[cherdano]

jillybean2, on May 1 2008, 07:39 PM, said:

Dealer: East Vul: None Scoring: IMP

♠ A85 ♥ K6532 ♦ 64 ♣ AT3

Ok you may not want to open this playing 2/1 but I think it is a clear opening hand playing SAYC

I think this has little to do with 2/1 vs SAYC, you can fit either style (of opening or passing this hand) into either system.

[jillybean]

cherdano, on May 1 2008, 11:01 PM, said:

jillybean2, on May 1 2008, 07:39 PM, said:

Dealer: East Vul: None Scoring: IMP

♠ A85 ♥ K6532 ♦ 64 ♣ AT3

Ok you may not want to open this playing 2/1 but I think it is a clear opening hand playing SAYC

I think this has little to do with 2/1 vs SAYC, you can fit either style (of opening or passing this hand) into either system.

I saw the 2/1 players were unhappy opening this hand and I understood (wrongly) that the standards for opening bids were a little more conservative in 2/1.

[P_Marlowe]

jillybean2, on May 2 2008, 01:36 AM, said:

<snip>
I saw the 2/1 players were unhappy opening this hand and I understood (wrongly) that the standards for opening bids were a little more conservative in 2/1.

I just wanted to add, that SAYC in this context
meant for me, that a 2/1 response promises
another bid.

And the question would be, if you said, it is a clear
opening bid in SAYC, do we talk about the same
system.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Gerben42]

Quote

The hand also has 26 ZAR, and is thus an opening bid by that standard.

Here comes the Z-word again...

The reason that in 2/1 GF you want to be a bit more careful opening 1M is that if you open light, partner will force to game on hands on which no game has any chance of making. At least playing SA you can stop somewhere lower sometimes.

[keylime]

Echo my German peer here - I probably don't open this unless using LIA.

[mikeh]

jillybean2, on May 2 2008, 01:36 AM, said:

cherdano, on May 1 2008, 11:01 PM, said:

jillybean2, on May 1 2008, 07:39 PM, said:

<!-- ONEHAND begin --><table border='1'> <tr> <td> <table> <tr> <td> Dealer: </td> <td> East </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Vul: </td> <td> None </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Scoring: </td> <td> IMP </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td> <table> <tr> <th> <span class='spades'> ♠ </th> <td> A85 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='hearts'> ♥ </span> </th> <td> K6532 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='diamonds'> ♦ </span> </th> <td> 64 </td> </tr> <tr> <th> <span class='clubs'> ♣ </span> </th> <td> AT3 </td> </tr> </table> </td> <td>  </td> </tr> </table><!-- ONEHAND end -->
</span>

Ok you may not want to open this playing 2/1 but I think it is a clear opening hand playing SAYC

I think this has little to do with 2/1 vs SAYC, you can fit either style (of opening or passing this hand) into either system.

I saw the 2/1 players were unhappy opening this hand and I understood (wrongly) that the standards for opening bids were a little more conservative in 2/1.

Everyone has their own standards for opening hands, and some 2/1 players are more conservative than others. I would pass this hand at imps and open it at mps.

At imps, I have some solace in that I can use drury if partner opens 1♠... the hands I hate are where I am going to feel fixed if partner opens in 3rd chair.. make this 2=5=3=3 and I am going to hate responding to a 3rd seat 1♠. 1N will be an underbid, and 2♥ on this suit is awful.

BTW, when I used to play 10-12 1N, it was this type of hand that made me want to play the method: I could open without worrying that partner would get carried away.

As it is, the double removed the gun from my head, in terms of the force, so I have an easy pass.

I echo Han in that posts like this are useful. The beauty of the forum is that players of all levels of experience can post issues that trouble them without, I hope, ever getting the feeling that others think the posts are too easy. There isn't a single expert posting to this forum who wasn't a B/I or intermediate at some point, and those of us who have progressed beyond that stage should never forget that. We got better because we asked questions and players with more skill than we had, answered them.

[Flame]

Jill I thought sayc opening shows 12 hcp. Not that im against opening this but you seems to say its a stadard opening and i dont see why. What do you base your opening on ?

[jillybean]

If anything, my sayc notes say a minimum hand is 13 but it is not very clear. When I started playing this game I was taught to open on 13 and that wasn’t all that long ago!

Obviously the rules have been relaxed a little now and I have learned that Aces and Kings are undervalued, Queens and Jacks overvalued. This hand has 2 Aces and 1 King so I think its more like a poor 13 count hand than a bare 11. If partner responds 1nt or 2♥ I have an easy pass, if I hear 1♠ I need to chose between 1nt and 2♠.

If my partner wants a better hand I would not fret having to pass but in the absence of any partnership limitations, I like to get in and bid.

[fromageGB]

I agree it is a matter of judgment whether to open or pass a hand like this, but while opening may get you committed to a failing game, passing seems a waste of a fair hand.

This is why with a couple of partners we use a 2H open for a "strong weak 2" 5 card suit, and a multi 2D for a normal weak 2 6 card suit. It works well, but I don't know if that is allowed everywhere.

[whereagles]

dcvetkov, on May 1 2008, 01:53 PM, said:

I think we should limit the number of wtp hands in forums . I ve seen number of challenging hands problems seems to diminish, but maybe I a wrong.

in this forum, ANY hand and be made challenging

Incidently, yeah, pass now is nice. Without RHO's dbl 2♥ is clear. Opening the hand is borderline but certainly won't cause our side trouble most of the time. It has big plusses when it helps pard compete.

[the hog]

This is far better than 13 random points with Quaks, for heaven's sake, you have 5 controls - count them! 5! This is an opening unless you change your name to Caspar Milquetoast.