[Hanoi5]

R/W, you receive:

x
KJ8x
AQTx
KQJx

It goes:
Pass Pass 1♦ ???

It's a teams event against weak opposition.

[MFA]

Easy pass.

[OleBerg]

1♥

Pass is tempting, and "distributional correct", but in sequences like:

(Pass) - Pass - (1♦) - Pass
(1♠) - Pass -(2♠) - X
(Pass) - ???

partner will Lebensohl on to many hands where we have game, or he might be pre-empted by 3♠ from responder, or by opponents bidding up to 3♦ (which might not be the party it looks like.)

[hrothgar]

Hanoi5, on Mar 12 2009, 05:23 PM, said:

R/W, you receive:

x
KJ8x
AQTx
KQJx

It goes:
Pass Pass 1♦ ???

It's a teams event against weak opposition.

1NT

[hotShot]

I dbl and have an easy 1NT rebid in case partner bids 1♠.

[Phil]

R/W I'm not passing, but I would at W/R. Maybe Michael's pard's balance lighter than mine

Put me down for 1N and bidding 2N over a 2♥ xsfr, which should be an offshape 1N overcall.

[FrancesHinden]

I would pass. Always.

If I didn't pass, because I'd run out of pass cards or something, I would bid 1NT and complete a transfer to 2S (if partner wants to play in 2S the 5-1 fit is probably no worse than anything else).

I don't see the point of overcalling 1H.

[FrancesHinden]

hotShot, on Mar 12 2009, 03:24 PM, said:

I dbl and have an easy 1NT rebid in case partner bids 1♠.

How would you bid this hand:

Kxx
KJxx
AQx
AQx

?

Most people play that doubling then rebidding NT shows a balanced hand too strong to overcall on the first round.

[MFA]

Phil, on Mar 12 2009, 10:26 AM, said:

R/W I'm not passing, but I would at W/R. Maybe Michael's pard's balance lighter than mine 

No, he doesn't balance lighter than everybody else.

Quote

Put me down for 1N and bidding 2N over a 2♥ xsfr, which should be an offshape 1N overcall.

But he does like to bid spades, though.

[whereagles]

I usually pass these hands. 1NT if my spade singleton were AKQ.

[OleBerg]

MFA, on Mar 12 2009, 05:50 PM, said:

Phil, on Mar 12 2009, 10:26 AM, said:

R/W I'm not passing, but I would at W/R. Maybe Michael's pard's balance lighter than mine 

No, he doesn't balance lighter than everybody else.

On a few occasions he does.

Anyway, the risk of being passed out, and it being wrong, is virtually non-existant.

[hotShot]

FrancesHinden, on Mar 12 2009, 04:31 PM, said:

hotShot, on Mar 12 2009, 03:24 PM, said:

I dbl and have an easy 1NT rebid in case partner bids 1♠.

How would you bid this hand:
Kxx
KJxx
AQx
AQx
?

Most people play that doubling then rebidding NT shows a balanced hand too strong to overcall on the first round.

Good point! I will probably bid the same and get in trouble.

But a very weak partner will not move over 1NT, a strongish partner would have jumped over my dbl and if partner bids a 2nd suit I hope that my next decision is better.

[Phil]

OleBerg, on Mar 12 2009, 11:02 AM, said:

Anyway, the risk of being passed out, and it being wrong, is virtually non-existant.

Will pard reopen r/w on:

Axxxx, xx, xxx, Axx,

KJx, Qxx, xxx, Axxx,

KQxx, xx, xxx, Axxx


I'm not saying passing won't work out, but to say that 1♦ - float is a non-existent problem isn't being objective.

[OleBerg]

Phil, on Mar 12 2009, 06:14 PM, said:

OleBerg, on Mar 12 2009, 11:02 AM, said:

Anyway, the risk of being passed out, and it being wrong, is virtually non-existant.

Will pard reopen r/w on:

Axxxx, xx, xxx, Axx,

KJx, Qxx, xxx, Axxx,

KQxx, xx, xxx, Axxx


I'm not saying passing won't work out, but to say that 1♦ - float is a non-existent problem isn't being objective.

These are all easy re-openers. If you change the ♣A into the King, I would consider them to be minimum. (I'd probably re-open on worse thrash than that, but I would feel like an overbidder.)

