Are these opening bids?

[VixTD]

I had to make a decision whether to open these two similar hands as dealer in pairs games this week. I have a strategy that covers this situation, but since it led me to poor results on both boards I'm wondering whether to revise it.

 

Both times I was playing Acol, 12-14 NT, four-card majors. In the first I was vulnerable against not, in the second both sides were vulnerable.

 

[hv=pc=n&e=s7ha862d9643cak72]133|100[/hv] [hv=pc=n&e=s53hak93d9432ca73]133|100[/hv]

Would you open these hands, and why?

[helene_t]

The first one has a quite terrible rebid problem, so no.

 

The second one I don't think so strongly about. I would pass, though.

[hrothgar]

I had to make a decision whether to open these two similar hands as dealer in pairs games this week. I have a strategy that covers this situation, but since it led me to poor results on both boards I'm wondering whether to revise it.

 

Both times I was playing Acol, 12-14 NT, four-card majors. In the first I was vulnerable against not, in the second both sides were vulnerable.

 

[hv=pc=n&e=s7ha862d9643cak72]133|100[/hv] [hv=pc=n&e=s53hak93d9432ca73]133|100[/hv]

Would you open these hands, and why?

 

Two bullets and a King strongly suggest opening.

 

These are shapes where I would normally open 1♦.

I think that I'll open 1♣ in each case (though I am torn between 1C and 1D on the second)

[billw55]

I always open with A and AK.

[gordontd]

The first one has a quite terrible rebid problem, so no.

What rebid problem? Open 1D and rebid 2C (or raise hearts)

[gordontd]

Two bullets and a King strongly suggest opening.

 

These are shapes where I would normally open 1♦.

I think that I'll open 1♣ in each case (though I am torn between 1C and 1D on the second)

That problem is solved by the fact that he is playing a weak NT - which also makes opening 1C on the first one problematic.

[the_clown]

I would pass both. No spot cards and no spades in both hands.

 

The first one is closer, I may open if I can open 1♥ systemically. On the other hand I have perfect shape to make a takoeut double of spades in the next round. Admittedly if it goes p-p-1♠-p I have a real problem.

 

When playing weak NT I like 12-14 vul and 11+ - 14 NV so I would open the second only NV.

[TMorris]

I wouldn't open either first in hand.

 

Third in hand is harder but I'd have to open the first one diamond systemically and that is not sufficiently lead directing for a third in hand opening - I can't open one club and pass one spade so I pass it. The second one I open one heart and pass the response. Opening the second 1 NT in third vulnerable would be horrible.

[hrothgar]

That problem is solved by the fact that he is playing a weak NT - which also makes opening 1C on the first one problematic.

 

URK. SOrry, should have read the conditions of contest.

 

I'd open 1NT with the second hand, and have not real objection to doing so on the first as well.

If you don't think these are quite strong enough to open, then I'd pass.

[NickRW]

Whether I'd open them or not - if I had been in your shoes - and you were my p - would depend on what I think you expect of an opening. I regard both as very borderline.

[helene_t]

What rebid problem? Open 1D and rebid 2C (or raise hearts)

It's just that my primary suit isn't quit good enough to play in a 4-2 fit.

[gordontd]

It's just that my primary suit isn't quit good enough to play in a 4-2 fit.

That's true, although I have once done exactly that with a very similar suit!

[Trinidad]

That's true, although I have once done exactly that with a very similar suit!

There are quite a few things that I have done exactly once. Usually there was a reason why I didn't do it twice...

 

Rik

[mycroft]

In the UK, if partner will expect it, I'll open 1NT with both. If partner expects a big singleton, then 1♥ and 1NT, respectively (what do I get to rebid on the first one when partner bids 1♠? One hopes one of 2♣ or 1NT will be "okay").

 

It may lead to bad results, but I sure open worse 12 counts than these (though I would think about passing the first one as I play K/S in the ACBL (despite what K/S has to say about it), because 1NT is verboten, 1♥ is anti-system, and 1m is going to get me into trouble unless they compete (for once, I have the defence I promised!)), so either I straighten up and fly more soundly in general, or I open these and take the bad results that sometimes come, as I'm sure to get bad results if I pass them and partner "knows" I don't have 3 QT.

[gszes]

pass with both

 

One of the fundamental principles of all bidding systems is to know how you will

rebid before deciding how to open. While it is not possible to anticipate all

sequences at least we can avoid damaging low level sequences where there is little

or no room to escape from a bad contract.

 

Both of these hands can lead to some very poor low level contracts using a weak NT

structure no matter the basic system (except maybe EHA). Sometimes succeeding at

getting to a good low level contract is not worth the overall risk associated with

landing in poor ones. The 3 quick tricks make it much less likely the opps have a

game so the reward part is dramatically reduced while the risk remains.

[ArtK78]

I always open with A and AK.

I agree 100%

 

The first one is a full Goren 1950's style opening - A and AK and a singleton. I find it hard to believe that anyone playing today would not open that hand.

[ahydra]

I would open the first one 1D and pass the second (I probably don't upgrade BAL hands as much as I should, but this one doesn't really have anything going for it - no touching intermediates, no 5-card suit).

