[pclayton]

mikeh, on Nov 5 2006, 11:11 AM, said:

GaryFisch, on Nov 5 2006, 02:01 PM, said:

.  Also, as pclayton pointed out, 1♠ followed by 3♥ may not be absolutely forcing. 

I wonder if Phil can give any examples of good players, playing 2/1 or sayc or any other standard based method who would pass after 1♠ then 3♥?

I may be going out on a limb, but my bet is that he knows none.

Now, this is not the same as saying that one cannot have an agreement that the jumpshift is non-forcing. Personally, I believe that to be unplayable in the long run, but that isn't the point. The point is that in a standard method 3♥ is no more passable than an original 2♣ opening. So to use the argument that 3♥ may be passed as a justification for 2♣ is invalid. Go ahead and argue the merits of 2♣ vis a vis 1♠, but using the non-forcing nature of the GAME FORCE jumpshift as an advantage for 2♣ renders the other arguments suspect.

There's players that will pass a jump shift response. Its rare, but I think we are talking about the specific subset of of hands that some will respond something to 1♠, but pass a jumpshift to 3♥, like x, Jxx, xxxxx, Kxxx for instance. Frankly with this hand I'd pass 1♠, but if I were to bid (say I was just trying to 'improve the contract'), I'd be mighty tempted to pass 3♥. After all, take some more 'normal jump shifts like:

AKxxx, AKxx, Axx, x
AQxxx, AKTxx, Ax, x
KQxxx, AKxx, AKx, x

3♥ might be the last makeable contract.

[blackshoe]

what kind of hand passes in first seat and then preempts over a 2 ♣ opening?

[Codo]

My lho is an unpased hand, he can preempt easily.
Most pairs are much better to handle competitive bidding after their normal opening bids but are quite helpless if you come into their strong opening bids, so there are good reasons to bid with really bad hands and a long suit.

F.E. take the example hand and switch pds hand with the hand from lho.
Lets assume that the bidding starts with:

pass pass 2 ♣ 3 ♦

I guess pd will bid 3 NT, won´t he? IF rho preempts again with 4 or 5 diamond, can you now show your two suiter and reach 6 Heart? Maybe you can, but I doubt that most of the pairs on this planet can.

In the same scenario, if you open 1 Spade, you will find 6 heart with or without opps bidding quite easily. Of course this proofes nothing as the real example hand is a good example where the bidding may end in 1 Spade. Lho is a little too weak to bid direct and rho may be too weak for a reopening X. But even here, this is very close, if you change just one High card from one opponent to the other, ne will surely act.

[dosxtres]

Is not standard in sayc or 2/1 2C 2D 3N Showing strong both majors?
That's the way I used play strong hands with both majors.
Pard, choose a major and transfer it to me.

[whereagles]

2♣ for me. I don't foresee any trouble describing this hand after a strong opening...

2♣ 2♦
2♠ 2/3x
4♥

etc..

[bid_em_up]

whereagles, on Nov 6 2006, 08:44 AM, said:

2♣ for me. I don't foresee any trouble describing this hand after a strong opening...

2♣ 2♦
2♠ 2/3x
4♥

etc..

Really?

You don't forsee auctions like:

2♣-(3♣)-p-(5♣)

2♣-(2N minors)-p-(5m)

2♣-(4♦)-p-6♦

awaiting your future on these hands?

[whereagles]

I usually don't think in terms of worst-case-scenarios

Besides, I can always dbl for take out on those auctions.

[pclayton]

bid_em_up, on Nov 6 2006, 08:14 AM, said:

whereagles, on Nov 6 2006, 08:44 AM, said:

2♣ for me. I don't foresee any trouble describing this hand after a strong opening...

2♣ 2♦
2♠ 2/3x
4♥

etc..

Really?

You don't forsee auctions like:

2♣-(3♣)-p-5♣

2♣-(2N minors)-p-(5m)

2♣-(4♦)-p-6♦

awaiting your future on these hands?

Are we really that better placed if we opened 1♠ and we get to take our next call at the 5 level? Are our vulnerable opponents more or less likely to interfere over a 1 level opening than a 2♣ opening?

