Would you open?

[bd71]

[hv=pc=n&e=s42haq73dq63ck764&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p]133|200[/hv]

 

Matchpoints. Vanilla 2/1.

 

See poll...

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&e=s42haq73dq63ck764&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p]133|200|

 

Matchpoints. Vanilla 2/1. [/hv]

IMO

• Playing 2/1: Pass = 10, 1♣ = 7.
• Playing a natural system with 11-14 notrump: 1N = 10, 1♣ = 6,
• Playing a natural system with strong notrump: 1♥ = 10, 1♣ = 6,

[aguahombre]

In our 2/1 style, we open some really ugly hands which contain a 5-card major. But with a balanced hand which would open 1m, this doesn't quite meet the standard. Instead of rating them numerically, I rate Pass=yes, 1C=no.

[MrAce]

I would open this and yes i would DBL 1♠ as well :P

 

I would consider both decisions to be close. I would not argue anyone who chosed otherwise, as i didn't argue in other topic when DBL of 1♠ was the subject,

[PhilKing]

Pass = 10

1♣ (11-13 or 11-14 NT rebid) = 10

1NT (11-14) = 10

1♥ (Hackett-style) = 10

Anything that floats your boat = 10

 

This is just a matter of system - not marking. We have a somewhat indifferent 11-count, which I would not open. I would need two tens to turn this example into a 1♣ opening in second seat. I would say that anyone who routinely opens this hand 1♣ and describes their 1NT rebid as 12-14 has serious issues.

 

Are there circumstances where I would open it? Sure. Against a very weak pair at matchpoints I would award myself two imaginary tens.

[wyman]

A good discussion to have with partner pre-session: "Do we open most 11-counts?" / "Do we open flat 11-counts?"

 

I tend to like to open these, but that's a style thing. You have to adjust for this when you're GF-ing or making marginal decisions in invitational auctions. Sometimes we get to some bad games and are only accompanied by pairs that don't understand that it's MPs not IMPs. Sometimes we steal the hand and play undoubled with a combined ~16 HCP for a cold top.

 

"It's a style thing" only works if you actually incorporate the style into your decision-making after the opening bid. If you think that you'll make good decisions when opps are silent and that you'll make better decisions in competitive auctions than your opponents, it probably behooves you to open the bidding as frequently as possible.

[hrothgar]

[hv=pc=n&e=s42haq73dq63ck764&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p]133|200[/hv]

 

Matchpoints. Vanilla 2/1.

 

See poll...

 

Playing 2/1 I would pass this in first / second and open in third / fourth.

I am no too far away from opening in 1st/2nd.

[Free]

Damn, didn't see the 2/1 constraint and voted when playing Precision... :rolleyes: In 2/1 context I'm very conservative and I'd never open this hand.

[ggwhiz]

I've never understood how you can play 2/1 and open hands like this where you so often need a hand worth at least 14 opposite to make game.

 

Many do but I have no idea how they survive. Do flat 13's proceed with caution? Do you get consistently bad defense? I'm really curious.

[wyman]

Do flat 13's proceed with caution? Do you get consistently bad defense? I'm really curious.

 

Sometimes 24 is enough to make 3N double dummy. Sometimes the defense blows a trick on opening lead. Sometimes the defense makes a hero play thinking it's more likely that declarer has 13 than 11. Sometimes opponents take a dive over your 4M. Sometimes...

 

And keep in mind that a lot of deals are partials as well, and there are a lot of ways to win by being in the auction first.

[aguahombre]

I've never understood how you can play 2/1 and open hands like this where you so often need a hand worth at least 14 opposite to make game.

 

Do flat 13's proceed with caution? Do you get consistently bad defense? I'm really curious.

This "modern paradox" was addressed by a Canadian reporter last year in the ACBL Bulletin article on the Canadian Nationals. Very few posters seem to be concerned about it when they force to game or invite game with the same values which were used to do so some 60 years ago.

[MrAce]

I've never understood how you can play 2/1 and open hands like this where you so often need a hand worth at least 14 opposite to make game.

 

The relevance of 2/1 system and opening this hand or not escapes me. Can you please explain ? I mean... which response to 1♣ in 2/1 or which auction in 2/1 makes opening light more dangerous/undesired than the one in sayc or acol ?

