[Free]

The only negative on this hand is the poor ♥ suit quality. But it's no reason to pass an opening hand imo.

[xxhong]

Try another partner then. It is ok to either open or pass this hand. It is just ignorant to say something like it would be passed in expert consensus.

tkass, on 2011-May-25, 15:16, said:

you are red, they are white we play mp

you are the dealer

sp Aq8x
he 10 7 xxxx
di axx

[kenrexford]

I'd open 1♥. I'd also rebid 2♦ after 1NT.

[Foxx]

UGH.

I've indeed heard a lot of experts say how important it is to "get in the first shot".... but in a borderline case like this, I prefer to have a high-card point in my opened suit. I pass, but I wouldn't yell in my partner's face for opening this hand himself.

Everybody has to draw their line somewhere, and this is just below my own line.



Of course, heaven knows that if I held this hand and passed at the table, partner would turn up with ♠Kx ♥AJxx ♦xx ♣Qxxxx, and the hand could be PASSED OUT when we were a big favorite to land the slam.

[fred]

I think that opening 1H is quite normal nowadays. I would open 1H and I consider myself sounder than most about such things.

What surprises me is the number of people who say they would rebid 2D over 1NT. To me that is one strange bid - rebidding 2H is even more normal than opening 1H in my view.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[rogerclee]

I saw a hand where Balicki (playing with Zmudzinski) did not open something like KQ98xx Jxxx Ax x in second seat playing Polish Club. It doesn't prove anything, but I think whether or not you open these shapely 10 counts matters less than most people think.

[2200]

Boy, being a non-expert I learned on my very first day that void counts as 3 points. So this is an automatic full opener. What's the problem?

I always hate to pass and hear LHO opened 3 or 4C back to me. It makes me uncomfortable. If you are too cowardly to bid at one level, now you are thinking about getting involoved at 3 or 4 level?

[2200]

Being a fan of Fred it's a joy to hear Fred also chooses to open 1H. However, I'm one of the 2D rebid voters......

I saw Garozzo, once in a bidding match, rebidding 2 minor with similar hand(stronger in point count, but also with weak 6 card major), after pd "converting to 2H" with dblton, now the suit gets promoted, and Garozzo duly invited and was accepted to get a full 10.
The other expert simply rebid 2H, all pass.

[655321]

Fred is a world champion so he doesn't need to bid a 3 card suit to prove he is an expert.

2200, on 2011-May-26, 18:17, said:

I saw Garozzo, once in a bidding match, rebidding 2 minor with similar hand(stronger in point count, but also with weak 6 card major), after pd "converting to 2H" with dblton, now the suit gets promoted, and Garozzo duly invited and was accepted to get a full 10.

But with this hand you would pass partner's preference to 2♥, so the cases are not the same.

[MrAce]

655321, on 2011-May-26, 18:44, said:

Fred is a world champion so he doesn't need to bid a 3 card suit to prove he is an expert.

Fred is a world champion and he also stands by his statements with his name, with confidence

I really would bid 2♦ over 1 NT, and if Fred says it is a strange bid, i confess here that i must be wrong . But i wasnt trying to prove that i am an expert , when i thought 2♦ was the correct aproach after 1 NT, as i dont even use "expert" in my BBO card

[NickRW]

2200, on 2011-May-26, 18:10, said:

Boy, being a non-expert I learned on my very first day that void counts as 3 points.

Yes. And further echoing that sentiment, one of the next things I learnt was that any six card suit, no matter how poor, is not only biddable, but re-biddable. I neither understand pass, nor this weird desire to rebid in diamonds which wouldn't even cross my mind.

[2200]

NickRW, on 2011-May-27, 04:30, said:

Yes. And further echoing that sentiment, one of the next things I learnt was that any six card suit, no matter how poor, is not only biddable, but re-biddable. I neither understand pass, nor this weird desire to rebid in diamonds which wouldn't even cross my mind.

The reason to rebid 2D is if pd is short in hearts, you won't be comfortable. If pd has dblton he would convert back to 2H.

[gordontd]

2200, on 2011-May-27, 08:01, said:

The reason to rebid 2D is if pd is short in hearts, you won't be comfortable. If pd has dblton he would convert back to 2H.

Would you rather play in a 6-1 fit or a 3-3?

[Gerben42]

gordontd, on 2011-May-27, 09:38, said:

Would you rather play in a 6-1 fit or a 3-3?

What about a 6-2 fit rather than a 4-3 fit

Agree with opening here - rule of 20 and prime controls, partner won't be disappointed. I can understand passing

---

(in fact I would) but not the actual hand. And 2♦ is very anti-percentage. If partner passes, that's bad. If he raises, that's trouble too.

