[pclayton]

goodwintr, on Oct 30 2004, 04:53 PM, said:

There are many good arguments for opening 2C on  S-AQJxx  H-AJ10  D-AKQxx  C--, but fear of being dropped in 1S isn't one of them. There is virtually NO chance that this will happen, as you will discover if you generate a bunch of deals with this hand fixed and everything else random. Somebody "always" finds a bid.

Churchill (in "Churchill Natural Bidding Style At Contract Bridge") told about a hand he played with Roth in 1941. Roth held  S--  H-AKQJx  D-AQ10  C-KQ109x, and out of deference to Churchill (who played no strong forcing opening bid) opened one heart. It went P - P - P, and Roth immediately berated Church for not keeping the bidding open when he, Roth, had a game in hand. Church's hand was 109xx  xx  xxxx  xxx, and a forcing defense held declarer to five trump tricks, one club, and one diamond -- making one heart on the nose! The deal actually belonged to the opponents in two spades. (Church said he got no thanks at the for keeping the side low, however. . . .)

How did Churchill utilize the 2C opening bid, then? The answer is that he didn't open 2C at all -- or any other two-bid (except 2NT), for that matter. I doubt if THAT part of the style would attract many adherents today!

TLGoodwin

Church's hand was 109xx xx xxxx xxx, and a forcing defense held declarer to five trump tricks, one club, and one diamond -- making one heart on the nose!

_____________________________

Fortunately Churchill's hand (opposite the subject hand) wasn't: xxx, xx, 109xx, xxx; where 5♦ is just about frigid and 4♠ is excellent. Passing out 1♠ should be a BIG concern on this hand.

[goodwintr]

All I will say is, try the simulation I suggested above. Fix one hand at S-AQJxx H-AJ10 D-AKQxx C--, and let the generator deal the other three hands at random. The claim is simply that it will be very rare indeed that everybody else will pass over a 1S opening bid.

[This is not to say I believe you should open 1S -- only that the fear that it will go 1S - P - P - P is largely unwarranted. As I suggested before, there are other more cogent arguments for opening 2C.]



TLGoodwin

[junyi_zhu]

goodwintr, on Oct 31 2004, 03:13 AM, said:

All I will say is, try the simulation I suggested above. Fix one hand at S-AQJxx H-AJ10 D-AKQxx C--, and let the generator deal the other three hands at random. The claim is simply that it will be very rare indeed that everybody else will pass over a 1S opening bid.

[This is not to say I believe you should open 1S -- only that the fear that it will go 1S - P - P - P is largely unwarranted. As I suggested before, there are other more cogent arguments for opening 2C.]



TLGoodwin

The problem is that once your partner holds some support in either S or D, and about 4-5 HCP, you may get passed out and nobody would save you if your opps don't balance as insanely as a lot of self claimed "good players" do in this world. So even if it can be a small portion to be passed out, it still costs a lot comparing with 2C guys.

[junyi_zhu]

LH2650, on Oct 29 2004, 11:32 PM, said:

junyi_zhu, on Oct 29 2004, 01:52 PM, said:

They are completely different. For the 2C opening, the opener knows that partner doesn't have 3 card spade support, so responder can bid 3S as a false preference.
For the 1S 1N 3D sequence, 3S here should show 3 card support and invitational value,
so responder has to bid 3NT with a lot of semibalanced or balanced hands with some sort of support in diamonds,  because if he bids 4D, they may get too high.

I consider 3S over partner's 3D on this hand as automatic as I do bidding 2S over partner's 2D rebid. If I had a limit raise, I would bid 4S over 3D. Partner may have invented a jump shift with 6 spades. If you rebid 3N, he has a guess.

Even if you play 3S to show only two spades, you still should bid 3NT here, slam is super remote, and your partner can hardly bid 3NT which can be your best game, because you hold a lot of values in H and C. You wait only when you don't know the direction of the bidding, here you really have a clear 3NT bid. It's not the same as the 2C auction,
because your partner has shown a strong opening, it's safe for you to explore minor suit slam possibility or 6NT, that's the reason why you want to bid 3S here.

