What’s your opening bid?

[Dinarius]

♠️

❤️3,

♦️A,Q,10,9,8,6,4,2

♣️A,K,Q,3

 

I’m just interested in people’s approach to this kind of hand.

 

If you open 1♦️, partner bids 1♥. What’s your rebid?

 

Playing Benjamin ACOL, you can open 2♣️, if 2♦️ is reserved for your big hands. This could make a rebid easier.

 

But, would anyone (who doesn’t have that big 2♦️ bid) open 2♣️ with this hand?

 

Bear in mind that, if you opt for 1♦️, you have a lot of catching up to do after a positive response from partner. (Consider, for example that as little as ♦️J,x ♣️J,x with partner and the ♦️K,x onside makes 6♦️virtually certain.)

 

Also, 2♣️ opening would usually remove the chance of Opps finding a Major fit.

 

The hand is short on points but has huge playing strength with the right couple of cards in P’s hand.

 

Well?

 

D.

[hrothgar]

Don't expect this to be at all popular, but I'd open 5!D

[sfi]

Also, 2♣️ opening would usually remove the chance of Opps finding a Major fit.

This is a common but poor assumption playing against good players. When an opponent uses an entire level of bidding to announce a good hand but not say anything about shape, you should look for any opportunity to mess with their auction. After all, your side rarely needs any constructive bids at this point.

 

On the actual hand, I would start with 1D and hope I have a better idea what to do next. I suppose I'll have to bid 3C much of the time, which doesn't go very far to describing my hand. 5D looks much better than 2C as an opening bid - at least it puts us ahead in the guessing game I am worried is about to occur.

[Tramticket]

What is the vulnerability / form of scoring? (It really does help if you use the hand diagran).

 

I think that either a 1D or game-forcing 2C are reasonable options. 1D will never be passed-out and will allow more bidding space in an uncontested auction. But how likely is an uncontested auction? Your opponents almost certainly have a big fit in at least one major and are likely to compete strongly stealing your space. If, as you suggest, the auction would start 1D, (Pass), 1S, (Pass) I would be delighted that my choice had worked so well and would be happy to rebid 3C (gf).

 

I think that the hand is strong enough to force to game and 2C is a reasonable choice. Even this might attract opposition bidding, but at least you have established a game-force. The only down-side is that partner might respond 2D - wrong-siding the contract. Ironically, if I were playing Benji, I would be happier to open 2D for this reason.

 

No hrothgar, I don't like 5D! :)

[Dinarius]

It’s MPs.

 

In my opinion the hand isn’t strong enough for 2♣️. So, I open 1♦️. (5♦️ totally undervalues the hand.)

 

Secondly, if you rebid 3♣️, I think that partner will rebid 3NT. And now?

 

In a ♦️ or ♣️ fit you have a two loser monster. The problem is conveying this if it’s there, or stopping in 3♦️ or 3NT if it isn’t.

 

D.

[JanisW]

I quite recently held red vs green ♠x ♥- ♦AK 9th ♣KQx

 

I opened 5♦ and got a good result, because most of the field was in 6♠X-3

There are several ways 5♦ could be the winning call

- opponents might not find their sacrifice

- you might be allowed to play 6♦, because of some fishy auction like 5♦ (X) P (5♠) 6♦ (X) aP while an ordanary power auction would've led to 6MX-2 or -3

- 5♦ might be the right contract anyway

 

Of course 5♦ will let you miss some cold small slams and even grands. I'm not experienced enough to judge what does happen more often.

 

What I would argue is, that it is better to open 1♦ then 2♣

- you do not enough quick tricks

- you are at 3♦ (if opps are silent, which is not guaranteed) when you begin describing your hand, which for all P knows could still be Ax,x,AKQxxxx,KQxx and not the actual hand

 

regards

JW

[HardVector]

It’s MPs.

 

In my opinion the hand isn’t strong enough for 2♣️. So, I open 1♦️. (5♦️ totally undervalues the hand.)

 

Secondly, if you rebid 3♣️, I think that partner will rebid 3NT. And now?

 

In a ♦️ or ♣️ fit you have a two loser monster. The problem is conveying this if it’s there, or stopping in 3♦️ or 3NT if it isn’t.

 

D.

1♦, then 3♣, and if partner bids 3n, I bid 4♦. That should be forcing as you don't pull game contracts to bid part scores. I'd take any major suit bid to be controls, but you could have the agreement that the 4d would be ace asking. I'd take 5c after 4d to be to play and probably with a small singleton or void in diamonds.

