[fromageGB]

Yep, usually is sheer bad luck when I fail to a win single matchpoint! But if someone persuaded me to have a go at acol I would open (1) 1♦ and (2) 1NT.

[wank]

a ak and a singleton isn't a good thing. 4441 shapes are very bad. i'd pass very happily, at any vul, but especially given the all vul stated.

as for the seond one i'd pass too. why am i so desperate to play 1nt vul that i'm adding points to my hand?

[whereagles]

I might open the 1st. Might. Shape is nice.

I probably won't open the 2nd. Probably. No shape is not nice. (Though the hand is worth a full opener if a fit is found.)

[MrAce]

I open both in a split second.

My main reason is the definition of a "passed hand" People have to understand that the merits of opening AAK hands do not come from finding a cheap game or getting in early or finding a fit early only. Mostly we benefit on hands when pd does not open. This approach narrows down the definition of a passed hand, which is often ignored by a lot of players who have fallen into love with small details and criterias and formulas to open but yet missed the ocean when they were shooting on a boat.

The most sad part is, those who passes this type of hands (not everyone in this forum who advocated passing) feel like they have a free ticket to bid until the hell freezes over, once they pass first round and pd opens 3rd seat. I just can't imagine anyone being comfortable with a style where their pd who is coming from pass can hold 5 controls, aka AAK! Sorry this is way too much for me, regardless of what vulnerability, what kind of rebid problems he has.

I would love to advice AAK passers not to drag their pd to game if he opens 3rd, but I can't do that. Basically once you pass this hand, you just messed your pd's judgement regardless of what he chose. I ask everyone to go back and read the topics on all bidding/hand evaluation/competitive decisions/slam decisions/game decisions/ which comes a lot on every day. You will see good players paying attention to something and they use a word " Pd is coming from pass" And they use it almost each and every single time when in fact pd is coming from pass. Which means in all these decisions they make, they involve the fact that pd is coming from pass. Effects of opening AAK hands do not shine on a single board where one side opened and found grand slam where other pair landed on game, but they make difference in long run much more than single hand grand slam or w/e swing imho.

There are other merits of opening AAK hands, as well as downsides. I won't get into that because they wash each other while definition of a passed hand remains crystal clear for those who never passes an AAK hand.

[akwoo]

The conditions of contest say 12-14 1N.

I'd love to know what people who open the second hand open with. If it's not 1N, I'd love to know how they avoid rebid problems. If it is 1N, I'd love to know happy they are when partner raises to 3N with a good 12 count.

The first hand, I wouldn't open, because the systemic opening bid is 1♦ and that's the suit I don't want led if opps buy the contract. But I would open it if my diamonds were switched with another suit.

[helene_t]

Presumably the 12-16 1nt rebid means 12-16 three suited short spades OR 15-16 bal. If you have good follow ups after that then I think it's ok.

[AyunuS]

1st hand: Yep, I'll open that, unless my partner sucks. Just don't open 1♣ since then you don't have anything good to bid if partner bids 1♠, which is very likely.

2nd hand: Nope, don't open that. Even if you're in 3rd or 4th seat and the action seems passive, your partner will likely compete a bit too much since you had an opening hand. And with a balanced hand I don't like to compete too much with both teams have about 20 HCP since they'll probably end up either being able to make spades at the same level you could bid at, or cause your team to bid 1 level higher where you can't make the bid, and then they still get points.

[VixTD]

 ArtK78, on 2014-October-29, 12:53, said:

If your plan is to rebid 1NT over a 1♠ response on the first one, you had better have an understanding partner if he rebids his spades. I don't disagree with opening 1♦ and rebidding 1NT over a 1♠ response, especially at matchpoints. But if the 1NT rebid promises a balanced hand (i.e., at least 2 spades), then you have to rebid 2♣.

If your methods require you to open 1♣ and rebid 1NT to show 12-16 balanced, then your methods are partly to blame. But you can always claim that you had a club (diamond?) mixed in with your spades. Did you treat the hand as 1-4-3-5 because of the disparity of strength in the minor suits? Normally with 4-4 in the minors the correct opening is 1♦.

The methods don't require anything in particular. I had to either lie and say I had a balanced hand, or lie and say I was 5-4 in the minors. I don't see much to choose between the two.

I have always opened the lower ranking suit when 4-4 in either the majors or the minors and intending to rebid no trumps. I know there are many who open 1♦ with the minors, but I don't think this is universally regarded as "correct".

 ArtK78, on 2014-October-29, 12:53, said:

You said you were playing Acol with 4 card majors. Why not open 1♥ on the first hand? Is there something in Acol that would not allow you to open 1♥? I remember from old-fashioned Goren with 4 card majors that you were supposed to open the suit below your shortness (to facilitate rebids). In this case, that would be hearts.

This stems from a peculiarity of the partnership. We open the lower-ranking of two four-card suits (unless 4-4-4-1 and intending to rebid the next suit down) so that our 1M suit openers are nearly always 5+ cards in length. It's not "standard English", and I don't expect it to meet with approval from anyone in this forum. I don't play it with any other partner.

 ArtK78, on 2014-October-29, 12:53, said:

As for the rule of 20, the less said, the better.

I don't use the rule of 20 as a yardstick for opening, but Andrew Robson does on his regular seminar tours of these parts, so there must be something in it.