[mikeh]

pclayton, on Nov 6 2006, 11:43 AM, said:

Are we really that better placed if we opened 1♠ and we get to take our next call at the 5 level? Are our vulnerable opponents more or less likely to interfere over a 1 level opening than a 2♣ opening?

I don't know about your experience, but mine suggests that opps, whether vul or not, are more prepared to interfere on long suits with weak hands after 2♣ than 1♠. While the risk has gone up for them, so too has the potential gain.

A 3rd seat 1♠ opening is rarely seen as threatening a making slam. A 3rd seat 2♣ opening may easily be en route to slam and is surely going +620 or more.

So that argument fails.

On the given hand, I admit that my choice of 1♠ would likely work out very poorly. I am an aggressive responder, but I also play BART over a semi-forcing 1N that fetches a 2♣ response, so I have no way to find and stop in 2♦, which really adversely affects the decision to respond.

As it is, I bid 1♠, lose 10 imps and move on to the next hand, unrepentant.

Now, if I have a similar experience relatively soon and in the meantime see no perceptible gain from my approach, I will consider lowering my 2♣ requirements. But one hand is an insufficient sample.

[pclayton]

mikeh, on Nov 6 2006, 09:10 AM, said:

pclayton, on Nov 6 2006, 11:43 AM, said:

Are we really that better placed if we opened 1♠ and we get to take our next call at the 5 level? Are our vulnerable opponents more or less likely to interfere over a 1 level opening than a 2♣ opening?

I don't know about your experience, but mine suggests that opps, whether vul or not, are more prepared to interfere on long suits with weak hands after 2♣ than 1♠. While the risk has gone up for them, so too has the potential gain.

A 3rd seat 1♠ opening is rarely seen as threatening a making slam. A 3rd seat 2♣ opening may easily be en route to slam and is surely going +620 or more.

So that argument fails.

On the given hand, I admit that my choice of 1♠ would likely work out very poorly. I am an aggressive responder, but I also play BART over a semi-forcing 1N that fetches a 2♣ response, so I have no way to find and stop in 2♦, which really adversely affects the decision to respond.

As it is, I bid 1♠, lose 10 imps and move on to the next hand, unrepentant.

Now, if I have a similar experience relatively soon and in the meantime see no perceptible gain from my approach, I will consider lowering my 2♣ requirements. But one hand is an insufficient sample.

And next time my 2♣ opening may get bombarded with preemption and I end up in the wrong strain at the 5 level and, as a result, I'll reconsider my approach.

We are all the sum-total of our experiences.

[inquiry]

You guys have misIrable choices... do you open 1♠, do you open 2♣, how about 4♠... Oh the MisIry. Chalk another one to maybe the opponents will keep the auction open for you, or open 2♣ where you can not stop short of 4♥ even if that is an overbid. Too bad there isn't some other choice on hands like this, that reduces the chance for intereference, and even if it comes, it is less effective, that while forcing you to 3 level, allows you to stop there, and doesn't require the opponent to save you when your partner passes your 1 bid and you have game on.

[bid_em_up]

pclayton, on Nov 6 2006, 11:43 AM, said:

bid_em_up, on Nov 6 2006, 08:14 AM, said:

whereagles, on Nov 6 2006, 08:44 AM, said:

2♣ for me. I don't foresee any trouble describing this hand after a strong opening...

2♣ 2♦
2♠ 2/3x
4♥

etc..

Really?

You don't forsee auctions like:

2♣-(3♣)-p-5♣

2♣-(2N minors)-p-(5m)

2♣-(4♦)-p-6♦

awaiting your future on these hands?

Are we really that better placed if we opened 1♠ and we get to take our next call at the 5 level? Are our vulnerable opponents more or less likely to interfere over a 1 level opening than a 2♣ opening?

Personally, I think so, for basically the same reasons Mike mentions.

Opps are much more likely (imo) to preempt aggressively opposite a 2C opener than they are vul against vul over a 3rd seat (or even 1st/2nd seat) 1S opener. This would be even more probable if they were favorable.

