2H opener as 44 in majors: developments ?

[Chamaco]

Hi all,

i the version of Precision I am currently playing, we use

- 1D = 13-15/11-13 bal OR max 15 with 4+ D;

- 1NT = 10-12/14-16

- 2C = 6+ clubs OR 5c+4cM

- 2D =Multi

- 2H = 4441/5440/5431 short in diamond, no 5 card Major

 

Recently my pard has suggested that he feels a bit insecure when responding to 2H as 3-suiter: when he wishes to signoff, he always feels doubt when deciding to signoff in 2 of a Major, especialli if it's a 3 card suit, since he is afraid of being in a 3-3 fit.

 

E.g. 2H-?

Responder holding

Jxx-Qxx-KJxxx-Qx

has to guess whether opener has 5 clubs for a 5-2 fit or which opener's major has 4 cards.

 

For these reasons, he has suggested he'd feel much more comfortable opening all 5431 hands with 5 clubs with our 2C opener (which allows for 5c+4M).

Then, we could open 2H with all hands with 44M (including 4432), 11-15.

 

If so, I'd like to hear from you:

 

a. which followup you recommend ?

a possible one could be that all bids except 2NT are to play;

2NT = positive relay asking for singleton.

 

b. Including ALL 44M hands improves the ambiguity for 5431 hans, but adds to the opening 4441 with singleton club; in this case, pard holdoing long clubs may not dare to offer a signoff to 3C fearing a misfit.

Do you recommend including all 4441 and 4432 hands in 2H or excluding hands with short clubs and opening them 1D (whose balanced range is 13-15/11-13 according to seat+vuln)?

 

 

Thanks !

[whereagles]

There are many views on the subject of what should one open with a 4315/3415. Some open 2C, others 2D/H (whichever is the 3-suiter), others 1D... etc.

 

I myself prefer opening 1D. That is the bid that makes it easier to find the 44 major fit. If you like supporting a major on 3 cards like Ben does, the auction gets REALLY simple:

 

1D 1M

2M <--- could be 4, could be 3. But it's always a playable contract due to the diamond singleton.

 

If you don't like supporting on 3 cards, well, rebid 1NT and all is well.

[mr1303]

On the first topic:

 

Personally, the 2H opener (which I also play) comes up so infrequently it really isn't worth worrying about too much, but with the given hand I'd pass 2H quickly. After all, isn't this the reason that we use 2H as the 3 suited hand (as opposed to 2D, which was the standard precision opening for these hands)?

 

Apart from this, the opponents are there as well. 1) They are unlikely to find a penalty double here, and 2) They may well balance in with 3D (which happens a lot more frequently than would be expected).

 

I would be wary of opening 4315 hands with 2C, as this makes it harder to find the correct fit if partner has invitational values, as he usually has to choose one, as to make two bids would be GF. And especially not with 4405 hands.

[Chamaco]

Personally, the 2H opener (which I also play) comes up so infrequently it really isn't worth worrying about too much,

This is true.

 

But the decision to open 2H with all 44M hands, including 4432 would have at least these bonuses:

1. increase A LOT the frequency of the opening.

2. clean the nebulous diamond opening from some hand types

3. allow weak NT opener hands with 44M to find a major fit even when responder is not strong enough to respond.

 

On the minus side:

1. we have to open 2C more frequently on 5c4M hands, and

2. when we open 2H, weak responder with no tolerance for majors ignores our holding in minors so he is less well placed to give a preference

 

So, IMO, the question revolves around these issues: what is your cost-benefit analysis ?

[pbleighton]

"So there will be a bonus from this side, and a big benefit at MP for weak NT opener hands with 44M where responder is not strong enough to respond.

 

On the minus side:

1. we have to open 2C more frequently on 5c4M hands, and

2. when we open 2H, weak responder with no tolerance for majors ignores our holding in minors so he is less well placed to give a preference

 

So, IMO, the question revolves around these issues: what is your cost-benefit analysis ?"

 

Mine is that I don't like the Precision 2C opener. Your change would make it more frequent, more likely to have 5 cards, and therefore worse.

