[Edmunte1]

1. 1♠ for me, but at this vulnerability and form of scoring i don't consider 4♠ a killer, 1♠-1NT-4♣ (autospl) -4♦-4♥-5♥-6♥-6♠ is possible
2. I would have bid 4♠ if you play decent preempts. Missing 2 honours partner should have 7 cards, so on a non trump lead we are home. Even on a trump lead we have some chances, East's pass increases the probabily for partner to have an extra king
3. Diamond
4. I won't be too opthimistic about this hand: my trumps are not so good, the clubs are badly placed, partner has 5+♥ in my void and almost certainly only 3 trumps. If 2♣ was forcing i'll pass, if it wasn't i'll try 3♣ and sign off over 3♥
5. 3NT

[the hog]

What no one has commented on yet is the fact that if you open 2C and get pre empted to the 5 level in a minor, partner can and should double on one trump trick, expecting you to have your bid. What do you do then; pull to 5S and find that he had more, you are not making and they were going down?

[han]

Although I'm in the "never 2C" camp, just as I am in the "never 4S" camp, I don't think that the problems are larger after 2C - (5m) then after 1S - (5M). In both cases you will clearly bid 5S, at least in the 2C auction you have shown the powerhouse that you have and partner might raise when it is right (and sometimes when it is wrong).

[cherdano]

What noone has commented on yet is the fact that if you open 4S and they bid 5m over that and partner doubles, you don't know what to do. Partner may have a trump stack, but he may also have two aces and trump trick.

[han]

Of course nobody commented on that because 4S is idiotic.

[the hog]

Hannie, on Sep 18 2007, 09:56 AM, said:

Of course nobody commented on that because 4S is idiotic.

I am glad we are in agreement that 4S and 2C are both idiotic. Btw apart from the original posted auction which poster suggested opening 4S?

[ArtK78]

We are not in agreement that 2♣ is idiotic. The only thing that is idiotic is to suggest that 2♣ is idiotic.

At least one poster has stated that the hand is "too strong" for a Namyats opening. Then, by definition, it is a 2♣ opening.

If you do not agree that it is a 2♣ opening, then it is a Namyats opening.

After reading all of the posts in this thread, I have reconsidered my original position and have decided that it is very close between a Namyats opening and a 2♣ opening. I think it is a heavy Namyats opening rather than a 2♣ opening, but I would not criticize a 2♣ opening on these cards.

[the hog]

So I take it from your post that you only see 2 possible openings, 2C and Namyats. What about 1S?

Originally I said I have sympathy for 4S or Namyats, (NY), but would open 1S. If you open 4S or NY, next hand bids high pre emptively and pd doubles, you have a much more realistic option of passing. If you open 2C and next hand bids 5C or so and pd doubles, we already have the situation where one poster says he would bid 5S. By doing so you are taking the last guess on the hand not forcing the opps to do so. True, you may have a similar scenario when you open 1S, but at least pd will not take you for 2C strength.

One thing I should have said, this is certainly a 2C opening IF you are playing Benjamin 2s; but I doubt that is what any poster was thinking of.

Again you have not addressed the scenario where the bidding is
2C (5C) X (P)
?
Where pd has doubled on a trump trick and nothing else, or where pd thinks pass by him is forcing, a treatment many play after a 2C opening. Would it really surprise you that much if 5C made?

[cherdano]

The_Hog, on Sep 18 2007, 12:08 AM, said:

Again you have not addressed the scenario where the bidding is
2C (5C) X (P)
?
Where pd has doubled on a trump trick and nothing else, or where pd thinks pass by him is forcing, a treatment many play after a 2C opening. Would it really surprise you that much if 5C made?

If this auction happens then you bid 5S. Of course this is not such a great auction, you might be going down instead of taking 300, but even suggesting to pass (or basing criticism of 2C opening on the assumption someone would pass here) is very strange indeed.

[jdonn]

cherdano, on Sep 18 2007, 01:13 AM, said:

The_Hog, on Sep 18 2007, 12:08 AM, said:

Again you have not addressed the scenario where the bidding is
2C (5C) X (P)
?
Where pd has doubled on a trump trick and nothing else, or where pd thinks pass by him is forcing, a treatment many play after a 2C opening. Would it really surprise you that much if 5C made?

If this auction happens then you bid 5S. Of course this is not such a great auction, you might be going down instead of taking 300, but even suggesting to pass (or basing criticism of 2C opening on the assumption someone would pass here) is very strange indeed.

