Basic Precision: Opening style: How light?

[helene_t]

Suppose you play with a pick-up partner, having agreed to play basic Precision, 1NT=13-15, few further agreements. What do you think about opening this hand in 2nd seat, white vs white, at IMPs? (Note: You do not play Muiderberg, so the option of opening this hand (or a slightly weaker one) 2♠ is probably not available, unless you have a funny preempt style B) )

 

♠K9842

♥AJ5

♦QT93

♣9

[whereagles]

This is a matter of style, not of system. I, for one, wouldn't open it. If it were with hearts I might open.

[Chamaco]

Absolute minimum for first seat opener.

 

Not strong enough for 2nd seat opener: 2nd seat bids must be textbook bids because the likelihood it's opps hand have decreased, and any distortion we make 2nd seat is more likely to drive our partner astray rather than disturb opps.

 

This is a borderline hands for my standards: offensive strength is rated as 7.5 losers, almost an opener; defensive strength is rated as 1.5-2 defensive tricks, = almost an opener.

 

I might stretch first seat (at white) but not second seat (no matter which vuln).

However, gimme the diamond king instead of the Q and I'll open (at least I'll have 2 full defensive tricks) .

[Gerben42]

Also "yes but absolute minimum" for me. Perhaps for Inquiry it's not minimum B)

[hrothgar]

Barebones minimum...

However, I'd want to be able to open

[inquiry]

Also "yes but absolute minimum" for me. Perhaps for Inquiry it's not minimum :)

Right you are. I voted open it even without the queen of diamonds (but I assume I can grab the jack of diamonds).

 

Kxxxx

AJx

Jxxx

x

 

This is 9 hcp, 3 control points, 13 distributional points for 25 Zar points. Call me wacky, but I open this PLAYING 2over1, so you guys should open it playing precision.

[hrothgar]

Right you are. I voted open it even without the queen of diamonds (but I assume I can grab the jack of diamonds).

 

Kxxxx

AJx

Jxxx

x

 

This is 9 hcp, 3 control points, 13 distributional points for 25 Zar points. Call me wacky, but I open this PLAYING 2over1

And it bugs the ***** out of many of us when you do so

[MickyB]

Lol, nicely put Richard...I'll concur by saying that I'm not convinced by the soundness of opening that light, particularly using unlimited openings, particularly playing 2/1! BTW, there was a separate option for "yes, and even if Q♦ had been J♦"

[luke warm]

yup, i open 1♦ :unsure:

 

but it's a minimum opening