[Lovera]

PhilG007, on 2016-March-14, 13:20, said:

If this deal came from a tournament,I would be curious in learning what contract(s) the other tables
were in. It should make for interesting reading(!)

This one is from MyHands database on Relaxed Club.

[dave_beer]

hrothgar, on 2016-March-13, 08:59, said:

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...

The hand evaluation method commonly called KnR was developed by Edgar Kaplan to allow Jeff Rubens to program The Bridge World's computer to generate hands suitable for two club openings. The article gives AKxxx-AKxxx-Ax-x as one such hand and AKxxx-AKxxx-Axx-void is a bit stronger so Edgar Kaplan would have opened it 2♣ and I suspect he isn't the only one.

While a 3♣ response to 2♣ is positive and forcing, some players use a single jump response to show a solid suit. In either case you should end up in 6♣ which is cold if there is no trump loser (about 54% of the time) and has some play if there is one trump loser.

[hrothgar]

dave_beer, on 2016-March-14, 13:50, said:

The hand evaluation method commonly called KnR was developed by Edgar Kaplan to allow Jeff Rubens to program The Bridge World's computer to generate hands suitable for two club openings. The article gives AKxxx-AKxxx-Ax-x as one such hand and AKxxx-AKxxx-Axx-void is a bit stronger so Edgar Kaplan would have opened it 2♣ and I suspect he isn't the only one.

I suspect that the 4C count is not the be all and the end all for Kaplan...

Case in point

Void
AKxxxxx
AJxxxx
Void

has a 4C count of 21.85. I'd be very surprised if Kaplan were to have advocated a 2C opening.

In a similar vein

♠ Ax
♥ AKxxx
♦ AKxxx
♣ x

Has the identical 4C count as one of your example hands. This hand is MUCH worse for a 2♣ opening that the original.

FWIW, I am sitting with a copy of The Kaplan Sheinwold System of Winning Bridge in my lap.

The examples of 2C openings with two suiters are significantly stronger than they ones that you are providing

♠ AKQxxx
♥ AKxxx
♦ A
♣ x

♠ AKQTxx
♥ AKQxx
♦ x
♣ x

These are both 25+ on the K+R scale rather than the 22 counts that you are claiming as minimum strength openings.

[kenberg]

PhilG007, on 2016-March-14, 13:20, said:

If this deal came from a tournament,I would be curious in learning what contract(s) the other tables
were in. It should make for interesting reading(!)

Indeed. There was a 7NT down 6.
I saw the results for 16 pairs, nobody was in 6C.
3 out of 16 pairs were in 6H, none of them made it. In 2 of those cases the auction began 1S-3C, not alerted but I suppose showing a passable hand with clubs. 2 pairs were in 4H making 6.

I had not looked at these when, earlier, I speculated as to how it would go after a 1S opening. Not very well, it seems.

Of the 16 shown times, 12 were opened 1S, in two cases W (the dealer) first opened diamonds (once 1D, once 2D) and in two cases the opening was 2C. The other 2C opener was from the pair who ended in 7NT, maybe we can skip over that one.

[zillahandp]

Oh dear, first your p is no expert, I sypathise with the 2c opening as I have found it best to use contols or quick tricks as a better guide than pure point count, how ver you need to agree this and the responses. In old acol a jump bid to an openly ng two show d a solid suit with the ace i.e. Akqjxxx, not missing the knave. Your p should learn slow arrival, indeed so should most of the commentators. And acol 2club players.

[1stpanda]

The auction 2!c - Pass - 5!c should show something like !cQJ1098765432 and no side winners. You can't contribute anything to that hand so you should pass.

The 2!c opening is poor, but the 5!c response is abominable.

[dave_beer]

hrothgar, on 2016-March-14, 15:03, said:

I suspect that the 4C count is not the be all and the end all for Kaplan...

Case in point

Void
AKxxxxx
AJxxxx
Void

has a 4C count of 21.85. I'd be very surprised if Kaplan were to have advocated a 2C opening.

