Your responses to partner's 2 Clubs opening bid?

[RedSpawn]

Obviously I read your other post, because I responded to it. Why did you repeat it? You had nothing more to add.

 

You are boring.

Because you were suggesting that I had overcounted the hand value and it's not so; either way you slice it, that hand is a 2 club open. I would love to hear how many points you consider this hand to have...

[benlessard]

I dont care too much if the hand is too good for 1S or not enough good for 2C.

 

I look at how the auction might unfold.

 

std jump-shift

1S--1NT--3D

 

std 2C

2C-2D(wait)-2S-??-3D

 

look pretty equivalent to me

 

 

With my system it might go like

 

1S-1NT-2C(♦)--2D (5-11 pref)--??

 

3H= exactly 6142 18-21. So with a relay system or systme with artificial rebid the incentive to open 1S are greater.

 

Without any gadget i would open 2C because all thing being equal why risk 1S--all pass.

[nige1]

We play 2♥ and 2♠ as wishing to play there opposite 20-21(22) balanced. After the Kokish relay we play 2NT as both minors, and 3m to play there opposite 20-21. We have a lot of idle bids that we are thinking about. Hate controls a lot.

Vampyr's version seems simple and clever.

[RedSpawn]

Ok, not enough hcp the way you play.

 

 

So why isn't the hand worth 22+ hcp? Or is there some other reason why you can't open 2♣?

No one wants to commit to a hand value for this hand. This hand is worth 22 points if not more once you evaluate its features. I look at TOTAL points. This hand is by no means weak and has more total points than 21 points. I am still waiting to hear a full on point value on this hand for its features. Is it just a 21 point hand for opening purposes?

[Zelandakh]

No one wants to commit to a hand value for this hand. This hand is worth 22 points if not more once you evaluate its features. I look at TOTAL points. This hand is by no means weak and has more total points than 21 points. I am still waiting to hear a full on point value on this hand for its features. Is it just a 21 point hand for opening purposes?

Not everyone is a Walrus and requires a point count for everything. For unbalanced hands above a certain strength it is very often easier to think in terms of playing tricks. This hand has ~10 PTs, which easily qualifies it for a 2♣ opening. The only poster that has said otherwise is the OP who also wrote that he has a special agreement. Playing my own system I would also not open it 2♣ - it's a strong 1[clubs instead (!) - but that is hardly relevant to whether it is a 2♣ opener in American standard methods. It is not particularly helpful to assign a single number beyond that so why bother?

[RedSpawn]

Not everyone is a Walrus and requires a point count for everything. For unbalanced hands above a certain strength it is very often easier to think in terms of playing tricks. This hand has ~10 PTs, which easily qualifies it for a 2♣ opening. The only poster that has said otherwise is the OP who also wrote that he has a special agreement. Playing my own system I would also not open it 2♣ - it's a strong 1[clubs instead (!) - but that is hardly relevant to whether it is a 2♣ opener in American standard methods. It is not particularly helpful to assign a single number beyond that so why bother?

Cartruck referred to opening this hand as 2 clubs as "fool's gold" -- that is being a walrus. I haven't heard a sound reason for starting the bidding at a conservative 1♠ which he recommended.

 

Cartruck stated that a Q♠ was needed instead of J♠ before a 2 ♣ bid should be made. Why do we need 11 playing tricks for a 2 club open? That pedestal seems a bit too high.

[pescetom]

Controls works well when opener has a shapely hand with self-supporting suit(s) and only needs top cards for slam. Unfortunately that's a very small subset of 2C openers.

Here in Italy a large percentage of club players still ask for controls or Aces as the initial reply to 2C.

I'm usually grateful as more often than not it fizzles out leaving them with little idea of how to proceed.

Having said that, we are still working on 2C replies and developments, for now we tend to see 2D as the least of all evils.

 

If opener only needs top cards for slam then he can of course use other openings.

Even Sabine Auken uses the good old ACOL 4NT opening to ask for specific Aces.

We extend it to ask (with limitations) for specific Kings too.

[GrahamJson]

I find it difficult to believe that an expert forum is discussing how may points a hand of AKJ853 7 AKQ10 A6 is worth. Anyone who needs to count points in order to determine whether it is a 2C bid is surely playing the wrong game.

 

My preferred sequence I think someone has already suggested; 2C-2H-2S-3D etc. I don't think that a 2D "waiting" bid is appropriate when holding a good heart suit as a 2H response is descriptive without taking up any bidding space.

[nullve]

I find it difficult to believe that an expert forum is discussing how may points a hand of AKJ853 7 AKQ10 A6 is worth. Anyone who needs to count points in order to determine whether it is a 2C bid is surely playing the wrong game.

Why do pairs think they need a strong 2♣ opening in the first place? I can only think of two reasons:

 

1) fear of being passed out if they open something else, e.g. 1x;

2) lack of methods after 1x-1y/N.

 

But for pairs using gadgets like Gazzilli or transfer rebids, only 1) remains. So for them, the problem is to determine when it becomes too dangerous to open 1x. And good players understand that that has much more to do with hcp than playing tricks, don't they? E.g. it's more dangerous to open 1♠ on ♠AKJxx ♥AKJT ♦AQx ♣x than on ♠AKQJxx ♥AKJTx ♦x ♣x, although the latter hand has much greater playing strength.

