BBO Discussion Forums: Do you open? - BBO Discussion Forums

Do you open this hand (1st seat, both non-vul)?

I passed considering there is no A or T, and that the ♥KQ is bad.

11HCP, lousy suit(s), tight honors in short suit, no intermediaries.

If you open at 11´s, yes.

If you start at 12, given there are no reason to upgrade this disgusting collection, no. Especially with S that you might mention later.

Make it KQT9x xx QJ9x Kx and it becomes much clearer.

I'd pass, at either form of scoring. If it's a partscore battle (for which this is the most encouraging vulnerability) I can bid 2♠ over their bidding later.

Swap the hearts and the spades and I open.

mikl_plkcc, on 2021-October-01, 12:48, said:

CCCC of 9.25

(Kaplan hated two-honors-doubleton)

the most important thing in bridge about opening is do you have a good rebid if partner responds? the answer is 'no' so do not open as other players have said.

Depends totally on agreements. My personal preference would be open it at match points but not at imps.

No way would I open 1♠ with 2/1, at either MP or IMPs.

How about 2♠ Muiderberg if you play R20 rather than R19

Looks pretty revolting, we open most rule of 19 hands but I can bear to pass this.

I wouldn't, it's an eight loser hand with no lead directional value. Sometimes it will work, maybe you get to 3♠ -2 undoubled when opps have a part-score. Next time though, will you miss game when your partner bails out short of game and you have a decent minimum?

If I open balanced bad 11s then this qualifies; if my NT range starts at good 11s or at 12 then this is not good enough. There are a small number of systems where I could open this with a limited 1♠ and be sure that a 2♠ rebid is not necessary. Playing a typical 5cM SNT system with sound openers, it is a clear pass.

DavidKok, on 2021-October-01, 13:17, said:

It is quite interesting that you write this. Fans of Zar Points will have noticed that this hand has 25ZP - the Zars rule for opening says that you open the hand with 5 spades but pass with 5 hearts.

Interesting. My reasoning was as follows:

The hand is very marginal, we probably won't miss a game by passing. Partner will take action on 'any' hand that will make game good, so we're protected. Conversely, if the opponents have a game I probably don't want to sacrifice and don't want to tell them the layout of the board, so passing can actually gain a lot on defence.
Now let's check the vulnerability. Oops, nobody vulnerable, the most aggressive vulnerability for partscore bidding. How will I effectively compete the partscore? Easy, I have spades. If the bidding peters out on the 2-level I just bid 2♠ and we're all good. No good reason to open then¹, and pass it is.

If we have hearts instead of spades the exact same applies, but competing the partscore becomes a lot more difficult if they bid to 2♠. So I'd open to protect myself from the 6 IMP loss with a double partscore swing, risking all the other factors mentioned above (and two more not mentioned: firstly partner may well push to a sharp, failing, game and secondly I play 2NT as a catchall invitiational or mild GF raise, so we might land in 3♥-1 when the field gets to play in 2♥= if opps have the minor suits but not enough values to compete further).

I agree with the ZAR evaluation that the hand is probably stronger with spades instead of hearts, but I don't think that is the decisive argument for bidding/passing here.

¹Note that passing might miss a profitable sacrifice over their 4♥, for example, if partner has the perfect hand. But it's a game of percentages, and I can live with the odds on offer here.

DavidKok, on 2021-October-03, 05:16, said:

The value of opening IMO is the interference - it’s not about bidding games but stealing space.

If our partnership standard is rule of 20, I pass this in a heartbeat. While the hand technically qualifies, look at all the negative factors. ♥KQ has already been aptly described -- it is quite horrible, one negative factor for the insufficiently guarded queen, another for the inflexibility caused by the absence of small cards. Now let's look at those long suits, headed by the queen and jack respectively, with neither protected by a higher honor nor supported by a ten. Two more negatives, I can reasonably add another because only two of my five honors are in my long suits (with nine cards in two suits, expectation is three honors to the nearest whole number, and I'd expect to see four rather more often than two. In my experience, a negative factor is about -1/3 of a point (a positive is about +1/3 -- and this hand has none). So adding my adjusted 9.333 HCP to my nine cards in the long suits, this hand is a good rule of 18 opening, but because of the tactical value of the fifth spade, I'd stretch and open 1♠ if our standard is rule of 19, but a partner who chose to pass this hunk of junk wouldn't even get a raised eyebrow from me. Of course it would be a mandatory third seat opening.

mikl_plkcc, on 2021-October-01, 12:48, said:

I cohabitate with my bridge partner.

I like cohabitating with my bridge partner.

So no, I would not open this hand in first seat.

This is a matter of partnership agreement. With one partner I would, with another partner I wouldn't.

spade7, on 2021-October-07, 01:05, said:

On the cusp, it's a matter of judgement
If partnership agreement would tolerate opening 1♠, then that's what I'd do

I play a method that opens virtually all 11 counts

I pass

Calling this an 11 count is honouring form over substance.

We have no aces

We have no good spot cards

Our two long suits are very weak, both in hcp and texture

Almost half our hcp are in the form of KQ tight, which is worth fewer than 5 hcp at this juncture (they may evaluate upwards should partner suggest long hearts, but at this stage we need to be cautious)

If we open 1S and partner bids a forcing 1N, as I play (perhaps not optimal these days), rebidding 2D on Jxxx, and fearing a preference to spades, makes me very uncomfortable

Finally, should this be our hand, partner will be bidding and I don’t expect much difficulty.