have 5m, or maybe a cheap save against 4♠.

 

Maybe at our table I passed with seven solid, LHO opened, and they stayed low in their misfit, because they could exchange more information at the one and two level, and let us have it for 2-3♠.

 

Worst of all, at the other table, LHO made a reasonable double of 4♠ on xx, AQxx, Axx, KQxx. Our teammate had a really tough call and chose to take it out to 5♦ on Jxxx, xxx, KJxxx, x. Unlucky!

 

Or, our partner had a spade fit, and a good side suit, but didn't have a clue about what we had when we 'passed and then bid', so couldn't effectively compete to the five or six level.

 

And another time, their LHO opened 1♥, and RHO bid 4♥. we felt obligated to then 'show our hand' and bid 4♠. LHO now gets a free shot and has a lot of information about their partner's hand and either competes to 5♥, doubles 4♠, or, armed with this extra information, makes a slam try and they get to a great spot.

 

I hope you see the point.

 

No bridge action works 100% of the time, or 0% of the time for that matter, but if you gave a hand like this to 100 top players, you would get at least a 90% vote for either 3♠ or 4♠. 1♠ would be an outlier, and so would pass, and 2♠ would receive NO votes. Why do you think this is? Are good players simply not aware of the pass and then bid strategy?

 

Or is it that passing with a hand like this is simply bad bridge?

[wank]

 

 

Assuming my partner's shape is:

 

♠xx

♥xxxx

♦xxxx

♣xxx

 

 

 

♠xx

♥AKxx

♦Axxx

♣Axx

 

 

 

i assume partner has Jx Axxx Axx AKQJ so i just open 7nt on the hand

[semeai]

Assuming my partner's shape is:

 

♠xx

♥xxxx

♦xxxx

♣xxx

 

and a smattering of points, you're still looking at barely 17 trumps on the deal. You're going to feel really stupid when you're in 4♠ doubled -1 and the one lonely pair that managed to play hearts was in 3♥ -100

 

That doesn't even count the possibility that partner has ♥KJ10x or some other very unattractive holding.

 

Ignoring everything else, let me debunk this. When a player holds a long suit, there are more tricks than trumps usually. This is because you make more trump tricks than you seem entitled to given the size of your fit and the way they break. Try some example deals, even with this distribution for partner.

[gwnn]

[the hog]

No I don't open 1S. I open 4S at all vulnerabilities. Passing this hand is a joke.

[bill1157]

My partner opened 3♠ with this hand and I passed with:

♠ 8 2

♥ K 7 5 2

♦ A K Q 10 6

♣ J 5

 

so I guess the next question is: if partner opens 3♠ do you raise to 4 with this hand (same conditions, MP's)?

[wyman]

no

[ahydra]

I open 4S. As for whether to raise 3S to 4 with the 2452 hand, I'm not sure. Depends if partner is known for crazy pre-empts or not - I play a fairly solid style, particularly in 2nd seat, and so would raise hoping for something like 6 spades, 3 diamonds and the HK, without 4 quick losers. At MPs you need to take 50% chances and here the 50% chance is that the HA is onside, I guess.

 

ahydra

[mikeh]

My partner opened 3♠ with this hand and I passed with:

♠ 8 2

♥ K 7 5 2

♦ A K Q 10 6

♣ J 5

 

so I guess the next question is: if partner opens 3♠ do you raise to 4 with this hand (same conditions, MP's)?

No and it isn't close

 

KQJ109xx xx x xxx Is there a bridge player with a pulse who wouldn't open 3♠ at favourable even in 2nd seat?

 

Mps is about plus scores: if I held this hand and one of my partners opened 3♠ at favourable I would be far more concerned that we are going -50 against air than that we have just missed a game.

 

Even at imps, I'd pass...now red v white, 2nd seat, imps...I'd bid...ony because a 40% chance of making makes it a good call

[semeai]

My partner opened 3♠ with this hand and I passed with:

♠ 8 2

♥ K 7 5 2

♦ A K Q 10 6

♣ J 5

 

so I guess the next question is: if partner opens 3♠ do you raise to 4 with this hand (same conditions, MP's)?

 

Not at favorable or equal. At unfavorable, yes. This is all assuming a modern but middle-of-the-road style.