Help
Scoring: IMP
Is this hand worth an opening bid? If so, what bid? And most of all why?
Page 1 of 1
Hand evaluation To open or not to open?
#1
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 128
- Joined: 2006-October-28
- Gender:Male
- Location:The Netherlands
- Interests:Besides bridge, cycling and reading
Posted 2006-October-28, 05:15
Is this hand worth an opening bid? If so, what bid? And most of all why?
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,289
- Joined: 2005-January-08
- Gender:Male
- Location:Tulsa, Oklahoma
- Interests:Art, music
Posted 2006-October-28, 05:43
White verse Red I open 5D.
Maximum preemptive value.
Descriptive of values.
Lack of spade cards.
Good interior spots provide a bit of safety for -500 instead of -800.
Maximum preemptive value.
Descriptive of values.
Lack of spade cards.
Good interior spots provide a bit of safety for -500 instead of -800.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 14,900
- Joined: 2004-May-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:Portugal
- Interests:Everything!
Posted 2006-October-28, 05:51
4♦ for me. 5 seems a bit of a stretch. Good hand for a lightner dbl if opps go to 6♠ 
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,153
- Joined: 2003-February-28
Posted 2006-October-28, 05:52
5D.
When I have an eight card suit, I want to declare. If my pd has DQx and out, we have 9 tricks on offense, and perhaps only one on defense.
Peter
When I have an eight card suit, I want to declare. If my pd has DQx and out, we have 9 tricks on offense, and perhaps only one on defense.
Peter
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,725
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Natick, MA
-
Interests:Travel
Cooking
Brewing
Hiking
Posted 2006-October-28, 06:03
Easy 5♦ opening
I don't think twice
I don't think twice
Alderaan delenda est
#6
- mmm Duvel
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,728
- Joined: 2003-July-30
- Gender:Male
- Location:Belgium
- Interests:Duvel, Whisky
Posted 2006-October-28, 07:06
At this vulnerability 4♦ is pure trash, so I'll open 5♦. I might miss slam easily, but that's a chance I'm willing to take...
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
#7
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 775
- Joined: 2005-May-05
- Location:Oxford
- Interests:mathematics, science fiction, Tolkien, go, fencing, word games, board games, bad puns, juggling, Mornington Crescent, philosophy, Tom Lehrer, rock climbing, jootsing, drinking tea, plotting to take over the world, croquet . . . and most other things, really.
Posted 2006-October-28, 07:48
5♦ at any scoring and colours.
#8
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 2006-October-24
Posted 2006-October-28, 10:42
ditto....5♦ every time
#9
- 5555
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,520
- Joined: 2003-September-04
- Gender:Male
Posted 2006-October-28, 10:50
hrothgar, on Oct 28 2006, 02:03 PM, said:
Easy 5♦ opening
I don't think twice
I don't think twice
I am surprised not to hear a 6♦ suggestion from you...
I hope whereagles has misread the vulnerability.
Arend
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
#10
- Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,586
- Joined: 2005-September-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
- Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor
Posted 2006-October-28, 10:55
Clearly, this is "worth" an opening bid.
What bid to make? More and more, when white on red with this sort of freak, I have been finding some success going counter-intuitive. That move is a simple 1♦ opening. Sure, I may end up making a seven-level decision. But, white-on-red, with info exchange, this is not so bad.
The high preempt obviously may work wonders. However, I am not all that eager to give up on slam. The 1♦ opening hampers the opponents somewhat anyway, as they will expect more defensive strength, both practically and theoretically. The "theory" side is "interesting" to me recently. If I preempt, I convert their agreements from "possibly obstructive, possible constructive, possibly defensive" to "clearly constructive." I purify their approach.
When my hand is "possibly obstructive, possibly constructive, possibly defensive," I find that purifying our system to clearly obstructive, with defensive (lead) tendencies, is not all that clear if I may want to be constructive and my lead preference is unclear.
May be that this is extremist, but 1♦ is my call.
What bid to make? More and more, when white on red with this sort of freak, I have been finding some success going counter-intuitive. That move is a simple 1♦ opening. Sure, I may end up making a seven-level decision. But, white-on-red, with info exchange, this is not so bad.
The high preempt obviously may work wonders. However, I am not all that eager to give up on slam. The 1♦ opening hampers the opponents somewhat anyway, as they will expect more defensive strength, both practically and theoretically. The "theory" side is "interesting" to me recently. If I preempt, I convert their agreements from "possibly obstructive, possible constructive, possibly defensive" to "clearly constructive." I purify their approach.
When my hand is "possibly obstructive, possibly constructive, possibly defensive," I find that purifying our system to clearly obstructive, with defensive (lead) tendencies, is not all that clear if I may want to be constructive and my lead preference is unclear.
May be that this is extremist, but 1♦ is my call.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
#11
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,151
- Joined: 2003-June-11
- Location:Southern California
Posted 2006-October-28, 11:10
At these colors, 5♦ is fine. After awhile, you just learn to make the call and live with the result.
As with so many of these quasi-2 suited freaks, I need to catch a long heart suit with pard for hearts to be right, since my hand will certainly get tapped at every possibility.
Think of 5♦ as an all-in semi-bluff on the nut flush draw when you sense a semi-strong hand opposite. You make the bet, and live with the result.
By the way, I think 6♦ is just too much. On this particular hand, you sort of want them to take a call at the 5 level.
As with so many of these quasi-2 suited freaks, I need to catch a long heart suit with pard for hearts to be right, since my hand will certainly get tapped at every possibility.
Think of 5♦ as an all-in semi-bluff on the nut flush draw when you sense a semi-strong hand opposite. You make the bet, and live with the result.
By the way, I think 6♦ is just too much. On this particular hand, you sort of want them to take a call at the 5 level.
"Phil" on BBO
#12 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2006-October-28, 13:12
5D....and i still lol at the notion of 6 level preempts.
Page 1 of 1