[thepossum]

Ok everyone

Have a look at this beauty. 1S +6 😟

I have a few questions and please let's not discuss GIB. Let's assume we are all human and get that hand. It fits into the forcing opening category I have discussed before.

There is no way you want partner to let this go round unpassed. I would probably open 2C and suffer the ire of partner and oops

Fair enough I nearly bid 2 based on Trump strength, again overstating point count. A few people used premptive response overstating Trump support.

Two out three of us made 1+6 and one third made 4+3. Nobody even explored slam

That opening hand has more than enough to justify game force in my book because you are looking at possible slam

Is it a problem with the guidelines on two over one or is this unlucky again

I'm sure 4 S premptive response is the closest to being correct or maybe stretching 3S but opener could have rubbish with a 1S bid.

But again I make my point that needed a forcing opening bid of some kind

---

Regards, One Disappointed Possum

[smerriman]

If I got that hand, then I would open 2♣. Wouldn't suffer any ire from anyone nor be against any guidelines.

[thepossum]

smerriman, on 2018-December-04, 16:06, said:

If I got that hand, then I would open 2♣. Wouldn't suffer any ire from anyone nor be against any guidelines.

OK then, so why does it not fit into the 2C opening on Bridge Base

Lets discuss the issues I raised please

[The_Badger]

It's a 2♣ opener every day of the week. Reasons:-

a) 5 and a half quick tricks
b) Partner needs very little for game to be made
c) TWO five card suits headed by AK
d) An easy sequence (most of the time) to describe hand, the only real exception if partner bids 3♣ over 2♣ - but that's not a good enough reason not to open 2♣, and,

e) On calculation - though it's not that difficult to realise - K&R evaluator puts it exactly at a 25.00 count

[smerriman]

thepossum, on 2018-December-04, 16:30, said:

OK then, so why does it not fit into the 2C opening on Bridge Base

Lets discuss the issues I raised please

Can you clarify what you mean by "the 2C opening on Bridge Base"? If you mean the GIB description, I specifically didn't mention GIB because you said not to. GIB's description is not a good description of what 2♣ means.

The issue you raised what was I would bid as a human, and not what GIB describes it as. Let me know if you meant to ask something else.

[The_Badger]

thepossum, on 2018-December-04, 16:30, said:

OK then, so why does it not fit into the 2C opening on Bridge Base

Lets discuss the issues I raised please

GIB cannot think like a human player, and hasn't been programmed as such. By the way, there are some players who would use a forcing 1NT response with the South hand, and then correct to 2♠ if North rebids a new suit at the two level. When the bidding goes 1♠ - 1NT - 3♦...I don't know if GIB would raise 3♠ to 4♠, or that you have to chance a 4♠ bid with the South hand.

[thepossum]

Courtesy of Richard Pavilcek


S A-K-6-4-2 H K-6 D A-K-7-6-2 C A
Evaluation Hand S H D C
High-Card Points 21 7 3 7 4
Revalued Points 24 7 4 7 6
Playing Tricks 9.5 4 0.5 4 1
Losing Tricks 3 1 1 1 0
Quick Tricks 5.5 2 0.5 2 1
Controls 9 3 1 3 2
Guards 8 2 2 2 2
Freakness 6 1 1 1 2
Kaplan-Rubens 25 8.5 3.6 8.5 5.4
True Points* 22.26 7.7 2.71 7.85 4

[sfi]

This is one of those hands where it is strong enough to open 2C but the auction is likely to work much better if you open 1S and get another chance to bid. Yes that's a risk, but it's also a risk that you miss a good slam when you can't show your diamond length.

Even on this hand, the auction will start 2C - 2D, 2S - 4S and you never find out how good South's one picture card is. Even if South bids 3S you won't be able to sort it out. Compare that to a start of something like 1S - 1NT, 3D where South can evaluate their hand much better.

So sure, the hand might be worth 2C but it's definitely a risk I would take. And I would expect a lot of company in 1S+6 in any reasonable field.

[Cyberyeti]

You got stiffed by robots, human E might well double, slam is bad, you need trumps to play for no loser and you might be going more than one off, but you want to be in game.

[akwoo]

I hate opening 2!C on two-suited hands, and I would open 2!C with that North hand playing 2/1. GIB's hand evaluation is pretty primitive, based solely on point count, and any decent player knows to take into account other factors. I'm not opening a 3 loser hand (especially only 2.5 modified losers) anything other than 2!C.

I wouldn't raise 1!S to 4!S with only 4 trump and no singleton. I would consider raising to 3!S if I was playing that as a preemptive raise (e.g. playing Bergen raises), but even then, I'd probably only do it if LHO looked like they were itching to bid.

Even after a 2!C opening, I don't know how to get to slam. North needs to find out about the queen of diamonds, and I don't see how that happens. Maybe it's possible with a very complicated highly artificial bidding system.

