JLOGIC, on 2012-June-27, 18:01, said:
Rainer, surely you get that when you open light you pass sounder in third/fourth? Didn't Roth-Stone open extremely light in third seat since they opened so sound in first seat? These 2 things go hand in hand. It is extremely misleading to say that grue is not known for strong opening bid requirements but passed a balanced 11 in third seat! You often make similarly misleading comments like this, I wonder if you are actually failing that much at logic or if you do it intentionally.
FWIW I can promise you Grue would open that hand at any vulnerability in first or second seat, and would pass at any vulnerability in third or fourth seat, that is standard for our style. What would be the point of opening this hand, a 2344 11 oount, in third seat when your partner will never have 11 and will very rarely have an unbalanced 10? If you played SOUND openers though, there would be a lot more reason to open it, your partner might have TWELVE points in fact and passing out 23 HCP would be ridiculous. So you see, SOUND openers might open this hand, but light openers would never do so. Do you understand how these go hand in hand now? Of course, you probably always did.
I do not understand what someone who plays extremely light openings NV passing a 4432 11 count in third seat with a doubleton spade has to do with your assertation that a sizable minority of players in a world championship would pass with K Kxxx A9x QTxxx. As much as you try to deflect from this, that will never be true in 2012 lol.
Of course I understand if you play light openings that you need not protect your game chances by opening light in third or fourth position. But this is not the point.
As I understand the modern trend in opening lighter in first and second position is not driven by improving your constructive bidding, but by competitive and obstructive tactics. Do these not apply any more when you are favorable in third position? Fact is that in the other room the hand was opened and Grue lost the board.
The whole idea that you should have half the strength needed for game to open the bidding is what drove the old school in Bridge. (Kaplan, Goren etc)
I respect of course that you have much better hands on experience at high level Bridge than me.
But on this forum it seems to me that many panelists seem to compete for the dubious honor, who is prepared to open the greatest rubbish hand.
The trend has certainly gone to lighter openings, particularly in the Anglophone world.
It is my impression that for example the Italians still do not open as light as you do and there are exceptions like Rubin-Granovetter.
There seems also agreement (except on this forum) from pure logic that somewhere this trend must be counterproductive.
Rodwell claimed in an interview he gave to Glen: "I don’t think opening a hand like Jx Axxxx Kxxx Qx with 1H is winning bridge."
I sometimes have the impression he and particularly Meckstroth do not follow their own convictions.
I have a collection of 149 deals from Pavlicek where Meckwell opened 1
♦ in one room, while the other room passed.
The overall net result was inconclusive. It still makes for interesting analysis.
It is rare that 12 HCP hands are passed nowadays. It is probably losing Bridge in today's competitive world.
However, I still believe in down- and upgrading and I would not argue with anybody, who would downgrade
♠K,
♥K743,
♦A92,
♣QT743.
I said I would open it, but only just and I would not feel very comfortable. I am aware that Grue would certainly open it.
This does not prove it is a long term winning decision, particularly when your one level openings are not limited.
Rainer Herrmann
Help
