[luke warm]

concerning the tsr vs. zar issue, how do each bid this hand? north is close in zar evaluation, but looks like a pass.. however, east should open (i think, i'm not an expert in zar)... had east opened 1H, would it have been much different?

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     Pass  Pass  Pass
 1♣    1♠    Dbl   2♠
 3♣    Pass  Pass  Pass
 

result 3C west, +1

[inquiry]

Let's look at north's hand.

He has

10 HCP
2 Control points (one each king)
13 Distributional points
-------
25 total ZAR points. But, with the master suit, you get +1, so this is a ZAR 1♠ opening bid. I still believe E/W outbid N/S however (or 3♠X will not be kind to N/s).

Next, EAST

10 HCP
4 Control points (two for each ace)
13 distributional points
-------
27 total. An easy 1♥ opening bid.


Ben

[Free]

Yeah, imo North and East should open. However, East is in second hand, and if you don't suspect light openings problems will start. A 2-level opening might be better, but not sure.

[Zar]

*** free wrote: "Yeah, imo North and East should open. However, East is in second hand, and if you don't suspect light openings problems will start. A 2-level opening might be better, but not sure."
<

Free, you are free not to open :-)

However, if these 2 hands are kinda "shaky" for you, let's have a look at the currently running finals between Nickell and Welland:

Kxxxxxx
Axxxx
x
-

Just 7 HCP, but opened on BOTH tables.

I didn't ask them if they did think about the potential problems :-)

Cheers:

ZAR

[Free]

I'm watching them as well And no, these hands don't scare me

[hrothgar]

To some extent, I think tht people are missing the forest for the trees:

>Kxxxxxx
>Axxxx
>x
>-
>
>Just 7 HCP, but opened on BOTH tables.

I don't "use" Zar points. I still consider this a clear opening bid.

With this said and done, it is critical that your bidding system is able handle this type of opening style. If you are playing Roth-Stone or even a sound 2/1 variant, you're going to suffer major systemic losses if you open you hand. You won't be able to recover.

hand evaluation structures are all fine and dandy, however, they need to be integrated into a comprehensive bidding structure.

[inquiry]

Richard,

What evaluation scale do you use to make this hand an opening bid? The fact you have 3 controls? 7-5 distribution? Whatever it is, it is probably along the lines of Zar's criteria I suspect.

Ben

[hrothgar]

inquiry, on Jun 13 2004, 04:21 AM, said:

Richard,

What evaluation scale do you use to make this hand an opening bid? The fact you have 3 controls? 7-5 distribution? Whatever it is, it is probably along the lines of Zar's criteria I suspect.

Ben

Who cares why I consider this an opening bid.
Its immaterial to my basic point:

I want to be able to open hands like this.
Therefore, I play a bidding system that treats this as an opening hand.

If forced to play 2/1 or Roth Stone, I would pass this hand, because these systems DON'T allow me to open this type of hand.

[inquiry]

Hmm,,,, i play 2/1 and I open this hand (except in some ACBL events.. it lacks the necessary 8 hcp)....

Ben

[luke warm]

ben, i've toyed (i know it won't work, but i have toyed) with the idea of an artificial system that has opening and first responses based on the LTC... that means this hand has 5 losers, but it can't be opened at the one level in any acbl event that mandates gcc

but isn't that rule only for opening one level bids? for example, in an old precision system of mine, 2C is 5+ in both majors.. that would make this hand fine under gcc, right?

[inquiry]

Yes, the 8hcp rule applies to the one level, obviously... :-)

Ben

[EricK]

inquiry, on Jun 13 2004, 01:37 AM, said:

Hmm,,,, i play 2/1 and I open this hand (except in some ACBL events.. it lacks the necessary 8 hcp)....

Ben

What would be your complete bidding sequence on EW hands (asssuming NS pass throughout)?

Eric

[Free]

We don't know the other hand, so how can we give a bidding sequence?

[EricK]

Free, on Jun 13 2004, 08:27 AM, said:

We don't know the other hand, so how can we give a bidding sequence?

Sorry. I meant the original hand.

I put my question in response to that post because that was the one where Ben said he played 2/1GF.

Eric

[hrothgar]

inquiry, on Jun 13 2004, 04:37 AM, said:

Hmm,,,, i play 2/1 and I open this hand (except in some ACBL events.. it lacks the necessary 8 hcp)....

Ben

Ben

You play 5 card majors and use a forcing a No-Trump, however, you aren't playing 2/1 Game Forcing.

2/1 Game Forcing refers to a specific family of bidding systems that share a number of common characteristics. One of the most significant is sound openings in first/second seat.

Now, it could be that I am misunderstanding your post. Assume for the moment that you are sitting down opposite a random expert. You have just agreed that you are laying "2/1 Game Forcing". Are you really going to open 1S?

I'd pass every day of the week, because to do so is an explicit violation of the system that I am playing.

[inquiry]

Scoring: IMP

---

Without interference the bidding would be

1♠      2NT       (2NT = limit + raise)
3♥      3♠        (3♥=slam try, ask shortness)
4♣      4♠      (4♣=cue, 4♠=no red A/K)
Pass

3♥ shows slam interest. Would south be interested in slam with only 7hcp? You betcha. His hand which was worth 29 ZAR points when he opened becomes worth 35 when his partner promises ♠ support with 2NT. You decide how best to continue.. A jump to 4♣ showing shortness and to invite cue-bid is not a bad start if you play that over 2NT. After a jump to 4♣, north would retreat to 4♠, also ending he auction. With Misho, I can bid 3♥ to ask for responder shortness, 3♠=none. Once responder can’t cue-bid a red suit control, game is the limit. It is easy to stop short of slam. Turns out 6♠ made at both tables after the ♣Ace opening lead.

This hand shows the idea that 1) Zar points can get very high very quick, and 2) a reality check (controls) are very important to make sure you don’t get too high. Once North can not cue-bid any red suit (I cue-bid first or second round controls up the line), the slam ambition is killed.

[inquiry]

hrothgar, on Jun 13 2004, 06:02 AM, said:

2/1 Game Forcing refers to a specific family of bidding systems that share a number of common characteristics. One of the most significant is sound openings in first/second seat.

Now, it could be that I am misunderstanding your post. Assume for the moment that you are sitting down opposite a random expert. You have just agreed that you are laying "2/1 Game Forcing". Are you really going to open 1S?

I'd pass every day of the week, because to do so is an explicit violation of the system that I am playing.

The answer is, yes I would open this hand (assuming there is no RULE against opening hands with only 7 hcp). The reason being, is that I think it is an opening hand, yes, even playing 2/1 GF. This isn't a zar trick, this isn't a get the first bid in kind of thing. This is a GOOD HAND. I would hate to hear the bidding go All pass for instance.

I would have opened this hand before I ever read ZAR's theories, just as you claim now you would open it. The system is not an issue. This is an opening hand, infact, this is a good opening hand, as witnessed by Soloway opening it and then leaping to slam over a "Game forcing" raise.

Ben