[kenrexford]

fred, on 2011-May-26, 16:56, said:

I think that opening 1H is quite normal nowadays. I would open 1H and I consider myself sounder than most about such things.

What surprises me is the number of people who say they would rebid 2D over 1NT. To me that is one strange bid - rebidding 2H is even more normal than opening 1H in my view.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Yeah, but part of that for me is somewhat partnership understanding. As you may suspect, I have a lot of strange partnership understandings.

The idea?

You start with the concept of what to do generally after forcing 1NT. Generally, I like a 2♦ rebid to promise four. Thus, for example, with 3532, we would rebid 2♣ (normally).

You then get to the strange circumstance of 4531. In that situation, 2♣ seems like too much. I've done it, but it smells ugly. So, yet get an exception that 2♦ could be three diamonds with a stiff or void in clubs, which means four spades.

You then assume that 2♦ either shows a heart-diamond two-suiter OR a heart-spade two-suiter (with a diamond fragment).

Once you assume that, then a 2♦ rebid is a two-way bid. 4630 is closer to a 4531 contextually than it might be otherwise. You are putting more description on the table, in a sense, than a traditional 2♦ rebid would show.

The "would you rather" discussion is quite misloeading.

"Would you rather play in a 4-3 fit or a 6-2 fit?" Who passes Two Diamonds with 4D/2H?!?!?

"Would you rather play in a 3-3 fit or a 6-1 fit?" If partner has 3-1-3-6, my concern is actually playing in a 6-0 fit, somewhat. Besides, if you play that 1H-1NT-2D-2S (that precise sequence) shows spade tolerance with long clubs, the question becomes, "Would you rather play in a 3-3 fit, a 6-1 fit, or a 4-3 fit?" I like the 4-3 fit.

[FrancesHinden]

Maybe I'm under-analysing this hand, but I would open 1H and consider it not only normal, but not completely minimum.
If partner responded 1NT, I would rebid 2H and think anything else is totally warped. The time to bid 2D with 6-3 is when I have a good hand with broken hearts and don't want to jump to 3H, not when I have a minimum opening bid.

[gordontd]

FrancesHinden, on 2011-May-27, 10:34, said:

Maybe I'm under-analysing this hand, but I would open 1H and consider it not only normal, but not completely minimum.
If partner responded 1NT, I would rebid 2H and think anything else is totally warped. The time to bid 2D with 6-3 is when I have a good hand with broken hearts and don't want to jump to 3H, not when I have a minimum opening bid.

Indeed.

[kenrexford]

I don't understand these comments.

Why is "the time" to open 1♥ and rebid 2♦ when you have a big hand? Sure, this allows to to bid again when partner, as expected, makes a courtesy correction. But, if he makes a courtesy corrections opposite this garbage hand, Opener has a solution to avoid having partner think that he has a big hand -- pass.

If the concern is over a pass, I think Responder only passes with a stiff and at least four diamonds, personally, and that sounds like a good spot also.

If the concern is over a 2NT call, how does bidding 2♥ stop further agression from partner better than 2♦?

If the concern is over a super-accept of diamonds, if partner has that hand, most of the time 3♦ sounds OK too.

[gordontd]

kenrexford, on 2011-May-27, 11:07, said:

If the concern is over a pass, I think Responder only passes with a stiff and at least four diamonds,

In that case, on the occasions when you're 5-5 in the reds, you get to play your 5-1 heart "fit" rather than your 5-3 diamonds.

[kenrexford]

gordontd, on 2011-May-27, 12:16, said:

In that case, on the occasions when you're 5-5 in the reds, you get to play your 5-1 heart "fit" rather than your 5-3 diamonds.

In what world?

First of all, I also like 1♥-P-1NT!-P-3♦ to handle high-end 5-5's (playing rstrength of five losers).

Second, you are not converting 2♦ to 2♥ with 1♥/3♦ in any world I know.

Granted, you might end up at the three-level in the 5-3 (rather than the two-level) in diamonds (but never in hearts) if Responder rebids 2♠ to show the spade-tolerance-long-clubs hand, but then you also might end up in a 4-3 spade contract a lot or in a good club contract a lot as well. That sounds really good.

Plus, force of reality kicks in somewhere here. If Opener has hearts and diamonds, especially 5-5, and if Responder has the 3-1-3-6 hand, entering the three-level to resolve clubs-or-diamonds is usually perfectly fine, because the opponents have already bid or are about to bid spades.