Jxxxx,Kx,AKQxxx,-

[Kenny McCormack]

Jxxxx,Kx,AKQxxx,-
Dealer, IMPS, none vul.

Your plan? Is there anything that would cause you to open anything other
than 1D?


--
Shikata ga nai...

[Dave Flower]

I'm for 1D - I dread the auction 1S 1NT pass 3NT
making with 6 diamond tricks off the top against it.

Incidentally, quite a few players in the EBU alert an opening bid of 1m as: 'No 5-card major'

David Flower

[Fred.]

I see this hand as a little more than an ace above
a minimum 1D opening, worth a reverse, but not worth
a jump shift in spades, especially given the topless
suit.

After a 1S response I am torn between 4C showing 4+
trump and a club void and 4D showing 4+ trump and
long concentrated diamonds. I think 4D to keep partner
from thinking small diamonds are a bad fit.

On any other response my second bid is easy, a minimum
number of spades, at the reverse level if need be. The
next call is tougher, and more system dependent, but I
don't like the way my hand is going to play in a weak
5-3 spade fit, so my next call is going to treat the
spade suit as a 4-carder. This is going to miss some
makeable 4S contracts, but put us into more makeable
3NT contracts.

Fred.

[Fred.]

I'd be tempted to treat the spade as a 4CM and open
1D even in the unlikely event that I'd agreed that 1m
denies a 5CM.

Fred.

[Co Wiersma]

Op 10-2-2017 om 9:03 schreef Kenny McCormack:

> Jxxxx,Kx,AKQxxx,-
> Dealer, IMPS, none vul.
>
> Your plan? Is there anything that would cause you to open anything other
> than 1D?
>
>

Open 1D and then rebid spades twice
And I am not afraid to play 4S if partner has 3 poor spades

I do support hearts if partner bid hearts twice

Co Wiersma

[KWSchneider]

The worry with 1D is a 2C overcall followed by a 3C raise by RHO.
The diamond suit is self-sustaining for probably 6 tricks. I would open this hand with 1S to immediately determine whether spades is a viable landing place. Diamonds is always viable...

Kurt

--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post

[Fred.]

I agree with your support of partner's rebiddable hearts on
a doubleton honor. What if partner takes the same view of
supporting your allegedly rebiddable spades?

Fred.

[paul...@infi.net]

On Friday, February 10, 2017 at 3:03:35 AM UTC-5, Kenny McCormack wrote:

1D, then rebid spades twice if possible seems right. There's a good chance I'll get to bid cheaply over hearts, but I'm prepared to bid spades at the four level if necessary.

[Co Wiersma]

Op 10-2-2017 om 22:01 schreef Fred.:

If partner rebids hearts, then its likely that partner has six hearts
While my 1D opening strictly denies six spades
And my rebidding spades do promise six diamonds
So I hope partner is not to keen on supporting spades on a doubleton, as
I presume it may play poor.

Co Wiersma

[jogs]

Assuming an uncontested auction; diamonds, spades, then back to diamonds.
Open 1D. If contested, the spades may be lost.

[Player]

Playing 2 handed bridge I would open 1D. As bridge is mostly played with 4 hands, that is with two opponents, I think 1S is correct. It is too easy for the spades to be lost if you open 1D, hear a c overcall and then a raise from rho. Lol at anyone who would bid 3 or even 4S as one poster suggested.

[Berti Rupsli]

Clearly 1D.

1S opening (here)? There might be some bidding systems which allow that kind of opening the shorter M, and some which require it (Canape style). But in "standardish"? Bridge is a partnership game - you can NEVER let pd know about your true distribution (and the excellent D holding) later in the bidding, once you've opened the shorter S. So, you might end up in a dubious S contract, when the D slam could rather be lay down...
OTOH if pd holds some useful S and points, you should have another chance to bid your lousy 5cS... But if oppts' simple C overcall really prevents your side from finding the S game, you might be thankful about that!

Berti

[judyo...@gmail.com]

What is your plan when (not if) partner prefers to spades with xx in each? Or even false-prefers with Qx and xxx?

Carl

[ttw...@att.net]

Jxxxx,Kx,AKQxxx,-

My canapé plan is simpler. I open 1S. If partner bids 1NT or 2C, then 2D; if 2H or 2S then 3D (forcing). Over 1NT, this isn't strong enough to force to game and over 2C, the misfit may need slower going.

[Player]

My plan? What is your plan if you open 1d and next hand bids 2 or worse 3c pd passes, and if rho raises you are stuffed. Pauls comment that he would bid up to 4s is idiotic.
Now if 1 open 1s, pd bids 2c I can bid 2d. The only problem is:
1s 1nt 2d 2s. Now I will bid 3d. Pd is likely to have a fistfull of c anyway.

