[keylime]

Greetings

I have a simple question. Had a BBO member ask me if I'd open 2♣on this hand:

AKQxx AKxxx x xx

This hand make me think a bit. Who would consider this a psychic? Who would consider it kosher? What does NBO's look upon this? Is there a standard used?

[mikestar]

In the ACBL, any opening which shows 15+ HCP is considered "Strong", so it would be legal to agree to open this 2♣. I believe it is off center enough to need an alert.

In general, 2♣ shows either a balanced hand too strong for 2NT or a hand with about 9 tricks with some defense, so that

---

is not a 2♣ bid even though it has 9 tricks.

Your example hand has enough defense, but is not likely enough to have 9 tricks to be a sound 2♣ opener. While it is reasonable to assume a fit in one major or the other, it is not reasonable to assume a double fit.

I would not consider this a psychic, just an overbid. The hand is worth about 8 tricks.

[mr1303]

Hi everyone

My understanding of the rules of bridge were that you weren't allowed to psyche an artificial strong opening.

Anyway, I think the hand is worth an acol 2♠, if you play them, or some other opening that only needs trump support to make game. But I think 2♣ is an overbid. A 1♠ opening, followed by a 3♥ rebid should be fine.

[bearmum]

WELL here in Australia it is NOT allowed to psyche a conventional bid - SO IF playing Standard American (or SAYC as MOST folks mean SA to be) - or EVEN STANDARD AMERICAN YELLOW CARD - where 2C is artificial bid -- than NOT allowed to PSYCH a 2C opener

[hrothgar]

keylime, on Mar 17 2004, 06:37 AM, said:

Greetings

I have a simple question. Had a BBO member ask me if I'd open 2♣on this hand:

AKQxx AKxxx x xx

This hand make me think a bit. Who would consider this a psychic? Who would consider it kosher? What does NBO's look upon this? Is there a standard used?

Opening 2♣ on the hand i question probably isn't a pysche. From my perspective, this is not a "gross" distortion regarding offensive strength.

With this said and done, opening 2♣ is a VERY bad bid. Players should strive to avoid 2♣ openings with 2 suited hands. However, people have the right to play bad bridge.

In any case, the NBOs seem unable to reach consensus regarding whether a
2♣ opening on

AKQ87652
A4
32
6

is legit. Like always, rulings vary by director and day of the day.

I would not want to predict their opinion regarding minimal strength 2-suited patterns.

[Free]

Considering that a 2♣ opening shows a balanced hand too strong for 2NT or an unbalanced hand with about 9 playing tricks, I think you may even open AKQxxxxxx-xx-x-x with 2♣, because you need a 4-0-0 split before you'll make only 8 tricks! And you don't need much from p to make 4♠: 1 Ace or ♥Kx with the Ace in front or ♥KQ. But do you really think opps won't intervene if you have such a hand?

Back to the topic: the 5-5 suiter isn't the best hand to open 2♣. You can't show your hand anyway, or not like you want to. That's why I inserted transferpreempts with strong 55+ hands in them, so I could open 3♣ with this hand (preempt ♦ OR GF 55+ ♥-X). After a 3♦ response, I'd bid 3♠ showing 55+ ♥-♠.
But if you don't play this stuff, I suggest opening 1♠ is the better option, followed by 3♥ (after a 1NT response, you can even bid 4♥)...

[joker_gib]

You only have 16HCP so without special aggreement I will open this hand with 1♠.

[Free]

Yes, only 16HCP, but you have also only 4 losers, which means almost GF!!! Do you want partner to pass with xxx-Qxx-xxxx-xxx? 4M laydown!

[inquiry]

Free, on Mar 17 2004, 08:27 AM, said:

Yes, only 16HCP, but you have also only 4 losers, which means almost GF!!! Do you want partner to pass with xxx-Qxx-xxxx-xxx? 4M laydown!

I would not open this hand 2♣, two suiters are notoriously difficult to bid well after a 2♣ opening bid.

Second, I don't believe a 2♣ opening on this hand is a gross misrepresentation of the playing stregnth, so while I would not open it 2♣, I would not call a 2♣ opening bid a psyche.

