Strategy

[kiwinacol]

Hello all. This combination was posted in OCP Super Precision forum and I voiced an alternative approach and wasn't satisfied with the small but majority opinion.

 

East passes as dealer. IMPs. Us vul. Your system is Precision with 16 point 1C.

 

South

 

S -

H A

D KJ984

C AQ85432

 

One South recognised the playing value of the hand and upgraded it to 1C opening. An argument made against that was that there was likely to be violent obstruction in the master suits and South may be facing 4 o M by opponents without a suit being bid by NS.

 

Another suggested that with a 'natural' 2C at least you are underway in showing your anchor suit and a later D bid or perhaps uNT might describe the hand just as well? This person felt the advantage of the strong 1C was an illusion here as bidding space was likely to be taken by the opponents and its better to try showing shape on the hand in lower HCP range. If the two suits were majors instead, the case for 1C is much stronger?

 

The 1C opener was not prepared to witness a responding hand where responder might pass the 2C with small slams in either minor on and gave an example to support that argument. A claim was because of its real strength, that a 2C opening would be 'anti-system'.

 

What would you do?

[spotlight7]

Hello all. This combination was posted in OCP Super Precision forum and I voiced an alternative approach and wasn't satisfied with the small but majority opinion.

 

East passes as dealer. IMPs. Us vul. Your system is Precision with 16 point 1C.

 

South

 

S -

H A

D KJ984

C AQ85432

 

One South recognised the playing value of the hand and upgraded it to 1C opening. An argument made against that was that there was likely to be violent obstruction in the master suits and South may be facing 4 o M by opponents without a suit being bid by NS.

 

Another suggested that with a 'natural' 2C at least you are underway in showing your anchor suit and a later D bid or perhaps uNT might describe the hand just as well? This person felt the advantage of the strong 1C was an illusion here as bidding space was likely to be taken by the opponents and its better to try showing shape on the hand in lower HCP range. If the two suits were majors instead, the case for 1C is much stronger?

 

The 1C opener was not prepared to witness a responding hand where responder might pass the 2C with small slams in either minor on and gave an example to support that argument. A claim was because of its real strength, that a 2C opening would be 'anti-system'.

 

What would you do?

 

 

I voted for 2C* 11-15 6+ clubs.

 

 

If the hand was stronger(and not 7-5 shape), Rigal in his Precision in the 90s book(I think) suggests 1C-1D-2S* as 5-5+ minors.

 

You avoid playing in the wrong minor when game/slam might be possible in the other minor.

 

 

Being 7-5 shape, I strongly prefer to play in the 7 card suit.

 

Taking a spade ruff at trick one could often lose control of the hand.

[sfi]

I'm prepared to bid 4NT for the minors, so I'll open 1C and do my best to cope with whatever interference the opponents dream up. It doesn't feel like there's much in it though - either option has a fair chance of working.

 

A 1D opening looks wrong though, for the reasons spotlight7 gives.

[mikestar13]

2♣ followed by UNT if they boost it to 4M and probably 4♦ in the unlikely event they don't. No chance at all 2♣ gets passed out. Meckwell have been known to open 1♣ on a 13 count with extreme shape if they have the spades, but here the enemy does (and the hearts to boot).

[PrecisionL]

I play a Precision-like System with a natural 1♦ opener, thus I would open this hand 1♦ and Jump in ♣ to show this hand.

[The_Badger]

The hand is a tad over a 20 count on the Kaplan & Rubens hand evaluator.

 

As a Precision player myself for many years, I would always open 1♣. There's no knowing even at this vulnerability that the opponents are going to compete. (Partner could be 6-6-1-0 in the majors and you're looking at a massive misfit.) However, opening 2♣ followed by a 'reverse' in ♦ suits this hand well too.

 

And to what level initially are the opponents going to compete? I just can't see them bidding beyond 4♠/4♥ (but they might mind you) if we haven't bid game ourselves, so a 4NT bid can always be used as a reserve bid showing the minors after a 1♣ opening.

 

I think the choice of opening bid all depends on the structures you have in your Precision system to cope with interference, and what bids you have available to show controls in your system.

 

I haven't voted as I think both approaches deserve merit. On one day a 1♣ will be right, and on another a 2♣ opener will be the winning bid.

[phoenix214]

Definetly open 2C, as this hand is easy to bid after the opening.

I actually recall a hand some years back, where my p with 7-6 opened 2C, goes p-p, old lady bids, p jumps to 4M, and I'm like, what is going on?? If p has 6-5 he bids 3M...

[Phil]

Yes, 2C.

[Zelandakh]

I'm prepared to bid 4NT for the minors, so I'll open 1C and do my best to cope with whatever interference the opponents dream up. It doesn't feel like there's much in it though - either option has a fair chance of working.

 

A 1D opening looks wrong though, for the reasons spotlight7 gives.

I think this post hits the nail on the head. The hand has 8 PTs so is clearly strong enough for a 1♣ opening and the choice comes down to tactical thinking. For me, this hand falls just the wrong side of the line for 4NT after, for example, 1♣ - (2♠) - P - (4♠) so I am preferring 2♣. This is more of an agreement and judgement thing than anything though, so calling either route anti-system is too much. Switch the ♥A with a small ♦ and 1♣ would be clear.

[Trick13]

Rules for upgrading 1♣:

(1) It's OK not to upgrade and good 2-suiter if you fear competition

(2) It's even OK to downgrade a good 2-suiter

(3) You should probably upgrade 4-losers or better (reason: partner will strive to keep the bidding open with just an Ace and out if you open 1♣, but will not even thinking of supporting if you make a limited opener)

 

Either option could be correct but this comes under case 3 for me.

[Kapi Blas]

I voted for upgrading this hand to 1♣ opening.

The hand is too strong to open this 2♣. It's pretty the same thing like about opening this hand in 2 over 1 system:

 

♣ -

♦xx

♥ AKQxxxxx

♠AKx

 

It is "only" 16 HCP but you must open this 2♣ ACOL, because IT IS A GF HAND. You have pretty much 10 top tricks. It's the same thing about opening this hand 1♣ 16+HCP. While opening this 2♣ you will never catch a balance with your partner during the bidding. If you partner will have an A♦ and K♣ you are making slam easily.