[Player]

Carl what is YOUR plan if you open 1d, next hand bids some no of c, pd raises and perhaps rho raises or does not raise.
Seriously 3 or 4s is idiotic. Bad luck, pd had axxx of s and out; they broke 2-2 and 4s was cold. Tough titties boys! There is a reason some play 4 card majors or Mafia responses.

[jogs]

On Sunday, February 12, 2017 at 6:31:49 AM UTC-8, Player wrote:
> Carl what is YOUR plan if you open 1d, next hand bids some no of c, pd raises and perhaps rho raises or does not raise.
> Seriously 3 or 4s is idiotic. Bad luck, pd had axxx of s and out; they broke 2-2 and 4s was cold. Tough titties boys! There is a reason some play 4 card majors or Mafia responses.

Anyone can manufacture a hand where 1S works better. My goal is to beat my opponent holding my cards most of the time.
The location of 8 spades is unknown. 39 cards in 3 hands are unknown. The average number of spades by pard is 2 and 2/3. After 1D - (2C) - p, we are likely to defend. With West declaring in clubs, do you want pard to lead a spade or diamond?

[judyo...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, February 12, 2017 at 9:31:49 AM UTC-5, Player wrote:
> Carl what is YOUR plan if you open 1d, next hand bids some no of c, pd raises and perhaps rho raises or does not raise.
> Seriously 3 or 4s is idiotic. Bad luck, pd had axxx of s and out; they broke 2-2 and 4s was cold. Tough titties boys! There is a reason some play 4 card majors or Mafia responses.

I am not worried about 3S. At worst, we'll play in our longest fit. You will be playing Jxxxx opposite xx.

If your diamond rebid denies real spades, do your oppolnents know that?

Carl

[Player]

Why??

[Player]

So you are saying a 5 card S suit is not a real suit? Do YOUR opponents know that YOU hold this view?
If you think my views are alone, you should look at Steve Robinson's Washington Standard.

[Adam Lea]

If opponents do the same 2C overcall and raise, do you bid 3D?

In the case of the club overcall and raise after I open 1D, I would be
tempted with 3S. I have a 4 loser hand, the opponents have advertised a
likely nine card fit, which means we have an eight card fit in one of my
suits, and there are possible six counts opposite where 4S is cold.

[judyo...@gmail.com]

Robinson is notorious for that crazy view. Do you pretend not to know it is an extreme outlier?

And don't pretend to misunderstand my point. You appear to say that 1S-2S; 3D-3S; 4D is to be understood as escaping from spades. Do your partners know that? Do your opponents?

Carl

[Will in New Haven]

On Friday, February 10, 2017 at 3:03:35 AM UTC-5, Kenny McCormack wrote:

> Jxxxx,Kx,AKQxxx,-
> Dealer, IMPS, none vul.
>
> Your plan? Is there anything that would cause you to open anything other
> than 1D?
>

I would open 1S if I had agreed that opening in a minor denied a five-card Major. In my regular partnerships, I would open 1D. My plan is to bid Spades next and bid them twice if possible. If there is competition and partner does not make a Negative Double or bid a suit, we might lose the Spades.

I had this exact hand online except that the Kx of Hearts was xx and I had the Jack of Diamonds. I opened 2D and bid 4S after it went (2H) pass (4H) and they went on to 5H. No swing.

--
Will, now in Pompano Beach

[judyo...@gmail.com]

What compensation would you demand from a partner for that agreement?

Carl

[Player]

Carl, you are illogical. If pd raises S why would I want to escape from S? I would probably bid 4.

[judyo...@gmail.com]

3 trump losers.

Spade suit may block in another strain.

Carl

[Sandy Barnes]

On Friday, February 10, 2017 at 12:03:35 AM UTC-8, Kenny McCormack wrote:
> Jxxxx,Kx,AKQxxx,-
> Dealer, IMPS, none vul.
>
> Your plan? Is there anything that would cause you to open anything other
> than 1D?

Only if I was playing Canape Jump-Shift Rebids, my style (which show minimum values).

[KWSchneider]

So you are suggesting that every opening bid I make must be on the presumption that the opps will buy the contract, and that partner will be on lead? Isn't that akin to assuming failure before one picks up one's cards?

Are you serious?

