[zasanya]

Setting: Local monthly mp tournament.Important because a first place means you can play in the Grand sounding annual 'Champion of Champions.'
You are playing with your favourite P and you are expecting 60% or more which is usually enough to be in top 2 if not 1st.
You know the field very well and know most people play precision and stretch to open 3rd hand at this vulnerabilty.You also know this East is a conservative who is not prone to stretch.

Scoring: MP

3 passes to you.To open or not to open?

---

[whereagles]

1♠, and pass whatever pard bids.

[Echognome]

If I'm having a good set (as you were), I definitely pass this. The alternative of opening 1♠ carries too much risk without enough reward. You are balanced and if partner misjudges in the auction, you can risk getting a bottom for no good reason whatsoever. Just pass and hope you can get your good board another way.

If you think you need a board to win it, then you can risk some action. In that case, I might make the strange opening of 1♣ if that is natural. It's a good lead director for you. If it is 16+, then I go back to my original statement.

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Codo]

I am a believer of the rule of 15, so I open whatever opening this is in your system. In mine, it is 1 NT- which is the biggest reason not to open

[Gerben42]

If you are having a good set you better continue to play well on the last board. No last-board-itis. Just bid 1♠ and pass partner's bid.

[inquiry]

Codo, on Apr 26 2006, 07:06 AM, said:

I am a believer of the rule of 15, so I open whatever opening this is in your system. In mine, it is 1 NT- which is the biggest reason not to open

It is interesting you are a believer in rule of 15. I was toying with bridgebrowser using a criteria where the bidding went pass-pass-pass- and 4th seat was held to 14 Pearson points, and asked teh question is pass or bid better? For this test, sadly 4th seat could hold (for instance) 9 hearts, which invalidated the study as pass would seem to be clearly wrong, but bidding with 13 and 14 pearson points was a clear winner both at matchpoints and imps.

A better "controlled" study needs to be done, but it appears from the initial testing that Pearson's rule might be highly over-rated. Looking at the results that I observed the reason seems to be that if third hand doesn't open light, odds are partner has slightly more than the "expected hcp" if you are have a minimum opening..

Might be worth persuing if we can define what kind of hands to exclude from the pearson point calculations (we could limit 4th hand to 3334, 2344, 1444, or 1345 type distributions), short suit always spades.

On this hand I would open, as I have both majors and if they outbid me, I will not be too upset if it is in spades, and if it is a minor it will be by an entire level. Since I hoping to find a major fit, I will buck the trend and open 1♦ rather than 1♠ as it makes it easier to find either major fit.

[bid_em_up]

Gerben42, on Apr 26 2006, 07:48 AM, said:

If you are having a good set you better continue to play well on the last board. No last-board-itis. Just bid 1♠ and pass partner's bid.

I dont see where it says its last board.

EDIT: DUH!! The thread title "another last hand", I was looking in the text of the first post for it.

[bid_em_up]

To comment further on the last board/good set issue, you state that you believed that you are having a good set, so we will assume it is late in the set, and possibly even the last board (ok, having determined now that it IS the last board from the thread title). If you normally open this hand in fourth seat, then there is no reason to vary from that. If you normally pass this hand in fourth position, then thats what you do. Stick with what got you here, dont change it in an attempt to create action. You usually will create it, but not with the desired results.

If your partnership tends to favor aggressive opening styles in 1st/2nd seats (opening 11-12 counts, rule of 20, LTC, etc), then I would pass. Partner has passed already, denying any of these possibilities, making it more likely his hand is the 7-8 count at the table.

If, on the other hand, your partnership style is to play sound openings in 1st/2nd position, then opening this hand is (almost) a must to protect your part-score.