Another point I would make is that I would much rather have both of my suits named when making my second call at the 5 level, if forced to do so. Certainly, this has to be a big two suited hand.....you are not bidding it as a sacrifice.

I ask you Phil, wouldnt you bid 3C with LHO's holding over 2C on the hand in question (Or double to show clubs)? I know I would be likely to do so. What does North do? Pass or bid 3D, probably. Now East may well bid 5C. Back to you....

Now yes, your penalty of 5C is a better result than playing 1S (and so is 5H). But effectively, you had no chance of playing 4S to begin with.....and if you open 2C, you will never be able to bid 5H (which has play, as opposed to 5S which doesnt).

[bid_em_up]

blackshoe, on Nov 5 2006, 07:48 PM, said:

what kind of hand passes in first seat and then preempts over a 2 ♣ opening?

This one's easy.

4th seat hasnt bid yet

It's likely to be his hand that preempts, or bids and gets raised by his partner.

And there are still some people who play some semblence of discplined preempts who may not have a preemptive opener, but would certainly make a preemptive bid over a 2C opener.

[bid_em_up]

whereagles, on Nov 6 2006, 11:36 AM, said:

I usually don't think in terms of worst-case-scenarios

Besides, I can always dbl for take out on those auctions.

Oh, thats nice.

Since when is X by a 2C opener for takeout at the 5 level? (Or the 6?)

How often do you think partner is actually going to take it out? After all, you have a big hand, its probably better to defend, no matter what his hand is.

What if he takes the X of 5D out to 6C? Do you really a 6H/6S bid now shows 6-5 in the majors?

Sorry, I fail to see your logic here.

[FrancesHinden]

I'm surprised at the amount of passion this hand generates.

I would open it 1♠, but I think it is right on the edge. For all the arguments against a 2C opening on this type of hand, you eventually arrive at a hand that is so strong you open it 2C anyway. Give opener the ace of spades in addition, and everyone would open it 2C. Give opener the SA instead of the SQ and I would open it 2C although I don't know if mike would. In fact, give me any three of the top 4 spade honours and I think it becaomes a 2C opening. The spades are just ratty enough that I'm unhappy about having to go to the 5-level in them opposite a doubleton.

There are two risks associated with opening this hand at the 1-level, and only one has been mentioned: the first is you play in 1♠; the second is that you get too high. Opener may feel obliged to do more bidding just to get across how strong his hand is. Suppose you start

1S - 1NT
3H(say) - 3NT

now what?
If you bid 4H, partner will pass with hands where slam is making.
If you bid 4C you have shown a 5413 or 5404, not a 65 in the majors.

At least if you open 2C, partner will suitably appreciate the major suit jacks.

Anyway, compared to some actions I've seen analysed on BBO, if the worst my partner ever did was open 2C/1S (take your pick) we should all be happy....

[whereagles]

bid_em_up, on Nov 6 2006, 06:26 PM, said:

Opps are much more likely (imo) to preempt aggressively opposite a 2C opener than they are vul against vul over a 3rd seat (or even 1st/2nd seat) 1S opener. This would be even more probable if they were favorable.

Well, I could argue that out of the suits opps might have, clubs isn't that much of a problem since opps would need to overcall 3♣. In other words, what was

1♠ (2♣)

might now be

2♣ (pass)

[whereagles]

bid_em_up, on Nov 6 2006, 06:37 PM, said:

whereagles, on Nov 6 2006, 11:36 AM, said:

I usually don't think in terms of worst-case-scenarios

Besides, I can always dbl for take out on those auctions.

Oh, thats nice.

Since when is X by a 2C opener for takeout at the 5 level? (Or the 6?)

How often do you think partner is actually going to take it out? After all, you have a big hand, its probably better to defend, no matter what his hand is.

What if he takes the X of 5D out to 6C? Do you really a 6H/6S bid now shows 6-5 in the majors?

Sorry, I fail to see your logic here.

All dbls are for take-out until a suit is found, at any level. What's the problem?

If it goes

2♣ (2/3♦) pass (5♦)
dbl (pass) 6♣ (pass)

I now bid 6♥ asking pard to select another suit. Simple, no?