[KWSchneider]

On 13 Feb 2017 08:14 PM ,"judyo...@verizon.net" <judyo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >
> > Carl, you are illogical. If pd raises S why would I want to escape from S? I would probably bid 4.
>
> 3 trump losers.
>
> Spade suit may block in another strain.
>
> Carl

So you're dumping the spade losers on the running diamond suit? Oh wait, that's trump...
And I need to make 11 tricks now? Oh dear.

It would be an interesting exercise to do a DD comparison based on a 1S 2S 4S auction with 3+card spade support (based on a logical 2S response) or with 5D based on having some strange auction that gets you to 5D with an 8+ spade fit.

Are you serious Carl?

[KWSchneider]

On 13 Feb 2017 09:35 AM ,"judyo...@verizon.net" <judyo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> And don't pretend to misunderstand my point. You appear to say that 1S-2S; 3D-3S; 4D is to be understood as escaping from spades. Do your partners know that? Do your opponents?
>
> Carl

Like Ron said, having found the fit, diamonds are irrelevant. A more important issue is when responder does not have spade support and the objective is to get into diamonds. Let's say the auction goes:

1S (P) 1N (2C);
2D (3C)

I think that you'll agree this is probably the worst case scenario. Presumably, responder has nowhere to go and will pass - so then it goes

2D (3C) P (P);
3D

If responder with 2=5=2=4 (worst case) 'corrects' to 3S, it has a decent play. Diamonds will pull trump honors if we are devoid of them and we're ruffing clubs. If they pull trump, we fall back on the diamond suit as well.

Ultimately, whether we have a 52 fit or a 53 fit, diamonds should be the offsuit. If trump, where are the likely four spade losers going? And with what entries?

Kurt

[KWSchneider]

=============EDIT=================

>
> On 13 Feb 2017 08:14 PM ,"judyo...@verizon.net" <judyo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Carl, you are illogical. If pd raises S why would I want to escape from S? I would probably bid 4.
> >
> > 3 trump losers.
> >
> > Spade suit may block in another strain.
> >
> > Carl
>
> So you're dumping the spade losers on the running diamond suit? Oh wait, that's trump...
> And I need to make 11 tricks now? Oh dear.
>

> It would be an interesting exercise to do a DD comparison based on a 1S 2S 4S auction with 3card spade support (based on a 2S response) or with 5D based on having some strange auction that gets you to 5D with an 8 spade fit.
>
> Are you serious Carl?
==================================

[Adam Lea]

What is the probability of partner raising spades and holding none of
the top three honours?

[Player]

It is certainly possible, Adam, but then you always had those three triks to lose anyway in any contract.

[Berti Rupsli]

Am Mittwoch, 15. Februar 2017 01:18:50 UTC+1 schrieb Player:
> On Wednesday, 15 February 2017 06:28:14 UTC+7, Adam Lea wrote:

...

> It is certainly possible, Adam, but then you always had those three triks to lose anyway in any contract.

...always - anyway - in any contract...? But only if oppts find the S lead (in time, if S not trumps), else you could (possibly) discard... (eg 3(+) of you S on pd's "high" C). I cannot judge how likely this outcome would be, but still a possibility against "...always".

I follow this discussion with interest. You all present good arguments pro/con. But what about the underlying bidding "system"? If you agreed to play "standard(ish)" then you have to follow certain rules, otherwise the bidding could take a completely wrong lane, resulting in a bad or sub-optimal contract. What about this expectation / probability? Do you simply ignore it, just because here you (one-sided) "feel" better to open 1S, what about your partner's perception of the situation?

Berti

[france...@googlemail.com]

Pedant's reply:

Try these hands opposite and tell me what contract you want to play in:

xxx
Axx
Jxx
Axxx

Axx
AQJxx
Jx
xxx

AKxx
AQJxx
Jx
xx

xxxx
AQx
Jxx
Axx

(4S would be unlucky to go off opposite that, but even my grandmother's cat could make 3NT)

[Douglas Newlands]

it's an amusing try but it's difficult to outdo William Sealy Gosset

doug

[judyo...@gmail.com]

>
> It is certainly possible, Adam, but then you always had those three triks to lose anyway in any contract.

You *know* that is untrue. When HH faces Hxx, it may be impossible for three tricks to be cashed if that is a side suit. Even if it is possible, the opponents may not know to begin unblocking.

Even when the split is HHx facing Hx, it still takes positive action by the defense to get 3 tricks when the suit is not trumps.

Carl

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <c08f90eb-8384-46e1...@googlegroups.com>,
Berti Rupsli <squee...@gmail.com> wrote:
...

