[mcphee]

I fail to see why we do not open this 1S. If you do and partner raises your suit don't you know what to do? If partner fails to raise S, we can get D into the bidding later maybe. Bidding S now makes it more difficult for the opps to bid H. Maybe if I was in a money game you could convince me to open 1D where I might collect 150 honors. The big problem with 1D is you will never be able to show this 5 card major without suggesting longer D.

I am not going to make a j/s creating a GF with this S suit.

[bid_em_up]

zasanya, on Apr 23 2006, 01:15 PM, said:

Most if not all bidding books advocate bidding a 5 card weak major in preference to a strong 5 card minor,In fact one of the first books I ever read gave exactly same kind of suits as given in this thread and advised to bid 1 major.Perhaps the experts who advocate opening 1 ♦ in preference to 1♠ have a different system.The book such an expert would write would suggest opening 1 minor in preference to 1 major when the minor is very very strong and the major is very very weak.
The point I want to stress is the two groups are playing different systems.The precision player would of course say both are wrong and advocate 1♣

The problem with this logic is that the majority of books are written for, well, beginners/intermediates. You said it yourself "In fact one of the first books I ever read gave exactly same kind of suits as given in this thread and advised to bid 1 major" (what level of player were you when you read it?). When teaching someone to play the game initially, it is simply not possible to explain to them when to open 1D and when to open 1S. They have enough to remember already and do not have the experience to be able to judge when to open 1D and when to open 1S. You give them a set of rules to follow, in the hopes that they can remember those (most can't). Since most books that are written are geared to this level of player, it is unlikely that you will ever see a book written that advocates opening 1D instead of 1S.

I am not playing a different system when I choose to open this hand one diamond. I am using my judgement and experience at the table to do so and that is why I do not believe that all top 50 experts will open 1S. They have been there, done that, so to speak and while their systemic bid is 1S, they may opt to deviate from this. This hand certainly qualifies as one on which they may choose to do so.

[1eyedjack]

Miron, on Apr 23 2006, 10:07 AM, said:

I think I want play 4♠ or 3NT.

Perhaps, but I worry that you will end in 4♠ on some hands when you would rather have ended in 3NT.

[hrothgar]

zasanya, on Apr 23 2006, 09:15 PM, said:

Most if not all bidding books advocate bidding a 5 card weak major in preference to a strong 5 card minor,In fact one of the first books I ever read gave exactly same kind of suits as given in this thread and advised to bid 1 major.Perhaps the experts who advocate opening 1 ♦ in preference to 1♠ have a different system.The book such an expert would write would suggest opening 1 minor in preference to 1 major when the minor is very very strong and the major is very very weak.
The point I want to stress is the two groups are playing different systems.The precision player would of course say both are wrong and advocate 1♣

For what its worth I'm one of those crazies advocating a 1♦ opening.
Left to my own devices, I prefer playing Major's first opening styles where I show a crappy 4 card major in preference to a 5 card minor.

When I suugest a 1♦ opening, I'm very much doing so within the context of a "standard" 2/1 game force construct. I'm very much playing a standard system. I simply think that things will work out better if I lie about my shape and treat this hand as if it were a 4=1=5=3 shape.

[P_Marlowe]

luke warm, on Apr 23 2006, 10:32 AM, said:

there's a case to be made for treating the spade suit as if it was 4 cards, but i can't make it... i'd bid 1s then 3d

I agree.

It's ugly, but ...

With kind regards
Marlowe

[nickf]

I saw a similar hand about 10 years ago in our national Butler and the only pair to bid to a grand opened 1D.

I think the theme of hands like this is "don't bid bad suits with good hands"

nickf
sydney

[zasanya]

nickf, on Apr 23 2006, 04:47 PM, said:

I saw a similar hand about 10 years ago in our national Butler and the only pair to bid to a grand opened 1D.

I think the theme of hands like this is "don't bid bad suits with good hands"

nickf
sydney

Would be interesting to see how the pair reached Grand.Did they reach knowing that opener was 5-5 in ♠ and ♦ or did they reach it because responder thought opener was 5-6 in ♠♦ or something even weirder?
There was a day when Garozzo and Belladonna stumbled into 7♣ missing ♣ k10xxx .Right?
Can we develope a theme based on the result?

[Codo]

I am with the 1 Spade bidder too.
There are some possibilities to win:
1. If pd has a good fit, you have no problem and your Slam searching engine will run
2. If pd has no fit, you will not play in spade and can find other fits or 3 NT later.
3. If you play 3 NT, it is hard for them to led and cash their spade tricks.
4. You makes it hardfer for them to bid their suits.

Downsides:
1. If they win the contract, pd may lead a Spade from Kx or so.
2. He will give false preference with xx,xxxxx,xx,xxxx.

For me, 1 Spade wins.

[nickf]

zasanya, on Apr 24 2006, 04:09 PM, said:

Would be interesting to see how the pair reached Grand.Did they reach knowing that opener was 5-5 in ♠ and ♦ or did they reach it because responder thought opener was 5-6 in ♠♦ or something even weirder?

I can't recall. But I do remember once diamonds were bid they quickly became the agreed suit and those that bid and raised spades went negative.

nick
sydney