[kfay]

Alright, but I concede that 1♦ isn't the worst call of the auction. But I still don't like it.

[Apollo81]

kfay, on Mar 11 2008, 11:20 AM, said:

Alright, but I concede that 1♦ isn't the worst call of the auction. But I still don't like it.

Right thats all I was arguing, 3NT obv worse than 1♦.

[Apollo81]

kfay, on Mar 11 2008, 11:18 AM, said:

I have some sympathy for opening 1♦ on some 4-5 hands but I totally fail to see how any hand that's worth an opening when you have this 'usually open 1♣ mentality falls to a 1♦ opening when you have a void, especailly a heart void.

What if LHO bids 1♠ and partner doubles? What if partner responds NT without competition? I'd want to have started 1♦ in these cases. Also partner may be able to raise diamonds to the 3-level over a 1♥ bid when he couldn't raise clubs except maybe to the 2-level. Opening 1♦ has some merit.

[pclayton]

There's a moral to this story, and I think it shows up in several places. While its important to compete in low level auctions (especially at MPs), there's a limit and occasionally you can push yourself overboard when both partners take aggressive calls.

Here's my 2 cents:

1. 1♦. Definitely NOT my style. While 1♣ may lead to some rebid problems, 1♦ is far from foolproof. I suppose it's reasonable as a lead director, which may be a tie breaker here. Oddly, I don't mind a pass, which is something no one has mentioned. 5440's are overrated, and our hand is very minor-oriented. I give 1♦ an 8/10, since its hard to see how it contributed to the result.

2. 1N. OK, its matchpoints, fine, I get it. However, its hard to see how a negative double is 'wrong'. Frequently when pard has a weak NT type hand, he will be the one rebidding 1N anyway, so there's no rush to get to NT. Spades, OTOH, will be buried unless we make a negative x. 7/10.

3. 3♣. Maybe the partnership hasn't discussed what a double means here. Maybe it doesn't show this hand type. 3♣ is a serious overbid. Wouldn't you make the same call on Ax x KQxxx AQJxx? Agree 100% with Gnome that good-bad is useful here. Many hands that want to take a push to 2N are frequently better off hitting 2♥. I also disagree that the 1N bidder will automatically sell out to 2♥. I think that shows a lack of faith in partner who can see short hearts in your hand, and understands you couldn't find a call. I give it a 3 and I think I'm being generous.

4. 3N. The 'blame' for this call is similar to opening 1♦. If 3♣ shows extras, then how can 3N ever be wrong. We have a max 1N call, a likely double stop, and fitters in both minor suits. Frankly I think its clear. 10/10.

I give 3♣ the dinger. 1N is a distant 2nd. East gets 70%, West gets 30%.

[cherdano]

Apollo81, on Mar 11 2008, 09:26 AM, said:

kfay, on Mar 11 2008, 11:18 AM, said:

I have some sympathy for opening 1♦ on some 4-5 hands but I totally fail to see how any hand that's worth an opening when you have this 'usually open 1♣ mentality falls to a 1♦ opening when you have a void, especailly a heart void.

What if LHO bids 1♠ and partner doubles? What if partner responds NT without competition? I'd want to have started 1♦ in these cases. Also partner may be able to raise diamonds to the 3-level over a 1♥ bid when he couldn't raise clubs except maybe to the 2-level. Opening 1♦ has some merit.

What on Earth is the problem with 1♣-1N on this hand? You have found your club fit, don't worry, be happy.
I agree 1♣ (1♠) X is a problem, but it is the only problem auction I can see. I am surprised 1♦ is drawing so much sympathy.

[cherdano]

pclayton, on Mar 11 2008, 09:27 AM, said:

3. 3♣. Maybe the partnership hasn't discussed what a double means here. Maybe it doesn't show this hand type. 3♣ is a serious overbid. Wouldn't you make the same call on Ax x KQxxx AQJxx?

No certainly not, 3♣ is not forcing...

[whereagles]

cherdano, on Mar 11 2008, 03:31 PM, said:

pclayton, on Mar 11 2008, 09:27 AM, said:

3. 3♣. Maybe the partnership hasn't discussed what a double means here. Maybe it doesn't show this hand type. 3♣ is a serious overbid. Wouldn't you make the same call on Ax x KQxxx AQJxx?

No certainly not, 3♣ is not forcing...

That depends on what books you read. In my literature, 3♣ shows extras and invites pard to 3NT. If you want to compete and 2NT good-bad is not available.. well, sorry, you'll have to see if pard can balance.

[Apollo81]

cherdano, on Mar 11 2008, 11:30 AM, said:

Apollo81, on Mar 11 2008, 09:26 AM, said:

kfay, on Mar 11 2008, 11:18 AM, said:

I have some sympathy for opening 1♦ on some 4-5 hands but I totally fail to see how any hand that's worth an opening when you have this 'usually open 1♣ mentality falls to a 1♦ opening when you have a void, especailly a heart void.

What if LHO bids 1♠ and partner doubles? What if partner responds NT without competition? I'd want to have started 1♦ in these cases. Also partner may be able to raise diamonds to the 3-level over a 1♥ bid when he couldn't raise clubs except maybe to the 2-level. Opening 1♦ has some merit.

