[mr1303]

---

Options here are:

1D (2+, but balanced hands rebid in no trump, and 1D blah 2C shows at least 5-4 either way in the minors, and 1D 1H 1S would promise at least 4 diamonds)
1S (5+)
1NT (12+-15)
2C (5 clubs and a 4 card major or 6+ clubs, 11-15)

[Hanoi5]

2♣

[tolvyrj]

If u system requiers 5 card majors then 2 ♣. Of course u can bid something else, but that would be anti systemic and i see no clear reason to do so.

[chasetb]

1♦ without a doubt. With only 5♣, you MUST have a good suit, and 10 high is garbage. You imply 4+ ♦ if the auction goes 1♦-1♥; 1♠, but with 4-2-3-4 or a 4-1-3-5 hand like yours, it happens. If you are feeling REALLY gutsy, put the 3♣ in with you Spades and open it 1♠ (or get your suits confused on BBO), then apologize to partner if it's found out and ask him/her what they would open.

[the hog]

Well, this depends on what you have agreed with your partner. However I would NEVER open this 2C and think that is an appalling bid with this hand. For me this is a 100% clear 1D opening. I think 2c is so poor that i would rate it as a zero.

[Flameous]

What balanced range bids 1♦+1NT? 10-12? I'd rather just didn't open those and have better follow ups after 1♦ and have 2♣ almost always promise 6. (Or you play 10-12NT NV and switch V? Then I can sort of understand it)

But whatever, I'm selling my hand as 4144 and bid accordinly. So 1♦+1♠ and whatever...

[helene_t]

The modern style is that 2♣ shows 6. But even if it shows only five (as in your system), it shows a better suit.

1♦=10
1NT=4
Pass=3
1♠=1

[Free]

The systemic bid is 2♣ but I don't like it. I would prefer 1♦, which is exactly what I do when playing 2♣ as a 6 card suit or longer anyway. But hey, you know what people say on the forums about systemic bids right?

[mikestar13]

Free, on 2011-August-07, 12:31, said:

The systemic bid is 2♣ but I don't like it. I would prefer 1♦, which is exactly what I do when playing 2♣ as a 6 card suit or longer anyway. But hey, you know what people say on the forums about systemic bids right?

Agree wholeheartedly. In one partnership we play Real Diamond Precision, where 1♦ promises 4+♦ with sub-12 balanced hands passed (other treatment as for OP). And this hand still looks more like 1♦ than 2♣. I can handle NT with a stiff, but not on this totally suit oriented hand

[Foxx]

Let me start out by saying: TOTAL NEWBIE to Precision here. TOTAL newbie. Rather than advocate a call, I'll simply summarize how every choice could get you into a stew.

As I understand it, the 2♣ opening has evolved from "classical" Precision such that it is expected to deliver six clubs, or a STRONG five-card suit. Partner, holding ♣Kx, will have every right to think clubs will be a respectable home. Oops.

If you open 1♦ (probably the least of evils IMHO), you well know that THEY will compete in hearts, and partner will drive to 3♦ with ♦Q108x. Oops, again. Better dust off those scrambling shoes.

If you open 1♠, partner will push to the three level or put you in game with three-card support, or you'll end up in 2♠ on a 4-2 fit. Ouch! Better get ready to scramble like crazy!

You could try opening 1NT, of course, but partner will transfer to hearts, pass, and put down ♥Q9xxx in dummy.

Finally, if you decide everything just sucks too much, and pass, you'd soon find yourself being submitted as a candidate for an officer of the Fourth Reich.

[hrothgar]

FWIW

Hate both 2♣ and pass.

I can live with either 1♦ or 1N
I prefer 1NT

I understand that the Aces scream suit contract
I understand that the stiff heart is a big flaw

However, 1NT is nice and preemptive. It also limits our hand nicely.

Limiting the hand is admitedly less importantly playing a limited opening system.
Even so, its my preferred bid.

[mike777]

1nt if offshape often is ok.

[Foxx]

For the sake of balance, I'll now go through all the GOOD things that can happen after all the calls discussed above. Well, all but one.

Opening with a 2♣ bid will put you in business if partner has three clubs (or four spades).

The nebulous diamond is certainly not without risk, but it would be money if it hits partner with five diamonds.

With a 1♠ opening bid, you could find your way to a skinny but good game if partner has four-card, or heck, five-card support.

Opening 1NT could work well if partner has four spades. Besides, nothing stops partner from having a holding like ♥QJ10xxx or ♥Kxxxxxx, in which case you could get to a slender but awesome 4♥ contract.

However, I must confess that I have nothing good to say about the pass. In fact, nobody should see any merit in that call, unless he or she is a fascist.

Having given the problem some thought, here is my order of preference: 1♦ > 2♣ > 1NT > 1♠ > pass

[jjbrr]

opening this 1NT is terrible imo

[jjbrr]

and for emphasis i'll post again. it's really, really bad.

[the hog]

Foxx, on 2011-August-08, 13:42, said:

Let me start out by saying: TOTAL NEWBIE to Precision here. TOTAL newbie. Rather than advocate a call, I'll simply summarize how every choice could get you into a stew.

Oops.

If you open 1♦ (probably the least of evils IMHO), you well know that THEY will compete in hearts, and partner will drive to 3♦ with ♦Q108x. Oops, again. Better dust off those scrambling shoes.

Only if partner does not know how to bid in precision.

[helene_t]

depends what kind of precision you play. 1NT=12-15 and 2♣=5+ suggests a classical style in which 1♦=4+.

But OK the OP said that 1♦=2+ (I wonder which balanced range that is; if it is 16-17 then I can see why partner might raise to 3♦ with 4-card support).

[JLOGIC]

helene_t, on 2011-August-09, 02:55, said:

depends what kind of precision you play. 1NT=12-15 and 2♣=5+ suggests a classical style in which 1♦=4+.

I think this is obviously true based on the OP, and that's why it's a bidding problem. If 1D could be 3 it is not much of a problem, 1D is easy! It seems like systemically our bid is 2C, but since that seems so retarded, we might have to violate system which comes with all kinds of problems (1N shows a balanced hand and we have a stiff heart, 1D showing 4 is not so bad in and of itself, but it compounds on itself if we are having some auction later since our shape is impossible, we won't be able to show 5 clubs...and may end up showing 4144 or something).

Personally I would go with 1D and then change my system.

[JLOGIC]

helene_t, on 2011-August-09, 02:55, said:

depends what kind of precision you play. 1NT=12-15 and 2♣=5+ suggests a classical style in which 1♦=4+.

But OK the OP said that 1♦=2+ (I wonder which balanced range that is; if it is 16-17 then I can see why partner might raise to 3♦ with 4-card support).

I would guess 10-11. Whatever it is, we cannot show a balanced hand later since we will be out of range as well as unbalanced, so I think the 2+ part is an illusion since it seems to be 4+ if unbal

[whereagles]

Don't you have a precision three-suited short diamonds 2♦ for this sort of hand?