Like Ben, I think opening the minor will work better with this hand (as opposed to opening 1S), but I will open 1C and pass partners bid, unless this opening is systemically precluded (you say that most of the field is playing precision, but not that you are). This gives you three options to play (1D, 1H, 1S), and it allows you to reasonably compete to 2D, or 2H if it becomes necessary. If it goes 1C-p-1D-p-p-? Now opps may try to balance in a major, which we will like .

If you are playing precision, then open 1D.

As always, jmoo.

[FrancesHinden]

My experimental evidence is that on a marginal hand it's never right to pass a board out at matchpoints in 4th seat. I don't know exactly why, but whenever I pass a hand like that (or a strong HCP-fewer Pearson point hand) I get a bad matchpiont result.

I can't give a logical justification for this, because I think it 'ought' to be correct to pass in 4th seat on this pile of rubbish. But I'll open it anyway.

[mike777]

I open 1D whether we open junk or Roth/Stone in second seat. I do think the jxx of D and AQ tight of clubs makes it a very close decision but the KJxx of s and ugly but 15 Pearson Points persuade me.

[Echognome]

It might have helped if I realised we were in 4th and not 3rd.

Opposite my regular partner, this is an easy pass.

Opposite most others, I think a 1♦ opening is better than 1♠.

Everyone agree that the problem is quite different (and interesting) in 3rd?

[han]

I agree with all that Justin said.


This hand reminds me of a hand I had several years ago. Playing against the weakest pair in an already weak field, I picked up a nice 11-count with 2 small spades, and it went pass pass pass to me. I couldn't bear the idea of passing out a hand against this pair, so I opened 1D. My partner bid 1S and RHO bid 1NT. My partner doubled this and it turned out to be unbeatable.

What had happened? RHO forgot to open his balanced 15-count, passed out would have been a great score for us. My partner had an 8- or 9-count, and figured that since I didn't have spades, I must have had a full opening hand (Pearson points again). Also, doubling this pair is often a good idea.

So we got a bottom instead of a top , any thoughts?

[whereagles]

Hannie, on Apr 26 2006, 02:58 PM, said:

So we got a bottom instead of a top , any thoughts?

Yes. There's no need to introduce randomness when opps are likely to mess things up unaided

[jdonn]

If you are going to open light in 4th seat with 4432, 4342, or 3442 shapes with the intention of passing partner's response then I really think 1♣ has a lot going for it, as dumb as it seems. It's more likely than 1♦ to keep the opponents OUT of the auction, since you are probably opening in their length. On the hand in discussion it probably won't cause partner to misevaluate either since it has AQ of clubs, and that's what I would really do.

[jdonn]

Jlall, on Apr 26 2006, 10:49 AM, said:

When the auction gets competitive, or when partner raises to 2C, I think you may regret opening 1C. I see no need to mastermind in this way, just on the hope that it may go 1C p 1D p p p.

I don't hope it goes 1♣ p 1♦ p p p. I hope it goes 1♣ p 1♥ p p p instead of 1♦ p 1♥ p p 2♣, etc.

But I admit I'm masterminding

(further edit) one last point. It's not as though we are exactly hoping our 1♦ opening gets raised either.

[bid_em_up]

FrancesHinden, on Apr 26 2006, 09:18 AM, said:

My experimental evidence is that on a marginal hand it's never right to pass a board out at matchpoints in 4th seat. I don't know exactly why, but whenever I pass a hand like that (or a strong HCP-fewer Pearson point hand) I get a bad matchpiont result.

I can't give a logical justification for this, because I think it 'ought' to be correct to pass in 4th seat on this pile of rubbish. But I'll open it anyway.

I think this is probably more of a case of remembering the bad boards, and forgetting the good. Overall, passouts should even themselves out (good, average, bad result).

On this particular hand, I think because it has both majors, 4 reasonable places to play (♦ ♥ ♠ NT), and can tolerate whatever partner responds (within reason), it should be opened.

Same hand, different pattern: ♠AQ ♥Jxx ♦xxxx ♣KJxx

Here, I would expect passout to yield an excellent result.