Checking that I'm not the crazy one

[PhilKing]

Well you better get a straight jacket for everybody who suggested a 2H rebid as well on the suggested 2425 shape. There are some decent players amongst that lot.

 

The jacket was for opening a weak no trump. The 2♥ raise is more easily cured with a bit of shock treatment.

[the hog]

The jacket was for opening a weak no trump. The 2♥ raise is more easily cured with a bit of shock treatment.

 

So after a 1C opening and a 1S response you would reverse to 2H on this hand? That is gross! If this is your choice, don't even bother responding as that choice is absurd. Or perhaps you would rebid the Cs - acceptable, but not ideal by a long way; or maybe you would rebid 1NT showing 12-14? Which is it?

 

By the way, Phil, seeing that you like Cherry picking hands, how about

QJxx

xxxx

QJ

Jxx

2S, 1H, 2Ds and a likely C to lose. Even 2H does not make. "Sorry pd, I should not have bid 1H."

Give opener the K of S instead and 3 doesn't make. "Sorry pd, I should not have bid 1H."

[PhilKing]

Duplicate.

[PhilKing]

So after a 1C opening and a 1S response you would reverse to 2H on this hand? That is gross! If this is your choice, don't even bother responding as that choice is absurd. Or perhaps you would rebid the Cs - acceptable, but not ideal by a long way; or maybe you would rebid 1NT showing 12-14? Which is it?

 

By the way, Phil, seeing that you like Cherry picking hands, how about

QJxx

xxxx

QJ

Jxx

2S, 1H, 2Ds and a likely C to lose. Even 2H does not make. "Sorry pd, I should not have bid 1H."

Give opener the K of S instead and 3 doesn't make. "Sorry pd, I should not have bid 1H."

 

Now, now - nobody would reverse holding a weak no trump. That would be crazy!

 

When one opens 1♣, it does not always go pass-1♠-pass. If it did, I would rebid 2♣, but a (strong) 1NT rebid would be fine on strength. Having eschewed a weak no trump, I can hardly rebid 1NT 12-14, can I? Anyway, if you can any remotely competent player here who agrees with opening a weak no trump I will cancel your treatment.

 

On the hand you give, you have made a fine stop indeed. When partner has an effective one count it pays to underbid. And you probably escape for two down in your beloved 1NT ....

[akwoo]

I have to say that the hog is at least partially right here.

 

Back when I last played a 12-14 1nt in a regular partnership, we agreed to systemically open 2425 hands in range with 1nt. (In fact, our 12-14 1nt specifically allowed any 5422 hand with 5 in a minor; in practice this was unusual with a 4 card spade suit and usual otherwise.)

 

(To answer the question about K-S inspired raises. The raise to 2♥ showed anywhere from an unbalanced 11 to a bad balanced 16. Keep in mind that 1♥ is usually bid over 1♣ with nothing but ♥Kxxx and a doubleton.)

 

That said, I probably wouldn't have opened 1nt with AK in both my long suits.

[the hog]

Codo: "I am a crazy man too"

I guess the comments above are a mild insult to Roland as well.

 

I am curious:

x

AKxx

xxx

AKxxx

 

I would certainly bid 3H on this. (Or mini splinter 2S if that was available). Would the naysayers bid 4H on this, or do you think this hand has the same value as

xx AKxx xx AKxxx ? It doesn't for me.

[PhilKing]

I am curious:

x

AKxx

xxx

AKxxx

 

I would certainly bid 3H on this. (Or mini splinter 2S if that was available). Would the naysayers bid 4H on this, or do you think this hand has the same value as

xx AKxx xx AKxxx ? It doesn't for me.

 

My guess is that you are not curious, but you may be unique in adding gazillions for holding a shortage, but nowt for the other features. The naysayers would not think of such a method, so I doubt they would bid 4♥.

 

You could consider adjusting for holding two good suits, but the odds say no. As for the difference between x xxx and xx xx, it may not be as much as you think and could even be a trick weaker (such as when partner holds KQx xxx in your relevant suits - a frequent scenario whe no one has dredged up a spade overcall). On average, it is a bit stronger, I would guess, but not hugely so unless we are slamming. But surely the actual hand is about a trick and a half stronger than a rock minimum though, so 2♥ is just crazy ...

[lycier]

♠A ♥JT9xxx ♦Ax ♣Txxx

 

IMPs. I don't know what the vulnerability is.

 

1♣ - (p) - 1♥ - (p)

2♥ - (x) - ?

I ignore opp's double in this case, I will bid 2♠ so as to let partner to describe the features of his hand in further,and tell me what his help suits are. my goal is to check ♣ suit controls and the quality of ♥ trump so as to determine 4♥ or slam try in safe.

