[Joe de Balliol]

Weak nt, 5cm, 3 weak 2s, IMPs. First in, Green, you pick up
A87x
xx
xx
KQJTx

Average plus opponents, unreliable partner.

What do you do?

[hrothgar]

Slightly tempted by 1♣, but I'll pass

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[HeartA]

pass

[Winstonm]

Pass.

[pclayton]

Strictly a style issue here. I know many pairs that open this but I pass.

[inquiry]

25 zar, 4+n♠'s, zar followers will open

[bid_em_up]

Pass seems clear cut, even discounting unreliable pard and above average opps.

[helene_t]

Just read one of Bergen's books yesterday. So 1♣ is fine.

[EricK]

If I were playing 4 weak twos I would probably go with 2♣. As it is I pass.

But it is very close. Make the ♠ AJ7x and I think I would open 1♣, but if instead you make one of the side suits Jx, I still pass.

[Codo]

EricK, on Jul 16 2006, 05:15 PM, said:

As it is I pass.

But it is very close. Make the ♠ AJ7x and I think I would open 1♣, but if instead you make one of the side suits Jx, I still pass.

No way to say it better.

[Joe de Balliol]

Nobody tempted by 1N for the pre-emptive effect?

[EricK]

Joe de Balliol, on Jul 16 2006, 09:23 AM, said:

Nobody tempted by 1N for the pre-emptive effect?

I was slightly tempted by 3♣ for the pre-emptive effect.

1NT has too many flaws - off-shape, below strength, two totally unstopped suits, and possibly wrong sides the final contract.

[awm]

Playing weak notrumps it's important that the 1-minor bids be kept up to strength. Partner is entitled to play you for a strong notrump or reasonably shapely hand in some auctions. While 1♣ has some advantages playing strong notrumps (I still wouldn't bid it), I think playing weak notrump it's out. Opening a weak notrump does have a lot of flaws, including wrong-siding the likely contract (if partner is strong) and playing in the wrong spot (if partner is weakish). I'd pass.

[000002]

if i open 1♣,to my partner,it will become one of my singular demerit

[mr1303]

I was given this hand before it was posted on here, and I calculated it to be just worth a 1♣ opener. I also know that the player holding this hand opened it 1NT, a bid that I think is fundamentally wrong.

He was playing a 12-14 NT, not an 11-14 NT. This hand is too weak for that. As a result, partner will bid game and you will go off.

Secondly, this hand will not be stuck for a rebid after a 1♣ opening. Make it 4 hearts and 5 diamonds etc and I might well change my mind, but here there is no reason to distort my hand.

[hrothgar]

The ugly auction after a 1♣ opening is

1♣ - (P) - 1N

The opps have an 8+ card heart fit and are likely to hit the right lead

[luke warm]

Joe de Balliol, on Jul 15 2006, 03:19 PM, said:

A87x
xx
xx
KQJTx

fits in well with winston's canape thread

[neilkaz]

Codo, on Jul 16 2006, 03:40 AM, said:

EricK, on Jul 16 2006, 05:15 PM, said:

As it is I pass.

But it is very close. Make the ♠ AJ7x and I think I would open 1♣, but if instead you make one of the side suits Jx, I still pass.

No way to say it better.

I agree completely. For me, this is just a bit too light unless I have an open aggressively agreement with PD.

For rule of 20 openers, I have 19..OK a very good 19, but with two weak dbltons.

.. neilkaz ..

[Echognome]

luke warm, on Jul 17 2006, 12:11 AM, said:

Joe de Balliol, on Jul 15 2006, 03:19 PM, said:

A87x
xx
xx
KQJTx

fits in well with winston's canape thread

Yes indeed Jimmy. I would be tempted to open this hand 1♠ in my system. I dislike 5422 shape however. Still, it wouldn't be outside of the parameters we have for opening and in 1st or, especially, 3rd you get some preemptive value.