BBO Discussion Forums: Light openings - BBO Discussion Forums

Basic system Modern Acol-like (2/1 enough to GF opposite a strong NT) with weak NT and 5cM.

The other night partner opened 1S on ♠AK10xx ♥Q8xxx ♦x ♣xx (second seat all vul IIRC) and I drove to 3NT with ♠Jx ♥Ax ♦1098x ♣AQJxx. Both very rose-tinted bids for sure, and I went four off (after perfect defence, everything offside and misguessing a lot). I told him it's not a good idea to open light for this reason - if partner has strength but no fit, you're doomed.

For example, change the hands slightly to ♠AK10xx ♥QJ8xx ♦x ♣xx opposite ♠Jx ♥Ax ♦J109x ♣AQJxx and now the opening and driving to 3NT are clearcut, but you're still going off.

What's the correct thing to do here? It seems we have some options, probably some combination is best:

- Play light openers but only as low as 10 and only if you don't mind playing 3NT opposite some decent misfitting 12-count
- Only play light openers in the majors
- Play more solid openers (11 HCP absolute minimum unless really shapely, i.e. 6-5 or better, so you can pull 3NT safely)
- Increase the upper range of 1NT response to 10 HCP, 2NT rebid 11-bad 13, and don't force to game without a good 13 HCP
- Take the bad hands when they happen - the thin games you bid otherwise will pay off (we play a lot of IMPs)

Would be grateful for some advice. I should definitely learn to not force to game on averagey 12 counts, even at IMPs, but I'd also prefer to play a more solid opening style.

ahydra

Open the majority of 11s but not many 10s. Opening 5-5 9-counts is just losing bridge, it'll often be easy to show your hand on the next round, whereas if you open you'll often be unable to show your second suit for lack of strength.

GF on all 13s, invite on most misfitting 12s.

Take the bad hands when they happen.

Declare better, so that you have a chance of making 3NT on your second construction

Having played LOBs for a while here are my suggestions:

You will need a way to ID the LOBs.

Our solution was to open 1M with 8-12 hcp (pre-alert required in ACBLand, 2) Open 1C Artificial with 12-16 hcp hands, and 3) Open 1D with 17+ hcp hands (All alertable).

Using the rule of 20, your example is a pass, but using ZAR points your example is an opening bid of 1S (26 = 9 + 10 + 4 = 26)

Gosh13 and I open almost all rule-of-20 hands and gf as responder with most 12 counts. Yes, we get too high sometimes. Sounder openings would avoid that but also make us miss some good games and lose more partscore battles. Sounder gf responses would avoid some games but take us too high when opener has to make a third move with a decent 15 count, catering to a conservative responder.

You pay one price or another for playing a system with a high upper range of the 1-level openings. That said, I think the first hand takes it too far, certainly at r/r in second seat. You might consider playing Polish 2-openings in order to allow you to open the marginal 5-5 hands.

Hi,

#1 Assuming standard opening bids, a 1-level opening bid has a variance
from 11/12-21HCP, i.e. 9-10 HCP.
Natural system do work, but have a hard time to get you to the right
level. If you widen the gap, you start guessing, and whatever the gains,
they are not worth it.

I.e. you should not do it.

In general, I would recommend a "Line in the Sand" you never cross, crossing
the line due to suit quality / the sun / moon constellation is not a judgement
call, it is a breach of agreement.

#2 It is understandable, why your partner wanted to open the hand, 55 in
majors, reasonable 5 card suits.
The solution would be, to move those hands into 2-level openings.
This adds burden to your strong 2C opening, but ...

The alternative idea is to wait and come in later, and underrated strategy.
The 55 is nice, unfortunately you are not able to show the shape in 2 bids,
you can only show 54, so you are not going to find the 53 fit in the lower
ranking suit, which reduces the strength of the hand.
In contrast - after pass + 2-suited overcall, you have shown the 55.

With kind regards
Marlowe

Play light openers but only as low as 10 and only if you don't mind playing 3NT opposite some decent misfitting 12-count

comes closest.
For my liking I would open ♠AK10xx ♥QJ8xx ♦x ♣xx but not ♠AK10xx ♥Q8xxx ♦x ♣xx, but it is close.
You have to draw the line somewhere and this is where I do.
Lighter opening have become commonplace, but we would not have the discussion about them if there would not be drawbacks as well as advantages.
The major drawback is that you might get to game or slams with inadequate values.
My general impression is that very few, playing light openers, would not force to game with ♠Jx ♥Ax ♦J109x ♣AQJxx opposite a possible light major suit opening.
Game will not necessarily make if the opening hand does not fit and partner has a minimum. But that in itself requires a parlay and sometimes such games make anyway. .

Rainer Herrmann

If you want some sort of 'rule' to help with these 5-5 decisions, then you could do a lot worse than follow one of Kantar's bidding tips from his A Treasury of Bridge Tips :
With any 5-5 distribution, open with 11+HCP, pass with less.
However, with exactly 10HCP, open the higher ranking suit if:
(1)the suit is a major AND
(2) the suit contains three honour cards (from the top 5)AND
(3) ALL 10 HCP are in the two long suits.

This tip does have an Asterisk next to it, which apparently means that it is a controversial tip, which he says means "some experts, however misguided, may not see in exactly the same light as I do"!

So here 1 spade would not have been opened as there was only 9 HCP, even though there were 3 honour cards and the points were in the two long suits.

ahydra, on 2014-March-25, 14:44, said:

What I assume you mean is that it is not a good idea to open this light without agreement. If you agree that a minimum opening bid is this (or less) then you just have to adjust Responder's ranges, and probably also limit the top end so that things do not become unmanageable. There is no intrinsic reason why an opening 1 bid cannot be 8-17 rather than 10-19 or 13-22. And there are definite advantages to getting in first so deciding that LOBs are a bad idea because of a lack of agreement about them is falling into something of a trap.

ahydra, on 2014-March-25, 14:44, said:

There is not really a "correct thing" here. There are different styles and they all have their advantages and disadvantages. My preference as a junior was for a very conservative style in which I passed most 11 counts. Having learned a little more I now prefer an aggressive style that opens most unbalanced 10 counts. The main point here is that if you agree to a LOB strategy the Responder needs to adjust and not force to game on a nondescript 12 count. It is not the case in such systems that 2 opening bids are automatically worth game.

ahydra, on 2014-March-25, 14:44, said:

I suspect this is the source of the problem. Your natural instinct is to play a different style from your partner. You need to sit down together and decide where the lines are, by seat and vulnerability if necessary. Only then do you have any chance of making the right decisions as Responder and only then can the partnership really come together harmoniously.

You can also just accept that sometimes you're going to reach bad 3NT contracts...

ahydra, on 2014-March-25, 14:44, said:

We play this sort of thing and open this light, we would play an only slightly less horrible 2N on this hand.

Quote

Would need to be a terrible 10 that didn't want to bid game opposite 16 as otherwise you have to bid on with 16 over 1N, and yes, decent 13 is reasonable requirement, also play 4SF not GF at 2 level, doesn't help here, but does with ♠/♦.

Quote

Yes