[VixTD]

 wank, on 2014-October-29, 13:12, said:

as for the seond one i'd pass too. why am i so desperate to play 1nt vul that i'm adding points to my hand?

I'm trying to take into account the number of quick tricks, which surely improves the value of the hand. I would normally pass if the AAK honours were all in different suits in a flat hand. I'm not particularly happy about opening 1NT, though.

[NickRW]

 ArtK78, on 2014-October-29, 12:53, said:

You said you were playing Acol with 4 card majors. Why not open 1♥ on the first hand? Is there something in Acol that would not allow you to open 1♥? I remember from old-fashioned Goren with 4 card majors that you were supposed to open the suit below your shortness (to facilitate rebids). In this case, that would be hearts.

Assuming you are not playing wide ranging 1NT rebids (not particularly standard, though quite a lot do), then after a 1♥ opener on hand 1, you have to rebid 2♣ after a 1♠ response. But many prefer this to guarantee a fifth heart. Alternatively, if you open 1♣, you have no systemic rebid over 1♠. Many do, however, allow 1♦-1♠-2♣ to not guarantee a fifth diamond. (But the utterly anaemic diamond suit makes this unattractive too).

Not saying I agree or disagree with any of that, just sayin' what often gets taught these days in EBU land about 1=4=4=4 shape.

[NickRW]

One thing I might add to the mix here. It has, I think, become fashionable for players to make up their mind as to whether a hand qualifies for an opening bid or not (by whatever hand valuation method(s) they consciously or subconsciously use) - and then, as an afterthought, figure out what opening to select (in whatever system is in use). However, some hands, as here (arguably), don't fit nicely into the system of openings and potential rebids. IMO, if such hands are borderline, pass is often the better option (or change your system of openings and rebids if you really don't like it).

[buha]

 ArtK78, on 2014-October-29, 10:06, said:

I agree 100%

The first one is a full Goren 1950's style opening - A and AK and a singleton. I find it hard to believe that anyone playing today would not open that hand.

Quite a few lads, as you can see.

[fourdad]

Pass and pass.,,,,in 1st and 2nd chair. open otherwise.
2.5 quick tricks is tempting, but without a suit it is off...subject to partnershipo agreement as always.

[nige1]

 VixTD, on 2014-October-29, 07:37, said:

I had to make a decision whether to open these two similar hands as dealer in pairs games this week. I have a strategy that covers this situation, but since it led me to poor results on both boards I'm wondering whether to revise it. Both times I was playing Acol, 12-14 NT, four-card majors. In the first I was vulnerable against not, in the second both sides were vulnerable. Would you open these hands, and why?

IMO 3 quick-trick hands with 2 As and a re-enforcing K are worth more than 11 HCP. Nevertheless...
Pass = 10, 1♣ = 9, 1♦ = 8, 1♥ = 7.
Arguably, you should pass borderline 4441 hands that are hard to rebid because they're good in defence as well as offence,
A 1♣ opener is more descriptive than 1♦ but If you open 1♣ and partner responds 1♠ then you are badly placed if your 1N rebid shows 15=17. You might improvise by rebidding 2♣.
If you open 1♦ and rebid 2♣ this normally implies 5♦s, rather than 4 rags. Hence opening 1♦ is just as problematic as opening 1♣
Misrepresenting m-length is less fraught than exaggerating M-length by opening 1♥ and rebidding 2m over 1♠

---

1N = 10, Pass = 9.

With a good partner, especially at MPs, there's a better case for opening 1N; but
Most other partners tend to lack understanding when you go for a penalty, "opening a flat 11 count, vulnerable".

---

[nige1]

 VixTD, on 2014-October-29, 12:33, said:

I opened the first one 1♣ and rebid a 12-16 NT over the spade response.

A 1♣ opener becomes more attractive on the first hand.now that Vixtd tells us that a 1N rebid shows 12-16. Crowhurst popularised this wide-range rebid (hence the Crowhurst 2♣ check-back convention). He had lots of success with it, although it seems unsound to me.

[tma]

By Kaplan Ruben hand evaluation, the first is a clear opener, the second an optional opener. If I opened the first hand, I would open 1D and rebid 2C -- I think biddng 1N both light in points and off shape is asking
for trouble. The second I would rebid 1N but would definitely not open second seat vul.

[mike777]

Good question, many top players open pretty light but I believe Mike Rosenberg passes balanced 12 counts.

Excellent question to ask your pards, what hands do they open?

[wank]

 nige1, on 2014-October-30, 13:13, said:

A 1♣ opener becomes more attractive on the first hand.now that Vixtd tells us that a 1N rebid shows 12-16. Crowhurst popularised this wide-range rebid (hence the Crowhurst 2♣ check-back convention). He had lots of success with it, although it seems unsound to me.

crowhurst was bad 30 years ago. nowadays it's so bad i doubt half of the forum have heard of it.

[rmnka447]

I would open both hands. Both hands have 3 QTs which is enough for me to make some noise.

I can't comment on what the proper Acol calls would be as I play Standard American, 2/1, or K/S with various partners.

Playing K/S (essentially 2/1 with weak NTs), my partners and I specify that a 1 NT opener is 11+-14 with the 11+ hand being this AK and A hand only.

[Roby]

On borderline hands I use the LTC principle: A minimum opening bid usually contains seven losers. In the first hand I can count 7 losing tricks so I would open, but the second has 8 losing tricks so I would pass.