 

FWIW, I don't open 2♣ (strong) on unbalanced hands unless they meet the rule of 31.

[GrahamJson]

I agree that you shouldn't be opening 2C on wildly distributional hands just because you have lots of playing tricks (something that I have seen happen many times on BBO); responder needs to know that if he has a few values then a slam is likely. However the example hand does not fall into that category and is an easy 2C opener. No matter how good your methods are after a one bid, if you stretch the range too far you are certain to lose accuracy. Personally I still like Acol Twos, albeit played as Tartan Two Bids, largely because they take some of the weight off one bids and 2C openings.

[RedSpawn]

I find it difficult to believe that an expert forum is discussing how may points a hand of AKJ853 7 AKQ10 A6 is worth. Anyone who needs to count points in order to determine whether it is a 2C bid is surely playing the wrong game.

 

My preferred sequence I think someone has already suggested; 2C-2H-2S-3D etc. I don't think that a 2D "waiting" bid is appropriate when holding a good heart suit as a 2H response is descriptive without taking up any bidding space.

 

I would have opened that hand 1♠. I don't open 2 suited hands 2 Clubs, unless I have more HCP than that. That hand is not good enough.

 

Swap the J of Spades for the Queen and I would.

 

Opening 2♣ on weak hands is Fool's Gold. Don't do it.

 

To clarify:

 

2♣ opener in my system shows 22+ Points (Our points system is heavily modified, Aces = 4 1/2 points (usually - have to deduct at times), etc.

 

When my father and I open 2♣ (very rarely) we got the goods.

Actually, I find someone telling me that opening the hand in question as 2♣ is fool's gold in an Expert Forum is even more obscene. Or to suggest that I need 11 playing tricks for a 2♣ open is just blasphemous.

 

The discussion of points came AFTER the person suggested the hand is question is not good enough for 2♣ and isn't a 22+ points hand (see above).

 

2♣ openings don't have to be determined by points. You can count losers or playing tricks as well. But if you were to play TOTAL points, the hand has more than 21 HCP and just how much is your call, but to dismiss it and suggest that it isn't a 22 point hand because we experts don't commit to such novice academic exercises during hand evaluation...no problems here.

 

At some point, however, you have to trade in shape and suit length and trick taking ability for points and while you may not want to commit an arbitrary # to it, you have to assign it something even if you prefer to evaluate 2♣ on a case-by-case basis.

[helene_t]

The way my dad (born 1929) played it, as was advocated by the Dutch text books used for beginners in the 1990s, a strong 2M opening showed a semiforcing hand OR a GF 2-suiter. This means that the 2♣ opening was usually 23+ balanced OR a GF one-suited hand.

 

In that context, control-showing responses sound reasonable. If opener is balanced it doesn't matter so much and if he is one-suited, opener knows which suit is trump so he just needs to know if responder has some useful aces and kings.

 

In a modern system where 2♣ can be anything that would traditionally open at the 2-level, we really need to preserve the space below 3NT for finding our fit.

 

Does anyone play transfers, btw?

[keylime]

I recently played controls for the first time in ages, and didn't find enough merit to really want to repeat the experience. Most of the time I feel as if partner's either balanced or major oriented.

[fromageGB]

Does anyone play transfers, btw?

Well, there's me - post #42

[Zelandakh]

Does anyone play transfers, btw?

One of the methods I played with a regular partner on BBO (some years ago) was 2♦ pos, 2♥ neg, 2♠-3♦ as SP transfers. As I posted previously, I think it is better to drop the (semi-)bal 2♠ transfer hands down to 2♦ but how onw organises the remaining suits between 2♠, 2NT and 3m is fully open and retaining transfers makes as much sense as the more popular nat + 2NT = ♥ structure.

[Lovera]

I have found an interesting article on Karen Walker Library about this strong bid (looking for the jump rebid by opener): http://kwbridge.com/bb/b_2c.htm

(Lovera)

[Lovera]

When the conditions are stictly defined for a positive answer the 2♦ as negative one is better and saving space when are lacking these indications. Anyhow the 2♣ opening that i use is forcing till 2NT or if is repeted a major suit two times (as double negative).

[Lovera]

About jump bidding by 2♣ opener (see url in post #66) the 3NT (as negative) answer shows only a King or less whilest with an Ace can be raised trump and considering also that to get slam can be necessary a K w/ a Q aside or two Kings in right specific suits.

[Phil]

Some points.

 

1. I do not know of a single top US pair that plays 2♥ negative. I go out of my way not to make a positive response to 2♣. The only rational reason is that I would expect competition by my LHO.

 

2. I would open 2♣ with the 6=1=4=2 hand and not feel bad about it. My standards for 2♣ are pretty high.

[Fluffy]

After many years with my father I still play this:

 

2♦ I have a weak hand

2♥ = I have hearts

2♠ = I have spades

2NT = I am mostly balanced

3♣ = I have clubs

3♦ = I have diamonds

 

So far it has worked, and we didn't get any missunderstandings.

[masse24]

After many years with my father I still play this:

 

2♦ I have a weak hand

2♥ = I have hearts

2♠ = I have spades

2NT = I am mostly balanced

3♣ = I have clubs

3♦ = I have diamonds

 

So far it has worked, and we didn't get any missunderstandings.

Complex stuff, this. ;)