 

I play:

1C - 15+, any shape

1D - 10-14, 0+ diamonds, unbalanced, either

1) any 4441, or

2) minor 2 suiter, or

3) 4 of a major and 5+ of a minor

1M - 9-14, 5+ cards

1NT - 11-14

2m - 6+ cards, no 4cM

2M - 3-9, 5+ cards (vul is better)

2NT - 8-12, 5-5 or better in the minors

 

The 1D opener in uncontested auctions is good, the

non-fit rebids after 1D-1M clarify the shape quite

nicely.

 

The 2m openings are great.

 

If you think this is too light, you could move the ranges up a point, and play a 16 point strong club with the limited openings being 11(10)-15 and NT being 12-15. And 5 card weak 2s are optional, you can play 2H as 4-4 in the majors if you like - I would but I can't because of the ACBL :)

 

Peter

[tysen2k]

Then, we could open 2H with all hands with 44M (including 4432), 11-15.

Don't open the 4432 hands with 2♥. A lot of the time the right final contract is going to be 1NT. Oops.

 

Keep your definition the way it was and pass as responder on those 3352 hands.

 

Tysen

[awm]

I generated some random hands, enough so that the 4-4 majors 2H opening came up 10000 times. Here's what I found:

 

Total hands generated: 325379

Frequency of 2H open: 0.030733

Hands with 10+ card major fit: 669

Hands with 9 card major fit:2005

Hands with 8 card major fit:3699

Hands with 7 card major fit:2865

Hands with 6 card major fit:728

Hands with 5 card major fit:34

Hands with 4 card major fit:0

Fit Relay Invite Signoff Total

10 353 316 0 669

9 687 558 760 2005

8 928 928 1843 3699

7 519 649 1697 2865

6 123 187 418 728

5 7 5 22 34

4 0 0 0 0

 

Allowing any 4-4 major hand makes the bid about 10 times more frequent than opening just on 4414 or 4405 shape. So those 44(32)s are a LOT more common!

 

The strength ranges I used here are:

 

For 10+ card fit, I assumed that weakish hands just bid game. So "relay" is 10+ hcp and invite is the rest.

 

For 9-card fit, relay=12+ hcp, invite=9-11

For 8-card fit, relay=13+ hcp, invite=10-12

For 7 (or less) fit, relay=14+ hcp, invite=11-13

 

Making the 2H opening "more frequent" isn't really a win by itself; these are hands you'd open anyway. The question is whether you're reaching better or worse contracts. There is some preemptive effect (i.e. the opponents may judge wrong as to whether to compete) but this tends to be hard to quantify. In terms of just finding a good resting place, you will win when there is an 8-card fit with a non-invitational hand (i.e. a fit that a 1NT opening would've lost). This is 1843 hands from the sample, but only about 80% of them were balanced (1474).

 

On the other hand, you will tend to lose by opening 2H when there is no 7-card or longer major fit and partner has less than game values, because it will be difficult (if not impossible) to scramble to a playable minor fit. Also, hands with 3-card support and invitational values will be hard to bid (since you're using 2NT as a relay). This gives 1285 hands from the sample where you're losing.

 

In addition, there are 1697 hands where you will play a 4-3 major fit partial, which may occasionally be superior to 1NT (but will often not be). I'd tend to assume more of these are losses than wins.

 

Finally, you have to consider just how bad the losses are. Playing a 6-card major fit is going to be bad; it will normally be a substantial imp loss (going down instead of making) or a near-bottom at matchpoints. Playing 1NT with a 4-4 major fit will rarely be costly at imps, and occasionally gets you a good board at matchpoints to compensate for the frequent bad ones.

 

Seems to me that this treatment is a loss. It becomes slightly better though, if you treat 2NT as a balanced invitation (some 841 of the "lose" hands become normal results). Perhaps 3c could be the relay?

 

-- Adam

[Chamaco]

Adam, ty a lot !

 

I have a few other comments/questions on this topic.

 

Making the 2H opening "more frequent" isn't really a win by itself; these are hands you'd open anyway. The question is whether you're reaching better or worse contracts.

 

How much would things improve by opening 2H 4432 with DIAMOND doubleton only ?

 

- Guaranteeing 3+ clubs would help responder when deciding to scramble in a minor.

