strong 2 club open

[phoenixmj]

[hv=pc=n&s=saj982haqjdaj7ckq&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=ppp]133|200[/hv]

 

 

If you play a strong 2C is 22+ points OR 8.5 tricks, should you ALWAYS open 2C with any 22 point hand?

 

 

This hand came up and it was PPP to me. This hand has 22 HCP, but is also has a 6 LTC - although it might be better than a 6 with adjustments. The spade suit lacks "texture" and I know my partner does not have an opening hand. I probably only need 4 points and a spade fit to make 4 spades and the only forcing bid I can open is 2C.

 

 

Do you look at a hand like this and say - I can open 2NT (I am a point strong but i have 3 tenaces and the KQ of clubs. OR, do you say I am going to open 2C and then bid spades. Or, do you say this hand is really only "worth" 19 ish points so I will treat it as such.

 

I have frequently opened hands that have lower point counts but also fewer losers with a 2C open - so this is somewhat the reverse of that. IMHO weaker than its HCP.

 

As always - interesting hand and I look forward to hearing different opinions - or a universal opinion if there is one.

Thx in advance

[hrothgar]

From the sounds of it, your 2NT opening is ??? --> 21

 

If this is true, I would never consider downgrading this to a 21 HCP hand

 

You have three bullets and a decent 5 card suit

 

I'd open 2♣ and rebid 2NT

[phoenixmj]

From the sounds of it, your 2NT opening is ??? --> 21

 

If this is true, I would never consider downgrading this to a 21 HCP hand

 

You have three bullets and a decent 5 card suit

 

I'd open 2♣ and rebid 2NT

 

Yes -2NT is 20-21. So one point off the 2C open.

[Tramticket]

Neither an upgrade nor a downgrade. KQ doubleton is a negative feature, but a five-card suit with two honours and intermediates is a good feature.

[Cyberyeti]

Neither an upgrade nor a downgrade. KQ doubleton is a negative feature, but a five-card suit with two honours and intermediates is a good feature.

 

This would be my assessment I'd treat it as an average balanced 22 although K&R disagrees and gives it less than 21

[FelicityR]

I would never open 2♣ and bid ♠s here. It's a 2NT opening - if 2NT is 20-22 HCPs in your system - every time in my opinion. I look at the ♣KQ doubleton as the equivalent of ♣A. It's more 21 HCPs than 22.

 

Opening 2♣ here is overstating the strength of the hand.

[shermangao]

It’s a 21 count to me, maybe less, not a 2C opener

[nudnikbp]

If opening 2NT shows 20/21, then open 2C, then rebid 2NT.

[Cyberyeti]

If opening 2NT shows 20/21, then open 2C, then rebid 2NT.

 

I think it's close, we play 19.5-21 and I wouldn't feel anything like as comfortable downgrading as partner will assume he's facing 19-20 as this constitutes a VERY high proportion of the openers.

[bluenikki]

This would be my assessment I'd treat it as an average balanced 22 although K&R disagrees and gives it less than 21

 

CCCC hates 2 honors doubleton

[bluenikki]

CCCC hates 2 honors doubleton

 

for example xxxx xxxx xxx KQ is only 3.5

[msjennifer]

Sir ,there are not enough winners to open this hand as 2Club.The KQ doubleton is also not a good feature but the hand has enough to open it 2NT.One would certainly not like to suppress a fairly decent 5 card spade suit but thats the way the life is.Thanks.

[pescetom]

It's more 21 HCPs than 22.

 

Opening 2♣ here is overstating the strength of the hand.

The overstatement if any (I think not) is considering this to be worth its 22 HCP.

Opening 2♣ with 22 is quite proper if that is the agreement (as it is for OP and us).

 

 

Sir ,there are not enough winners to open this hand as 2Club.

I don't see what winners have to do with it, unless you have some bizarre regulations. We are making an NT opening.

The only difference agreed between opening 2NT and opening 2♣ 2NT is in the range of HCP.

