[kgr]

IMPs
W/-
Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx
Would you open this hand after 3 passes at IMP's? (Partner will open most 12 pts and some 11 pts with 5 card Major).

[rogerclee]

Yes. People pass out too many hands in general, I think.

[andy_h]

In 3rd seat, definitely. Who says partner can't have a bal 11 or 12 count, or we could have a major fit - don't want to be giving up a part score if your side holds the majority of the deck!

Edit: Realised it's after 3 passes, but yes in 4th seat also. Not 1st/2nd due to 4333

[han]

I would open in 3rd or 4th (the OP said 4th), not in 1st or 2nd.

[helene_t]

Rule of 15 ... but this is quite a bad 12-count. OTOH I have a comfortable pass over anything p might respond.

I think it's close. Without any specifics about p's opening style, I would open.

[655321]

Do people really pass these hands in real life? I mean, you have 12HCP including 2 Aces.
I can't help thinking that even people who post that they would pass these hands would open them at the table.

[Trinidad]

I would only pass if my opponents are considerably better players then I am.

Rik

[P_Marlowe]

I would open, but we open fairly sound, if you open
light as it seems, than pass is certainly an option.

You wont have game, and the worst which may
happen is they make 110-140 on the other table.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[skjaeran]

I'd definitely open this in 1st, 2nd and 3rd seat.

In 4th seat it's marginal IMO, but I'd open most of the time, not always.

[kgr]

Trinidad, on Mar 17 2008, 03:41 PM, said:

I would only pass if my opponents are considerably better players then I am.

Rik

I hesitated between passing and opening 1♦, but that is a good reason to open 1♦
Partner did bid 1♠ showing ♥ and I did bid 1NT.
Partner had:
Kxx=Jxxxx=Jxx=Kx
Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx
1NT did go -1

[Codo]

Even if you play this system, why don't you play 2 Heart? Isn't that a much better spot?

[foo]

kgr, on Mar 17 2008, 05:38 PM, said:

Trinidad, on Mar 17 2008, 03:41 PM, said:

I would only pass if my opponents are considerably better players then I am.

Rik

I hesitated between passing and opening 1♦, but that is a good reason to open 1♦
Partner did bid 1♠ showing ♥ and I did bid 1NT.
Partner had:
Kxx=Jxxxx=Jxx=Kx
Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx
1N did go -1

I agree w/ justin that you should not play Kaplan Inversion opposite a passed hand.

Also, looking at your pard's hand you have answered your own question.

Whether you open this hand or not depends on how "heavy" your pard will pass in 2nd seat. Roth-Stoner's must open such 12 count 4333's in 4th lest they risk missing a game. Rule of 20 Bergenites should pass the hand out quickly. etc.

In short, there is no universal correct answer to your OP question.

[effervesce]

Open 1D. Wtp? There are still hands in which game is stone cold, for example opposite

Kx KQxxx Kxx xx

unless you open such hands 1M in 1st/2nd. I think probability-wise you and partner have better chances for a positive partial score than the opps; however even if you and the opps have similar probabilities of partial scores, the odds are tilted due to you and partner having chances for game and the opps close to zip.

[foo]

effervesce, on Mar 18 2008, 10:43 PM, said:

Open 1D. Wtp? There are still hands in which game is stone cold, for example opposite

Kx KQxxx Kxx xx

unless you open such hands 1M in 1st/2nd. I think probability-wise you and partner have better chances for a positive partial score than the opps; however even if you and the opps have similar probabilities of partial scores, the odds are tilted due to you and partner having chances for game and the opps close to zip.

The OP hand for clarity Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

If you expect your passed hand pard to have such a perfect fitting hand as your example whenever you hold the OP hand, you are not playing odds on Bridge.

...and let Us note that your Opponents on this board you have constructed have a double fit in the Pointeds and a profitable "4 over 4" at any vulnerability.

So, the =real= question is: if you open this, how often do you think you and your pard will make the correct X, pass, or bid 5 over 4 decision?

You better be right considerably more than 50% of the time, or you will have a difficult time getting and keeping teammates.

[effervesce]

foo, on Mar 18 2008, 11:44 PM, said:

effervesce, on Mar 18 2008, 10:43 PM, said:

Open 1D. Wtp? There are still hands in which game is stone cold, for example opposite

Kx KQxxx Kxx xx

unless you open such hands 1M in 1st/2nd. I think probability-wise you and partner have better chances for a positive partial score than the opps; however even if you and the opps have similar probabilities of partial scores, the odds are tilted due to you and partner having chances for game and the opps close to zip.

The OP hand for clarity Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

If you expect your passed hand pard to have such a perfect fitting hand as your example whenever you hold the OP hand, you are not playing odds on Bridge.

...and let Us note that your Opponents on this board you have constructed have a double fit in the Pointeds and a profitable "4 over 4" at any vulnerability.

So, the =real= question is: if you open this, how often do you think you and your pard will make the correct X, pass, or bid 5 over 4 decision?

You better be right considerablt more than 50% of the time, or you will have a difficult time getting and keeping teammates.

Then it simply becomes a matter of yours and your opponent's competitive judgement. If you and partner have terrible competitive judgement/agreements, then sure of course opening a hand would be more likely a loss.

Such a concern, however, doesnt contribute to whether or not it is correct to open the bidding. Assume all players are good at competitive bidding such that the par spot is reached. I believe opening this as 1D is a long-term winner.
Sure, you and your partner may have such bad judgement that making any bid at all will make you lose, and that it would be best for you to take any chance to passout a hand to not lose on that board. That does not change the fact on whether or not it is technically correct to open a hand or not.

A more relevant question is, is it more likely you and your partner own the partial, or the opponents. A simulation could probably be run to see which pair is more likely to 'own the hand'.

[foo]

You are not still understanding the situation here.

pa-pa-pa-?? and you hold Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx

What is pard's most likely hand?

They are limited to 11- or a very bad 12.

Their expected number of ♠'s is 10/3. ♥'s 10/3. ♦'s 9/3. ♣'s 10/3.
IOW, a flat hand like yours.

Their expected number of honors in ♠'s is 1, 2/3 it is an A or K.
♥'s 1, 1/3 it is an A or K.
♦'s 2/3, 1/3 it is the K.
♣'s 4/3, 2/3 it is an A or K.
IOW, GOP rates to have 3-4 honors and the suit that rates the highest to have A's or K's is ♣'s. Where they do you little good.

We usually need an 8+ card fit and 7+ controls to make a game.
You have 4 controls. We need 3 from GOP.
GOP rates to have 2 controls. IOW, an A =or= 2 K's.

IOW, that perfect hand you constructed is optimistic in the extreme.

ATT passed hand pard had Kxx=Jxxxx=Jxx=Kx
4th hand got unlucky mirror distribution in ♠'s but lucky that GOP had a 5th ♥.
IOW, just about what the odds say you should expect.

The actual hands found ATT rate to take 7 tricks, but are not 100% to do so.

[jdonn]

This is definitely a wtp opener.

[foo]

jdonn, on Mar 19 2008, 01:09 AM, said:

This is definitely a wtp opener.

4th hand at IMPs playing a mainstream style you consider
Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx
a "wtp opener"?

Ah, the days of being a Junior...