I open two clubs and partner jumps to five, but...

[miamijd]

As others have noted, 2c is poor, although it makes things a lot easier on this hand, especially if you play that 1s. 2c. 3h is a h splinter with c support. After 1s you are likely to end up in 6h, which is shaky, whereas 6c is very much odds on.

 

5c is poor, of course. The "standard" bid with no-loser one-suites after 2c is 3nt, showing AKQxxxx or longer in one suit and no outside cards. The 2c opener won't have a problem figuring out which suit. Here, opener can raise to 6c comfortably, which is a fine spot.

 

Another fairly common treatment is to play 4c, 4d, 4h, and 4s as showing one loser hands with the suit above the bid suit (4s shows c) and no outside cards.

 

Cheers

Mike

[hrothgar]

There is actually an ACBL directive on this! The reason being, that it is illegal to open a game-forcing 2♣ bid with insufficient strength. In fact, psyching an artificial opening bid is forbidden on the SuperChart.

 

The ACBL directive is: "If you believe that this is a strong hand, its fine to open it 2♣"

 

There is no firm guidance, no case laws, and some fairly interesting examples of what strike me as preemptive hands being opened 2♣ with nary a peep

[kenberg]

The ACBL directive is: "If you believe that this is a strong hand, its fine to open it 2♣"

 

I don't much read the laws, but I am very glad to hear this. I am ok with someone telling me that a 2C opening I make is stupid, but I am not ok if they tell me it is unethical. If I open 2C it is because I think it is right to make an almost gf artificial opening bid. I expect my partner to believe I want to, outside of a small number of well defined exceptions, force to game and I expect opponents to trust my intent.

 

I think we can all recognize a truly psychic 2C when/if we see one.

[billw55]

Personally I would open 1♠. But on BBO I have seen far worse abuses of the 2♣ opening than this hand. Honestly I would not even bother commenting to a partner that did it.

 

5♣ is much worse, wasting a vast amount of space in a near certain slam auction.

[kenberg]

Personally I would open 1♠. But on BBO I have seen far worse abuses of the 2♣ opening than this hand. Honestly I would not even bother commenting to a partner that did it.

 

5♣ is much worse, wasting a vast amount of space in a near certain slam auction.

 

Not to mention leaving partner to guess just what the hell you mean by it. I defy anyone to give a clear explanation as to how opener is to decide among pass, 6C and 7C. With the stiff Jack of clubs he should have raised to 7? Presumably the long spade can be set up for the 13th trick. Well, he guesses.

[Lovera]

Not to mention leaving partner to guess just what the hell you mean by it. I defy anyone to give a clear explanation as to how opener is to decide among pass, 6C and 7C. With the stiff Jack of clubs he should have raised to 7? Presumably the long spade can be set up for the 13th trick. Well, he guesses.

I don't think that the raise bidding problem that you said it be so. Infact should be a question (that Barbone talked in the other his work about tournament bridge and relatives strategies "Il libro completo del bridge di gara" MURSIA edit home) of this type and you need not to get seven necessarly(=because the analyzed hand allow it) it being sufficent 6♣ +1 and in this way if 13 tricks are not you don't have down.

[msjennifer]

opening 2club on the given hand is simply eccentric.playing standard system the bidding would go 1S -2C

3H -5C.

[Lovera]

The hand evaluation method commonly called KnR was developed by Edgar Kaplan to allow Jeff Rubens to program The Bridge World's computer to generate hands suitable for two club openings. The article gives AKxxx-AKxxx-Ax-x as one such hand and AKxxx-AKxxx-Axx-void is a bit stronger so Edgar Kaplan would have opened it 2♣ and I suspect he isn't the only one.

 

While a 3♣ response to 2♣ is positive and forcing, some players use a single jump response to show a solid suit. In either case you should end up in 6♣ which is cold if there is no trump loser (about 54% of the time) and has some play if there is one trump loser.

This one like me because is compatibile with a (little) mine variation (that i have already told previuosly in another topic about valutation hand). The "rule" indicate for two-level idoneity talks more that for balanced hands without two Aces the MW points (to refer) are detracted for -2 points. Mine variation is to insert longness points (+1 for 5th card and so on) lonely and you have not to consider shortness at all. The limit should be four losers than 20 points(=pair) but you are not obliged to open 2♣ and in these case is more probable -the why is the limit- that you'll open at first level instead of.

