[Apollo81]

all white IMPs

xx
Q1098x
AJ
AQxx

1h-1NT
2c-3h
??

[pbleighton]

Pass, but it's thisclose.

Peter

[mike777]

Apollo81, on Apr 11 2007, 09:24 AM, said:

all white IMPs

xx
Q1098x
AJ
AQxx

1h-1NT
2c-3h
??

4H, I could have opened on so much less I guess so I better bid game now.

Of coure playing sound openings I would not have opened this hand so I guess I am playing with a regular pard.

My point being, this like so many other hands is really so dependent on your opening bid requirements.

[gingolia]

4♥; the additional chance that opponents will misdefend suggests bidding 4♥ with this hand.

[Apollo81]

mike777, on Apr 11 2007, 12:17 PM, said:

Apollo81, on Apr 11 2007, 09:24 AM, said:

all white IMPs

xx
Q1098x
AJ
AQxx

1h-1NT
2c-3h
??

4H, I could have opened on so much less I guess so I better bid game now.

Of coure playing sound openings I would not have opened this hand so I guess I am playing with a regular pard.

My point being, this like so many other hands is really so dependent on your opening bid requirements.

mike777, a suggestion: in general when you post replies you should assume you are playing "standard" strength openings or that you haven't discussed the issue unless the OP states otherwise. You can trivialize pretty much all evaluation decisions by "my non-standard style is xxx on this hand so this decision is clear" but it doesn't help you (or anyone else) learn anything

also a general suggestion to everyone: when an auction is posted leading up to a decision the OP generally does not care if the auction to the point of the decision would have been different with your pet methods; don't waste your time -- just give your opinion in the situation posted. You can still post that you disagree with previous bidding but do it because of judgement, not methods

[cherdano]

4H
Trying to get Mike to make a little sense is a Noble cause, but unfortunately a lost cause, too.

[mike777]

As a nonexpert player, I find what is a "standard strength" opening hand quite confusing and undefined. That is the main reason for my discussing my opening hand style so often in my posts. Playing often on BBO in pick up partnerships, I see a huge variety of "standard" opening bids.

Your experience may be very different. I do hope my posts are helpful to other nonexperts and not just a waste of time and space. I think my bridge improves by trying to answer this post questions.

If my posts are illogical I better stop now.

[pclayton]

I have a 6 loser hand and good intermediates so I'll bite on 4♥. The J♦ is a small bonus too.

As far as Mike's comments are concerned, I sometimes find them inconsistent. But to each his (their) own.

Frankly, I don't find that opening strength requirements vary that much. Maybe in 1967. But not in 2007.

[Apollo81]

mike777, on Apr 11 2007, 12:42 PM, said:

As a nonexpert player, I find what is a "standard strength" opening hand quite confusing and undefined. That is the main reason for my discussing my opening hand style so often in my posts. Playing often on BBO in pick up partnerships, I see a huge variety of "standard" opening bids.

maybe I can help.


To give us some starting point:
Rule of 20: add your HCP and 2 longest suit lengths.

Standard is, IMO:
---------------------
18 or less: opening is a mistake
19: normally pass
20: normally open
21: open almost all hands
22+: not opening is a mistake

Some examples of 19/21 hands where I would consider a "deviation" from normal appropriate (but I would understand if the normal action was taken)
-------------------------
AJ109xxx x Ax xxx open 1♠
A1098x x AJ10xx xx open 1♠
Qx Qxxxx AJ Kxxx pass
QJ KJxx QJx QJxx pass

If your "bar" is set at:
--------------------------
19.5-20.5 you are playing standard strength openings
19-19.5 you open a little light, but not enough to warn your opponents
20.5-21 you open a little soundly, but not enough to warn your opponents
anything else: you are either making a mistake or playing something that I would call "non-standard"


Hope this helps.

[Apollo81]

pclayton, on Apr 11 2007, 12:57 PM, said:

I have a 6 loser hand and good intermediates so I'll bite on 4♥. The J♦ is a small bonus too.

As far as Mike's comments are concerned, I sometimes find them inconsistent. But to each his (their) own.

Frankly, I don't find that opening strength requirements vary that much. Maybe in 1967. But not in 2007.

I strongly feel that LTC is not appropriate for this auction. LTC assumes the ability to ruff as needed in partner's hand and he is showing a 3-card limit raise.

[jdonn]

I bid 4♥. Very close.

[jdonn]

mike777, on Apr 11 2007, 11:42 AM, said:

As a nonexpert player, I find what is a "standard strength" opening hand quite confusing and undefined. That is the main reason for my discussing my opening hand style so often in my posts. Playing often on BBO in pick up partnerships, I see a huge variety of "standard" opening bids.

Your experience may be very different. I do hope my posts are helpful to other nonexperts and not just a waste of time and space. I think my bridge improves by trying to answer this post questions.

If my posts are illogical I better stop now.

Go exactly halfway in between your junky openings and super sound openings. That is standard strength!

[pbleighton]

"As a nonexpert player, I find what is a "standard strength" opening hand quite confusing and undefined. That is the main reason for my discussing my opening hand style so often in my posts. Playing often on BBO in pick up partnerships, I see a huge variety of "standard" opening bids.

Your experience may be very different. I do hope my posts are helpful to other nonexperts and not just a waste of time and space. I think my bridge improves by trying to answer this post questions.

If my posts are illogical I better stop now."

Mike, what perplexes many of us is that your responses swing between a very light opening style, where you open pretty much any 11 count, and a very sound style, where you pass a lot of 13 counts. You do this without acknowledging that whatever you said in a given post is totally contrary to what you said in a post in a different post the previous day

I think Noble's post on opening styles is a good summary. I also strongly suspect that you know it already.

Please keep posting, but it might be a good idea, when discussing your openings, to specify either "playing my junky opening style" or "playing my super-sound opening style".

Peter

[Apollo81]

jdonn, on Apr 11 2007, 01:33 PM, said:

I bid 4♥. Very close.

agree

[ohioply]

Bidding 4♥
6 loser hand

[Apollo81]

Partner held AKJx Axx xxx xxx. Hearts makes 8 tricks: LHO has xx KJxx Kxx KJ10x or some such.

[jdonn]

Even after seeing partner's hand I'm not sure if I would want to be in game or not! But his limit raise was an excellent decision, some players would force to game but I think that is too much.

[whereagles]

I'd bid game. It depends so much on where pard's hcps are that I'll just take the flier.

[Fluffy]

opposite 3 trumps 4th ♣ is not always a winner, so pass

[Fluffy]

mmm I must be so old fashoned, because even not counting my 4th ♣ as a posible loser my LTC is

2♠
2.25♥
1♦
1.5♣

for a total of 6.75, where do I go wrong with everyone else?