The Four C's article minimum for a 2♣ opening was 22 for a long major and 24 for a long minor. Aside from the problem of not having 22 (which is easy to fix), it has sub-minimum defensive tricks and is void in ♠. I'm pretty sure Edgar would have opened it 1♥

[masonbarge]

The hand is at least close to 2♣ in terms of strength. The reason not to bid 2♣ is that, with 18 HCP, you won't get passed out in 1♠ and will be able to bid your hand much more descriptively at a lower level, which with 5-4 in the majors is a huge consideration.

That 5♣ bid is terrible. In the first place, if you bid 5♣ to show a suit with the tops, you can't do it without AKQJxxx or AKQxxxxx. In the second place, I wouldn't do it anyway. Partner might have AKQxxx of hearts or better.

I will say, if I were holding that hand and partner bid 5♣ over a 2♣ opening (showing a self-sustaining club suit), I'd bid 7 without a second thought. But my partner would be holding the ♣J, so . . . .

[masonbarge]

dave_beer, on 2016-March-14, 18:50, said:

The Four C's article minimum for a 2♣ opening was 22 for a long major and 24 for a long minor. Aside from the problem of not having 22 (which is easy to fix), it has sub-minimum defensive tricks and is void in ♠. I'm pretty sure Edgar would have opened it 1♥

There is actually an ACBL directive on this! The reason being, that it is illegal to open a game-forcing 2♣ bid with insufficient strength. In fact, psyching an artificial opening bid is forbidden on the SuperChart.

Most people use 8 1/2 or 9 tricks as the benchmark for a possible 2♣, and the hand in the original question qualifies. It's not the best bid, however, IMHO.

[masonbarge]

ahydra, on 2016-March-13, 08:48, 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.



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.



4 * 5 is not less than 18...

ahydra

That's all well said. There's a lot of strongly-stated nonsense going on here.

I wanted to add, for purposes of determining whether a hand is strong enough for a 2♣ opening, I count AKxxx as 3 1/2 to 4 winners. I wouldn't open this hand 2♣ because, as Max Hardy pointed out, when you have 19 or less HCP, a one-bid in a suit will almost never get passed out. Then you can show both your strength and your shape (usually) at the 3 level.

[miamijd]

As others have noted, 2c is poor, although it makes things a lot easier on this hand, especially if you play that 1s. 2c. 3h is a h splinter with c support. After 1s you are likely to end up in 6h, which is shaky, whereas 6c is very much odds on.

5c is poor, of course. The "standard" bid with no-loser one-suites after 2c is 3nt, showing AKQxxxx or longer in one suit and no outside cards. The 2c opener won't have a problem figuring out which suit. Here, opener can raise to 6c comfortably, which is a fine spot.

Another fairly common treatment is to play 4c, 4d, 4h, and 4s as showing one loser hands with the suit above the bid suit (4s shows c) and no outside cards.

Cheers
Mike

[hrothgar]

masonbarge, on 2016-March-14, 20:37, said:

There is actually an ACBL directive on this! The reason being, that it is illegal to open a game-forcing 2♣ bid with insufficient strength. In fact, psyching an artificial opening bid is forbidden on the SuperChart.

The ACBL directive is: "If you believe that this is a strong hand, its fine to open it 2♣"

There is no firm guidance, no case laws, and some fairly interesting examples of what strike me as preemptive hands being opened 2♣ with nary a peep

[kenberg]

hrothgar, on 2016-March-15, 04:26, said:

The ACBL directive is: "If you believe that this is a strong hand, its fine to open it 2♣"

I don't much read the laws, but I am very glad to hear this. I am ok with someone telling me that a 2C opening I make is stupid, but I am not ok if they tell me it is unethical. If I open 2C it is because I think it is right to make an almost gf artificial opening bid. I expect my partner to believe I want to, outside of a small number of well defined exceptions, force to game and I expect opponents to trust my intent.

