Help
Scoring: MP
Not vulnerable, you have the option between a 2-suited 2♠ and a 1♠ opener. What is the honor you need to open on the 1-level?
Page 1 of 1
Evaluation of a singleton K
#1
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 5,577
- Joined: 2005-March-01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Erlangen, Germany
-
Interests:Astronomy, Mathematics
Nuclear power
Posted 2007-July-17, 04:42
Not vulnerable, you have the option between a 2-suited 2♠ and a 1♠ opener. What is the honor you need to open on the 1-level?
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,727
- Joined: 2006-June-05
- Location:Oslo, Norway
- Interests:Bridge, sports, Sci-fi, fantasy
Posted 2007-July-17, 05:48
I voted king. But on occasion I might make a 1-level opening with the queen instead.
Kind regards,
Harald
Harald
#3
- The Abbess
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,398
- Joined: 2004-April-22
- Gender:Female
- Location:Odense, Denmark
- Interests:History, languages
Posted 2007-July-17, 05:51
Evaluating the sec K as one HCP and following the rule of 20, I need the ace.
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,724
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Natick, MA
-
Interests:Travel
Cooking
Brewing
Hiking
Posted 2007-July-17, 05:59
I think that this is much more a question of system rather than judgement.
Case in point: I can give a very specific answer for MOSCITO. (I would not make a constructive one-level opening holding QT732 in Spades because the hand has 4 slam points. A constructive opening with 5-5 (or 6-4) shape requires a minimum of 5 slam points. KT732 would be a perfectly legitimate opening.) However, this data point has little relationship to the decision to open this hand playing
SAYC
2/1 GF
Polish Club
Precision
Acol
etc
Personally, I would want to hold a minimum of
KT732 playing Precision
AT732 playing Acol or SAYC
In all of these cases, I'd like to have another Jack.
Playing 2/1 or Polish Club, I'd want a dead minimum of AJ732 (and I'm still not happy about my choice of openings)
I'll point out that this is the hand type where to Polish Wilkosz 2♦ did very well. Lots of folks playing traditional single suited preempts couldn't bear to pass a shapely 5-5 pattern, chose to open at the one level, and ended up cutting their own throat when partner played them for a legitimate opening.
Case in point: I can give a very specific answer for MOSCITO. (I would not make a constructive one-level opening holding QT732 in Spades because the hand has 4 slam points. A constructive opening with 5-5 (or 6-4) shape requires a minimum of 5 slam points. KT732 would be a perfectly legitimate opening.) However, this data point has little relationship to the decision to open this hand playing
SAYC
2/1 GF
Polish Club
Precision
Acol
etc
Personally, I would want to hold a minimum of
KT732 playing Precision
AT732 playing Acol or SAYC
In all of these cases, I'd like to have another Jack.
Playing 2/1 or Polish Club, I'd want a dead minimum of AJ732 (and I'm still not happy about my choice of openings)
I'll point out that this is the hand type where to Polish Wilkosz 2♦ did very well. Lots of folks playing traditional single suited preempts couldn't bear to pass a shapely 5-5 pattern, chose to open at the one level, and ended up cutting their own throat when partner played them for a legitimate opening.
Alderaan delenda est
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,864
- Joined: 2003-October-07
- Gender:Male
Posted 2007-July-17, 15:21
Gerben42, on Jul 17 2007, 05:42 AM, said:
|
|
Not vulnerable, you have the option between a 2-suited 2♠ and a 1♠ opener. What is the honor you need to open on the 1-level?
Q but partners expect me to open light.
#6
- The Abbess
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,398
- Joined: 2004-April-22
- Gender:Female
- Location:Odense, Denmark
- Interests:History, languages
Posted 2007-July-17, 15:42
Wow, is that a new partnership, Mike? 
The world would be such a happy place, if only everyone played Acol :) --- TramTicket
#7 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-July-17, 19:01
mike is a bipolar opener, don't mind him.
Anyways, K for me.
Anyways, K for me.
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,680
- Joined: 2005-February-09
- Gender:Male
- Location:Zurich, Switzerland
Posted 2007-July-17, 19:19
I evaluate the ♥k as worth roughly 2 points. What I need to open depends on system. Playing standard, I want about 11 points to open a 5-5 pattern so would need the ace. In other methods I might open lighter.
Adam W. Meyerson
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
a.k.a. Appeal Without Merit
#9
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,162
- Joined: 2006-July-10
- Gender:Male
- Location:Maryland
Posted 2007-July-17, 20:45
Ace
#10 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-July-17, 22:03
Jlall, on Jul 17 2007, 08:01 PM, said:
mike is a bipolar opener, don't mind him.
Anyways, K for me.
Anyways, K for me.
Surprised I said king, I would normally say ace I think. Maybe I said this because it was white/white MP. Guess I'm bipolar too
#11
- Brain Farts and Actual Farts Increasing with Age
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 9,586
- Joined: 2005-September-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:Lima, Allen County, North-West-Central Ohio, USA
- Interests:www.limadbc.blogspot.com editor/contributor
Posted 2007-July-18, 08:14
Notwithstanding the number of responses here, it seems rather impossible to answer this question.
You indicated that the partnership has the tool of a two-suited 2♠ opening. As I have no idea what the parameters are for that opening, or what 1♠...2♦ implies when you do not elect to open 2♠, I cannot tell what is the right opening.
You indicated that the partnership has the tool of a two-suited 2♠ opening. As I have no idea what the parameters are for that opening, or what 1♠...2♦ implies when you do not elect to open 2♠, I cannot tell what is the right opening.
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
#12
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,016
- Joined: 2005-June-20
- Location:Lovettsville, VA
Posted 2007-July-18, 08:20
kenrexford, on Jul 18 2007, 09:14 AM, said:
Notwithstanding the number of responses here, it seems rather impossible to answer this question.
You indicated that the partnership has the tool of a two-suited 2♠ opening. As I have no idea what the parameters are for that opening, or what 1♠...2♦ implies when you do not elect to open 2♠, I cannot tell what is the right opening.
You indicated that the partnership has the tool of a two-suited 2♠ opening. As I have no idea what the parameters are for that opening, or what 1♠...2♦ implies when you do not elect to open 2♠, I cannot tell what is the right opening.
I think the implication is clear, Ken. The COC (CoQ?) implies that when the hand is a 1S opener, you don't open it 2S. But you have a 2S preempt to fall back on on any hand less than a 1S opener, so you don't have to "stretch" to open. The choice is not between 1S and pass, but 1S and 2S.
It costs nothing to be nice -- my better half
#13
- World International Master without a clue
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,404
- Joined: 2003-November-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:madrid
Posted 2007-July-18, 08:47
I said the King in theory, then I will find myself opening with the queen all the time.
EDIT: Oops I though the other option was pass, if the other option is 2♠ I think it is the ace.
EDIT: Oops I though the other option was pass, if the other option is 2♠ I think it is the ace.
#14 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2007-July-18, 08:52
Fluffy, on Jul 18 2007, 09:47 AM, said:
I said the King in theory, then I will find myself opening with the queen all the time.
And I thought you were a solid citizen
Page 1 of 1