[Tramticket]

I agree with others, this hand is worth so much more than the 21 HCP basic count (5-5 shape, all aces & kings etc.). Also, you have an easy follow-up since you can bid 2♠ after partner's negative 2♦ response. A reasonable auction would be 2♣, 2♦; 2♠, 4♠*

[* the fast arrival 4♠ denies values and controls. With a stronger hand you would bid 3♠, game forcing.].

You don't want to discuss Bots, fair enough. I will simply say that your partner could have made a better choice. To be fair, this is not an easy area and does need some judgement rather than relying on rules.

You mentioned in another thread that you had previously played Strong Acol Twos - this would be a good hand for that system.

akwoo, on 2018-December-04, 19:55, said:

Even after a 2!C opening, I don't know how to get to slam.

You don't want to be in slam. Trumps do not have to split 2-2

[steve2005]

Playing Bergen raise isn't this a 3♠ bid?!

[neilkaz]

steve2005, on 2018-December-05, 16:39, said:

Playing Bergen raise isn't this a 3♠ bid?!

Yes but GIB doesn't play Bergen.

[helene_t]

You can't bid 2♠ with the south hand. You may do this as a passed hand, but as an unpassed hand 2♠ shows a stronger hand because the weak raise goes via 1NT.

People rarely bid 1NT with 4-card support. I am not sure why.

[rmnka447]

I'm also of the opinion that this is a 2 ♣ opener. It's a 3 loser hand with 21 HCP (all primes) and 5 1/2 QTs.

As far as South's bidding is concerned, pass is correct over 1 ♠.

The hand happens to make 7 because of some very fortuitous circumstances -- ♠ break 2-2 and ♦ break 3-2. For those to occur simultaneously, the probability is around 28% (40% chance of 2-2 X 68% chance of 3-2 break). If ♠ break 3-1 or worse, you're likely to lose a trump trick and a ♥ if the defense can find the switch.

After a 2 ♣ opening, it depends on the partnership bidding agreements. If you play 2 ♦ waiting with an agreed second negative available, then you should reach 4 ♠. If you play 2 ♦ as constructive and 2 ♥ negative, this is a problem hand.


In the former case, the bidding would likely go

2 ♣ - 2 ♦(waiting)
2 ♠ - 3 ♣ (2nd negative whether cheapest suit/cheapest minor)
3 ♦ - 4 ♠ (responder's hand got better -- ♦ Q is a big card that with ♠ fit justifies bidding on.)


In the latter case, the bidding might go

2 ♣ - 2 ♥ (negative)
?

Opener has a rebid problem because any rebid is likely to be passed. Two suited hands are problematic for this style of responding to 2 ♣ and maybe should be opened 1 ♠ by those bidding in this manner. But that would get you to the actual auction that occurred.

[akwoo]

helene_t, on 2018-December-06, 14:08, said:

You can't bid 2♠ with the south hand. You may do this as a passed hand, but as an unpassed hand 2♠ shows a stronger hand because the weak raise goes via 1NT.

People rarely bid 1NT with 4-card support. I am not sure why.

I don't think constructive raises (i.e. an immediate 2♠ promising more values than going through 1N) is part of GIB's 2/1 system.

In any case, I think it's not a good agreement because it makes it easier for opponents to come in precisely on the hands where they have values.

[thepossum]

Thanks everyone for responses

[hrothgar]

thepossum, on 2018-December-11, 05:40, said:

Thanks everyone for responses

Two quick comments

1. I would not be horrified if partner chose to open 1!S rather than 2!C (I think that I prefer 2!C, however, I strain to avoid this opening with a two suiter)

2. Opposite a 1!S opener, I'd bid a forcing NT and then rebid spades at the lowest possible level

[Winstonm]

hrothgar, on 2018-December-11, 06:07, said:

Two quick comments

1. I would not be horrified if partner chose to open 1!S rather than 2!C (I think that I prefer 2!C, however, I strain to avoid this opening with a two suiter)

2. Opposite a 1!S opener, I'd bid a forcing NT and then rebid spades at the lowest possible level

1) I would open 1S. The big hand isn't all that wonderful without a fit.
2) I expect partner to bid a forcing NT with a 4-card fit and a ruffing value.

[thepossum]

thx all

I wanted to find a bid, having the four trumps but didn't analyse the correct one. I spent so much time thinking about spade limit bids that I missed the 1nt response, mentioned by several people.

I think that was clearly my correct bid.

As a follow up question, how should we evaluate 4 trumps with only 2 HCPs we are effectively saying that the 4-trump fit is worth 3-4 points or so, yes? given that the short hearts give me 1 short point, 2 HCPs.

So the 4 trumps are worth 3 points? I need to remember the 1NT next time

Note, I dont think anyone bid the 1NT. Everyone of the one third (who didnt pass) bid variants of Spade bids. 2,3 and 4

In fact, when I was browsing bridge sites to find the appropriate bid I did find it mentioned on one site, Richard Pavlicek, so thx to those above on this thread who also mentioned it. Maybe it needs to be more widely known as an option. INT followed by correct back to spade support because usually it denies major support, yes?