[bluecalm]

K8 Q86 97 AKQJ42

1C - 16+
1NT - 14-16
2C - 11-15, 6+C

After 1C, partner will GF with any 8.

Your call ? I have an opinion here and I think it's different than the most popular call will be.

Let's say we are playing MP's non-vul if that's important for you. Please post your opinion, especially if the answer vary depending on scoring/vulerability

[awm]

I'd go with 2c. Its supposed to be 11-15 with 6+c and that's what I have. I don't actually think this is that "good" a 2326 15 that I need to upgrade, and while I sometimes open 1nt with this shape, this hand seems to be about the club suit.

[Siegmund]

At MPs I understand a 1NT opening. That doesn't mean I am necessarily convinced it is better than 2C.

Playing Polish I am willing to treat this as a 1C-then-2C "16-20 with clubs" hand, but in a strong club system where my first rebid is unlimited or responder will GF with a misfitting 8, no.

[Mbodell]

At imps I'd open 1♣. At MP I'd open 2♣.

[petterb]

1♣. I think hand is too strong for 1NT or 2♣.

[rogerclee]

At MP, not really sure why 2C would be better than 1N. Anyway I don't play precision but I would always open 1C if I did.

[Zelandakh]

Perhaps it is only because when I play strong club it is 15+ but this looks alot like a normal 1♣ opening to me. That said, if Adam says 2C is best then it probably is...

[mycroft]

Whenever I look at upgrading a hand into 1♣, I assume competition of the nastiest sort. If it's reasonable that we will be able to handle it sanely, then I'm happy to upgrade.

Therefore, switch the black suits and I'm happy to bid 1♣. I don't mind getting to 3NT on a misfitting 8, and it's very likely that I'll get to 4♠ on a 6-2 "misfit" instead. But am I going to be happy with any of my calls after 1♣-(1♠)-X (cards, usually 5-8) -(3♠)? Even a 2♠ advance is nasty, but I can at least bid 3♣ and look for another half-stopper.

For 3NT, I need (effectively) 2 tricks from partner - and unless he's got something in the opponents' suit, they have to be quick tricks, because I'm down if I lose the lead.

So, even though I know I'm going to miss some games, I open 2♣. 1NT is an interesting choice, and I might make it, but again, I've taken partner out of the loop when they come in (on the other hand, I've hid the feature of my hand from the opponents, which is likely a plus). Is partner a passed hand?

[bluecalm]

Interesting I thought 1C would win.
I think opening 1C leads to too many bad games. I would open 1NT my guess (after going through some random hands) is that benefits from concealing our hand and making it difficult for them to find their partial/game outweigh benefits from showing club suit immediately.
I admit I thought mainly about 1NT vs 1C and not 1NT vs 2C so I from my point of view 2C could still be right, especially after seeing several good players liking it.

[whereagles]

Looks like a dead easy 1♣ opener to me. Easy opening and rebid.

[Statto]

It's some way short of 8 playing tricks for a normal upgrade, I'd much rather have K Q in the same suit (+ x) to open 1♣, or that my suit was a major. If opps are white they might be a nuisance after 1♣, otherwise it may be closer, but still 2♣ at IMPs (as voted). After a 2♦ enquiry, 3NT will show exactly this type of hand. At MPs, 1NT looks better - the major suits are 1-no-trumpy, and long running minors are usually good value for NT.

[bluecalm]

Quote

Looks like a dead easy 1♣ opener to me. Easy opening and rebid.

If easy rebid is what you are looking for, 1NT should do just as well

[petterb]

16.95

http://www.jeff-gold...8+Q86+97+AKQJ42

[whereagles]

bluecalm, on 2012-January-03, 16:06, said:

If easy rebid is what you are looking for, 1NT should do just as well

Not really. I would rebid clubs on this one. Prefer 1NT rebids on 6 carders to be made on weaker suits.

[r_prah]

I open 2♣. I agree with Adam's reasons. I'm not thrilled with the scattered king and queen in the majors.

[rogerclee]

Maybe you think it's tactically good to open 2C or 1N or whatever, I can buy that, but I don't understand the argument that you wouldn't open 1C because you don't think this hand is worth 16 or more points.

[awm]

Thing is, MOST 15-counts with a six-card suit are better than a flat 16. But the 2c opening explicitly shows 6+c and 11-15, so you can't go and upgrade out of that range primarily because of the sixth club...

I'm not convinced that this hand (with no shape and unsupported major suit honors) is that much better than a typical 15 with six clubs.

[WellSpyder]

Maybe bidding questions need to specify the country you are playing in, not just rulings questions! It may seem mad to most of you, but you are not allowed to open this hand with a Precision 1♣ in almost all competitions in England since it doesn't have 16 points, and neither does it satisfy the rule of 25, ie HCPs plus length of longest 2 suits. (I suppose strictly speaking there is no law against opening 1♣, but if you do then you are likely to be ruled to be using an unlicensed agreement, since you are not allowed to agree, either explicitly or implicitly, that this hand qualifies as a strong 1♣ opener.)

That makes my choice rather easier on the hand, but might just distort your poll results..... I console myself with the thought that perhaps partner won't mind if just occasionally I am maximum for my bid.

[mike gill]

I'd always understood that the 2c opener was a hand that would bid 1c - 1x - 2c in standard. If you wouldn't do that, then do something else. Surely nobody would argue for opening 2c on, say, xx xx AKx AKJTxx just because you have 10-15 HCP and 6 clubs, right? The official agreement I play is actually 10-14 since so many 15s end up not wanting to open a limited NF bid. This also lets responder pass or just raise to 3c on random 8-9 counts without fear of missing game. The actual hand has some positive and negative features, but I would tend to slightly overbid my first call and then blame Meckstroth if it doesn't work out. 1c for me.

[gnasher]

Playing standard, I'd treat this as a balanced hand. I think it's about equivalent to a balanced 17-count, so it's not a 1NT opening. It would be ridiculous to open 2♣ on a hand because it's too strong for 1NT, so I suppose that makes it a 1♣ opening, even though it's a bit lacking in defensive values.