[The_Badger]

K&R evaluator puts it at nearly 24, so opening a lacklustre 1♦ isn't my cup of tea, nor is deceiving partner with a 5♦ pre-empt, but blagging a 2♣ opener doesn't look so bad even though technically it isn't right. Four-and-a-half quick tricks and the ability to play at four of a minor without any support is a good enough reason to tweak the bid to suit the hand, but only with an experienced partner.

 

p.s. If you are wondering why I have put 'four of a minor' - yes, I know it's strong enough on its own to be in 5♦ - as a number of players who use a 2♣ opening do not necessarily insist on it being game forcing, and can reside in three of a major or four of a minor if the hands don't fit well.

 

If you blag a 2♣ opening here, you do stand a chance that the opponents won't find their major suit fit, whereas I think if you open 1♦ it is inevitable that they will. I'm not too averse for players to open 5♦ because I'm a firm believer in the Rixi Markus philosophy of bidding what is in your hand, but I do think you diminish your chances of reaching slam considerably by doing so.

[helene_t]

1♦ > 6♦ > 5 ♦ > pass > 2♣. Yes, I'd rather pass than open 2♣.

 

After partner's 1♠ I rebid 3♣. If partner bids 3NT then I pass.

[Cyberyeti]

1♦ but I can follow up with a GF unbal 2N over 1♠.

[steve2005]

Playing Benjamin ACOL, you can open 2♣️, if 2♦️ is reserved for your big hands. This could make a rebid easier.

I don't get it. If 2♣ is the big hand.

What is wrong with opening 2♦?

If your happen to be playing Benjamin this way you might as well open 2♦ or not play the convention.

[ggwhiz]

I like pass better than 2♣.

 

After 1♦ and any forcing auction by them (1♥ - p - 1♠) I would pass (no sign of life from partner) and set them up to double my sacrifice.

[dsLawsd]

Ever the optimist, I open 6♦-max benefit if correct and places pressure on the next hand.

[GrahamJson]

Ok, you hold AQJxx KQxxx - xxx and partner opens 2C. Putting your 12 points together with partner’s suppose 20+ you are not going to stop bidding until you reach slam, which opposite the hand given will be hopeless. For this reason I think you should rule out a 2C (or Benji 2D) bid. If you don’t have an Acol two bid style opener available then you have to make do with opening 1D. If you follow up with 3C and 5D partner will at least realize that any major suit values that he has are unlikely to be of much value. You still might end up too high opposite an ill fitting hand, but I think you are less likely to than after a 2C opener.

[Dinarius]

I don't get it. If 2♣ is the big hand.

What is wrong with opening 2♦?

If your happen to be playing Benjamin this way you might as well open 2♦ or not play the convention.

 

The point is that if 2♦️ is the big hand (game force) then you can open 2♣️ - a less than game force hand.

 

So, 2♣️:2♦️ (negative) 3♦️ would should 8/9 tricks with ♦️, which pretty much describes the hand. 4♦️ rebid would show 10 tricks, if you had them.

 

2♦️:2❤️ (negative) 3♦️ would show 11 tricks with ♦️, as I play it. That’s why you can’t open 2♦️.

 

To answer your question: 2♣️ isn’t the big hand, 2♦️ is. At least that’s what I’m saying would work best here.

 

D.

[Dinarius]

1♦ > 6♦ > 5 ♦ > pass > 2♣. Yes, I'd rather pass than open 2♣.

 

After partner's 1♠ I rebid 3♣. If partner bids 3NT then I pass.

 

If I don’t have 2♣️ available as a less than game force strong opening bid (see above) then my problem with the 3♣️ rebid followed by some ♦️ rebid, is that we may end up in some 4/3 ♣️ fit, instead of just about any 8/whatever ♦️ fit.

 

I disagree with the other reply that we don’t have enough quick tricks. If anything, we are more likely to be able to cash those ♣️ tricks, since we hold only 4.

 

At MPs scoring, where being in the auction is so important, this hand is as close as it gets to a 2♣️ opening, in my view. At IMPs, where pin-point accuracy is more important, this hand creates more problems.

 

The problem is more the rebid, than the opening. Quite a few I spoke to opted for 1♦️ followed by 3♦️. Far from ideal either.

 

D.

[pes_6]

I didn't see anything about vulnerability but:

 

Both in white or both in red or we in red opponents in white: 2♣ (after 2♦ I'll rebid 5♦)

 

We in white opponents in red: 6♦ (partner can easy pass or bid something like 7♦ if he/she has hand for it)

[Tramticket]

After partner's 1♠ I rebid 3♣. If partner bids 3NT then I pass.

 

Really? Passing 3NT is quite a position to take - I love 3NT contracts at MPs too, but this hand does feel a bit extreme to sit 3NT. It would be easy to construct hands where 3NT fails but a diamond slam succeeds.

 

 

1♦ > 6♦ > 5 ♦ > pass > 2♣. Yes, I'd rather pass than open 2♣.

 

I'm not mad keen on 2♣, it lacks defensive values (quick tricks) and is likely to wrong-side the contract as well as being vulnerable to preemption from opponents. But all of the alternatives have some big defects too:

- If you open 6♦ you might be too high already, or too low and partner will be unable to judge what is useful (he will surely raise to seven with the king of diamonds, or with both missing aces).

- If you open 5♦, partner will never believe that you are this strong, with this much defence.

- Both Pass and 1♦ are vulnerable to preemption and you haven't begun to describe your strength.

 

 

For what it's worth, a 1♦ or 2♣ opening might work well and I would understand partner choosing either option. I would not understand partner choosing 5♦, 6♦ and especially not pass.

[nekthen]

Is there a case for 1♦ 1 any 4♦ being RKCB in ♦? Unfortunately, on this hand partner may bid 4♥ 0 or 3. I can then bid 5♣ and hope that partner will realise that he should bid 5 or 7. Not very satisfactory. Also, if he shows 1 or 2 I have to assume that he has the A♠ and set the final contract conservatively.

 

The MP issue also raises its head, so if partner responds 1 ace it may be wise to bid 6 as there is a danger of being out scored by the 3N crowd.

[PhilG007]

If I held this hand in third seat after 2 passes,I would not hesitate to open 5♦ as it puts huge pressure on LHO who very likely holds a rock crusher. However,as dealer I have to take the view that if I made a high preempt it would stifle partner as well as the enemy and we could well miss a small or grand slam. I've learned to treat such hands with caution and thus I would open a simple 1♦ on the hand given as a 'feeler' bid. If partner should happen to respond 2♣ my hand becomes enormous.

[Dinarius]

I agree.

 

In extremis, partner could could pass 1♦️ holding ♦️K.x, & ♣️J,x. Only 4 points, but 6♦️ is cold and you’re playing in 1♦️ passed out.

 

Such is the case for 2♣️ (as well as its preemptive value) though I accept that you can also construct hands where Opps can make 6 of a Major and outbid your 6♦️.

 

D.

[Cyberyeti]

I agree.

 

In extremis, partner could could pass 1♦️ holding ♦️K.x, & ♣️J,x. Only 4 points, but 6♦️ is cold and you’re playing in 1♦️ passed out.

 

Such is the case for 2♣️ (as well as its preemptive value) though I accept that you can also construct hands where Opps can make 6 of a Major and outbid your 6♦️.

 

D.

 

It's very unlikely to get passed out, opps will rescue you 99.9% of the time if partner isn't bidding, too many major suit cards missing.

[Dinarius]

It's very unlikely to get passed out, opps will rescue you 99.9% of the time if partner isn't bidding, too many major suit cards missing.

 

I agree. I was just giving an example in extremis.

 

In response to some other suggestions; any form of preempt is out of the question, in my view. Way too much playing strength.

 

So, 2♣, if you have it as a Benjamin strong but not game-forcing bid. Otherwise, 1♦.

 

For the record, here's the hand.

 

If those who preempted think they can bid 7NT, I'm all ears!

 

D.

 

Ps. and it's IMPs not MPs - not that it really matters.

 

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt42hqt87d75c752&w=sh2daqt98632cakq3&n=sk9876hj643d4ct98&e=saq53hak95dkjcj64&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=p]399|300[/hv]

[Dinarius]

Ps.

 

Note the wasted (unnecessary) cards in Partner's hand. Just shows the playing strength of West's hand.

 

Would any of you end up in 3NT after a 3♣ rebid by West? I presume not. But, playing catch-up with this hand is the key.

 

D.

[pescetom]

I bid 1♦ happy that after 1X we can bid 4♣ as RKCB(♦).

 

But otherwise I wouldn't have much compunction about bidding 2♣-4♦. There's nothing in our national rules that prevents this. By partnership agreement it's a game force, but that doesn't seem a huge or unjustified risk. The opponents are going to interfere but we can handle lower level flack quite well.

 

 

P.S. I wrote the above before seeing the hand. As it turns out, we could have bid to 7NT over either opening. Pass (which I would never have risked) works out well too.