[FelicityR]

The overstatement if any (I think not) is considering this to be worth its 22 HCP.

Opening 2♣ with 22 is quite proper if that is the agreement (as it is for us).

 

What I perhaps meant to say here when I say "a 2♣ opening is overstating the hand" is that the hand is 22 HCPs but it doesn't mean you should necessarily open it with 2♣ regardless of other factors.

 

First it is not a classic 'partner needs very little for game to be made' hand. A red suit king might add one trick to the tally, but it would still be difficult to make 10 tricks in a major or 9 tricks in no-trumps, obviously depending on what partner has precisely.

 

I was also always taught that a 2♣ opener should have 5 quick tricks available: this one has 4 and a half. And obviously again, distributional hands can be opened 2♣ without the requisite 5 quick tricks, but the nearer a hand is to a balanced distribution as this is, I would downgrade it slightly because it doesn't fit the quick trick criteria.

 

The forum poster asked all of us whether he felt that due to number of factors this hand, despite its 22HCPs, is worthy of a 2♣ opening? Looking at all the different ways of evaluating, I would still opt towards opening this 2NT (20-22) instead of 2♣. Others might state they see no reason why it shouldn't be opened 2♣. That's what bridge is all about: a matter of personal opinions :)

 

And, it would be interesting to see the whole hand, and what the outcome was.

[Cyberyeti]

What I perhaps meant to say here when I say "a 2♣ opening is overstating the hand" is that the hand is 22 HCPs but it doesn't mean you should necessarily open it with 2♣ regardless of other factors.

 

First it is not a classic 'partner needs very little for game to be made' hand. A red suit king might add one trick to the tally, but it would still be difficult to make 10 tricks in a major or 9 tricks in no-trumps, obviously depending on what partner has precisely.

 

I was also always taught that a 2♣ opener should have 5 quick tricks available: this one has 4 and a half. And obviously again, distributional hands can be opened 2♣ without the requisite 5 quick tricks, but the nearer a hand is to a balanced distribution as this is, I would downgrade it slightly because it doesn't fit the quick trick criteria.

 

The forum poster asked all of us whether he felt that due to number of factors this hand, despite its 22HCPs, is worthy of a 2♣ opening? Looking at all the different ways of evaluating, I would still opt towards opening this 2NT (20-22) instead of 2♣. Others might state they see no reason why it shouldn't be opened 2♣. That's what bridge is all about: a matter of personal opinions :)

 

And, it would be interesting to see the whole hand, and what the outcome was.

 

Missing the point, whether it is a 2♣ opener or not is not the question. Say you had 2N 20-21 and multi then 2N as 22-23 or vice versa, which do you choose ?

 

Basically the question being asked is whether this is a balanced 21 or a balanced 22. Nobody is going to bid 2♣-2♦-2♠ which is where it matters if it's a 2♣ opener or not.

[hrothgar]

And, it would be interesting to see the whole hand, and what the outcome was.

 

The fact that the poster chose to ask about this hand almost certainly means that something weird happened.

 

I think it would be a lot more interesting to see the results of a few thousand hands that chose to open this 2N and ones that chose 2♣

[Cyberyeti]

The fact that the poster chose to ask about this hand almost certainly means that something weird happened.

 

I think it would be a lot more interesting to see the results of a few thousand hands that chose to open this 2N and ones that chose 2♣

 

It's easy enough to see that there are low point count hands that pass 20-21 that make game and ones that bid terrible games opposite 22-23, the simulation is the way to sort this out.

[mikeh]

Lots of controls. 5 card suit. 22 hcp. Partner won’t likely go slam hunting, since he’s a passed hand. This looks like a balanced 22 count, hence 2C then 2N seems routine. I will downgrade some hands, but I’d need at least one more reason to do so on this sort of hand

[msjennifer]

The overstatement if any (I think not) is considering this to be worth its 22 HCP.

Opening 2♣ with 22 is quite proper if that is the agreement (as it is for us).

 

 

 

I don't see what winners have to do with it, unless you have some bizarre regulations. We are making an NT opening.