>...always - anyway - in any contract...? But only if oppts find the S lead
>(in time, if S not trumps), else you could (possibly) discard... (eg 3(+)
>of you S on pd's "high" C). I cannot judge how likely this outcome would
>be, but still a possibility against "...always".
>
>I follow this discussion with interest. You all present good arguments
>pro/con. But what about the underlying bidding "system"? If you agreed to
>play "standard(ish)" then you have to follow certain rules, otherwise the
>bidding could take a completely wrong lane, resulting in a bad or
>sub-optimal contract. What about this expectation / probability? Do you
>simply ignore it, just because here you (one-sided) "feel" better to open
>1S, what about your partner's perception of the situation?

Yes. This question/thread was intended as a question of system, not one of
"style" or "judgement". I posted it primarily because, on the late, great
system known as BBO, most players seem to adhere to the notion that opening
in a minor denies a 5 card major. I was, therefore, intrigued to hear (in
one of the early responses on this thread) that there are, in fact, people
in the real world who play this way.

It seems unplayable to me, especially when, as here, the minor is not only
longer, but (much) stronger than the major. These sorts of hands almost
always play better in the minor unless partner can introduce the major
himself. Yes, I know you can construct hands where 4S makes opposite 3
small, but more often than not, playing in spades (under these
assumptions/circumstances) will be uncomfortable at best, even assuming a
3-2 break. If spades break badly, it can be gruesome.

Finally, for those of you interested in results, the hand opposite is:

AK,Jxxx,J,AQJxxx

The (maladjusted) auction was:

1S 2C
3D 3N

And what is interesting about the hand is that, even with 29 HCP, there's
no clear path to 9 tricks in notrump. The cards broke badly, but 3N was,
in fact, made, on typical BBO defense. A diamond was led, which made the
transportation, shall we say, interesting.

--
The randomly chosen signature file that would have appeared here is more than 4
lines long. As such, it violates one or more Usenet RFCs. In order to remain
in compliance with said RFCs, the actual sig can be found at the following URL:
http://user.xmission.com/~gazelle/Sigs/LadyChatterley

[KWSchneider]

On 20 Feb 2017 03:23 AM ,gaz...@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) wrote:

> Yes. This question/thread was intended as a question of system, not one of
> "style" or "judgement". I posted it primarily because, on the late, great
> system known as BBO, most players seem to adhere to the notion that opening
> in a minor denies a 5 card major. I was, therefore, intrigued to hear (in
> one of the early responses on this thread) that there are, in fact, people
> in the real world who play this way.
>

To me, this is not about system, but judgment. A 6card suit headed by AKQ does not require support (and plays for as many tricks in notrump), and in the presence of another 5card biddable major should be ignored until evidence points to the major not being relevant. Indeed it may make the bidding sequence tricky but this is about judgment and nothing else. Our priorities are: check the major, play in notrump, lastly play in the minor.

Now if the hand has been: AJxxx Kx KQxxxx - I open 1D without hesitation, hoping to rebid spades twice.

[Player]

I agree with most of what Kurt says, but I would open this 1S under all circumstances. Lol at Kenny who thinks this is unplayable.

[Berti Rupsli]

Am Montag, 20. Februar 2017 20:51:28 UTC+1 schrieb KWSchneider:
> On 20 Feb 2017 03:23 AM ,gaz...@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) wrote:

...

> To me, this is not about system, but judgment. A 6card suit headed by AKQ does not require support (and plays for as many tricks in notrump), and in the presence of another 5card biddable major should be ignored until evidence points to the major not being relevant. Indeed it may make the bidding sequence tricky but this is about judgment and nothing else. Our priorities are: check the major, play in notrump, lastly play in the minor.
>

Kurt: ok, this is a clear statement, but your approach as presented is not a system at all. And playing Bridge based on judgement ONLY doesn't seem to be part of regular Bridge structures, because Bridge is a PARTNERSHIP game. So you should keep to certain basic rules (in bidding), and THEN apply your judgement to it.

I do not agree with the way you presented the priorities. As far as the score is concerned, agreed. But not along the way to find the final contract. In which priority would 4S be better than 6D??? The fundamental priority seems to find the "best" contract. But with your opening bid you know NOTHING about your partner's holding yet, everything is still possible! In order to find the best contract you should stick to the rules, enabling your partner to cooperate! Playing Standard(ish) there seems no way around opening 1D here (you MUSTN'T ignore the near solid D here, that's ridiculous); but playing Canape style you open 1S; etc...

