Jump to content

Sanity Check Pls


eagles123

  

39 members have voted

  1. 1. Rate 2S Opening

    • Very Obvious Weak 2
    • I would Open It 2S But It's Close
    • I would NOT Open It 2S But It's Close
    • 2S Would be a poor bid
    • Why on earth are you even thinking about 2S Here


Recommended Posts

Matter of style. You either open weak twos with a four card major, or you don't. I don't think either way is clearly wrong or right, but I expect you will get some strong opinions.

 

If you have an understanding (whether explicit or suspected) with your partner of the moment, stick to it. If not, do as you like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1st seat Green it is not completely off the wall and can obviously be a winner; but there are enough flaws that I would not expect it to be a majority choice and some responses are likely to be considerably stronger. As people keep pointing out, one card difference is never bad, so change the K to 2 or something and it looks a lot better.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To Bill, it is not just that the hand has a 4 card major, it is also the relative strengths of the suits and the overall strength of the hand. All of these aspects indicate away from a 2 opening. KQT954 9432 7 T3 would be a completely different matter entirely.

I understand, I just worry less about such things white on red (or green as you call it). Maybe it is too careless an attitude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two outside Kings is more defence than partner is going to expect (although the stiffness of the K tempers somewhat). The suit quality is at *most* what partner will expect. And there's the "want to play in hearts" issue.

 

All in all, unless I'm forced to open this, I feel it's too misleading to partner. But I'm getting conservative in my old age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw, whether or not this hand is a weak two is completely a matter of style and partnership agreements. The important thing is not which agreement is best but whether or not you adhere to your agreements in the heat of battle. There is no quicker way to ruin partnership trust than to cowboy it up with a unilateral system violation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To Bill, it is not just that the hand has a 4 card major, it is also the relative strengths of the suits and the overall strength of the hand.

Considering QT9xxx too weak a suit for a weak 2 (non-vulnerable at that!) is just ultraconservative. And, uh, what's wrong with the overall strength of the hand? I wouldn't open it 1, so it's not too strong, and it's definitely not too weak either.

 

Oh and uh TylerE, why exactly would a stiff king stop you from opening a weak 2? Does having a stiff king just force you to always pass no matter the rest of your hand or what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh and uh TylerE, why exactly would a stiff king stop you from opening a weak 2? Does having a stiff king just force you to always pass no matter the rest of your hand or what?

Maybe you can tone down your sarcasm a little bit. A stiff king is a very defensive value (my opponents tend not to finesse into it on defense, for one thing), so it's definitely a flaw for opening a preempt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is a long term loser if you have a H fit, and a long term winner if you do not. But i think that (again long term) you stand to lose more if you have a H fit than you stand to gain if you do not. You have to multiply that up by the probability of having a H fit (or not), and the maths is beyond me. But there are some occasions when long term view is irrelevant. Such as approaching the end of an event in which you need a swing. I would open 2S if I feel a need to bid against the room.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering QT9xxx too weak a suit for a weak 2 (non-vulnerable at that!) is just ultraconservative. And, uh, what's wrong with the overall strength of the hand? I wouldn't open it 1, so it's not too strong, and it's definitely not too weak either.

 

The trouble is neither the strength of the suit not the strength of the hand, in isolation. The trouble is that 2 of the 9 HCP are in the trump suit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering QT9xxx too weak a suit for a weak 2 (non-vulnerable at that!) is just ultraconservative. And, uh, what's wrong with the overall strength of the hand? I wouldn't open it 1, so it's not too strong, and it's definitely not too weak either.

 

Oh and uh TylerE, why exactly would a stiff king stop you from opening a weak 2? Does having a stiff king just force you to always pass no matter the rest of your hand or what?

That may well be the first time anyone suggested my preempting style is conservative - I guess I am getting old. You will note that I never suggested this suit was too weak for a weak 2, indeed my modified hand in post #3 (QT9xxx, J93, K, Txx) contains both the given spade suit and the singleton diamond king. The point is that the strong hearts in combination with the good (for a weak 2) hand make game more likely. An old rule was not to open 2M with a limit raise in the other major. That is too conservative for me but might give you a better idea on where I am coming from. In essence, the strength of the hand is problematic in combination with the shape and the relative strengths of the suits. That the singleton king is a defensive feature and therefore an additional flaw is just the icing on the cake.

 

But the real emphasis of my first post (#3) was to let eagles know that opening 2M was not ridiculous for some, since I suspect that was the origin of the OP. And the quoted post (#4) was in answer to Bill because he mentioned 4 card majors as if KJ9x in a maximum weak 2 is similar to xxxx in a minimum weak 2 and it seemed to me advisable within the N/B forum to correct that. And given that this is N/B, it was probably a good idea that you made this post because if you were unsure what was meant then for sure some real beginners might have been confused too. So thank you for giving me the chance to clarify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About stiff kings, yes they are more defensive, but it's not like no declarer ever led toward one from dummy and held the trick. And there's no law that says dummy cannot hold the queen, gaining a pitch. And if dummy is so bad as to have no entry, I expect to do well declaring this deal in 2, white on red. Just saying.

 

Yeah, I guess there are good reasons not to bid this hand. Maybe I play with too many people who would do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...