Are these FG 2 Clubs openings? Or not?
#1
Posted 2010-December-08, 15:04
♠A7
♥KQJ865
♦AK
♣K95
This is more likely to be a 2♣ opening, but then how do you treat it? Do you have a special sequence for this kind of hands?
♠A6
♥AKQT98
♦A6
♣K75
Finally two which are pretty similar:
♠AKJT9842
♥5
♦A8
♣A5
♠A7
♥5
♦AJ
♣AKT9xxxx
Can you elaborate why you would/wouldn't consider each of these hands a 2♣ opening bid? Would the conditions (vulnerability, seat, scoring, partner) affect your decision?
wyman, on 2012-May-04, 09:48, said:
rbforster, on 2012-May-20, 21:04, said:
My YouTube Channel
#2
Posted 2010-December-08, 15:17
The third hand you have 4♠ making opposite partner with xx xxx xxxx xxxx or the like, so opening 2♣ seems normal.
The last hand is not a 2♣ opening. You have only 16 hcp (so not enough points to make 2♣ mandatory). You also don't have game in hand, because game in a minor is eleven tricks and you have nine or ten -- you have no real expectation of making game opposite a yarboro. Further, a 1♣ opening on only 16 hcp and this long of a suit will virtually never pass out.
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#3
Posted 2010-December-08, 15:46
- ♠ A7 ♥KQJ865 ♦ AK ♣ K95
- ♠ A6 ♥ AKQT98 ♦ A6 ♣ K75
- ♠ AKJT9842 ♥ 5 ♦ A8 ♣ A5
- ♠ A7 ♥ 5 ♦ AJ ♣ AKT9xxxx
#4
Posted 2010-December-08, 15:58
#5
Posted 2010-December-08, 16:16
Hand 2: I open 2♣. It's tempting to try3NT even if partner indicates a bust. But I suppose I will allow a stop in 3♥.
Hand 3: 2♣ and I will be in game at least.
Hand 4: 1♣. I have never figured out how to bid these hands. 5♣ probably makes as often, or more often, than 3NT. And 6♣ is certainly possible. But I need something from partner. On shapely hands like this usually everyone gets into the act. I expect to get to 4♣ on my own if necessary before I shut up.
#6
Posted 2010-December-08, 17:23
I prefer to play 2♣ as forcing to game except for a 2NT rebid. Certainly you might wish to stop in 3♥ on hand 1 if partner has nothing, but it's quite rare that partner has absolutely nothing and he'll never know if the little he does have is useful, e.g. J10x xx xxxx Qxxx vs xxx xx J10xx Qxxx. So I don't think the gain from being able to stop in a partscore outweighs the cost.
#7
Posted 2010-December-08, 22:10
Third one I open 1♠, I don't consider to have even close enough defense for 2♣ opening and I'm not afraid of it being passed out.
4th is hard one, cause I'm lacking good bids after opening 1♣ but I think I'd have the same problems after 2♣.
I hope partner responds 1♥ so I can give fairly good picture of my hand with 3NT.
#8
Posted 2010-December-09, 02:45
3rd is an obvious 2♣, you have 10 tricks all the time except with some unlucky ♠ split. You want to be in game opposite a complete bust.
I don't have strong feelings about the 4th hand, I guess I'd probably open 1♣ but wouldn't mind if someone opened 2♣.
#9
Posted 2010-December-09, 02:57
yes
yes
no, but there's not much wrong with it
you need more for minors than majors.
George Carlin
#10
Posted 2010-December-09, 03:11
awm, on 2010-December-08, 15:17, said:
Without wishing to disagree with what you say, this last point is only part of the issue: the other important question is what your rebid will be, and whether you will be able to adequately describe your hand after, for example, a 1♦ response.
London UK
#11
Posted 2010-December-09, 05:19
#12
Posted 2010-December-09, 05:20
#13
Posted 2010-December-09, 05:35
For me only #3 is an obvious 2♣. I'll take my chances with 1♥ on 1&2 (and expect to be able to desribe my hand as I play 2♣ relay/Gazzilli over 1♥-1x). I would not dream opening #4 anything but 1♣
#14
Posted 2010-December-09, 05:54
nigel_k, on 2010-December-08, 17:23, said:
Are you planning to play it in 3NT from the strong hand?
#15
Posted 2010-December-09, 08:35
Hanoi5, on 2010-December-08, 15:04, said:
I would consider all of them to be 2♣ openers. Reason: I firmly belive one should have an upper bound of about 20-21 HCP (or equivalent in playing tricks) on 1-level openers, even if the hand is strongly 1 or 2 suited. This has two advantages:
1. It takes some pressure off responder, who would otherwise feel reluctant of passing 1x on very marginal hands.
2. Makes it easier for responder to evaluate the combined potential when opener is in the top region of 18-21 HCP.
The downside is that it makes 2♣ openers rather lightish, complicating subsequent bidding. But since those are rather rare openings, even if lighter, the problem shouldn't be too frequent.
#16
Posted 2010-December-09, 08:43
whereagles, on 2010-December-09, 08:35, said:
But those are the hands where more points can be lost or won, aren't they?
wyman, on 2012-May-04, 09:48, said:
rbforster, on 2012-May-20, 21:04, said:
My YouTube Channel
#17
Posted 2010-December-09, 08:45
gwnn, on 2010-December-09, 02:57, said:
yes
yes
no, but there's not much wrong with it
you need more for minors than majors.
This gets my vote. Those worrying about going down in game on the first two, need to remember that sometimes you need to take uncomfortable risks where this is not odds averse.
the Freman, Chani from the move "Dune"
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
George Bernard Shaw
#18
Posted 2010-December-09, 09:46
Hand 2 is also 8.5 tricks but now 3NT has play even opposite a balanced bust so 2C (or Benji 2D) seems to be the best description.
Hand 3 is an obvious 2C (Benji 2D).
Hand 4 is not a 2C opening for me. Game is not there and the bidding is unlikely to die in 1C. Again, playing Benji this would be a clear 2C opener.
#19
Posted 2010-December-09, 10:14
Hanoi5, on 2010-December-09, 08:43, said:
Either
- you open 2♣ and live with the loss of bidding space, OR
- open 1x and guess to underbid/overbid at bid 1 (as responder) or guess (as opener) whether to go for slam after responder's 2nd bid.
In any case you'll have guesswork to do. The only way to bid those hands more intelligently is to play a different system, like strong club or relays.
#20
Posted 2010-December-09, 19:32
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean