[microcap]

You hold

Scoring: IMP

---

It goes pass pass to you? What do you open and why?

[hrothgar]

microcap, on Nov 30 2005, 09:06 PM, said:

You hold

Dealer: North Vul: E/W Scoring: IMP

♠ 4 ♥ AJ3 ♦ 65 ♣ AQJ6432

  It goes pass pass to you?  What do you open and why?

Playing standard, I open 1♣

Easy decision, since the hand isn't suitable for any kind of club preempt...

2♣ is strong, artifical and forcing
3♣ would be perfect if it weren't for theat pesky side suit Ace
4♣ bypasses 3NT
5♣ promises a better suit and less defense

I might, on occasion bid 1NT or 4♣ to stir the waters, however, the bulk of the time, i open 1♣

[mike777]

1c planning on a rebid of 2 clubs seems like a plan?

Sometimes 1club can be a better preemptor than 3clubs in third seat.

1nt would be my second choice.

[inquiry]

Opposite as little as Axx xxxx xxx Kx you might make 3NT if they don't lead a diamond, or if diamonds are 4-4 or if diamonds block. Even opposite Axx xxx xxx xxxx you have 3NT chances (club king drop and same luck in ♦s, not that you can bid game. So I can't see preempting because of this. So, a tame 1♣.

[pbleighton]

5C, because of opps 4M, and our possible game, and the vulnerability.

4C at this seat and vulnerability is "shut up, partner, I've got crap". If it was a better bid, I would bid 4C.

Peter

[luis]

I think I would choose 3♣

[mikeh]

1♣ for me. 2nd choice: 5♣. I can't open 4♣ because that is a toy for me: besides, partner would not play me for this much defence if I opened a natural 4♣. He might take a phantom save. Indeed, I see 4♣ as inviting a save, which is the wrong message with 2+ defensive tricks.

[cherdano]

I bid 3♣ and hope that opponents are strong believers in Hamman's rule.

[han]

I voted for 1C. At these colors I understand 3C or 4C. 5C seems too drastic.

[cherdano]

My choice was of course influenced by playing light openers in 1st seat btw. Despite this being a lovely 12-count, I found it pretty hard to construct realistic hands where we have game and partner would have passed. (Yes I know QJxx Qxx QJxx Kx but I said realistic didn't I?)

Arend

[awm]

1♣ for me. My experience of results from "heavy" preempts in 3rd seat on hands that would be clear one-level openers in first/second is that they are almost invariably bad. When opponents have the big anticipated spade fit, they tend to find it anyway, and in fact they will often be pushed into a making game by the preempt. When partner has cards, he will often pass when he should be bidding game and/or doubling the opponents. Partner will often take phantom sacrifices over opponents games, not expecting the preempter to show up with 2.5 tricks on defense. There are any number of ways it can go wrong to preempt with this hand.

Starting low gives partner a lot more chance to show his hand, so we can make the right competitive decisions.

[pclayton]

4♣ feels right. I'll give up on 3N in the hopes of burying their spades.

A typical result is that I'll be -50 while the field is -140 / -170 in spades.

[Kalvan14]

1♣ for me. There are too many chances to play 3N to go for a heavy pre-empt (and quite often it just spurs oppos in finding an "unpossible" game.). The 2 A are also contributing to my decision.

As an aside, this hand (even with 1 club less) would be perfect for a 3♣ opening in 4th seat (which shows 7-7 & 1/2 playable tricks, and is a 3N try ).

IMHO, there is too much concern about oppos having the majors (and in particular tha magic spade suit ): the only thing I know is that pard does not have 6 or 7 spades, but he might very well hold 5 spades, and maybe 4 hearts. Or viceversa).

I would add that if the major concern is that oppos have spades, a system should cater for that: 1st or 2nd seat, all hands with less than 3 spades and limited values should be opened as pre-emptive

[luke warm]

my first thought was 3♣, so i'll stick with that

[Double !]

Why would I wish to distort my bidding system and not communicate clearly with partner just because I'm 3rd seat, favorable. I still want partner in on the decision-making on this hand. Anything other than my normal opening at this point would, IMO, be taking a unilateral position. There is no law preventing P from having a reasonable hand with majors that still wasn't an opening bid. I lie (unintentionally) enough with my poor play and other bidding decisions. I don't wish to compound these felonies on purpose. Then I can't use ignorance as an excuse!

Way back when my P and I used to charge each other a quarter (big bucks, lol) when either one of us "took a view". I'll never forget the time one of us (won't say which one) took out a quarter, flipped it onto the table, and then made his bid. OK, so it's UI. This was a "good" club game, but we both had a good laugh.
[BTW: the bid/ view turned out poorly!]

DHL

[Robert]

Hello everyone

I play a Big Club system with 2Cs=6+ cards, 11-16(-)HCP

My opening bid strongly suggests that my suit be led.

Regards,
Robert

[Winstonm]

1C.

Any bid that tries to shut out the spade suit is unlikely to succeed unless such a gross distortion of the hand as to be rediculous like a 5C opening bid.

They haven't bid spades yet; they haven't bid game yet; they may not; why joust with windmills? Bid the hand normally and worry about oppenents' games and slams when they start sounding like they are heading toward a game or slam.

Sir Winston the Simple-Minded

[HeartA]

1C.