Open 1 spade, 4 spades, 2 Clubs.

[Liversidge]

[hv=pc=n&s=sakjt987h96daq5c8]133|100[/hv]

 

1♠, 4♠, 2♣? We play 3 weak 2's. Advice appreciated on the pros and cons of each bid. It's a regularly debated topic at our club on hands like this- 7+ card major, not quite 9 playing tricks.

I came across Namyats last week. Don't know if that's worthwhile enough to justify giving up the 4 level prempt in a minor.

 

My agreement with my partner is that we require 9 playing tricks and 4 defensive tricks for a 2♣ opening, so we would open 1♠ here, thinking it's a bit strong for a preempt. Some good (by our local club standard) players open 2♣regularly with 8 playing tricks, a very good 6-7 card suit and 16 HCP+ , despite the fact that my references, including several posters on this board, advise against it. I wonder if it's because opps at our club level rarely compete after a 2♣ opening so they don't get pushed too high.

[eagles123]

I spade is clear - your too good for 4s and not good enough for 2c. I mean 4s is bad but 2c is horrendous

[Tramticket]

If you open 4S, partner will not look for a slam without considerable values and controls. With 7+ playing tricks, 2 first round controls and a second round control, you can envisage slam on many possible hands for partner. It is much better to open 1S and jump rebid spades to show your playing strength. I would open 1S rather than 4S, even opposite a passed hand.

 

You are a long way short of 2C.

[Cyberyeti]

1st/2nd seat, 1♠, 3rd seat I have much less of a problem with 4♠, there is a pretty narrow selection of hands where 6 makes but partner can't open.

 

Your problems aren't over, what are you going to do over 2♣ or 2♥ from partner ?

[1eyedjack]

Your problems aren't over, what are you going to do over 2♣ or 2♥ from partner ?

3S wtp?

[Liversidge]

I spade is clear - your too good for 4s and not good enough for 2c. I mean 4s is bad but 2c is horrendous

Swop the ♠J for the ♠Q and I have 9 playing tricks but only 15 HCP. I feel a bit stupid asking this as I know it would be a bad bid, but not why, so that I can explain to partner why it's not a good idea.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=sakjt987h96daq5c8]133|100| 1♠, 4♠, 2♣? We play 3 weak 2's. Advice appreciated on the pros and cons of each bid. It's a regularly debated topic at our club on hands like this- 7+ card major, not quite 9 playing tricks. I came across Namyats last week. Don't know if that's worthwhile enough to justify giving up the 4 level prempt in a minor. My agreement with my partner is that we require 9 playing tricks and 4 defensive tricks for a 2♣ opening, so we would open 1♠ here, thinking it's a bit strong for a preempt. Some good (by our local club standard) players open 2♣regularly with 8 playing tricks, a very good 6-7 card suit and 16 HCP+ , despite the fact that my references, including several posters on this board, advise against it. I wonder if it's because opps at our club level rarely compete after a 2♣ opening so they don't get pushed too high.

[/hv]

Unless you play Benjamin, NAMYATS (South African Texas), or 3N=Good 4M, I rank

1♠ = Normal action. Choice of Eagles123 and Baby Bear.

4♠ = Non-consultative.

2♣ = Nondescriptive overbid

[Cyberyeti]

3S wtp?

 

That would be a bit less than this playing Acol, your slam potential is good opposite some hands that will just bid 4♠

[Cyberyeti]

Swop the ♠J for the ♠Q and I have 9 playing tricks but only 15 HCP. I feel a bit stupid asking this as I know it would be a bad bid, but not why, so that I can explain to partner why it's not a good idea.

 

8.5 not 9

 

If you have a solid 9, I can live with 2♣.

[gordontd]

That would be a bit less than this playing Acol, your slam potential is good opposite some hands that will just bid 4♠

Since it's unlimited and forcing in modern Acol, your partner should cue-bid with a suitable hand.

[Cyberyeti]

Since it's unlimited and forcing in modern Acol, your partner should cue-bid with a suitable hand.

 

Does he really think Qx, Axx, KJxx, 109xx is that suitable ?

 

We get round this issue by expanding 2N (which is GF anyway) to not always be balanced so we can distinguish between 3♠ bids.

[eagles123]

Does he really think Qx, Axx, KJxx, 109xx is that suitable ?

 

We get round this issue by expanding 2N (which is GF anyway) to not always be balanced so we can distinguish between 3♠ bids.

 

That really is a perfecto. also I'm not sure how your pet method is helpful to the op in this situation, especially with it being N/B

[gordontd]

Does he really think Qx, Axx, KJxx, 109xx is that suitable ?

 

We get round this issue by expanding 2N (which is GF anyway) to not always be balanced so we can distinguish between 3♠ bids.

Responder cue-bidding after a 3S rebid does seem to provide the most plausible route to the top spot. I'm not sure how your solution helps.

[wank]

Swop the ♠J for the ♠Q and I have 9 playing tricks but only 15 HCP. I feel a bit stupid asking this as I know it would be a bad bid, but not why, so that I can explain to partner why it's not a good idea.

 

opening 2 clubs shows more than what's required to make game. it shows a lot of defence, essentially plenty of points outside your long suit.

 

as for 4 spades, that's a pre-empt. it should be a hand lacking the defence for a 1 opener (different kettle of fish in 3rd/4th).

 

as others have said, it's basically a 1S 3S rebid hand.