I think we can all recognize a truly psychic 2C when/if we see one.

[billw55]

Personally I would open 1♠. But on BBO I have seen far worse abuses of the 2♣ opening than this hand. Honestly I would not even bother commenting to a partner that did it.

5♣ is much worse, wasting a vast amount of space in a near certain slam auction.

[kenberg]

billw55, on 2016-March-15, 07:47, said:

Personally I would open 1♠. But on BBO I have seen far worse abuses of the 2♣ opening than this hand. Honestly I would not even bother commenting to a partner that did it.

5♣ is much worse, wasting a vast amount of space in a near certain slam auction.

Not to mention leaving partner to guess just what the hell you mean by it. I defy anyone to give a clear explanation as to how opener is to decide among pass, 6C and 7C. With the stiff Jack of clubs he should have raised to 7? Presumably the long spade can be set up for the 13th trick. Well, he guesses.

[Lovera]

kenberg, on 2016-March-15, 07:57, said:

Not to mention leaving partner to guess just what the hell you mean by it. I defy anyone to give a clear explanation as to how opener is to decide among pass, 6C and 7C. With the stiff Jack of clubs he should have raised to 7? Presumably the long spade can be set up for the 13th trick. Well, he guesses.

I don't think that the raise bidding problem that you said it be so. Infact should be a question (that Barbone talked in the other his work about tournament bridge and relatives strategies "Il libro completo del bridge di gara" MURSIA edit home) of this type and you need not to get seven necessarly(=because the analyzed hand allow it) it being sufficent 6♣ +1 and in this way if 13 tricks are not you don't have down.

[msjennifer]

opening 2club on the given hand is simply eccentric.playing standard system the bidding would go 1S -2C
3H -5C.

[Lovera]

dave_beer, on 2016-March-14, 13:50, said:

The hand evaluation method commonly called KnR was developed by Edgar Kaplan to allow Jeff Rubens to program The Bridge World's computer to generate hands suitable for two club openings. The article gives AKxxx-AKxxx-Ax-x as one such hand and AKxxx-AKxxx-Axx-void is a bit stronger so Edgar Kaplan would have opened it 2♣ and I suspect he isn't the only one.

While a 3♣ response to 2♣ is positive and forcing, some players use a single jump response to show a solid suit. In either case you should end up in 6♣ which is cold if there is no trump loser (about 54% of the time) and has some play if there is one trump loser.

This one like me because is compatibile with a (little) mine variation (that i have already told previuosly in another topic about valutation hand). The "rule" indicate for two-level idoneity talks more that for balanced hands without two Aces the MW points (to refer) are detracted for -2 points. Mine variation is to insert longness points (+1 for 5th card and so on) lonely and you have not to consider shortness at all. The limit should be four losers than 20 points(=pair) but you are not obliged to open 2♣ and in these case is more probable -the why is the limit- that you'll open at first level instead of.

[Lovera]

masonbarge, on 2016-March-14, 20:27, said:

The hand is at least close to 2♣ in terms of strength. The reason not to bid 2♣ is that, with 18 HCP, you won't get passed out in 1♠ and will be able to bid your hand much more descriptively at a lower level, which with 5-4 in the majors is a huge consideration.

That 5♣ bid is terrible. In the first place, if you bid 5♣ to show a suit with the tops, you can't do it without AKQJxxx or AKQxxxxx. In the second place, I wouldn't do it anyway. Partner might have AKQxxx of hearts or better.

I will say, if I were holding that hand and partner bid 5♣ over a 2♣ opening (showing a self-sustaining club suit), I'd bid 7 without a second thought. But my partner would be holding the ♣J, so . . . .

I too thought "7 without a second thought" but then had a third thinking ..

[Oof Arted]

Lovera, on 2016-March-13, 06:41, said:

http://tinyurl.com/joe73uc

With a daft response like 5♣ I just bid 6♣ and let partner play it.