[junyi_zhu]

Fluffy, on Oct 29 2004, 09:04 PM, said:

junyi_zhu, on Oct 26 2004, 04:47 PM, said:

2C 2D
2S 2N
3D 3S
4D 5D
6D.

mmm lovelly bidding, now try to bid after this ones:

2♣-X-pass-4♣


2♣-pass-2NT-pass

If the double is for penalty, and 4C is natural, you can make a forcing pass here to show either penalty oriented hands or two suiters. Over partner's possible double, you can bid 4D to clearify your hand type. It's not mission impossible to bid two suiters at high level, as long as you have the right gadget and good partnership agreements.
If the 2NT is natural, you have really an easy 3S rebid and plan to bid 4D over a possible 3NT. For strong two suiters, 4C can't hurt it. 4H or 4S can, but you are not in
a good shape in that case even if you open 1S.
The only exception to open 1 level with stronger hands are three suiters. or 5-4-3-1 shape, you really don't have a good way to show them if you open 2C. In a lot of case, you'd distort your hand one way or another if you open 2C. For example:
with Sx HAKx DAKQxx CAQxx, it's awful to open 2C, because you have to rebid 3D
which takes up a lot of bidding space and you'd have no sensitive way to bid it again.
The same is true for Sx HAKxx DAKQx CAQxx, I prefer 1D opening to 2C then 2NT or 2H both distort the nature of this hand much.

[LH2650]

Let's change responder's hand a little bit. Instead of Kx in spades, make it two small. If you think that this would require a first or second negative at some point, change the club Q to the K. Now I would propose 1S - 1N - 3D - 3N...... Partner should avoid what is now a very poor 6D. Can the responder to the 2C bidder afford to make the same change, or does this hand result in the same auction that previously got to 6D?

Responding to Fluffy's comment, my Walsh system notes indicate that 2C - 2N is not a possible auction. All it does is preempt partner. (This is before 2H negative and 2N as a replacement for a 2H positive became popular.)

[junyi_zhu]

LH2650, on Nov 1 2004, 04:23 AM, said:

Let's change responder's hand a little bit. Instead of Kx in spades, make it two small. If you think that this would require a first or second negative at some point, change the club Q to the K. Now I would propose 1S - 1N - 3D - 3N...... Partner should avoid what is now a very poor 6D. Can the responder to the 2C bidder afford to make the same change, or does this hand result in the same auction that previously got to 6D?

Responding to Fluffy's comment, my Walsh system notes indicate that 2C - 2N is not a possible auction. All it does is preempt partner. (This is before 2H negative and 2N as a replacement for a 2H positive became popular.)

As I said, 1S 1N 3D 3S, 3S by reponder is natural and shows 3 spades.
Otherwise, you really have no way to distiguish about 4-5 HCP with 3 spades support
hand and balanced invitational hands with 3 spades playing 2/1 gameforcing.
So you actually can't bid 3S to show this hand at all.
However, for 2/1 GF,
2C 2D
2S 2N
3D 3S
should show honor doubleton support, so it's really quite easy for declarer
to find a 6D bid. Change the hand to spade low doubleton, what's the point
to bid 3S here, spade king is the only sure cover card for responder, without sp K,
his QJ riched hand would only justify a 3NT bid.
for 2C opening, the big advantage is that 2NT really denies spade support
and 1S 1NT can't afford doing so. For this kind of two suiters, you really
have a much easier time than 1S opening, because you may eventually get
passed out and nobody would save you or even if partner bids 1NT, your hand is still too strong for 3D; If it goes like 2C 2D 2S, it would be just like a traditional strong two opening in spades and you would be at a much firmer ground than your 1S opening, but not distributional enough to pull partner's possible 3NT.
So which opening is more informative and
easier to develop?

[chicken]

these hands are the reason why many players adopt verdi-openings with all their disadvantages.

"modified verdi" opens the hand 3!h or 3!c which is a X-fer bid, depending if u treat it as a semi/ or a gameforce.

[luke warm]

1♠

[flytoox]

luke warm, on Nov 14 2004, 03:58 PM, said:

1♠

Jimmy, if you consider 1s, then why not 1D? Pd is likely to pass 1S, but less likely to pass 1D.

For pd, 1S is very preemtive here, so I would rather go with 2C. This really didnt take much space in the 1st round but will save a lot space in later round.

[Fluffy]

1♦ opener rules out 5♠, so you by opening 1♦ you are getting rid of one of the most probable best contracts.

To answer 1♠ responder needs the same as to answer 1♦: 6+HCP.

And don´t forget opponets will let you play 1♦ more often than 1♠.

[luke warm]

flytoox, on Nov 14 2004, 07:46 PM, said:

luke warm, on Nov 14 2004, 03:58 PM, said:

1♠

Jimmy, if you consider 1s, then why not 1D? Pd is likely to pass 1S, but less likely to pass 1D.

For pd, 1S is very preemtive here, so I would rather go with 2C. This really didnt take much space in the 1st round but will save a lot space in later round.

i can do that fly, but then no matter what i do responder will play me for longer diamonds than spades, 4/5 or 5/6 or something.. my plan is to j/s into diamonds later, then rebid diamonds

[cf_John0]

1S will at risk of pass out,2C more suitable.