What on Earth is the problem with 1♣-1N on this hand? You have found your club fit, don't worry, be happy.
I agree 1♣ (1♠) X is a problem, but it is the only problem auction I can see. I am surprised 1♦ is drawing so much sympathy.

A lot of people play 1c-1n-2c as showing 6 clubs. You could get raised to 3♣ on Hxx if partner has a max. Also if opps jump in after 1N and you rebid clubs, pard may overcompete. Not big problems, but not no problem either.

[jdonn]

cherdano, on Mar 11 2008, 10:30 AM, said:

What on Earth is the problem with 1♣-1N on this hand? You have found your club fit, don't worry, be happy.
I agree 1♣ (1♠) X is a problem, but it is the only problem auction I can see. I am surprised 1♦ is drawing so much sympathy.

1♣ (1♠) 2♥ (p) ?

1♣ (p) 1♥ (1♠) ?

I guess I don't see why so many are so in love with 1♣, and I almost never open 1♦ with 4-5. It's not like this is some amazing club suit to be missing!

[cherdano]

jdonn, on Mar 11 2008, 09:54 AM, said:

cherdano, on Mar 11 2008, 10:30 AM, said:

What on Earth is the problem with 1♣-1N on this hand? You have found your club fit, don't worry, be happy.
I agree 1♣ (1♠) X is a problem, but it is the only problem auction I can see. I am surprised 1♦ is drawing so much sympathy.

1♣ (1♠) 2♥ (p) ?

1♣ (p) 1♥ (1♠) ?

I guess I don't see why so many are so in love with 1♣, and I almost never open 1♦ with 4-5. It's not like this is some amazing club suit to be missing!

Ok the first one is a problem, but is almost the same as the problem auction I gave. What on earth is the problem in the second auction? Am I not allowed to pass?

[whereagles]

Apollo81, on Mar 11 2008, 03:47 PM, said:

A lot of people play 1c-1n-2c as showing 6 clubs.

I don't see why you need 6 clubs. Pard is virtually guaranteed to have at least 3 of them (else 1♦ reply), so 2♣ needs only 5 cards. Ok, maybe in competition pard couldn't bid diams, but it's still pretty good odds he has 3 clubs. Heck, even a 5-2 fit is ok at the 2 level...

[han]

This is a sick thread.

[jdonn]

cherdano, on Mar 11 2008, 10:56 AM, said:

jdonn, on Mar 11 2008, 09:54 AM, said:

cherdano, on Mar 11 2008, 10:30 AM, said:

What on Earth is the problem with 1♣-1N on this hand? You have found your club fit, don't worry, be happy.
I agree 1♣ (1♠) X is a problem, but it is the only problem auction I can see. I am surprised 1♦ is drawing so much sympathy.

1♣ (1♠) 2♥ (p) ?

1♣ (p) 1♥ (1♠) ?

I guess I don't see why so many are so in love with 1♣, and I almost never open 1♦ with 4-5. It's not like this is some amazing club suit to be missing!

Ok the first one is a problem, but is almost the same as the problem auction I gave. What on earth is the problem in the second auction? Am I not allowed to pass?

Sure but I'd be a lot happier having bid both suits.

I guess I see 1♦ solving a bad rebid problem sometimes, and being a better suit anyway so it just doesn't bother me. I mean say you open 1♣ and get the second auction and pass. What have you gained? Partner doesn't know you have five clubs anyway, so you have in a sense hidden both suits.

I'll toss in one more, just our side bidding. 1♦ 1♥ 1♠ 1NT I am easily bidding 2♣. 1♣ 1♥ 1♠ 1NT now I have to pass, which again doesn't make me warm and fuzzy. Partner could be 5-5 in the red suits for example.

[Cascade]

The bidding is fine. They lack discussion of what their bids mean in competition especially what 3♣ means over 2♥ here and possibly whether this hand is a 1♦ or 1♣ opening.

Personally I do not like 1♦ openings on this sort of hand and I would not compete over 2♥ with a possibly misfitting hand with only a 5-4 hand especially when partner might give a preference to diamonds.

[the hog]

whereagles, on Mar 11 2008, 10:40 PM, said:

cherdano, on Mar 11 2008, 03:31 PM, said:

pclayton, on Mar 11 2008, 09:27 AM, said:

3. 3♣. Maybe the partnership hasn't discussed what a double means here. Maybe it doesn't show this hand type. 3♣ is a serious overbid. Wouldn't you make the same call on Ax x KQxxx AQJxx?

No certainly not, 3♣ is not forcing...

That depends on what books you read. In my literature, 3♣ shows extras and invites pard to 3NT. If you want to compete and 2NT good-bad is not available.. well, sorry, you'll have to see if pard can balance.

Agree with this - 3C is a serious overbid and the worst call in the auction. Also there is nothing wrong with the 1D opening.

[skjaeran]

What's wrong with a t/o double by west over 2♥? That surely must be better than 3♣ by far. That's the flexible call and keep all three suits in the picture. I'd open 1♣, not 1♦.

Agree that 3NT is an impossible bid over 3♣.

[benlessard]

I dont like 1D.

1Nt is better then X imo.

over 2H, X is too likely to be passed & passing 2H is sick. So 3C is the only bid. I like to play GB here but in both case 3C is 100% to play. So i give 95% of the blame for the 3Nt bid and 5% for 1D opening.