[FrancesHinden]

Phil, on Mar 12 2009, 04:14 PM, said:

OleBerg, on Mar 12 2009, 11:02 AM, said:

Anyway, the risk of being passed out, and it being wrong, is virtually non-existant.

Will pard reopen r/w on:

Axxxx, xx, xxx, Axx,

KJx, Qxx, xxx, Axxx,

KQxx, xx, xxx, Axxx


I'm not saying passing won't work out, but to say that 1♦ - float is a non-existent problem isn't being objective.

It's not a non-existent problem.
(Partner will certainly reopen on the first of your sample, might on the second and probably won't on the third)

But as long as we pass quickly and happily, we have less of a problem if we are playing one of those people who respond on 'nothing' at favourable vulnerability. Plenty of forum regulars would suggest that J10xxx xx Qxx xxx is a 1S response to 1D at w/r.

[OleBerg]

Phil, on Mar 12 2009, 06:14 PM, said:

OleBerg, on Mar 12 2009, 11:02 AM, said:

Anyway, the risk of being passed out, and it being wrong, is virtually non-existant.

I'm not saying passing won't work out, but to say that 1♦ - float is a non-existent problem isn't being objective.

Okay, maybe I was a little, but just a little, fast. So let me rephrase:

I bid 1♥, not because I fear that the opponents will pass, but because I fear they will bid.

[Phil]

FrancesHinden, on Mar 12 2009, 12:06 PM, said:

But as long as we pass quickly and happily, we have less of a problem if we are playing one of those people who respond on 'nothing' at favourable vulnerability. Plenty of forum regulars would suggest that J10xxx xx Qxx xxx is a 1S response to 1D at w/r.

Yes LOL. Isn't it odd that we are much better placed if our opponent bids, rather than passes?

Still, I am concerned about getting to 3N after ...pass...(1♠) - pass - (2♠), double, since we could have a weaker hand.

[mikeh]

FrancesHinden, on Mar 12 2009, 12:06 PM, said:

Phil, on Mar 12 2009, 04:14 PM, said:

OleBerg, on Mar 12 2009, 11:02 AM, said:

Anyway, the risk of being passed out, and it being wrong, is virtually non-existant.

Will pard reopen r/w on:

Axxxx, xx, xxx, Axx,

KJx, Qxx, xxx, Axxx,

KQxx, xx, xxx, Axxx


I'm not saying passing won't work out, but to say that 1♦ - float is a non-existent problem isn't being objective.

It's not a non-existent problem.
(Partner will certainly reopen on the first of your sample, might on the second and probably won't on the third)

But as long as we pass quickly and happily, we have less of a problem if we are playing one of those people who respond on 'nothing' at favourable vulnerability. Plenty of forum regulars would suggest that J10xxx xx Qxx xxx is a 1S response to 1D at w/r.

I generally agree with all of Frances' posts on this thread. I am one of the regulars who advocates a light response to a 1m opening when blessed with a 5 card major but I would add that I, and I suspect some others of similar inclinations, do treat 3rd and 4th seat openings differently than 1st and 2nd.

For one thing, I usually play variable notrump, and so there is an appreciable risk opposite a 1st or 2nd seat opener that passing gets us to our 3-3 (or 3-2 or even 2-2 if he opens 1♣ on 4=4=3=2 hands) misfit rather than to our 9 card major.

In addition, if we play 12-14 or 11-14, and I catch a big hand with a fit, he won't go nuts on me.. a raise to 2M includes most 15-17 balanced hands with 4 card support, so if he bounces higher, we rate to make.

For another, we tend to open 4 card majors quite frequently in 3rd and 4th seat, especially hearts. So there is less risk of missing a good fit by passing (not: no risk... we open 4 card majors only if we do not anticipate being able to reach game opposite a passed hand.. so we may still miss a major, but it is less common than after a 1st or 2nd seat opening)

Sorry for the threadjack.

But I agree with pass... over the opening bid.

[hanp]

I would also pass.

My guess is that if it goes all pass then we are more often in a good spot than in a bad spot.

[Free]

I learned to pass these hands. I don't like ending up in a 5-1 fit at 2-level while it's not necessary...