I open two clubs and partner jumps to five, but...
#2
Posted 2016-March-13, 07:02
#3
Posted 2016-March-13, 07:05
Let me start with the following: "Until you learn what a 2C opening looks like, you are not allowed to use words like Kickback"
Seriously, this may be the worst bid hand that I have seen in years.
#4
Posted 2016-March-13, 07:16
hrothgar, on 2016-March-13, 07:05, said:
Let me start with the following: "Until you learn what a 2C opening looks like, you are not allowed to use words like Kickback"
Seriously, this may be the worst bid hand that I have seen in years.
Infact, but how i have explained i raise to six but.. anything happened that altered final bidding probably not registering my 6♣. Although, to avoid time and compications i bid so but..About 2♣ opening i already told how i verify idoneity (losersx5<points).
#5
Posted 2016-March-13, 07:31
Opening 2♣ makes it hard to find your fit which you so desperately need,
Open 1♠ and you will likely find ♥'s
#6
Posted 2016-March-13, 07:54
steve2005, on 2016-March-13, 07:31, said:
Opening 2♣ makes it hard to find your fit which you so desperately need,
Open 1♠ and you will likely find ♥'s
Hello. I know that you (american) use more to open from first level, but this "rule" is not mine but suggest by G. Barbone (that i think is known in bridge world) and that i apply when had to decide if. When i saw partner biddings asked to me because to get at five but surely meanings was a long and (semi)autonom suit then i bid (i hoped) six (having although +3.47 with 5♣ but almost +6,.. with six clubs).
#7
Posted 2016-March-13, 08:48
steve2005, on 2016-March-13, 07:31, said:
LTC is OK to use on single-suited hands. A common criterion is: at most 4 losers with a major suit or 3 with a minor suit = open 2C, otherwise open 1x.
I'm confused where you get 8 losers from. You're correct that LTC is somewhat meaningless without a fit, but assuming 5C showed a self-supporting suit (it should surely show a pretty good suit opposite what could be a void), that'll be fit enough; you can now use LTC just fine and have 4 losers, just like you would if you were playing in any of the other three suits.
The problem here is that it's unwise to open two-suiters (or in general shapely hands that don't have a definite trump suit) 2C unless they're truly massive (where e.g. a fit and a king somewhere will still make game). This hand could be shown just fine by opening 1S and rebidding 2H or 3H according to agreements.
BTW I also don't agree with 5C - 3C is forcing and saves a lot of room. You could belong in anything from 5C to 7NT. Perhaps 4C is OK, if it sets trumps.
Quote
I think South would be unwise to settle for hearts with such a wonderful club suit but no outside entries, unless perhaps he was playing matchpoints.
Quote
4 * 5 is not less than 18...
ahydra
#8
Posted 2016-March-13, 08:49
#9
Posted 2016-March-13, 08:59
Lovera, on 2016-March-13, 07:54, said:
Perhaps you might want to ask G Barbone what you should have done over partner's 5♣ bid?
I don't understand the point of posting a request for help if you're going to (then) dismiss people's advice.
Opening 2♣ with this hand is an atrocity.
This isn't a "minor" error. Choosing to open 2♣ on this hand shows a player who is clueless about very elementary bidding.
I would be shocked if you can find a single decent player who would support this opening...
#10
Posted 2016-March-13, 11:11
#11
Posted 2016-March-13, 12:33
#12
Posted 2016-March-13, 13:01
#14
Posted 2016-March-13, 13:54
2 ♣ - 3 ♣ (positive)
3 ♠ - 5 ♣
Now opener with 5 sure cover cards ought to have an easy 6 ♣ bid.
Likewise, you might do something similar after a 1 ♠ opener.
1 ♠ - 2 ♣
3 ♥ - ?
Opener's values are in suits you hold, but your ♣ might not be any use for partner in a major contract. Opener doesn't guarantee more than 4 ♥ and, at times, may be on 3. So what's your next bid? 4 ♣ followed by 5 ♣ probably is an underbid. You can't be certain 4 ♥ is right. So, maybe you jump to 5 ♣. I think it sends the message -- "I've heard what you said and don't care what ♣ you hold I willing to play 5 ♣ opposite your bids so far."
Both 5 ♣ bids create what I've been taught is called a "momentum auction". Opener looks at all the primes and thinks "Partner must have solid ♣. If he/she has the right hand to bid 5 ♣ then with all these primes I must have enough to bid on and bid 6 ♣." These type of auctions do come up on a somewhat frequent basis.
#15
Posted 2016-March-13, 14:01
hrothgar, on 2016-March-13, 07:05, said:
Nah, you exagerate.
2♣ is a bit exentric but it is a style thing. 5♣ is a strange bid but if the bid exists at all, maybe it shows something like this? Solid clubs and nothing else. Not an unreasonable definition, although I would rather expect the same hand without ♣A.
#16
Posted 2016-March-13, 14:27
5c is considerably worse.
#17
Posted 2016-March-13, 15:59
#18
Posted 2016-March-13, 16:04
robert2734, on 2016-March-13, 12:33, said:
And now i try to respond : initial aim is that an hand with many ways to solve is not usual and i think was to be noticed.
#19
Posted 2016-March-13, 16:07
wank, on 2016-March-13, 14:27, said:
5c is considerably worse.
really with the exact same hand and a major queen are we really opening 2c - would never occur to me?
#20
Posted 2016-March-13, 16:12
manudude03, on 2016-March-13, 13:01, said:
About bidding i agree with you..now.