[kgr]

---

Dealer, Nobody vulnerable at IMPs (teams).
What do you open?

[ahydra]

1S (too much defence for pre-empt in my style)

ahydra

[gszes]

pass

only because I like the other alternatives less.

1s a poor start with this weak defensive hand will we ever trust a penalty x from p
and what about rebid nightmares how do we get p to realize we are this weak??
2s is out because it makes the range of our weak 2 bids totally unplayable
3s which comes close to the weak defense long suit concept (barely leaving hearts
and clubs in play) but greatly increases the chances of missing game
4s buries 2 other possible places to play which could be horrific at imps.

pass will not be a huge imp loser if the hand is passed out (at MP it is more speculative)
if the bidding warrants it, we will be able to show our spades later in virtually any auction that occurs
willing to play off to a 1s p 4s (that makes) auction that ends up getting passed out when I pass
should be pretty darn rare.

I strongly suspect 1s will be the number 1 choice and while I may not care for it much it definitely
caters to the growing trend of bid as quickly and as often as possible.

[nigel_k]

4♠. I like to preempt and I like it even better when opponents refuse to preempt with a hand that fails to satisfy their high standards for purity.

[akwoo]

I want to know what system all the 1♠ bidders are playing.

As far as I'm concerned, 2/1 is almost unplayable if you agree to open 1♠ on this hand. You are virtually guaranteed to go down in a bad game if partner responds 2♦.

I suppose it's possible to play some form of standard american where this hand is opened, but I wouldn't.

Playing Acol (where 1♠-2m-2♠ is non-forcing) I might open this 1♠.

I'm happy to open this 1♠ playing some form of strong club; that's part of the point of strong club systems, right?

[helene_t]

I think the playing strength is ok for 1♠. It is true that we will may too high if p has wasted values in diamonds. But the alternatives carry other dangers.

[MrAce]

If you are one of those who believes a preempt should not have a void or side Ace, or side major or no 2 round controls on the side and this and that and etc etc. Then you have to open this 1♠ But each time you preempt and they end up playing (or even when they are defending) they will be close to DD accuracy. Good luck with that. (Unless your opponents are not aware of those restrictions, while pd is aware each and every time you preempt )

I don't have much restrictions in my preempts and i would like to keep them various so this is perfect 3 or 4 ♠ opening to me, depending on how aggressive you are
I would go with 4♠ of course myself.

[the_clown]

I would open a rock solid 3♠ and apologize if we miss a game.

[the hog]

4s. I agree that a 1s opening is silly playing a 2/1 system. It smscks of little thought put into the system. 4 s for me.

[kenberg]

I am choosing 4♠ simply because I figure it will, more often than not, be the correct contract. The main downside of this bid is that if, say, the opponents come in with some two-suited bid and land in 5 of something, neither you nor your partner can soundly judge who really owns the hand. I don't see 1♠ as all that bad a choice, but there is again the problem down the road of who is going to do what on your side when the opponents get into the act. On hands like this, they always do.

I see 2♠ as totally mis-descriptive and 3♠ as too likely to lead partner to the wrong choice. Pass is not crazy, it's sort of inventive, but I just keep it simple and call 4♠.

[mikeh]

I'm torn between pass and 4♠

1♠ is simply not my style. I am sure some players are ok with it, and I'd probably choose it in a big club method. It's not so much that we'll stagger into a bad game (since my alternative to pass is to open a game bid) but more that we may get to the 5 level before partner, looking puzzled, realizes I don't have the opening bid I promised, or that he'll drive to a bad slam when he doesn't come to that realization or that he starts doubling them off and I have no defence.

I'd pass comfortably enough except....except that even tho I am planning on getting into the auction later, I doubt that I could ever have a meaningful cooperative auction with partner after passing. This hand is just not going to be describable. The main advantage to pass would be if the opps and partner bid in such a way that I can evaluate accurately, and if I were Alvin Roth I'd choose pass and then get it right. Being me, instead, if I pass there's a good chance I won't get it right.

Thus I reason myself into doing what I wanted to do all along, when I saw the hand and the conditions of contest: 4♠

Imperfect, flawed for several reasons, but I think it the best of the available options.

Edit: I appreciate that having 2 and 3♠in the poll makes it a broader question, but anyone who chooses those options has a fundamentally different understanding of the game than do I.

[kgr]

Thank you all for the answers.
This hand was send by email by a teammate. I didn't play the match myself.
I choose 4♠: I'm not used to open 1♠ this weak & I do not want to open 3♠ at IMPs; and pass is not my style.

The actual bidding at the table was (I don't know the hands):
Pass-(Pass)-2♣!-(DBL) Alert:2♣=Weak with ♦; Or semi-forcing
2♠-(pass)-pass-(2NT)
3♠-(DBL)-AP
Result: 3♠X+1
(I wonder if passing first and then bidding ♠ should logically promise some ♦ support?)

[kenberg]

kgr, on 2013-November-29, 10:36, said:

(I wonder if passing first and then bidding ♠ should logically promise some ♦ support?)

Having never played 2♣ as showing a possibly weak 2♦, I tried thinking along the lines of: Suppose I had passed (not my choice) and suppose partner opened a third seat weak 2♦ and rho doubled. I think I am stuck. In some partnerships 2♠ now would show diamonds and ask for a spade lead, but even w/o that I think partner would expect me to have some sort of diamond support since I passed originally and am now coming in with 2♠. So I very unhappily pass 2♦ X. Maybe the opponents will rescue me.

It's a little different with the 2♣ opening. I can pass, figuring that if lho passes then pard will escape to 2♦ and now my 2♠ call will, perhaps, be clearer. Perhaps they had discussed this, perhaps not. But yes, I think 2♠ at this point in the auction shows some diamonds.

[ggwhiz]

4♠ on these colors, 3♠ if red. My partner raises that on stiffs with a reason.

1♠ is not totally hopeless but the kind of thing we would only consider in a ko match, down a bunch at the half.

[fromageGB]

I go with 1♠, playing 2/1. Not perfect, but we open with 5 card and 12hcp, 6 card and 11, or 7 card and 10. I can't see how a 2♦ replying partner will get it wrong when I continue 2♠, 3♠, 4♠ (if nothing better happens). He will know it could be a 10 count. (Those tens look good.) There is no reason to expect partner to have a 2/1 in diamonds so opening 1♠ we may end up in a good contract.

I don't like 4♠, there's no indication initially that it will make, I don't have 8.

I don't like 3♠ because I think it is a shade too good to preempt.

I am reluctant to pass, but that is an alternative.