[akhare]

awm, on 2012-February-04, 05:27, said:

7. Its not true that other systems "have the same problem" -- a lot of your problem is lack of a way to show minor one-suiter at the two level after 1c-negative. Many systems can do this!

+1 -- I alluded to this before as well. The basic problem is 1♣ methods that don't allow a rebid of 2m as natural.

By suggesting passing of hands with 6m even in context of a strong ♣ system, this thread is headed in the retrograde direction.

[straube]

ok, I'm just defending myself a little bit because I didn't say that other systems have the same problem...

straube, on 2012-January-31, 09:19, said:

Thanks for the replies.

I like to open as low as possible. The question I'm having is how low can we afford to open?

I think that most strong club structures have difficulty with big minor suit hands. For us even more so because we've used Moscito-style 1H and 1S responses.

1C-1S (DN) and now we have problems with Axx x AKxxx AJxx or Axx AQx x AQxxxx. We have to rebid 1N on the first hand (partner thinking we usually have a balanced 17-21 count) and 3C on the latter (because 2C is Staymanish).

I'm not suggesting we revise to need 12 hcps for opening 1D on a 5m/5m hand. We would open any hand that we might open in Standard American (as well as light majors and 11-13 balanced).

I'm thinking we ought to bump the range of our minor suit openings (or 1D, 2C rebids) at least 1 and possibly 2 points.

When I said that most strong club structure have difficulty with big minor suit hands, I was thinking not just of the single-suited 6m hands, but other 2-suited with a longer minor.

1C-1D (0-7), 2C could be a 1-3-4-5 or even a 1-4-3-5 depending on the particular system. A 1-4-3-5 17 count could have a much easier time in a standard system after 1C-1S, 2H or even 1C-1H.

So I take Adam's point about standard openings of 1m and 2m rebid showing 11-15 or so. Aren't I off by a smidge over 1 point? 1 point on the low end and a point + smidge at the high end?

But what we're doing now is playing 10-15 (and some 15s we open 1C) and I'm suggesting this is too low.

So let me put it to Adam...if he were forced to play SCREAM, what range would he play for say our 2D opening (which distributions I think are identical to his own) given that opener has to sign off at the 3-level with the same distributions after 1C-1S (DN).

[awm]

straube, on 2012-February-04, 09:35, said:

So let me put it to Adam...if he were forced to play SCREAM, what range would he play for say our 2D opening (which distributions I think are identical to his own) given that opener has to sign off at the 3-level with the same distributions after 1C-1S (DN).

My 1♣ is 16+ right? How about 2♦ = 10(+)-15? This is what I actually play and it seems to work out. Hey, 2♦ denies a 4M (unlike my 2♦) right? Maybe I can manage 9(+)-15 then, since I don't have to worry so much about losing a major suit fit and I do play 4(+)-10 weak twos.

Yes, this means I am a little fixed after 1♣-1♠ when I have a minimum. However: (1) This auction is really rare; opponents will very often bid here given my shape and our combined strength, partner having a double-negative to begin with is rare, my having 16 with 6♦ is much rarer than my having 10 with 6♦. (2) We are not really trying to have a constructive auction when I have a min and partner makes a double-negative, so we don't lose anything that way. (3) Maybe I can bid 1NT on some of these minimum minor one-suiters to get out cheaper.

Of course, I wouldn't be playing 1♠ = double negative anyway if I had a choice in the matter.

[straube]

I forgot your 2D is different than ours.

Ok, thanks for your reply. I understand you don't like 1S DN, but it sounds like you're not too worried about the 16 with 6 diamonds. Sounds like we're better off keeping our opening range about the same.

[rhm]

JLOGIC, on 2012-February-04, 06:27, said:

Thanks awm, I was going crazy. Why do you people want to pass with more hands?

The question is in my opinion not whether to pass more hands or not.
For the moment let's keep out the question where you want to draw the line for a minimum opening bid.

Just assume you have a minimum opening hand for your criteria with a 5 card or longer major and shorter lengths in the minors.

Now exchange the majors and minors should you still open?
This is a very valid question and if the answer is you should not the question is how large should the difference in strength be.

What is certainly true is that your chances of making game is significantly different for these two types of hands.

Rainer Herrmann

[dake50]

Lesser without a 4xMajor.
More-ther with a Major to find and play.
Since a minor fit without a Major plays 3m at least
- they won't let 2D/2C play will they?
With a Major, we need secure info for our game decision.

[32519]

akhare, on 2012-January-31, 04:30, said:

Hmm..., I would argue for even lighter 2♣ given its premptive value. The same goes for unbalanced hands with 1♦ as well -- the downside is more than offset by firing the first salvo and denying the opps the comfort of their opening structure.

Also, if anything, I would argue for the upper range to be more lowered than raised -- my philosophy is to open 1♣ when in doubt (except when holding marginal extremely distributional hands)...

I don’t agree with this at all. I find that the further you lower your minor suit pre-empts, the greater the probability of the opponents making marginal games in a major when one of them can enter the auction. The further you lower your minor suit pre-empts the more any (required) finesses are taken through partner. I favour bumping up the HCP range for minor suit orientated hands as suggested in the OP. You may lose the part score, but not a game score.