[Lovera]

The hand is at least close to 2♣ in terms of strength. The reason not to bid 2♣ is that, with 18 HCP, you won't get passed out in 1♠ and will be able to bid your hand much more descriptively at a lower level, which with 5-4 in the majors is a huge consideration.

 

That 5♣ bid is terrible. In the first place, if you bid 5♣ to show a suit with the tops, you can't do it without AKQJxxx or AKQxxxxx. In the second place, I wouldn't do it anyway. Partner might have AKQxxx of hearts or better.

 

I will say, if I were holding that hand and partner bid 5♣ over a 2♣ opening (showing a self-sustaining club suit), I'd bid 7 without a second thought. But my partner would be holding the ♣J, so . . . .

I too thought "7 without a second thought" but then had a third thinking ..

[Oof Arted]

http://tinyurl.com/joe73uc

 

 

With a daft response like 5♣ I just bid 6♣ and let partner play it. :rolleyes:

[Tramticket]

Even playing Benji Acol, where you have a game forcing 2D and a 2C showing 8+ playing tricks available, this hand is still only a 1S opening. You want bidding space to show your 2-suited shape. The 5C response is of course daft. A 4C jump will show a solid, self supporting suit and would be reasonable. A 3C response would also be possible.

[helene_t]

But here I disagree. I think 5♣ should show something like ♣QJTxxxxx and out. The solid club hand can start with 4♣.

Are you sure that it is a good idea to bid 5♣ on QJTxxxxx and out? If opener has a long major an a void in clubs, 5♣ could take us beyond our only making game.

 

Not that it is a big deal - giving a definition to the 5♣ bid shouldn't be among the first things to discuss in a new partnership :)

[Zelandakh]

Are you sure that it is a good idea to bid 5♣ on QJTxxxxx and out? If opener has a long major an a void in clubs, 5♣ could take us beyond our only making game.

 

Not that it is a big deal - giving a definition to the 5♣ bid shouldn't be among the first things to discuss in a new partnership :)

Absolutely. I am not sure it is a good idea to bid 5♣ on any hand at all but the 2 loser suit is one that has enough parallels in bidding theory to seem a reasonable definition if we really feel the need. Any better suit and we either want to keep 3NT in the picture or maintain bidding space for slam. I suppose using it as XRKCB agreeing some other suit would be another possibility if we really wanted to find something vaguely useful but that is just asking for trouble.

[Lovera]

Anyone have talked about 5♣ bidding but, if let us consider the hand of my partner and evalute it in accordin to the F. Dudley Courtenay "Losing Trick Count" we can say that : with 14 losers is possible for partnership to play a game in a major suit, with 12-13 to play a game in a minor suit, with 11 losers a little slam. With my 2♣ i'll sure almost four losers (strong hand) or three (very strong hand).

[manudude03]

With my 2♣ i'll sure almost four losers (strong hand) or three (very strong hand).

 

Assuming you actually play it in one of your suits. Here you played in clubs where you really have a 7 loser hand (though could be reduced to 6-6.5 for those majors).

[Lovera]

Clearly it confirms, with another point of view, what i've told explaining partner bidding: the message should be "if you have a strong hand, i can bid alone 5♣ 'cause my (long) suit as trump" (in this unusual bidding).

[Lovera]

About play was possible to realize 5♣+1 if was been retained the Queen in club suit : the ending had to be N ♠ 97 ♥ 7 ♦ - ♣ - E ♠ - ♥ J ♦ - ♣ J8 S ♠ - ♥ 10 ♦ - ♣ Q10 W ♠ - ♥ - ♦ QJ8 ♣ -. If it is moving by N is a situation of pseudo Trump Coup (remaining a loser in the hand) that,although, it allowed to realize 13 tricks if E descarts wrongly heart J but it having viewble the cards of S is more difficult. In the other case by S leading heart for returning in club Q 10. This situation needs preventivate(=read) and the ♥ Q can help meaning there is not other fourth best.