As for 4M being a laydown, I doubt it. A 4-1 ♥ or ♠ split will defeat 4♥ and 4♠ respectifully, and a 5-0 split with ruffs beats both of them. Second, with your model hand, I would raise 1M to 2M...but then I have protection of my funky "drury" type bid after any seat opening bid.

ben

[joker_gib]

Free, on Mar 17 2004, 08:27 AM, said:

Yes, only 16HCP, but you have also only 4 losers, which means almost GF!!!  Do you want partner to pass with xxx-Qxx-xxxx-xxx?  4M laydown!

Do you really think that opps will let you play 1♠ and that the bidding is over ?

And as Ben says 4M is far from laydown with xxx-Qxx-xxxx-xxx !

[Free]

If you have to rely on opps to bid before you can get into a game, there's something seriously wrong with your bridge playing methods!! Anyway, I told I'd open 1♠ as well (the better of two bads), but it seemed like joker was looking only at his HCP, which is wrong (again). Quote: "You only have 16HCP so ... "

My example hand isn't the best example hand, but it has to be realistic. Imo, 4M has a good chance when partner has such an awfull hand, so you see he doesn't need much. Here he also has a double fit, where in most cases he will not. "Laydown" was perhaps the wrong word choice, but I really think most of the time you'll have a game available, even if partner hasn't got much...

[joker_gib]

np

I only say that the less HCP you have, the less chance you have to hear "pass-pass-pass" !!

[keylime]

There's a reason for this question I asked. About 10 days ago locally a friend of mine had this hand:

AKJTx AKxxx x xx

For fear of being passed (understand this person is an intermediate, still learning) opened 2♣. They ended up at 4♠ making for a top board. The opponents, who were both "experts" cried foul and wanted to appeal the board.

Don't know what came out of it, but with this and the B/I member giving nearly identical hands, started me thinking.

[luke warm]

i could be wrong, but my understanding of the rules is that an appeal of the 2♣ bid would be upheld... i don't know what the committee would do, but i think that hand and the example hand you gave can not be opened 2♣ in acbl land

[mikestar]

As a former club director, my understanding is that it is a judgement call: if I determine that opening such a hand 2C is the partnership's actual agreement, then it is a failure to alert the unusually low playing strength and will adjust if there is damage. If I determine that the player does not have sufficient hand evaluation skill and really thinks this hand is worth 9 tricks, the result stands.

[Free]

Seems like acbl land sucks bigtime... Freedom!!!

[keylime]

Some partnerships put this into their description:

2♣ - strong, forcing bid of 21+ HCP OR any hand with 4 or fewer losers OR 8.5 winners.

[Cascade]

keylime, on Mar 17 2004, 05:36 PM, said:

There's a reason for this question I asked. About 10 days ago locally a friend of mine had this hand:

AKJTx AKxxx x xx

For fear of being passed (understand this person is an intermediate, still learning) opened 2♣. They ended up at 4♠ making for a top board. The opponents, who were both "experts" cried foul and wanted to appeal the board.

Don't know what came out of it, but with this and the B/I member giving nearly identical hands, started me thinking.

Unless there really is a rule that you cannot judge this hand worth 2♣ then I think that these experts need to be hung out somewhere.

[Trpltrbl]

Free, on Mar 17 2004, 08:27 AM, said:

Yes, only 16HCP, but you have also only 4 losers, which means almost GF!!! Do you want partner to pass with xxx-Qxx-xxxx-xxx? 4M laydown!

I open 1♠ and I very very doubt that that is going to be passed out with opps having all the minor suit cards and 22 HCP.

Mike

[Trpltrbl]

keylime, on Mar 17 2004, 03:36 PM, said:

There's a reason for this question I asked. About 10 days ago locally a friend of mine had this hand:

AKJTx AKxxx x xx

For fear of being passed (understand this person is an intermediate, still learning) opened 2♣. They ended up at 4♠ making for a top board. The opponents, who were both "experts" cried foul and wanted to appeal the board.

Don't know what came out of it, but with this and the B/I member giving nearly identical hands, started me thinking.

It always seem that "experts" cry foul that fastest, if they get a bad brd against not so good players. Get over it, you'll more then likely get it back the next brd.

Mike