Clubs

[pilowsky]

[hv=pc=n&w=sht97da8ckqj98532&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=p]133|200|

Matchpoints. NS vulnerable.

Both pairs playing 1NT 15-17 and 2♣ "strong".

This hand came up yesterday in the Club. I'm North.

What would you do with the West hand?

[/hv]

[mw64ahw]

I open 10 counts as normal on a hand like that

[Winstonm]

5c. In second seat with a pass to my right I will follow the rule of 2 and 3. I don’t want to preempt partner as much as inform with my preempt.

[jillybean]

I'm afraid to ask what the rule of 2 & 3 is.

 

I open 1C

I have an eight card suit headed by the KQJ, I have Ax and a void.

[pilowsky]

All great answers - I would probably have chosen 1♣ or 5♣ if it was me, but it wasn't.

The bidding came round to me after West opened.

Feel free to vote before you peek.

[hv=pc=n&w=sht97da8ckqj98532&n=sakt8654ha82dktca&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=p2c(Strong)]266|200|

 

The bidding came round to me after West opened.

I also have exactly 5 losers but was planning to open 2♣ with that option unavailable,

what should I do?

[/hv]

[AL78]

What was the explanation for the 2♣?

[mw64ahw]

All great answers - I would probably have chosen 1♣ or 5♣ if it was me, but it wasn't.

The bidding came round to me after West opened.

Feel free to vote before you peek.

[hv=pc=n&w=sht97da8ckqj98532&n=sakt8654ha82dktca&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=p2c(Strong)]266|200|

 

The bidding came round to me after West opened.

I also have exactly 5 losers but was planning to open 2♣ with that option unavailable,

what should I do?

[/hv]

so 2♣ with a 3♣ rebid says I have ~8+ playing tricks (forgetting about the hcp count) and long ♣ which you would likely end up taking to 4♣

 

I have Namyats style overcalls available so 4♦ works for me showing strong with 7+♠ & 8+ playing tricks

[LBengtsson]

I think both 1♣ or 5♣ can be right here white/red with one vulnerable opp already passed. though I am more on side of 5♣ slightly as winstonm says as hand has little defense. yes, you pre-empt partner but you are showing the hand you have exactly by rule of 2 & 3

[pilowsky]

What was the explanation for the 2♣?

Exactly as shown in the Alert.

[pilowsky]

I'm afraid to ask what the rule of 2 & 3 is.

 

I open 1C

I have an eight card suit headed by the KQJ, I have Ax and a void.

 

I was afraid too so I looked it up.

Based on Loser count:

Not vulnerable: Playing tricks = 13 - losers +3

Vulnerable: Playing tricks = 13 - losers +2

IF PT=10 bid 4

IF PT=9 bid 3

 

Here it's NV vs V so I'm not sure if there's an adjustment.

[shyams]

Many countries prohibit the use of a strong 2♣ bid with this hand. It does not have sufficient HCPs and (if this were a serious tournament) N/S may have redress if they refer to a Director.

 

Edit: I meant the West hand with the long club suit.

Edited June 10, 2021 by shyams

[pilowsky]

Many countries prohibit the use of a strong 2♣ bid with this hand. It does not have sufficient HCPs and (if this were a serious tournament) N/S may have redress if they refer to a Director.

 

Edit: I meant the West hand with the long club suit.

 

It's currently the subject of discussion - only (a small) part of the reason for the post.

I would be interested to hear the views of any Australian TD's.

The club is one of Australia's largest. Easily the largest during the height of the pandemic.

There were about 16 tables at this session.

I've never played in a Congress so I don't know what rates as 'serious'.

The bidding continued:

[hv=pc=n&w=sht97da8ckqj98532&n=sakt8654ha82dktca&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=p2c(Strong)4spp5c]266|200|

Now what should I do?[/hv]

 

[DavidKok]

I have no idea what's going on. Is 2♣ Precision? Why is North jumping?

[AL78]

Exactly as shown in the Alert.

 

Ok, sorry, didn't realise that was an active link where you could click on the bid and get the at table explanation.

 

I've seen those bids at my club by the Benji Acol players who think opening 2♣ on an 8 playing trick hand means AKQxxxxx and no more than a king outside is fair game.

[pilowsky]

I have no idea what's going on. Is 2♣ Precision? Why is North jumping?

 

Precision ?

Opposite I think.

They are playing SAYC.

We're playing 2/1.

The problem I faced was that my partner was going to be (and was) baffled about the distribution of HCP - to say nothing about the shape.

[Winstonm]

I'm afraid to ask what the rule of 2 & 3 is.

 

I open 1C

I have an eight card suit headed by the KQJ, I have Ax and a void.

Rule of 2-3 is based on the value of the opponent’s game . Down 2 doubled at equal vulnerability or down 3 doubled at favorable are both smaller losses than the value of their hypothetical game.