 

Yeah i need about 13-14 hcps to make game when i hold 11 hcp, regardless of which system i play

 

Unless of course if you meant " if one is playing 2/1 system, his card play is weaker than those who doesn't.:P

[PhilKing]

Either BBO posters all like to open on dreck, or nobody likes to admit to being a conservative opener.

[mikeh]

Either BBO posters all like to open on dreck, or nobody likes to admit to being a conservative opener.

I don't see anything about this hand that justifies calling a passer (of whom I am one in a strong 1N context) as being a conservative opener! I'd see opening this hand with 1m as 'aggressive' and passing as middle of the road.

 

Having said that, I like weak 1N openings. It's clearly a non-awful 11-13/11-14 1N, and close to a 12-14 because it has 3 controls and no jacks and is 4432 not 4333. However, I wouldn't upgrade because the shortness is in spades, rather than a minor, and I have no 10's.

[ggwhiz]

which response to 1♣ in 2/1 or which auction in 2/1 makes opening light more dangerous

 

In this context 1♣ - 1♠ - 1nt - to a flat 13 count, now what? Not really 2/1 specific but on the forums I see the same flat (ish) 11 counts open 1♠ - p - to the same flat 13 counts with the same now what?

[Zelandakh]

The hand looks like an obvious pass given that the system is "Vanilla 2/1". Playing a 14-16 NT would make opening more appealing, as would many other system alterations. With reference to your poll question, it is possible to be in the most aggressive quartile for unbalanced hands and the most conservative quartile for balanced hands.

 

@Phil, you are abolsutely right, both about system and about posters. In general, BBF posters open significantly more aggressively than average.

 

@Timo, The reason why opening this hand in Vanilla 2/1 is less appealing is that the 1NT rebid becomes uncomfortably stretched. If the 1NT rebid range is 11-13, this is better. Similarly, playing Transfer Walsh gives a little more security. There is not really a great deal of difference from SAYC.

[fromageGB]

I need a bit more. I may open 1♣ (twalsh) if I had both majors, but otherwise a poor 11 does not qualify. You have to draw the line somewhere for partnership understanding and decision.

[JLOGIC]

If my agreements stipulated that I opened many balanced 11s, I would open. I think this is a very good style to have NV esp at MP but also at imps even if your NT range is 15-17.

 

If I had no agreements about opening bid style which is hard to believe since that would never happen I would probably still open since that is how much I believe it is a winning action to do so, even if I am half a point lighter than partner will expect. I would then discuss it after this hand.

 

If I had agreed to sound openers or my partner was not comfortable/did not like this I would pass obv. I wouldn't open this hand vul unless specifically agreed that that is our style (and I think it's probably not a winning style to open this 2nd seat vul in 2/1 with 15-17 NT). But really the main thing is to agree on what kind of opening bid style you play and are comfortable/happy with, and that should be one of the first things you discuss (as well as overcalling style and preempting style).

[Phil]

I do not like to open these hands in 2nd seat. At least in a club game.

 

1. I am short in spades. Opening makes it easier for them to find spades, not harder.

2. I have no spots.

3. I expect most people to pass this hand, and I don't want to take an anti-field action at my first opportunity.

4. If you open this range, your 1m - 1M - 1N is essentially 11-14, which is too wide a range. Switch to a 14-16 NT, and I don;t mind as much, but there's that anti-field thing again.

5. If you open this range, you need to adjust your 2/1's a little upward. Not a huge deal, but it puts added pressure on your 1x - 1N responses.

6. I don't particularly want a diamond lead.

 

If I do open, 1♥ has a lot of appeal. I want the lead, I can rebid 1N over 1♠ and won't get hung, and I can pass a SF NT in comfort.

[aguahombre]

 

4. If you open this range, your 1m - 1M - 1N is essentially 11-14, which is too wide a range. Switch to a 14-16 NT, and I don;t mind as much, but there's that anti-field thing again.

Similarly, Having one's opening weak NT as 11-14 seems like too wide a range...even worse, IMO, because they haven't introduced the Diamond suit or offerred up the ability to play at 2M in the 4-4 fit ---more likely to be good things when opener has less than 15 HCP.