[UdcaDenny]

My partner and I play 2/1. Now he says he dont want to play with me anymore if I open too weak. Is following hand too weak to open ? I think its a boarderline.
KQJxx Qxx 10x QJx. He says its not enough quick tricks to open this hand in first or second position.

[akwoo]

This is really up to partnership agreements. Playing 2/1, I open pretty sound, and I would usually open first seat favorable. But it depends on how much coffee I've had, what the opponents (at the table and around the room) look like, how the session has been going, and so on.

I can say that your losses from having partner double 3♦ expecting 2 tricks from you are more than outweighed by your gains from partner leading a spade against NT.

[billw55]

Let's see.

pros: good suit, which is spades
cons: quacky, scattered honors, balanced, no aces, lack of spots (or so I assume - those x could matter)

Yes, I think it is borderline, bid or pass is ok as long as style is mutually agreed. So if your partner wants pass, I suggest to go with that.

Personally, I will open this in 3rd or 4th seat, any conditions, and 1st or 2nd if nonvul at matchpoints. Otherwise, pass.

[mcphee]

I think opening this sort of hand is poor judgement. Perhaps I lean towards better hands to open, I do not even consider this one to be close. We have great S and should get the chance to overcall, although you might get shut out. After we see our great S the rest of the hand is trash. Partners will (with 10-11 hcp) be pushing towards a game perhaps in NT. Consider a typical start of 1S 1N, 2C 2N all pass. Facts are if responder does not hold the A of S your chances of taking 8 tricks isn't very good really unless he fills in the minor holding with a 5 card suit. I would not accept this sort of opening if I was your partner either.

[rhm]

I don't know what is borderline nowadays.
I would open in third or fourth position.
But otherwise I have more sympathy for your partner than for you.
For me this is a balanced 10 point hand and I do not open balanced 10 HCP hands in first or second position. In my opinion it is a losing proposition.
Weak players are usually mesmerized by quacks because with the same amount of HCP when they lack aces, they have more honors and because they have more they tend to be in sequence, of which some people make a big deal.

In white I have some sympathy for a weak two in spades. At least it could work out.

Rainer Herrmann

[nige1]

UdcaDenny, on 2015-September-14, 13:21, said:

My partner and I play 2/1. Now he says he dont want to play with me anymore if I open too weak. Is following hand too weak to open ? I think its a boarderline.KQJxx Qxx 10x QJx. He says its not enough quick tricks to open this hand in first or second position.

Depends on partnership agreement, style, scoring, vulnerability, and position at the table. For example, most would open it at MP, not-vul, in 1st seat,; and under all conditions or in 3rd seat..

From practical on-line experience, BBOers would open it, without thought

[rmnka447]

I agree with billw55's pros and cons.

So I'm not opening this hand in 1st, 2nd, or 4th seat. In 3rd seat, if I open it, I'd bid 2 ♠, not 1 ♠. But my partners know, anything goes with 3rd seat weak 2s.

I'm one of those old geezers who, like your partner, believe you normally need some QTs to open a hand. Normally, it's 2 QTs and 12 HCP, but will open all 3 QT hands and will open 11 HCP with 2 1/2 QT.

I'll also consider opening Rule of 20 hands that have 2 QTs, but I do use some judgment with those. With ♠ AJ432 ♥ AJ432 ♦ xx ♣ x, I'm not sure I'd open. But with ♠ AJ10xx ♥ AJ10xx ♦ xx ♣ x, I have no trouble opening 1 ♠ in any seat. The working intermediates make the hand quite a bit better.

Occasionally, I might open a balanced 11 HCP hand with 2 QTs, but it usually has lots of working intermediates in it. Maybe something like ♠ AQ10xx ♥ K109 ♦ Q10x ♣ xx.

If I do open with less than 2 QTs, it usually a hand with lots of playing strength. For instance, I had no trouble opening ♠ - ♥ xx ♦ KJ10xxx ♣ KQ10xx with 1 ♦.

Consider this. If you can open 1 ♠ and show a minimum with ♠ KQJxx ♥ Qxx ♦ 10x ♣ QJx all the way to ♠ KQJxx ♥ AKx ♦ xx ♣ xxx, you may give your partner unsolvable bidding problems. With something like ♠ Axxx ♥ xx ♦ AKJxx ♣ xx, a ♠ game is a good contract with the latter hand, but destined to go down at least 1 with the former. If you have too many bad results with hands like the former, it will shake your partner's confidence in your bidding. Then you'll be in really deep trouble if and when partner starts "compensating" for your bidding.

[rmnka447]

I spent a lot of space in my previous post outlining my personal opening standards. It's been a very serviceable way to play and has held me in good stead. I came to that scheme from cutting my bridge teeth in a local duplicate game with so many good players that it was like a regional A/X pairs final every week. One thing you learn from continually playing tough opposition is that you always get punished if you play too loosely. It's painful, but you eventually become a much better player.