I second this. And I don't see how it makes you any worse off than 1♠ (5♣) P (P)

[the hog]

Oh I give up.

No one suggested "pass". I have no idea from which universe this comment sprang.

JDonn:
"I second this. And I don't see how it makes you any worse off than 1♠ (5♣) P (P)"

Also I DID say you may have a similar scenario after a 1S opening, but pd will not take you for 2C opening strength.

Please read what is posted before replying.

[jdonn]

The_Hog, on Sep 18 2007, 01:29 AM, said:

Oh I give up.

No one suggested "pass". I have no idea from which universe this comment sprang.

JDonn:
"I second this. And I don't see how it makes you any worse off than 1♠ (5♣) P (P)"

Also I DID say you may have a similar scenario after a 1S opening, but pd will not take you for 2C opening strength.

Please read what is posted before replying.

Lol! You continually (despite everyone's obvious best intentions to try and ignore it which are proven by your need to repeat it several times) tried to make an argument against 2♣ based on the possibility that it might go 5♣ on your left and you would thus have a tough bidding problem. In order for this to be an effective argument against 2♣, such a problem would have to NOT exist over the bid you advocate, 1♠ in this case. So are you trying to say that every post you have made thus far is nonsense?

I have just gone back and carefully read all your posts. I am much more enlightened now, I'll be sure to take into account that you sympathize toward an idiotic bid before I make any further replies. Along with the realization that strongly suggesting pass could be the winning action on a particular auction in multiple posts is not from the same universe as suggesting pass.

[ycos]

1)4♦ i play 8,8+1/2 tricks in ♠ with external Ace (or 2!c if i dnt play namyats)
2)4♠
3)♣
4)4!s
5)3NT

[the hog]

jdonn, on Sep 18 2007, 01:51 PM, said:

The_Hog, on Sep 18 2007, 01:29 AM, said:

Oh I give up.

No one suggested "pass". I have no idea from which universe this comment sprang.

JDonn:
"I second this. And I don't see how it makes you any worse off than 1♠ (5♣) P (P)"

Also I DID say you may have a similar scenario after a 1S opening, but pd will not take you for 2C opening strength.

Please read what is posted before replying.

Lol! You continually (despite everyone's obvious best intentions to try and ignore it which are proven by your need to repeat it several times) tried to make an argument against 2♣ based on the possibility that it might go 5♣ on your left and you would thus have a tough bidding problem. In order for this to be an effective argument against 2♣, such a problem would have to NOT exist over the bid you advocate, 1♠ in this case. So are you trying to say that every post you have made thus far is nonsense?

I have just gone back and carefully read all your posts. I am much more enlightened now, I'll be sure to take into account that you sympathize toward an idiotic bid before I make any further replies. Along with the realization that strongly suggesting pass could be the winning action on a particular auction in multiple posts is not from the same universe as suggesting pass.

Roflemags

You hold x? x? x? QJT

Bidding:

2C (5C) ?

Are you seriously suggesting a pass? If you are, you are talking crap.

1S (5C) Pass is reasonable is it not?

4D/S (5C) Pass is reasonable is it not?

"I am much more enlightened now, I'll be sure to take into account that you sympathize toward an idiotic bid before I make any further replies."

Sympathise, ("s" please), means precisely that; it does not mean that you would perform that action.

Next:
You hold the original posted hand. (Note I do not suggest the bidding immediately below.)

4D/S (5C) X You pass, yes? Not too happy but much happier than over a 2C opening.

1S (5C) X Ok, decision time, maybe yes but maybe no, but still a damn sight happier than over a 2C opening.

[bid_em_up]

The_Hog, on Sep 18 2007, 06:45 AM, said:

"I am much more enlightened now, I'll be sure to take into account that you sympathize toward an idiotic bid before I make any further replies."

Sympathise, ("s" please), means precisely that; it does not mean that you would perform that action..

Sympathize ("z" please) is just fine. Sympathise is mainly a British variant.

http://dictionary.reference.com/

"sym·pa·thize Pronunciation[sim-puh-thahyz] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used without object), -thized, -thiz·ing. 1. to be in sympathy or agreement of feeling; share in a feeling (often fol. by with).
2. to feel a compassionate sympathy, as for suffering or trouble (often fol. by with).
3. to express sympathy or condole (often fol. by with).
4. to be in approving accord, as with a person or cause: to sympathize with a person's aims.
5. to agree, correspond, or accord.

