You have been selected for the Grand Jury!

[hotShot]

Still wondering if "agressive style" means "we are allowed to open nice 10-pointers" or "we are obliged to open all nice 10-pointers".

 

HCP is not all, suit quality and distribution is important too. agressive style means that you bid with any hand that is reasonable strong. This hand is "strong" you have 5 top tricks in a suit, look at usual opening hands you will hardly have more than 3 save tricks. You have only 6 looser, most openings are 5-9 looser. And you have distributional values.

 

You probably know the rule of 18 from the bridge laws. This hand follows the rule of 20.

(add length in 2 longest suits and hcp).

This hand is worth an opening.

[joker_gib]

It is ok to handle a suit without even the T as a 4 card suit. Experts argue with suit quality. Would you really want partner to lead ♠?

Suit quality is of course important but you have to do with the hands you have been dealt.

 

If you only bid suits you want your partner to lead, you will have serious problems to describe hands !

 

Come on, that fact is OK for overcalls but less on openings. I think it is quite important to tell your partner you have 5♠. :(

[hotShot]

If Def1 opened, we would not even discuss this hand here.

Why didn't Def1 open?

 

1) The hand was to weak?

It is not even weak if you didn't agree on "agressive style".

2) The hand had no good suit to bid?

Well if ♦ is not a good suit, i never had one in my live.

3) Player was scared of the rebid problem.

This can be solved by opening 1♦.

 

I have nothing against opening 1♠, at least if you open it. I'm just pointing at the fact, that you've got the rebid problem solved simply by opening 1♦.

[joker_gib]

I have nothing against opening 1♠, at least if you open it. I'm just pointing at the fact, that you've got the rebid problem solved simply by opening 1♦.

Don't you have any rebid problem when you open 1♦ ?

 

How would you tell your partner that you have 5♠ ?

 

For me this hand will have full potential when I will discover a ♠ fit so it is quite important to know it as soon as possible.

 

I prefer to pass than open that with 1♦ :(

[Finch]

Missing game on this hand is hardly the worst (bridge) crime I've seen. So even if found guilty, I don't think the sentence should be that severe.

 

As for the points the defence raise:

 

1.

I wouldn't open Def1's hand either, but if I claim to play an "aggressive style" of opening bids (which I don't) I would feel obliged to open 1S.

 

Not 1D, which is a distortion. Perhaps the 1D openers would like to suggest their auction to 4S, confident it is the right 5-3 fit, having opened 1D and received a 2C (or 2NT or 3NT depending on method) response from partner.

 

2. Agreed

 

3. This is where the defence case falls over. Partner opened 1C in 4th position. This promises a sound opening bid, not "below opening values". West is worth a game try rather than a 2S bid. I don't think West should bid diamonds here, because in a Walsh style this tends to show 5 (or 6) diamonds but only four spades.

[Fluffy]

Def1 guilty, Def2 forgiven

Agree.

 

1) 100% a 1S opener. The advocates of 1D are joking, right? You'd bid a 5-card minor before your 5-card major? Most experts open their 5-card major before their 6-card minor. Open 1S and if partner bids 2H, rebid 2S. What is the problem? That is not going to be the final contract. Grow up.

 

I myself open 1♠ with 5♠+7♣, but then, I can only count 4♠ on this hand, so with 5♦ and 4♠ it is clear that, if I have to open, I will do it with 1♦.

 

But I don't open 1x with 10 HCP unless I have either 5-5 or 6+ in a suit, since I only have 5-4 I won't open.

 

2) I can forgive the pass. A 4333 13 count with only 3 spades. A 1N rebid would have saved Def1. A 2S rebid deserves to find responder with 8HCP and 4 spades, going down when 1N is cold. That will lose you 5/6 IMPS

Pass is ok.

3) 2S is terrible. Now is the time for a natural 3D. Give partner a 2nd chance.

 

Here is the main point, 2♠ is obviously not the voice, who wants to play in a 7 card fit when you are gonan ruff on the long one?, Def1 should aim to play 2♦, wich will most of the cases be his best contract.

[olegru]

3) Player was scared of the rebid problem.

This can be solved by opening 1♦.

You open 1♦, partner reply 1NT.

What are you gonna bid?

Pass? Doesn't look good for me.

2♦? Bye-bye ♠.

2♠? Revers?

[Antoine Fourrière]

The guilt of def1 is overwhelming:

 

1) Passing doesn't accomplish anything. If the hand is too weak for 1♠, 2♠ at least shows spades with some interesting distribution, and will land the pair in a playable contract more often than not, provided responder relays with a good hand and less than three spades. It is true that one time out of five, responder will pass with less than two spades, opponents will also pass, and 2♠ will be an awful contract. But passing is bound to backfire more often than that, though in a less predictable way.

2) Pass is correct, even if there would be nothing wrong with 1N.

3) If 3♦ now shows an invitational five-five, def2 can't accept with three small diamonds, so def1 should have shown true remorse, either by redoubling and bidding 3♠ or simply by punting game opposite a known three-carder.

 

Nevertheless, the judge should (reluctantly) show some restraint because 4♠ wouldn't be enticing (34% instead of 84%) if def1 held two clubs and one heart and there is no totally convincing way to find out (unless 3♦ by def1 and 3♥ by def2 is deemed to be convincing). But even within that line of reasoning, 34% half of the time and 84% half of the time points to game.

So, def1 should get a harsh sentence, but not to the extent of having to play in an ACBL tournament or to practice French Standard.

[Brandal]

Defendant 1/. A clear cut 1 spade opener in my book, mind you I have just been served a 6 month suspended sentance by the same court for fraudulently using 13 out of 52 cards to swindle my partner out of a lay down game.

Agree,def1

 

If I didn't open 1S on this,it would be VERY hard work

convincing my pd to keep on bidding over the 2-level.

 

I know if I held def 2 hand across a passed hand,I would

look to pass any acceptable bid he makes.

[beatrix45]

:(

 

Hard for me to fault Def1's first round pass. The hand's playing strength deserves an opening bid, but to open 1♦ is weird, and opening 1♠ is ruinous after a 2♥ response. You just can't recover if the hand turns out to be a misfit.

 

The next two bids were just fine, but Def2's pass of 1♠ was gross. With a full opener and 3-3-3-4 shape, I guess 1NT is best. How in the world did Def2 think that a pass was going to win?

 

After 1NT, Def1 ought to make her move now with a 3♦ call (5-5 come alive with five sure playing tricks in diamonds). The subsequent 3♠ preference should be enough excuse (very little ought to be needed) to bid the game.

 

Assessment of blame??? Def2 100%. Let me count the ways passing 1♠ can lose. You have the one that actually existed, but the potential biggie is a shaky 4-3 fit vs 1NT bid by the field. Or, the opponents balance and make it or go down one.

[whereagles]

Thx all for the answers.

 

The Grand Jury sentenced the Defendants to play together again :P They already did so and got into more trouble... lol.

[mike777]

Thx all for the answers.

 

The Grand Jury sentenced the Defendants to play together again :P They already did so and got into more trouble... lol.

FYI Grand Jury only indicts not try and sentence.

 

Perhaps in Bridge World justice is more swift :)

[Double !]

It's refreshing to read such unanimity of opinions over one hand including whether or not the 5-5 hand should be opened or not. Should the other hand rebid 1NT? (Maybe the problem was the 1NT range being played.) And then to sentence the poor pair to having to play together again. This is gross injustice, a kangaroo court, and cruel and unusual punishment! Be more merciful, please..... such as sentencing both to having to watch HGTV when there's a major football game on TV.