Opening Bid

[Cyberyeti]

The other thing to consider when opening a weak NT is your runout method when doubled (add a card and I don't mind so much opening a strong NT). If you play one of the methods where partner bids say 2♥ as 4+ in each major as has happened to me, this can be horrible.

[the hog]

An Acol player would never do this.

 

This is not correct. When I first played, many years ago with a very good county player, this was common, as was opening 1S on some

45xx hands, so that you could rebid 2H.

[Vampyr]

This is not correct. When I first played, many years ago with a very good county player, this was common, as was opening 1S on some

45xx hands, so that you could rebid 2H.

 

Oh, I didn't know that. But it seems to me that the practice has died out.

[the hog]

Oh, I didn't know that. But it seems to me that the practice has died out.

 

Yes, my Majors example has certainly died out. Not so sure about the 4D/5C though. I think good players look at the quality of the C suit and see whether it is worthwhile rebidding.

eg

x

AKx

AQxx

xxxxx

Open 1D

x

AKx

xxxx

AQxxx

Open 1C

[Vampyr]

Yes, my Majors example has certainly died out. Not so sure about the 4D/5C though. I think good players look at the quality of the C suit and see whether it is worthwhile rebidding.

 

Yes, in your first example it is reasonable to treat the clubs as a 4-card suit. I feel that I myself must have been in this position before, but I can't remember ever opening 1♦ with this sort of hand.

 

If it is done routinely with this shape, in what jurisdictions does the 1♦ opening require an alert? I am pretty sure it does in the EBU.

[Zelandakh]

I think the 4♠5♥ 1♠ opening died out before I was born. But 1♥ on 4♥5♦ persisted for quite a while (into the 80s even) despite many writers discouraging the practise. It led to many 4-2 heart fits. I think opening a weak (13)45 hand containing very bad clubs with 1♦ is not so unheard of amongst better players but is still not the norm with the rank-and-file. I am also fairly certain that systemically opening 1♦ with (13)45 did not require an alert when I was last playing in EBUland. An obvious example is real diamond Precision. A quick perusal of the Blue Book (pp 11, 14) seems to reinforce that that is still the case.

[campboy]

I think the 4♠5♥ 1♠ opening died out before I was born. But 1♥ on 4♥5♦ persisted for quite a while (into the 80s even) despite many writers discouraging the practise. It led to many 4-2 heart fits. I think opening a weak (13)45 hand containing very bad clubs with 1♦ is not so unheard of amongst better players but is still not the norm with the rank-and-file. I am also fairly certain that systemically opening 1♦ with (13)45 did not require an alert when I was last playing in EBUland. An obvious example is real diamond Precision. A quick perusal of the Blue Book (pp 11, 14) seems to reinforce that that is still the case.

My reading is that it is alertable, by 4H2b: "Because they have a potentially unexpected meaning, players must alert: [...] The first bid in a potential canapé sequence".

[fromageGB]

I go with Zel on this. I open 1♦ on this hand and do not alert, nor has anyone objected. 1♦ guaranteeing 3 cards is natural (3E1) and natural openings are not alerted (4B1) and (4C1A).

 

Campboy's 4H2b refers to canape which does not apply as you do not necessarily intend to rebid clubs, and if you had a different hand with say diamonds and spades, 1♦ 1♥ 1♠ is not canape. Even if you did choose to rebid 2♣ partner will not expect clubs to be longer. So 1♦ followed by 2♣ is not canape.

[fromageGB]

Hijack interruption - what's the easy way of getting an e acute into this reply box when you do not have one on your keyboard?

[helene_t]

OB 5 G 2 (2) states as alertable "The rebid if in a suit that may be shorter than the first suit, following a

possible canapé opening."

 

Looks a bid weird, maybe "shorter" should read "longer". In any case the 2♣ rebid should probably be alerted if it is frequently based on 4♦5♣.

[Zelandakh]

Hijack interruption - what's the easy way of getting an e acute into this reply box when you do not have one on your keyboard?

Make sure your NumLock is on. Then hold down the Alt key and type 130 on the NumPad. Let go of the Alt key and you should see é. Similarly for Alt-144 if you want a capital É.

[fromageGB]

I can't find any equivalent of the OB clause in the blue book that replaced it. The closest thing may be 4B1b's "has a potentially unexpected meaning". But 2♣ has no unexpected meaning. It doesn't indicate canapé (sorry, Zel, ubuntu must be different, I have to copy from libreoffice, but thanks) either, because the sequence is much more likely to be xx54 or xx55 or xx64.

 

Maybe this is equivalent to a minor distortion caused by judgement, upgrading or downgrading, and as such is not alerted as no hidden information is conveyed.

[campboy]

Campboy's 4H2b refers to canape which does not apply as you do not necessarily intend to rebid clubs, and if you had a different hand with say diamonds and spades, 1♦ 1♥ 1♠ is not canape. Even if you did choose to rebid 2♣ partner will not expect clubs to be longer. So 1♦ followed by 2♣ is not canape.

The first sentence is irrelevant -- the regulation says "potential canapé sequence" so it doesn't matter that other potential sequences are not canapé. I can see that the alertability may depend on whether you have a rebid which shows longer clubs, though. Whenever I've agreed to open 1♦ on xx45 it's been with an unbalanced diamond, so that 1♦ - 1M - 2♣ was definitely canapé and 1♦ - 1M - 1NT showed both minors with diamonds longer or equal.

[Zelandakh]

The first sentence is irrelevant -- the regulation says "potential canapé sequence" so it doesn't matter that other potential sequences are not canapé. I can see that the alertability may depend on whether you have a rebid which shows longer clubs, though. Whenever I've agreed to open 1♦ on xx45 it's been with an unbalanced diamond, so that 1♦ - 1M - 2♣ was definitely canapé and 1♦ - 1M - 1NT showed both minors with diamonds longer or equal.

Out of interest, why do you do it this way round rather than 1NT = ♣ >= ♦; and 2♣ = ♦ > ♣? I thought that 2♣ showing longer clubs was usually only used for limited openings. But in these cases, my guess is that the 1NT/2♣ rebid should be alerted rather than the 1♦ opening.

 

Oh, and it does not surprise me that it could be different in a Unix-based OS. A quick search threw up this link, which gives 3 possibilities. Also, I saw a post that said the Alt codes worked for someone but they had to use the right Alt key and not the left. So try that too.

[campboy]

Out of interest, why do you do it this way round rather than 1NT = ♣ >= ♦; and 2♣ = ♦ > ♣? I thought that 2♣ showing longer clubs was usually only used for limited openings. But in these cases, my guess is that the 1NT/2♣ rebid should be alerted rather than the 1♦ opening.

Yes, you're right, I was misremembering.

[fromageGB]

Oh, and it does not surprise me that it could be different in a Unix-based OS. A quick search threw up this link, which gives 3 possibilities.

That's it; I hadn't actually looked! Control-shift-u then e9 and enter.