[mycroft]

1♣ or 3NT ("4m preempt"). Depends on which is more likely to talk this set of opponents out of spades. Before you open 1♣, figure out how high you're going to walk the dog, and what auctions you're pulling your partner's penalty double.

 

2♣ in the ACBL (assuming it's strong and not Natural Intermediate) is as stated illegal in Basic or Basic+ games, and in Open or Open+ games, if you agree this is a 2♣ opener, you must Alert *all* your 2♣ openers, "could be 8 playing tricks without defence". And when they believe you and it goes 2♣-2♠-p (A or K)-4♠; you get to decide if partner can set this, or if you have to bid 5♣ and hope it only goes 500 into their 620, or if they can actually make 6♠ and we should just let them take 680 - or even stripe-tail ape it the hard way!

 

3♣ isn't *bad* exactly, if your agreement is, like mine with most partners, "happy to put dummy down in 3NT". Hope we don't make 6, I guess.

 

[edit: of course I got the vulnerability wrong - again. What's worse is that I checked it - and then "fixed" my "mistake"!]

[pescetom]

Many countries prohibit the use of a strong 2♣ bid with this hand. It does not have sufficient HCPs and (if this were a serious tournament) N/S may have redress if they refer to a Director.

 

Edit: I meant the West hand with the long club suit.

No particular limitations on agreements about 2♣ opening in Italy, except those on a Brown Sticker such as weak and no known suit. But if EW want to use it for hands like this they had better have it documented and an explanation of "strong" won't cut.

[shyams]

The West hand is too weak to qualify as a Strong 2♣ opening.

 

Most national bridge authorities have guidelines on what qualifies as "Strong 2♣".

* Mycroft wrote about the rules within the ACBL.

* The EBU rules are very similar. (Quote from EBU Blue Book) "Partnerships who agree that an artificial opening (such as 2♣) may be made with a hand with a lot of playing strength but limited high cards must disclose this clearly

* My cursory search of the ABF website was not helpful. However, one of their documents (link) clearly states that "The psyching of a conventional bid, which is unequivocally forcing and systematically indicative of the strongest possible opening hand (e.g., a Game Forcing 2♣ or a Precision 1♣) is strictly forbidden."

 

If E/W described the 2♣ opening as "strong" with no other caveats or clarifications, I feel that N/S have a right to claim that West psyched. I cannot see why a Director would then not rule against E/W and in favour of N/S.

[jillybean]

All great answers - I would probably have chosen 1♣ or 5♣ if it was me, but it wasn't.

The bidding came round to me after West opened.

Feel free to vote before you peek.

 

 

4♠ and I think I will be getting the Director to review the hand afterwards.

[pilowsky]

The final outcome:

[hv=pc=n&s=sqj92hkq65dj972ct&w=sht97da8ckqj98532&n=sakt8654ha82dktca&e=s73hj43dq6543c764&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=p2c(Strong)4spp5cppp]399|300|

For 0%, here's the full hand.

My partner - thinking that there must be 50 HCP in the deck - passed the bid of 5♣.

I passed thinking that West must have a monster and that South and East must both have nothing.

West scored 5C-3 -150 for 100%.

One other person was in 5CX-3 for 5.8%

Everyone else made 12+ tricks with North in 4S (3 tables) or 5S (13 tables).

In the end, I did call the Director whose ruling was "They can do that" and "You should bid 5♠" - I don't think the second part was a ruling - albeit true.

I enjoyed this hand because (apart from the mysterious bidding and our terrible result) both 6S and 6NT are available - but 7CX is the best result.

Although 2♣ misdirected everyone, I have no idea if it's a reasonable call in Australia.

[/hv]

[helene_t]

Maybe North should pass over the 2♣ opening, based on the theory that the way to show a constructive hand over their strong opening is by passing first.

 

Without that agreement, I think North has enough to double 5♣.

 

I am not sure if South should bid 5♠ anyway, assuming that he expects West to have a normal 2♣ opening. North's red/white 4♠ bid should be sound enough that 5♠ should have a chance, maybe, but on the other hand, partner's preempt made opps make the last guess, and bidding 5♠ now might lift opps into a makeable slam.

[AL78]

Without that agreement, I think North has enough to double 5♣.

 

With three aces (including the ace of trumps) and Kx sat over a supposedly strong opener, can I ask what more you would need to double 5♣?

[pilowsky]

With three aces (including the ace of trumps) and Kx sat over a supposedly strong opener, can I ask what more you would need to double 5♣?

 

Bigger...

[helene_t]

If E/W described the 2♣ opening as "strong" with no other caveats or clarifications, I feel that N/S have a right to claim that West psyched. I cannot see why a Director would then not rule against E/W and in favour of N/S.

But if 2♣ was a psyche (and the local regulations allow the psyching of strong 2♣ openings), there's no problem.

 

The TD needs to establish if EW have an implicit agreement to open 2♣ with this kind of hands. In than case there's misinformation (and possibly an illegal agreement, but Australia is quite liberal so that's probably not the case)