[Chamaco]

Scoring: IMPS

---

[the hog]

4D or the equivalent if I am playing Namyats. (Probably 3N in this case).

[mishovnbg]

With 8 cards or 7-4 I bid normally at 4 level. With 9 or 8-4 - 5 level.
Misho

[OSH]

4D, but if I would know it is a prepared hand, 5 is tempting....

[Flame]

I voted for 5d, my second choice is 3d, and third choice is pass.
I hate 4D here (which most choose), 4d usually just help them bid 4M, which as i see it is the best contract for them.
MP i would bid just the same.

[Chamaco]

When I have a void, I usually consider my suit length as +1 (if no other reasons to downgrade) , so I bid 5D.

However, pard had
♠Qxx♥Kxx♦AKx♣Axxx

and we missed 3NT ... - (that was MP though)

Actually I'd better skip the bids that followed my 5D bid, ending in 6D doubled for a bottom, sigh... ; the sad part is that the sequence that led to 6D is even worse than the final contract .

PS- for OSH: That was no prepared hand, just a random deal from a MP tournament at my local club last week.

[Free]

the chances of 3NT are quite small imo, so 3♦ is REALLY an underbid. 4♦ or 5♦ seems normal. 5♦ ofcourse takes the opportunity for opps away to bid 4M, but since we have small support in both Majors, 4♦ might give us a chance of finding 4M of our own. All by all, I think I'd just bid 5♦...

[whereagles]

I'm going with 4♦ because I want to give opps the chance of bidding the wrong major-suit game..

[inquiry]

As a brand new follower of the zen master, ZAR, I realize that this is easily a 1♦ opening bid. Of course, playing in an ACBL event, this hand lacks the necessary 8 hcp, so you would have to open with a higher bid.

So non-acbl, 1♦, acbl, I think I would go with 4♦, but 3would worry it misses the possibility of 3NT, so I might bid 3♦ too.

I voted for other.

Ben

[Chamaco]

inquiry, on May 21 2004, 12:45 PM, said:

As a brand new follower of the zen master, ZAR, I realize that this is easily a 1♦ opening bid.

Hi Ben !

I read the article on ZAR points, and it sounds really interesting.

But it seems to me it makes harder to distinguish on "defensive strength" if opps buy the contract.

With usual opening evaluation, I expect a pard which opens in 1st-2nd seat to have 2 defensive tricks, so I can decide whether to double or not counting on those 2 tricks. This especially in misfit hands (so if pard corrects after my double we will be in trouble anyways).

Also, high level decisions, if the auction takes off quickly, can make use of the forcing pass.

If you open as regular openings hands that have good playing strength, but no defense, responder can be in dire straits ?

[luis]

4d not a problem.

Disagree with Ben this time, no matter what Zar says if you open the hand 1d you can have several problems.
Problem no 1 is not having a single defensive trick so your pd can end up making a wrong decision later.
Problem no 2 is not putting pressure on the opponents, a dangerous advantage.

[Trpltrbl]

1♦ or Pass.
Most likely pass, since 1♦ might have pd think I have something defensive.
This will not be passed out.

Mike

[Gerben47]

Opening this 1♦ is misleading partner and leaving opponents all the room they like. A clear 4♦ for me.

[tysen2k]

I picked 4♦ too. 1♦ is a big mistake.

[Wiste1]

My vote is 5♦. 4♦ ok too.
I dont know enough about Zar yet, but if Zar= 1♦ !!??...then i think Zar is wasted time for me

[EricK]

I went for 4♦. 4m is a good pre-empt on a lot of hands as it gives opps little room to judge their best contract, but it is not so high to give them an easy double.

1♦ is also tempting. I think that this has just as much chance as deceiving opps as it does of deceiving partner. If you open 4♦ and the opps happen to have a big hand, they may stay in a safe game rather than risking a slam because they know of the bad breaks. If you open 1♦, they will never suspect an 8 card suit!

Eric