[SimonFa]

Both Vul, you deal, MPs.

♠ QJT2
♥ J4
♦ void
♣ KQJ8765

I had a feeling this was going to be difficult when I picked it up.

1C (1h) 1S (1NT)
?

Playing 2/1 if it matters. 1NT is 15+ balanced. This is the one area partner is reasonably disciplined in that he won't bid on less than 6 HCP points but would bid the spades on 6543.

Agree with 1C? If not what? (Partner's hand is in the spoiler if you want to speculate on likely sequences.)

What now on this bidding?

As always, thanks in advance,

Simon

EDIT fixed bidding

Spoiler

Partner:

♠ K954
♥ 8652
♦ KJT63
♣ void

RHO had all four aces and LHO had ♥KQT97 and ♦Qxx

[mr1303]

Hang on, the 1NT by 4th hand showed 15+ HCP?

I think I bid 2S here regardless of what it means. I presume double from partner would deny 4 spades?

[P_Marlowe]

You know which suit you want to play.

And you know, game is not on, hence ... 2C

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Codo]

Do I have a fit jump a mini splinter or anything? Anyway, Partner does not hold Akxx in spades, so game is unlikely.

But: IF 1 NT is really 15+, they are ver likely to make game, and I bid 4 ♠... Maybe partner surprises me with Kxxxx,xxx,xxx,Ax ...

I now see the full hand- 4 ♠ well...maybe it will not make.

[mikeh]

At the risk of sounding hopelessly old-fashioned, I don't know how anyone expects to do well playing 2/1 gf is this is an opening bid. Sure, if partner fits your hand, you may make a lot of tricks with relatively few hcp, but experience, and plain probabilities, suggest that when we hold 11 black cards, partner will usually hold a lot of red cards.

We may then find ourselves forced to game...often 3N...when our only contribution will be preventing the opps from running the black suits.

Btw, 1♣ is what I call an anti-preempt. Opening a major, especially spades, with sub-minimum hands at least has the benefit of making it tougher for the opps. 1♣ makes it far easier for 2nd seat to come into the auction....by comparison, pass often operates as a preempt when LHO has an overcall but not an opening.

I assume from the OP that partner promised no more than 4 spades.

I'm going to pass. If it comes back to me in 2 red, I bid 2♠.

And next time, I pass as dealer. I won't preempt with this hand because of the spades and the void. I am one of those eccentrics who believe that not every hand with a long suit has to be opened.

Edit: I just looked at the spoiler. RHO is an utter beginner.

[mike777]

agree with 1c if pard knows we open these hand types.

easy 2S now I assume pard has 5s he would neg x with only 4.

If pard shows only 4s with his bid then easy 2c rebid by opener now.

[MrAce]

If 1♠ can be 4 card then i can understand 2♠, if 1♠ 5+ i always bid 4 ♠ with this.

[gnasher]

mikeh, on 2012-December-10, 10:51, said:

At the risk of sounding hopelessly old-fashioned, I don't know how anyone expects to do well playing 2/1 gf is this is an opening bid. Sure, if partner fits your hand, you may make a lot of tricks with relatively few hcp, but experience, and plain probabilities, suggest that when we hold 11 black cards, partner will usually hold a lot of red cards.

We may then find ourselves forced to game...often 3N...when our only contribution will be preventing the opps from running the black suits.

Btw, 1♣ is what I call an anti-preempt. Opening a major, especially spades, with sub-minimum hands at least has the benefit of making it tougher for the opps. 1♣ makes it far easier for 2nd seat to come into the auction....by comparison, pass often operates as a preempt when LHO has an overcall but not an opening.

Are you saying there's something special about 2/1 GF which makes this unsuitable for opening, or just that you shouldn't open it playing any system with wide-range openings?

I routinely open this type of hand, and don't often come to any harm. It's partly a matter of expectation - if I open the bidding and then show some shape, partner isn't going to assume I have a 13-count. And if partner bids 3NT on a misfitting 13-count we don't have to play there. 5♣ is playable opposite Kx AQxxx KJxxx x.

Regarding the "anti-premept" effect, I don't entirely agree. The reason it's easier for them to get in over 1♣ is that the range of an overcall is wider than the range of an opening bid. A consequence of that is that it's harder for them to judge what level to play at. If it were easy for them to get to the right contract after 1♣-(1♥) showing 8+, they could get the same benefit by playing pass-(1♥) as 8+.

[rhm]

mikeh, on 2012-December-10, 10:51, said:

At the risk of sounding hopelessly old-fashioned, I don't know how anyone expects to do well playing 2/1 gf is this is an opening bid.

How does 2/1 gf come into play when you open 1♣?
On any other strain I understand the argument, but how does 1♣ 2/1 differ from more traditional American natural systems?

Rainer Herrmann

[mikeh]

My mini-rant about opening these hands was more in the context of all standard-based methods rather than specifically 2/1. My experience, however, is that the problem simply arises earlier in a 2/1 method (assuming a 1M or, in some cases, 1♦) with a 2/1 response.

When dealing with an immediate 2/1, responder has to commit right now...at round 1: do I force to game? After a 1♣ opening, responder usually has to commit at round 2 of the auction and opener will have narrowed his range only a modest degree (assuming, as here, he has opened an unbalanced hand). Balanced openings are rarely a problem, since the notrump rebids are usually precisely defined.

Here, 1♣ 1♥ 1♠, as an example, merely eliminates great 18 + hands, leaving responder still needing to assume a certain minimum strength for opener in order to determine whether he can afford a FSF, especially if, as is commonly played, FSF is a gf, or responder's shape is such that his next call is going to be gf no matter what.

I have no problem with the notion that opening the OP type of hand can be very effective. But I think that the proponents of the method tend to underestimate the difficulties that can arise on misfits, especially in competition.

I've been toying the the idea of switching to a big club (which I played years ago, tho now I'd like to try Meckwell Lite) in part because I think that the benefits of getting in there with these hands (2♣ in big club methods) are so attractive yet I can't stomach the downsides of creating so much uncertainty in a standard based method.

[lalldonn]

Given that partner can have just four spades, I would definitely bid just 2♠ at this point. The auction won't die yet.

[losercover]

2♣. Good enough to open 1♣. Ugly hand without partner having a good hand and a fit.

[dwar0123]

mikeh, on 2012-December-10, 10:51, said:

Edit: I just looked at the spoiler. RHO is an utter beginner.

At risk of looking like an utter beginner, why?

Is it the single spade stopper?
Is it that s/he plays 1nt in that situation as 15+ balanced?
Is it the failure to just bid some number of diamonds?

[Fluffy]

Even when partner shows spades I am inclined to insist on playing clubs, sounds like a disclaimer for opening 3♣.