Also, especially British, sym·pa·thise."

Sorry that we don't speak or spell Brit on this side of the pond, but please stop trying to correct our English.

[hrothgar]

Comment 1: I think that we all agree that there is no perfect call with this hand. (With this said and done, I'd argue that some calls are less perfect than others)

Comment 2: I think that a strong 2♣ opening is one of the less preferable options. Strong Club players learned a long time ago that the opponent's would jump all over their 1♣ openings, and you don't always survive this. From what I can tell, folks are getting a lot friskier over the 2♣ openings as well... You need to worry about intervention. (Moreover, high ODR distributional hands like this one are the ones where the opponents are most likely to intervene)

I don't know about you, but I'd be a lot happier dealing with a competitive auction if I opened this hand 1♠ and gave some clarification to my shape than if I opened a very wide ranging 2♣ that doesn't promise any (real) defensive strength. Your milage may vary.

Comment 3: I still like a high level preempt, even if we are a bit strong:

(A) If I really like my hand, I always have the option to have an auction like the following:

3N - 4♥
4N

Where 3N = Strong 4 level preempt in Hearts or Spades
4♥ = Pass or correct
4N = specific Ace ask

(As I recall, Zenkel and Anderson provided a description of some specialized 5 level preempts that might fit this hand as well. I agree that trotting any of these out is dodging the question)

(B) One advantage of using 3N to show a NAMYATS type hand is that responder can use 4♣ and 4♦ as artifical asks. If you get a constructive auction, the 3N opener will actually be fairly well positioned to understand responder's strength.

© If I do open 3N and LHO overcalls 5♣, I'll feel reasonably well positioned. (I'll certainly feel better than I would after either a 2♣ or a 1♠ opening). Yes, the loss of bidding space will hurt, but at least partner's isn't expecting any real defensive strength from me. Unfortunately, I'll never be able to show the Heart fragment, since any Heart bid would be read as my suit...

[han]

Yes, let's preempt at the 5-level, surely that will solve our problems with this hand!

[hrothgar]

Hannie, on Sep 18 2007, 06:44 PM, said:

Yes, let's preempt at the 5-level, surely that will solve our problems with this hand!

Let's assume that I defined a 5♠ opening bid as follows:

1. 8 solid Spades to the AKQ
2. The KJTx of Hearts
3. A Diamond Stiff
4. A club void

Certainly not a high frequency bid, I admit. (Probably not worth playing). However, lets assume that I had choosen to play such a bid and (happy day), I was dealt the hand in question.

I'd open 5♠

This hand is a freak. You might like to pretend that you're going to have a nice controlled auction following you're storng club opening, or your 1♠ opening, or even 2♣. In reality, you're very likely going to be facing a high level interference, (articular given that the problem specified that you're red versus white).

Yes, 5♠ takes us past game. Yes we're un-necessarily high. However, the opening provided an incredibly specific description of out hand and partner damn well better be positioned to place the final contract.

In the real world, 5 level preempts are a lot less well defined that the hypothetical 5♠ opening that I described. However, most people use these as highly constructive bids. Its been a long time since I read through these chapters of A+Z. I don't recall precisely what they recommended for 5♥ and 5♠ preempts and I have no idea whether this hand would qualify for any of them. (perhaps someone might be good enough to check given that I'm at work right now and am cooking dinner for friends tonight)

Regardless, whats the old saying: "If the shoe fits, wear it?". If this hand happened to meet whatever set of 5 level preempts we happen to be using, I'd have very little worry about bypassing 4♠. All that you're nice slow controlled auction will do is let the opponents show their suits and at a convenient level.

[han]

The_Hog, on Sep 18 2007, 06:45 AM, said:

1S (5C) X Ok, decision time, maybe yes but maybe no, but still a damn sight happier than over a 2C opening.

I disagree.

[han]

hrothgar, on Sep 18 2007, 11:40 AM, said:

Hannie, on Sep 18 2007, 06:44 PM, said:

Yes, let's preempt at the 5-level, surely that will solve our problems with this hand!

Let's assume that I defined a 5♠ opening bid as follows:

1. 8 solid Spades to the AKQ
2. The KJTx of Hearts
3. A Diamond Stiff
4. A club void

Certainly not a high frequency bid, I admit. (Probably not worth playing). However, lets assume that I had choosen to play such a bid and (happy day), I was dealt the hand in question.

I'd open 5♠

Yes, I agree with you, if the 5-level bids can give you such an accurate picture then I would also use it.