Maybe you have your own bidding system and your partner knows and plays it, too. Then your bidding style will be ok, but it should definitely not be a one-sided opening "judgement". But if you really DO speak about your partnership's own bidding system here, then I wonder why all this discussion here??? It seems it's AGAIN a collision of different basic bidding systems, and nobody seems willing to refer to THAT... - how inefficient!
So, consequently and in contrast to your introductory claim, this *IS* about (your) system primarily, and then about judgment...

Berti

[Player]

Ridiculous? Let me quote from Washington Standard, "Opening Bids Summary
***************************
1C = 12+ HCP, 3+C
1D = 12+ HCP, 4(3)+D, 4D-4C can choose to open either m
1M = 12+ HCP, 5+M, may have a longer minor"

Do you see "may have a longer minor"?
Is it you or Ron the lesser who plays Polish Club? In PC a 1D opening denies 5M. Ridiculous is a HUGE overbid.

[Berti Rupsli]

Am Mittwoch, 22. Februar 2017 11:16:36 UTC+1 schrieb Player:
> On Tuesday, 21 February 2017 17:56:37 UTC+7, Berti Rupsli wrote:
> > Am Montag, 20. Februar 2017 20:51:28 UTC+1 schrieb KWSchneider:

...
> ..."(you MUSTN'T ignore the near solid D here, that's ridiculous); but playing Canape style you open 1S; "

>
> Ridiculous? Let me quote from Washington Standard, "Opening Bids Summary
> ***************************
> 1C = 12+ HCP, 3+C
> 1D = 12+ HCP, 4(3)+D, 4D-4C can choose to open either m
> 1M = 12+ HCP, 5+M, may have a longer minor"
>
> Do you see "may have a longer minor"?
> Is it you or Ron the lesser who plays Polish Club? In PC a 1D opening denies 5M. Ridiculous is a HUGE overbid.

Ron: Sorry, but you seem to not have understood my posts here and several times before in other threads. I NEVER tried to cast doubt on the correctness of a 1S opening here ***IF*** YOU "INDICATE" WHICH SYSTEM YOU REFER TO! To do as if you should open here 1S as a "better judgement" INDEPENDENTLY of the system you play, THIS is ridiculous! And in standard "Standard" you DO open the longer suit, this is one of the fundamental characteristics of it, independent from whatever a non-standard derivative bidding system says about it.
Ok, we could continue now forever again what means standard and what is the importance of modifications thereof... but let me rather point to the requirements for a basic expedience of a discussion, any discussion, also here on RGB.

I definitely don't doubt it, there are bidding systems in all variations out there, some more natural, some more artificial, some more whatever. Some modern, others old-stylish, some out-dated. And as long as they are "legal", it just requires BOTH partners to play the same one - AND TO INFORM THE OPPONENTS ABOUT THE MEANING OF THE BIDS ACCORDINGLY!!! But without this information, will digging into those "exotics" (without *EXPLICITLY* naming AND delineation!!!) contribute to a successful understanding of the issue at hand here?

Berti

[judyo...@gmail.com]

> Do you see "may have a longer minor"?

Robinson probably does in fact intend what you think.

But a normal person would think it refers to something like

AKJxx
Kx
Qxxxxx
--

Carl

[paul...@infi.net]

On Friday, February 10, 2017 at 3:03:35 AM UTC-5, Kenny McCormack wrote:
> Jxxxx,Kx,AKQxxx,-
> Dealer, IMPS, none vul.
>

Combining the hands:

Jxxxx Kx AKQxxx -
AK Jxxx J AQJxxx

Here are some plausible bidding sequences for the combined hands.
It isn't clear to me what contract you want to be in.

Diamonds first, Standard bidding
1D 2C
2S 3NT 2S should be game-forcing, so 3C is a plausible rebid
4S 5D I suspect many would pass 4S, but opener's sequence should discourage playing 5-2
pass

Diamonds first, 2/1 game Force
1D 2C
2S 3C
3S 3NT
? Perhaps 4D-5D, or pass

Spades first, Standard bidding
1S 2C A strong 3C is plausible, but at three level should deny a side suit
2D 2H 4SF -- to game? If not, opener will ahve a rebid problem
3D 3NT
?

Spades first, 2/1 game force
1S 2C
2D 2H
3D 3NT
?

[Player]

You think so Paul? See here is your problem. You open and reverse, showing a better hand than you have - about 16+ points. Now you want responder to pass 3NT with a 16 count? Hardly likely. The hand is not strong enough to bid 2S over 2C.

[Will in New Haven]

Probably an agreement never to play as partners again would do it.

[paul...@infi.net]

No, the question marks meant I wasn't sure what happens next. But your objection does apply to the first auction, where responder would be worried 3NT was an underbid. That's an argument for 3C rather than 3NT.