Ultimately, you and your partner need to come to some understanding about your bidding style. To be effective, you've got to be in sync. I've seen some pairs who are very aggressive and do very well. I've also seen some pairs that are more disciplined and also do very well. Both sets of players have adjusted to accommodate their style and are comfortable with what they do. So there's no one right answer. The goal is to play good bridge because that's always a winner.

[MrAce]

UdcaDenny, on 2015-September-14, 13:21, said:

My partner and I play 2/1. Now he says he dont want to play with me anymore if I open too weak. Is following hand too weak to open ? I think its a boarderline.
KQJxx Qxx 10x QJx. He says its not enough quick tricks to open this hand in first or second position.

I would open.

[mike777]

UdcaDenny, on 2015-September-14, 13:21, said:

My partner and I play 2/1. Now he says he dont want to play with me anymore if I open too weak. Is following hand too weak to open ? I think its a boarderline.
KQJxx Qxx 10x QJx. He says its not enough quick tricks to open this hand in first or second position.

To repeat others, opening is a partnership agreement. Clearly, clearly partner says you do not have an opening bid per agreement.. For some reason you want to disagree about your agreements. Partner says this is NOT an opening hand....you diaagree....seems time to say thy and bye.

btw I think this is a great partnership QUESTION...

FWIWTHIS IS clearly a piece of crap hand....if you open it per agreements ...great....but agree.

[helene_t]

I would not open this hand in 2nd seat playing 2/1. I think the hand has too little playing strength, especially in a suit contract. In 1st seat it is very close. I think I would pass if undiscussed but if partner thinks this type of hand should be opened in 1st seat then I would be OK with that.

[mr1303]

I must be very loose, because I thought it was automatic to open.

[helene_t]

If you play a semiforcing 1nt then it is ok to open this hand as you are very happy to pass 1nt.

[rhm]

helene_t, on 2015-September-16, 06:54, said:

If you play a semiforcing 1nt then it is ok to open this hand as you are very happy to pass 1nt.

The problem is not a 1NT response you might be able to pass.
The problem is when partner forces to game - and in 2/1 this decision comes early even on borderline hands - but there is no game, when partner doubles opponents or when he is even stronger and will consider slam.
I know if my partner opened 1♠, I would not expect a hand with a single second round control as his only important asset.
If you want to open light open hands like ♠AJxxx ♥Axxxx ♦xx ♣x.
This can badly backfire, but it can at least win as well.

Rainer Herrmann

[kuhchung]

Why hasn't anyone cited KnR yet?

K&R (KQJxx Qxx Tx QJx) = 9.85

[MrAce]

kuhchung, on 2015-September-16, 11:51, said:

Why hasn't anyone cited KnR yet?

K&R (KQJxx Qxx Tx QJx) = 9.85

KnR can be used only for upgrades, never for downgrades!

Joke aside, I said I'd open this 1♠ and I am ready to admit to be off on this.
Otoh whoever thinks about opening weak 2, with a weak NT hand ....upgrades my reply from being worst.

[Cyberyeti]

I'm known for opening light, and I think this is an opening bid (it's essentially a 5 trick hand) BUT there are a couple of systems in which I think it should not be opened, 2/1 being one as partner can have quite a lot of pretty good hands that will force to game and go off, and what I play where if I open it, I have to open 1N or lie about my suit lengths later.

[Zelandakh]

I am another that is generally a fan of light opening systems but think that agreeing to open hands like this in 2/1 is a mistake. It is at best borderline even in a light-ish opening system like Acol. As a general rule, I think it is good to open unbalanced hands aggressively but balanced hands conservatively. From that I would say that this is not an opening bid for the vast majority of players. In a few systems it is a normal opening bid of course. One reasonable test is whether you are comfortable opening corresponding hands with xxx/Axx or xxx/KJx in the rounded suits. This hand is certainly not stronger than those.

[Jinksy]

I'd be more inclined to open this in Acol than SAYC, since that lets me open this hand 1N. Spade suit schmade suit - I don't want partner to compete in spades, and unless we've got a 9-card fit, I'd probably prefer 3N to 4S as our best chance at game. Also, NV, P should know I'll be stretching the lower end of our NT range for preemptive reasons, so will be slightly more conservative in hunting for game.

So I think I'd open when playing a weak NT, NV, first in at IMPs, and perhaps favourable (not white) at MPs. Probably not in any other situation if I was being disciplined (ETA - oops. Except third in, obviously), though in practice I'm sure I'd open more often at the table.

[johnu]

MrAce, on 2015-September-15, 20:55, said:

I would open.

Scratch UdcaDenny's partner off your own future partner list