 

- Furthermore, this would "clean up" the nebulous 1D opener, which would then guarante 3+ diamonds, useful for partscore contested bidding

 

- on the minus side, there is still the need to open 2C when holding 5431 hands

IMO this is not bad when clubs are good, whereas it IS bad indeed when clubs are weak. I just wonder the frequency of this occurrence (5431 short in D with bad clubs).

[awm]

Seems there was a slight mistake in my hand generation from before. Here's the corrected information with the additional details you wanted.

 

Frequency of 2H open: 0.017924

Frequency of (43)15: 0.010808

Hands with 10+ card major fit: 458

Hands with 9 card major fit:1784

Hands with 8 card major fit:3821

Hands with 7 card major fit:3100

Hands with 6 card major fit:794

Hands with 5 card major fit:43

Hands with 4 card major fit:0

Fit Relay Invite Signoff Total

10 197 261 0 458

9 474 509 801 1784

8 743 922 2156 3821

7 419 669 2012 3100

6 93 191 510 794

5 9 10 24 43

4 0 0 0 0

 

Now winning on 2156 hands, but only about 2/3 of these are balanced (the rest are one of 4414, 4405, 4441, or 4450). So about 1438 winning hands.

 

Losing on 534 signoff hands (no 3+ card fit) and 870 invite hands (no 4+ card fit) for 1404 hands.

 

If we change 2NT to invite, the invitational hands with no fit become normal results, so losing on only 534 signoff hands.

 

If we restrict the 2H opening to just hands with 0-2 diamonds:

 

Total hands generated: 1127198

Frequency of 2H open: 0.008872

Frequency of (43)15: 0.010691

Hands with 10+ card major fit: 421

Hands with 9 card major fit:1764

Hands with 8 card major fit:3829

Hands with 7 card major fit:3140

Hands with 6 card major fit:798

Hands with 5 card major fit:48

Hands with 4 card major fit:0

Fit Relay Invite Signoff Total

10 177 244 0 421

9 446 511 807 1764

8 748 955 2126 3829

7 380 686 2074 3140

6 102 172 524 798

5 9 9 30 48

4 0 0 0 0

Club fit found for 148 invite and 492 signoff hands with 7-major fit

Club fit found for 81 invite and 250 signoff hands with 6-major fit

Club fit found for 7 invite and 25 signoff hands with 5-major fit

 

Now winning on 2126 hands, of which about 2/3 are balanced (so 1409 or so wins).

 

The weak hands with club fit are now also potential wins; there are some 767 of these.

 

The losses are weak hands with no fit, of which there are 554 - 275 = 279 clear losers.

 

Again the invites with no 4+ fit are losses unless 2NT is treated as invitational.

 

-------------

 

So my conclusions would be that 2H showing 4414 or 4405 or 4423 is probably the best choice, along with 2NT response as invitational without a major suit fit. The (43)15 shape is in fact quite common, but as you observed before, it's not necessarily possible to scramble to the best fit after a 2H opening with such a hand.

 

-- Adam

[hrothgar]

I think that broadening the definition of your 2♥ opening to include balanced/semi-balanced hands with 4-4 in the majors would (probably) work quite poorly. I have a lot of experience playing assumed fit preemptive methods. For example, my prefered 2♥ opening promises 4+♥ and either (4+♠ or 5+♣)

 

From my perspective, this method is workable because because it denies sufficient strength for a constructive opening bid... Since opener has a very weak hand, responder will rarely have sufficient strength to investigate slam. This allows us to optimize the response structure for signoffs and game explorations...

 

With this said and done, a precision style constructive opening is MUCH stronger than a MOSCITO preempt. As a result, your response structure will, necessarily need to be much more complex. It might not even be possible to design an adequate response structure...

[Chamaco]

I think that broadening the definition of your 2♥ opening to include balanced/semi-balanced hands with 4-4 in the majors would (probably) work quite poorly.

 

.......

 

With this said and done, a precision style constructive opening is MUCH stronger than a MOSCITO preempt. As a result, your response structure will, necessarily need to be much more complex. It might not even be possible to design an adequate response structure...

Ty Richard and all the other folks who contributed.

 

I'll discuss these points with my pard and teammates, hopefully to agree keeping the "standard" 2H 3-suiter short in ♦ :)