[eagles123]

agree with wank but I think a more general point is that weak players will open 2c way too often, quite often on hands which are completely unsuitable such as the one in the OP. I mean this with respect Liversidge but just because these players are strong within your local club, it doesn't necessarily mean that they are good players - if they often open these kinds of hands 2c I'd wager that they almost certainly aren't as strong as you think.

[rmnka447]

This hand is definitely a 1 ♠ opener. As eagles123 says, too much defense for a preempt, not enough tricks for 2 ♣. Make the hand ♠ AKJ109xx ♥ Ax ♦ AQx ♣ x, worth 1 track more, so 2 ♣ would be then be appropriate.

 

So assuming you open 1 ♠, the main issue is "what do you rebid?"

 

If partner makes a 1 NT response, or a simple raise, I'd probably just bid 4 ♠.

 

But if partner makes a forcing bid such as a 2/1 response, forcing raise, or splinter, slam could be a possibility. So you need to keep the bidding open and, if possible, show partner some slam interest when you can. Logically, you'll rebid 3 ♠ over a 2/1 as the playing strength dictates more than a minimum rebid. Over a Jacoby 2 NT forcing raise, show your singleton with 3 ♣, then hope to cue ♦ next.

[StevenG]

Assuming EBU, is it even legal to open this hand 2♣? Is doesn't seem to conform to ER25. Banning it as a Benji 2♣ seems crazy,

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

playing strong twos, I would have no problems with opening 2S,

so playing Benji, it is on the lower end, but so what.

 

Since you are playing 3 weak twos, all strong openings go via 2C,

and you need to have lower limit, what to include, otherwise you

will have trouble makeing decison, if you should go beyond the 4

level or not.

 

In short: With your system, I would open 1S.

 

Regarding Namyats: I would miss my 4 level minor preempts.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Cyberyeti]

Responder cue-bidding after a 3S rebid does seem to provide the most plausible route to the top spot. I'm not sure how your solution helps.

 

Because I don't think it's a cue after 3♠, I think it is after 2N-3♦(precisely 4-4 minors)-3♠ which is how we would bid it.

 

And since 2N is GF anyway in modern Acol, it actually requires very little work to use it for unbalanced hands as well, just that N/B don't think to agree to do it.

[steve2005]

Swop the ♠J for the ♠Q and I have 9 playing tricks but only 15 HCP. I feel a bit stupid asking this as I know it would be a bad bid, but not why, so that I can explain to partner why it's not a good idea.

You don't really have any defense so if the bidding gets high quickly you wont be able to sit for a penalty double. On defense your spades may all be ruffed.

Secondly, again if there is interference it may be impossible to show your spade length.

 

 

[gordontd]

Because I don't think it's a cue after 3♠, I think it is after 2N-3♦(precisely 4-4 minors)-3♠ which is how we would bid it.

 

And since 2N is GF anyway in modern Acol, it actually requires very little work to use it for unbalanced hands as well, just that N/B don't think to agree to do it.

So you just have a different route with exactly the same effect on this hand.

[gordontd]

Assuming EBU, is it even legal to open this hand 2♣? Is doesn't seem to conform to ER25. Banning it as a Benji 2♣ seems crazy,

It doesn't conform to ER25. It would if DQ were the SQ.

[GrahamJson]

Swop the ♠J for the ♠Q and I have 9 playing tricks but only 15 HCP. I feel a bit stupid asking this as I know it would be a bad bid, but not why, so that I can explain to partner why it's not a good idea.

 

The problem with opening 2C on this sort of hand is that partner, holding something like X KQxx xxx KQxx will add his ten points to your assumed twenty odd and start heading for an unmakable slam. And you can't really get around this by having agreements that a 2C bid can be this weak as this would take away much of the advantage of the bid. This is that, holding a big hand you can open 2C and then sit back, knowing that partner will bid on if he has a few values. If you were to open this hand 2C how do you bid a hand like AKJ10xx AKx AQx KQ where just X QJxxxx Kx xxx opposite is enough for six.

 

I still prefer Acol twos (or, better, Tartan Twos in which 2M is two way; strong or weak 55). It's not so much that Acol twos are great in themselves, but they take a lot of strain off opening one bids.

[Liversidge]

Really helpful, everyone. I now have a very different mindset. Until now I have had to resist the impulse to open 2♣ with 9 playing tricks in a minor or 8 PTs in a major holding AKQxxxx, but now have a better understanding about why, and can discuss it with partner. We need to spend more time studying modern Acol rebids - for example, the meaning (length and strength) of jump rebids after 1 level and 2 level response) that convey what I have been wanting to show with the 2♣ bid, but a lot more efficiently, allowing room for us to describe our hands at a low level.

 

I hadn't fully appreciated that the 2♣ is not necessarily the exciting bid we should yearn for, but in some ways is a cautious bid to make sure that partner doesn't pass with 5 points when all I may need from him is one trick to make game. If I am two playing tricks short of game and he can't respond to my 1 level opening then it's less likely I would have made game anyway, so nothing lost by opening at the 1 level.

 

I hadn't thought either about interference, where opps may be sacrificing and partner bids on thinking I have a better hand, or doubles, etc..

 

Plenty to think about still. Thanks again.

[Cyberyeti]

Another thing you need to know is around disclosure. If you do agree to open 2♣ on some hands with the offence but not the defence opps would expect, then you need to explain this. Acol - big is no longer sufficient.