[inquiry]

mike777, on Jan 12 2006, 02:17 PM, said:

Thanks for reply, but I assume we would not open your example hand.  In fact make it 6322  or 6124 and I still pass or open a weak 2 bid.

Also as I said we do not have  fit, yet......I guess it would be correct to say we do not have a known fit yet . Ya, that would mean passing most balanced 13 hcp hands, perhaps that it too old fashion?

Hi Mike,

Are you serioiusly suggesting you would pass instead of opening with:

♠AQJxx
♥Jxx
♦Kxx
♣Qx

Or even
♠AQJxxx
♥x
♦Kxx
♣Qxx

I only ask because this seems so unlike you. I had you down for a very light opener when holding five or more spades. And these hands seem ultra solid opening bids.

[the hog]

"Thanks for reply, but I assume we would not open your example hand. In fact make it 6322 or 6124 and I still pass or open a weak 2 bid."


Mike , does this mean you would either pass or open the following with a weak 2 bid?

AQJxx Jxx Kxx Qx

You have got to be kidding!

[mike777]

Easy pass. .

I hope my partner expects more from me in first or second seat but perhaps this is too old fashion. I fail to see 3 QT on this hand. Not sure why lower level players need to open lighter.

[Chamaco]

mike777, on Jan 13 2006, 04:38 AM, said:

Not sure why lower level players need to open lighter.

As I consider myself within the "lower level player" definition, I'll respond why I feel more comfortable opening lighter:

the reason is that with that kind of hands (say a minimum of a shapely 10/11 count with nothing wasted) I feel I need to deliver my strength/shape sooner or later in the auction but if I wait the next round the bidding might be already at a dangerous level to stick in.
Especially for a lower level player it takes a great deal of discipline to let the bidding die passing throughout when you do "feel the urge" to show your features.

Under such conditions, if I cannot restrain myself, I rather prefer to open those hands right away and then pull the brake later.

[mike777]

Thanks for reply, perhaps this is just old fashion thinking or just plain losing bridge to have partnership agreements to open sound in first or second seats?

For newer players or those of us trying to come back to bridge to open sound and try and win in the play and defense of the hand.

That would mean passing or optional weak 2bids with:

AQxxxx...Jx....Kxx...Kx

or

AQxxxx..x...KJxx...Kx

or passing with
AQJxx...Jxx...Kxx...Qx
or even
xxx...AQxxx...xxx..AK

that leaves passing or opening a weak 2 bid with Mauro's hands.

On the other hand if you are winning with lighter current style and system then I would only say do not change what is not broken.

[cherdano]

Wow, you must win a lot in the play and defense if you want to make up for the disadvantage of passing these monsters. AQxxxx x KJxx Kx! I would be worried about passing out a slam if partner is as conservative (Kxx xxxx Ax Axxx).

Arend

[mike777]

I would hope partner would open that 11 hcp hand in third and 4th seat assuming everyone is passing .

[mikeh]

mike777, on Jan 13 2006, 11:37 AM, said:

Thanks for reply, perhaps this is just old fashion thinking or just plain losing bridge to have partnership agreements to open sound in first or second seats?

For newer players or those of us trying to come back to bridge to open sound and try and win in the play and defense of the hand.

I do think that it is losing bridge to pass any of your example hands.

There are many, many reasons why this is so.

1. You let the opps in easily. Bidding after one opens is much easier than after one overcalls: think of the agreements that you have with regular partners for bidding after your side opens and compare that to when you overcall.

2. You either pass out a lot of hands that belong to you, or you have to open extremely light in 3rd or 4th. The wider the range of possible hands for a given sequence, the less efficient or effective you will be.

3. This is related to (1): consider how you would feel after P (3♥) P (4♥) with your example hands. The 4♥ bid might be stealing you blind or it could be on a powerhouse such that a balance by you goes 1100. Compare that to how you'd feel if you opened 1♠ and then passed, secure in the knowledge that you had informed partner of your general hand type.

These are only three obvious reasons: a fourth, and one that should never be discounted but which has to be offset against the need for partnership discipline, is that bidding is a lot more fun than passing.

[awm]

Some of Mike777's recent posts are a nice change of pace, since he seems to have adopted a Roth-Stone type opening style. This bidding style is not necessarily a bad thing, and it has some interesting similarities to the style Fantoni-Nunes play.

But there are times when you need to open a hand. Note that even for Al Roth, the weak two bid range was 6-12. This suggests that most thirteen-point hands with a six-card major are being opened at the one level. Just because Roth-Stone played a conservative-opening system doesn't make them incapable of evaluating the difference between a shapely hand with many controls and a flat quacky hand -- in fact they were/are quite good at this type of evaluation.

AQxxxx x Kx KJxx is surely a mandatory opening even for Al Roth. This is a five loser hand with nice controls and 6-4 shape. It will make game opposite many 6-8 point hands with a spade fit. Partner will not open those hands for you. In addition, the opening is a big winner in competitive auctions. If partner forces to game with a misfitting eleven or twelve point hand, I will not be ashamed to put this dummy on the table for 3NT.

Note that this hand is very different from a balanced thirteen like QJx KQxx Qxx Kxx, which I'm sure Al Roth would pass without thinking twice. Passing hands like that could easily be winning bridge and is certainly open for debate (I would open that one, but it is an absolute dead minimum for me).

[mike777]

excellent point, that 5 loser hand should be opened thanks.
But I think minimum hcp 5 loser hands would be often weak 2 bids?

Ok to open 1d with 3QT
x...xx...AKJxx..ATxxx

but weak 2 bid with

x
x
KJ98xx
AKxxx
or
AJT98x
KT98x
x
x

Anyway, Mike and many others point out the dangers with this style but would like to see more of it in action. If you are winning with a more lightish style do not fix what is not broken.