 

ahydra

[Wackojack]

Pass hand 1 and come in with a double after p-1z-p-1s.

Open hand 2 1NT

[VixTD]

I always open with A and AK.

I agree 100%

 

The first one is a full Goren 1950's style opening - A and AK and a singleton. I find it hard to believe that anyone playing today would not open that hand.

This was the advice I was following, and I wondered how much support there was out there for this theory. It doesn't look right to me to open some ropey twelve-counts but not these hands with three quick tricks just because they fall short by a point. They don't meet Bergen's rule of 20, thouugh.

 

I opened the first one 1♣ and rebid a 12-16 NT over the spade response. I opened the second one 1NT. I think bad luck was part of the reason why I didn't score a single matchpoint on either board, but the first one might have been unwise bidding too.

[ArtK78]

This was the advice I was following, and I wondered how much support there was out there for this theory. It doesn't look right to me to open some ropey twelve-counts but not these hands with three quick tricks just because they fall short by a point. They don't meet Bergen's rule of 20, thouugh.

 

I opened the first one 1♣ and rebid a 12-16 NT over the spade response. I opened the second one 1NT. I think bad luck was part of the reason why I didn't score a single matchpoint on either board, but the first one might have been unwise bidding too.

If your plan is to rebid 1NT over a 1♠ response on the first one, you had better have an understanding partner if he rebids his spades. I don't disagree with opening 1♦ and rebidding 1NT over a 1♠ response, especially at matchpoints. But if the 1NT rebid promises a balanced hand (i.e., at least 2 spades), then you have to rebid 2♣.

 

If your methods require you to open 1♣ and rebid 1NT to show 12-16 balanced, then your methods are partly to blame. But you can always claim that you had a club (diamond?) mixed in with your spades. Did you treat the hand as 1-4-3-5 because of the disparity of strength in the minor suits? Normally with 4-4 in the minors the correct opening is 1♦.

 

You said you were playing Acol with 4 card majors. Why not open 1♥ on the first hand? Is there something in Acol that would not allow you to open 1♥? I remember from old-fashioned Goren with 4 card majors that you were supposed to open the suit below your shortness (to facilitate rebids). In this case, that would be hearts.

 

As for getting bad results, sometimes you get bad results for good reasons. What can you do? You do what you think is best, and if they don't work out you try to figure out why. In these cases, I think it is just bad luck.

 

As for the rule of 20, the less said, the better.

[fromageGB]

Yep, usually is sheer bad luck when I fail to a win single matchpoint! But if someone persuaded me to have a go at acol I would open (1) 1♦ and (2) 1NT.

[wank]

a ak and a singleton isn't a good thing. 4441 shapes are very bad. i'd pass very happily, at any vul, but especially given the all vul stated.

 

as for the seond one i'd pass too. why am i so desperate to play 1nt vul that i'm adding points to my hand?

[whereagles]

I might open the 1st. Might. Shape is nice.

 

I probably won't open the 2nd. Probably. No shape is not nice. (Though the hand is worth a full opener if a fit is found.)

[MrAce]

I open both in a split second.

 

My main reason is the definition of a "passed hand" People have to understand that the merits of opening AAK hands do not come from finding a cheap game or getting in early or finding a fit early only. Mostly we benefit on hands when pd does not open. This approach narrows down the definition of a passed hand, which is often ignored by a lot of players who have fallen into love with small details and criterias and formulas to open but yet missed the ocean when they were shooting on a boat.

 

The most sad part is, those who passes this type of hands (not everyone in this forum who advocated passing) feel like they have a free ticket to bid until the hell freezes over, once they pass first round and pd opens 3rd seat. I just can't imagine anyone being comfortable with a style where their pd who is coming from pass can hold 5 controls, aka AAK! Sorry this is way too much for me, regardless of what vulnerability, what kind of rebid problems he has.

 

I would love to advice AAK passers not to drag their pd to game if he opens 3rd, but I can't do that. Basically once you pass this hand, you just messed your pd's judgement regardless of what he chose. I ask everyone to go back and read the topics on all bidding/hand evaluation/competitive decisions/slam decisions/game decisions/ which comes a lot on every day. You will see good players paying attention to something and they use a word " Pd is coming from pass" And they use it almost each and every single time when in fact pd is coming from pass. Which means in all these decisions they make, they involve the fact that pd is coming from pass. Effects of opening AAK hands do not shine on a single board where one side opened and found grand slam where other pair landed on game, but they make difference in long run much more than single hand grand slam or w/e swing imho.

 

There are other merits of opening AAK hands, as well as downsides. I won't get into that because they wash each other while definition of a passed hand remains crystal clear for those who never passes an AAK hand.

[akwoo]

The conditions of contest say 12-14 1N.

 

I'd love to know what people who open the second hand open with. If it's not 1N, I'd love to know how they avoid rebid problems. If it is 1N, I'd love to know happy they are when partner raises to 3N with a good 12 count.

 

The first hand, I wouldn't open, because the systemic opening bid is 1♦ and that's the suit I don't want led if opps buy the contract. But I would open it if my diamonds were switched with another suit.