The only difference agreed between opening 2NT and opening 2♣ 2NT is in the range of HCP.

SIR,the requirements are NOT bizarre as you consider them to be .Hence I, politely, beg to differ.

[msjennifer]

duplicated .cvancelled

[dsLawsd]

An accurate and complete discussion.

Never always- your question on most hands is would you be unhappy if partner passed with 3/4 points? Bid 2♣ if yes.

 

2NT feels accurate, but in some cases I would open 1♠.

It might depend on what event I am in and who my partner is.

One of my now deceased fav partners voted for 14-16 NT and 19-21 2NT ranges making this hand too strong.

 

Thanks for giving us this hand to discuss.

[pescetom]

SIR,the requirements are NOT bizarre as you consider them to be .Hence I, politely, beg to differ.

 

There is no logical bridge requirement for a 2♣ 2NT opening to have a certain number of winners, or be game forcing, or whatever.

It just shows range of HCP superior to a direct 2NT opening and thus can perfectly well be 22+, or even less if 2NT does not reach 21.

If your RA has a regulation to the contrary (mine does not) then I understand your problem, although I, politely, beg to consider such a regulation bizarre :)

[msjennifer]

What I perhaps meant to say here when I say "a 2♣ opening is overstating the hand" is that the hand is 22 HCPs but it doesn't mean you should necessarily open it with 2♣ regardless of other factors.

 

First it is not a classic 'partner needs very little for game to be made' hand. A red suit king might add one trick to the tally, but it would still be difficult to make 10 tricks in a major or 9 tricks in no-trumps, obviously depending on what partner has precisely.

 

I was also always taught that a 2♣ opener should have 5 quick tricks available: this one has 4 and a half. And obviously again, distributional hands can be opened 2♣ without the requisite 5 quick tricks, but the nearer a hand is to a balanced distribution as this is, I would downgrade it slightly because it doesn't fit the quick trick criteria.

 

The forum poster asked all of us whether he felt that due to number of factors this hand, despite its 22HCPs, is worthy of a 2♣ opening? Looking at all the different ways of evaluating, I would still opt towards opening this 2NT (20-22) instead of 2♣. Others might state they see no reason why it shouldn't be opened 2♣. That's what bridge is all about: a matter of personal opinions :)

 

And, it would be interesting to see the whole hand, and what the outcome was.

Madam,I,personally,FULLY AGREE.

[bluenikki]

There is no logical bridge requirement for a 2♣ 2NT opening to have a certain number of winners, or be game forcing, or whatever.

It just shows range of HCP superior to a direct 2NT opening and thus can perfectly well be 22+, or even less if 2NT does not reach 21.

If your RA has a regulation to the contrary (mine does not) then I understand your problem, although I, politely, beg to consider such a regulation bizarre :)

 

Actually, there is no logical bridge requirement for 2 followed by 2NT to be stronger than original 2NT. Rather than weaker, I mean.

[ruleof15]

[hv=pc=n&s=saj982haqjdaj7ckq&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=ppp]133|200[/hv]

 

 

If you play a strong 2C is 22+ points OR 8.5 tricks, should you ALWAYS open 2C with any 22 point hand?

 

 

This hand came up and it was PPP to me. This hand has 22 HCP, but is also has a 6 LTC - although it might be better than a 6 with adjustments. The spade suit lacks "texture" and I know my partner does not have an opening hand. I probably only need 4 points and a spade fit to make 4 spades and the only forcing bid I can open is 2C.

 

 

Do you look at a hand like this and say - I can open 2NT (I am a point strong but i have 3 tenaces and the KQ of clubs. OR, do you say I am going to open 2C and then bid spades. Or, do you say this hand is really only "worth" 19 ish points so I will treat it as such.

 

I have frequently opened hands that have lower point counts but also fewer losers with a 2C open - so this is somewhat the reverse of that. IMHO weaker than its HCP.

 

As always - interesting hand and I look forward to hearing different opinions - or a universal opinion if there is one.

Thx in advance