[Cyberyeti]

My partner and I open 1♣ and 1♠ with different 5-5s in an acol context, this is 1♠. The two types we open 1♣ are:

2 really good suits but not a great hand, open 1♣, rebid a NF 2♠ over 1red.

A king better than the hand here (our 1♠ rebid is all but forcing and we respond fairly light) 1♣-1red-1♠-any-2♠

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean, on 2012-December-11, 14:42, said:

---

Here's the hand that sparked the debate (new partner)

<snip>

Hi,

why?

North sees a 9 card fit, 2S did not promise 5, you would bid similr with 54 in the blacks.

So playing 4Hx with a known 9 card fit in spades, a 55 shape and no trump tricks, is ...

You can endlessly debate what to open, but the given hand is no hand to spark this discussion,
starting the discussion is just throwing a distraction bomb to avoid discussing the real issue on
the hand.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[gwnn]

Maybe in a strong club system.

[mycroft]

Nah, Rosencrantz was in that Stoppard Play. You know, that one about nothing? :-)

Around here, I hear it Alerted usually as "you know, that guy double?" "Tell me what it means, please, not whose name it is" "Uhhh..."

I was playing in Toronto NABC, 2001, against this lovely lady when a gentleman of clearly Latino extraction sits down. "Hi, George" said the lady's partner. And then the light went on...

[ArtK78]

BillPatch, on 2012-December-13, 21:51, said:

Rosencrantz and Guildenstein were charactors in Hamlet.
The double was invented by Jorge (George) Rosenkranz.

That would be Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. They were minor characters in Shakespeare's Hamlet who were killed after delivering a letter to the King of England which they thought was from King Claudius (Hamlet's uncle). However, Hamlet had altered the letter changing the instructions to the King of England to have Rosencrantz and Guildenstern killed.

And, as mycroft pointed out, they were the title characters in Tom Stoppard's play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead which is a quote of a line at the very end of Hamlet.

Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is often compared to Beckett's Waiting for Godot.

For fans of the early episodes of Saturday Night Live (back when it was still called Saturday Night), the line "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead" in Hamlet is very similar to the line at the end of the wrestling match between the Killer Bees and the Wasps "Yes! They've done it! They've dropped the cow!" Totally irrelevant but somehow it brings a fitting end to the action.

[Free]

Open the highest from two 5 card suits, no exceptions where you don't need any.

[Zelandakh]

Reading this topic always brings back memories for me. I learned bridge from Culbertson's books and he was typically extremely scathing of opening 1♠ with this hand pattern. Sometime in the 80s I managed to get hold of some "modern" books, dating from the late 60s and early 70s. All of these were British and all recommended opening 1♣ with 5-5 in the blacks. One of them did mention that there was a trend amongst American players to open the hands 1♠ and that, while this was illogical "it seems to work for them." Even now, I would suggest that the majority of British players still open 1♣ more often than 1♠ with this hand pattern.

For myself, when I play Acol I still open 1♣ sometimes, typically with hands where I am willing to introduce spades even if the bidding comes back at a high level. Playing another system I think I would be less inclined to open 1♣. So I do think that the "this is obvious" answers perhaps stem in some part from not considering alternative systems. I would definitely say that there is a clear difference between British and American thinking here, even when the British players do seem to have made a definite move in the American direction on this issue. That coincides with a move towards 5 card majors and it is quite possible that these two things are directly linked.

[Vampyr]

Zelandakh, on 2013-February-08, 07:24, said:

Even now, I would suggest that the majority of British players still open 1♣ more often than 1♠ with this hand pattern.

Where have you seen this? It is not the done thing in London, but as bluejak likes to remind me, London is not all of England.

[jdeegan]

No real debate in my world. Usually you open 1♠. The big and fairly frequent exception is a good playing hand w/o enuf HCP to warrent a high reverse. Examples:

AKxxx
x
Kx
J109xx
is a 1♠ opener - you are basically giving up on the anemic ♣ suit.

AK1087
x
xx
KJ109x
is a 1♣ opener. You don't mind a ♣ lead. Even vul you are safe to rebid ♠ up to the two level even opposite passing partner.

AKQxx
x
Ax
KJ10xx
is a 1♠ opener since with 17HCP you can rebid 3♣ as a high reverse.

[MickyB]

Vampyr, on 2013-February-08, 14:39, said:

Where have you seen this? It is not the done thing in London, but as bluejak likes to remind me, London is not all of England.

I'm not sure I agree with "majority", but it's certainly not uncommon. While I wouldn't expect to see it at the YC, there are a lot of clubs with generally low-standard play in London as well, I'd be surprised if you frequented them but I've been surprised before!

[Zelandakh]

Vampyr, on 2013-February-08, 14:39, said:

Where have you seen this? It is not the done thing in London, but as bluejak likes to remind me, London is not all of England.

I play regularly in the Acol Club on BBO. The standard there is distinctly lower than the major London clubs. Most play a rather traditional form of Acol.