[Hanoi5]

No-one Vulnerable, after 2 passes you hold:

♠Q9xxx
♥
♦
♣KQJxxxxx

It's imp's, you can:

Open 1♣ 3+, 1♠ 5+, 2♠ 5♠'s 4+ in a minor (less than 10) or a club pre-empt at the level you choose.

[helene_t]

5♣ is fine. Second choice 6♣.

When a similar hand came up in the bidding poll of a Dutch Bridge magazine, one of the panel members said "a junior advised me to open 4♥ but I am too old for that".

[Jlall]

Finally a hand I would open 5m with!

[lmilne]

Hanoi5, on Dec 14 2009, 05:37 PM, said:

It's imp's, you can:

Open 1♣ 3+, 1♠ 5+, 2♠ 5♠'s 4+ in a minor (less than 10)...

Just because its imps doesn't come remotely close to justifying a 2♠ opening with this hand

5♣ looks very normal to me.

[manudude03]

I've opened 2♠ with 5 spades and a bad 7 card club before, 5♣ for me.

[dake50]

I anticipate 5C leads to X and 5N(2-places) -> 6-red or 5N ->6-red immediate. Try 6C. Way ups the chances opponents' one guess where-to-play is wrong for the price -200 more.

Besides those little counting numbers 1,2, .. 4,5 levels are for children!? As colors were suggested for children by someone famous.

[P_Marlowe]

5C.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Codo]

I open 1 Club. I hate bidding 5 club with a 4 card major, but there are exceptions. But I cannot do it with a 5 card major.

[andy_h]

5♣. Why am I considering to play in spades. We have two voids with an 8 count and the auction has gone pass-pass! Gl opps.

[bluecalm]

5clubs for me. Not many hands play better in spades even wit solid support.
We can miss a slam or maybe we are preempting too low. I don't know. 6clubs seems like good alternative but I have absolutely no intuition/knowledge/feeling about it being a good gamble or not.

[Cyberyeti]

andy_h, on Dec 15 2009, 05:50 AM, said:

5♣. Why am I considering to play in spades. We have two voids with an 8 count and the auction has gone pass-pass! Gl opps.

Agreed, I posted a hand where I opened 5♦ on x, 9xxxx, AKxxxxx elsewhere, so I'm going to do the same sort of thing here too.

If opps think I'm an idiot, I might consider bidding like an idiot (start with 3♣ then bid 5♣) and I bet I'll get to play 5♣x.

You probably only want to play in spades if partner has 4 or 5 of them and no clubs, which is certainly pretty unlikely given what partner and I habitually open at the one or two level with, but this inference is less safe for others. Yes it's possible partner has ♠J10xx and the spade ruff puts you one further off in clubs, but that's not a big consideration.

[Phil]

5♣ looks normal, but I would be tempted to open 4♣ and compete to 4♠ over the likely 4♥ by RHO or LHO.

[jjbrr]

Phil, on Dec 15 2009, 11:34 AM, said:

5♣ looks normal, but I would be tempted to open 4♣ and compete to 4♠ over the likely 4♥ by RHO or LHO.

This was my initial reaction.

[hanp]

4C did not enter my mind I must admit.

[andy_h]

I think 4♣ is kinda in no man's land. It's a bid that isn't so destructive as it lets them in at the 4 level for the purpose of a hopeful constructive 4♠. It pretty much defeats the purpose of the preempt.

[Apollo81]

I think 4♣ is ill-advised. This hand is not about us trying to find the best fit, as we know who has the high cards at this table (LHO).

I'd either open 5♣ or 1NT.

[655321]

Yes, it seems to me the only possible reason for bidding something other than 5♣ is that you want to try a psyche.

[Phil]

Apollo81, on Dec 15 2009, 04:47 PM, said:

I think 4♣ is ill-advised. This hand is not about us trying to find the best fit, as we know who has the high cards at this table (LHO).

I'd either open 5♣ or 1NT.

Yes, but, 4♣ provides 80% of the preemption 5♣ does, and it helps partner evaluate his cards for the five or six level decision.

I think I've convinced myself I like 4♣

The 3rd seat 1N psyche is an old, tired joke now. I'd rather open 1♥ or even 2N

[jdonn]

Phil who says the effect of preemption is a linear function? I bet it's a lot closer to exponential...

[Echognome]

jdonn, on Dec 15 2009, 02:53 PM, said:

Phil who says the effect of preemption is a linear function? I bet it's a lot closer to exponential...

Depending on which way you parameterize your exponential that could mean that either 4♣ captures most of the preemptive value that 5♣ does or quite a bit less than 80%.