inquiry, on Jun 22 2006, 09:20 AM, said:
But the problem isn't south. The problem is North... the question if south is an opener or not is a red herring.
Let me ask you a few questions as well as provide my own thoughts.
Why is it a red herring? The original poster asked who was more to blame. I think by opening this hand the normal auction to 4
♠ gets fouled. He didnt state it specifically, but if I had to bet, he could go and check the boards and would find that none of the pairs playing spades got a 1
♣ opener in front of them.
How much simpler would the auction be if South passes? Opening this hand 1
♣ simply screws the auction up as it usually will. I would much rather see this hand opened 3
♣ if it absolutely must be opened. At least that would be a somewhat accurate description of its values and defensive potential.
Why should they end in 4
♠ anyway? North certainly has every right to expect that 6C is a great contract, regardless of the form of scoring. 10 card fit, solid 6 card side suit, 4 trumps, 2nd round control in diamonds. All he really needs is the heart Ace and voila!!! 6
♣. Both red aces and the club Ace? Hot diggity dawg!! 7
♣!! Heck, partner did open, its not too unreasonable to expect something like this x Axx Axx A10xxxx, now is it?
On second thought, scratch that last question, from someone who espouses ZAR openings, I suppose it would be too much to expect.
What do you hope to accomplish or gain when you open this hand 1
♣? You have no major, heck, you dont even have SUPPORT for a major!! You aren't going to be happy when it goes 1
♣ (2
♥) X p. You wont be all that thrilled at having to bid 2
♣ after 1C-1
♥/1
♠, will you? I can see absolutely no purpose for opening this piece of trash hand. Unless of course, you just like to hear yourself bid and pass simply isnt a part of your vocabulary.
Sorry, but I think overall, the end result is directly caused by the opening bid. And not because of Norths subsequent bidding, although I will agree that he could do better as well.