[mikeh]

FrancesHinden, on Nov 6 2006, 02:10 PM, said:

I'm surprised at the amount of passion this hand generates.

I would open it 1♠, but I think it is right on the edge.  For all the arguments against a 2C opening on this type of hand, you eventually arrive at a hand that is so strong you open it 2C anyway.  Give opener the ace of spades in addition, and everyone would open it 2C.  Give opener the SA instead of the SQ and I would open it 2C although I don't know if mike would.  In fact, give me any three of the top 4 spade honours and I think it becaomes a 2C opening.  The spades are just ratty enough that I'm unhappy about having to go to the 5-level in them opposite a doubleton.

There are two risks associated with opening this hand at the 1-level, and only one has been mentioned: the first is you play in 1♠; the second is that you get too high.  Opener may feel obliged to do more bidding just to get across how strong his hand is.  Suppose you start

1S - 1NT
3H(say) - 3NT

now what?
If you bid 4H, partner will pass with hands where slam is making.
If you bid 4C you have shown a 5413 or 5404, not a 65 in the majors.

At least if you open 2C, partner will suitably appreciate the major suit jacks.

Anyway, compared to some actions I've seen analysed on BBO, if the worst my partner ever did was open 2C/1S (take your pick) we should all be happy....

Agree absolutely (despite the language employed by me earlier). This is on the cusp: I would open 2♣ with KQJxxx AKQxx void Ax. It is precisely the weakness in the ♠ suit that dissuades me from opening 2♣. If ♠ are to be trump, I want to maximize the chance that partner will at some point be able to make a clear raise/strong preference... which probably cannot happen after a 2♣ auction even without interference.

I also agree absolutely that if anyone's worst error was opening this hand either 2♣ (if 1♠ is 'right') or 1♠ (if 2♣ is right), then they can partner me anytime, in any event.

[neilkaz]

[quote name='mikeh' date='Nov 6 2006, 04:48 PM'] ...[/QUOTE]
Agree absolutely (despite the language employed by me earlier). This is on the cusp: I would open 2[cl] with KQJxxx AKQxx void Ax. It is precisely the weakness in the [sp] suit that dissuades me from opening 2[cl]. If [sp] are to be trump, I want to maximize the chance that partner will at some point be able to make a clear raise/strong preference... which probably cannot happen after a 2[cl] auction even without interference.

I also agree absolutely that if anyone's worst error was opening this hand either 2[cl] (if 1[sp] is 'right') or 1[sp] (if 2[cl] is right), then they can partner me anytime, in any event. [/QUOTE]
The initial hand is right on the cusp of 1S or 2C for me. I'd try 1S in first or 2nd seat, but am a bit concerned about a pass out in 3rd seat and have no preference between 1S and 2C. In 4th seat, both opps have passed and if they can drum up preemption over 2C vulnerable..well, heaven help them when they are wrong if I hold something else for my 2C opener since I am afraid of being passed out and missing game.

With Mike's stronger hand above I open 2C all day in any seat since game looks like almost 100% opposite anything and I can make a slam if PD has a couple cards.

With the initial hand I wouldn't criticize a PD for 1S or 2C in any seat if playing a standard "American" 2C sys.

.. neilkaz ..

[keylime]

I choose 1♠, happily.

If they are going to bid minors, so be it. Pard will be a lot better off than if I open 2♣, and the auction comes back to me at 5♦ knowing that the only thing I have is a good playing hand. I need to involve pard immediately. If pard finds a 1NT call, I have the easiest 4♥ rebid (or 3♥ is that is considered G/F).

The other problem is, opening this hand with some sort of strong opening makes you one step behind in the auction. This is a hand where a slam is opposite almost any 6 count pard tables as long as the primary honor cards aren't diamonds.

I feel the premise that because I open 2♣ to deter competition, is asking for a five of a minor to be dropped in your lap with this hand when pard and you probably have not discussed how to cope with interference of 2NT for minors. Pass being positive, double being negative is of absolutely no help to this fine hand.