[the hog]

My guess is that you are not curious, but you may be unique in adding gazillions for holding a shortage, but nowt for the other features. The naysayers would not think of such a method, so I doubt they would bid 4♥.

 

You could consider adjusting for holding two good suits, but the odds say no. As for the difference between x xxx and xx xx, it may not be as much as you think and could even be a trick weaker (such as when partner holds KQx xxx in your relevant suits - a frequent scenario whe no one has dredged up a spade overcall). On average, it is a bit stronger, I would guess, but not hugely so unless we are slamming. But surely the actual hand is about a trick and a half stronger than a rock minimum though, so 2♥ is just crazy ...

 

You are correct - it was a rhetorical question. However treating a 5431 and a 5422 as the same strength IS crazy in my opinion. There is something fundementally wrong with your hand evaluation if you believe that the same bid is capable of describing both hands.

[Nabooba]

I totally agree with Hog's evaluation here. This is a 2 heart bid in my book. The hand with a singleton would be worth 3 hearts.

[MrAce]

Deleted

[Zelandakh]

Back when I last played a 12-14 1nt in a regular partnership, we agreed to systemically open 2425 hands in range with 1nt. (In fact, our 12-14 1nt specifically allowed any 5422 hand with 5 in a minor; in practice this was unusual with a 4 card spade suit and usual otherwise.)

As far as I can tell, noone is suggesting that opening 1NT with a 2425 hand is a problem per se. Rather it is whether xx/AKxx/xx/AKxxx falls into the 12-14 range. It is a separate question again whether you actually want to treat such a hand as balanced or as 1.5 suited.

 

Also, I do not think anyone is suggesting that 2 doubletons are as good as a singleton once a fit has been found. It is possible for 2 hands not to have exactly the same evaluation and yet still to qualify for the same bid. For example, I assume both xx/KJxx/Ax/KTxxx and x/KJxx/Axx/KTxxx would be 2♥ raises for (almost) everyone? Similarly, if you judge xx/AKxx/xx/AKxxx to be a minimum 3♥ raise, then I do not see any problem with x/AKxx/xxx/AKxxx being a (better) 3♥ bid. The question is merely where you draw the line. I would be happy bidding 3♥ on both (but I do come from Acol-land and play a weak NT, if that makes a difference). If I had a problem with the range of the 3♥ raise then I would probably try to use the 3♦ rebid to cover some of these hands.

[helene_t]

So after a 1C opening and a 1S response you would reverse to 2H on this hand?

90% of club players here in Northern England would open 1♣ and rebid 2♣ with that hand. It has merits. After all, 3NT is probably best played by partner.

[Nabooba]

Did not one poster post this: "As for the difference between x xxx and xx xx, it may not be as much as you think and could even be a trick weaker"?

[PhilKing]

Did not one poster post this: "As for the difference between x xxx and xx xx, it may not be as much as you think and could even be a trick weaker"?

 

Could.

 

If partner has KQx QJxx xxxx xx, we have reasonable play for for hearts, yet when partner has x AKxx xxx AKxxx we have four top losers. On average the hand with the singleton is stronger (as I stated in the same paragraph), but it ain't necessarily so. Maybe you simply misunderstood, but the partial quotation does you no credit.

 

♠xx ♥AKxx ♦xx ♣AKxxx is a 3♥ bid because we usually have a decent play for game opposite a mundane 8 or 9 count that will pass 2♥. Try this hand with less, including a wasted queen:

 

♠Axx ♥Jxxxx ♦Qxx ♣xx

 

Hardly, cherry-picking. By the way, where can I get your book?

[Trinidad]

Would the naysayers bid 4H on [x AKxx xxx AKxxx], or do you think this hand has the same value as

xx AKxx xx AKxxx ? It doesn't for me.

No, I would bid 3♥ on both and no, I do not think they have the same value.

 

Surprise: I would open a strong NT on 15HCP and on 17HCP, despite the fact that 17>15.

 

Hands do not have the same value, just because I use the same bid for them. There is such a thing as "range".

 

Rik

[MrAce]

No, I would bid 3♥ on both and no, I do not think they have the same value.

 

Surprise: I would open a strong NT on 15HCP and on 17HCP, despite the fact that 17>15.

 

Hands do not have the same value, just because I use the same bid for them. There is such a thing as "range".

 

Rik

 

 

Exactly, imo xx AKxx AKxxx xx or xx AKxx xx AKxxx looks like lower range of a 3♥ bid much more than higher end of a 2♥ bid.

 

Let me put it this way, we could have a different debate (and of course choices) if the hand was xx AQxx Jx AQJxx and this is still the high end of 2♥ range despite the Jx ♦ imo, still way too weak compared to the hand we are discussing.

 

Untill we are allowed by bridge laws to bid 1/2 bids (2.5 ♥), i am afraid this debate between absolute hcp followers and others will continue forever.