[rduran1216]

---

What would you open this hand first seat all white?

[rhm]

Everything could be right.

I probably open 6♦. But my partners know I do this for tactical and preemptive reasons and I have never 12 solid tricks when I do this.
So they will not raise solely on the ace of ♦ alone.

Rainer Herrmann

[jillybean]

Lacking any fancy agreements, 2♣ wtp

[rhm]

jillybean, on 2011-February-19, 06:31, said:

Lacking any fancy agreements, 2♣ wtp

And what useful information do you expect to find out after 2♣?
Do you expect a nice unobstructed sequence, where cue-bidding follows ♦ agreement ending at the right level?

A bit naive.

In bidding as in play it helps to look ahead. If I do not believe that a couple of rounds of bidding will enlighten me nor my partner and is much more likely to help opponents than us, I prefer to take an immediate decision I will have to take eventually anyway and keep opponents in the dark.
The opening lead could be crucial.

Rainer Herrmann

[jillybean]

I think it would be naive to think I could open 6♦ and not expect partner to bid 7 holding the Ace, 5♦ is an underbid
so my choices seem to be 1♦ or 2♣. Please enlighten me.

[pooltuna]

If I can't open it a strong 2♣ or equivalent then 6♦

[Gerben42]

With 3 losers 6♦ could certainly be right, but I have a bit much defense. I would open 2♣ followed by 5♦.

[rhm]

jillybean, on 2011-February-19, 07:20, said:

I think it would be naive to think I could open 6♦ and not expect partner to bid 7 holding the Ace, 5♦ is an underbid
so my choices seem to be 1♦ or 2♣. Please enlighten me.

Agree with your partners that 6♦ like 5♦ is a tactical preempt (a void in a major is likely) with good chances for 12 tricks, but not the silly rock crushers some expect, for which you can wait a lifetime and never get one
Actually I made such a bid last month, but do not get me wrong I can not remember when I did it before. I held all white in third seat in the German Bridge Bundesliga (IMPs)

♠-
♥K9
♦AKJ7
♣AKQ9764

2 passes to me and I opened 6♣ and made an over-trick. (I received a trump lead and of course nobody kept ♦ on the run of the clubs.)
In the other room they opened 2♣ and ended up in 3NT
The boards were duplicated at 50 tables. Almost half the field played in game. Slam was lay-down. The only one who bid 7♣ went down, probably after a nice informative bidding sequence.
About half made 13 tricks.

Many smile on such an "unsophisticated" way of bidding, but I believe they misjudge. Do not be shy to take responsibility for a daring decision if the conditions are right!

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

deleted

[rduran1216]

I dont see what info I will learn after 2C. if it goes 2C 4H/4S by LHO and partner dbls or passes, wont i be bidding 5 or 6 diamonds anyway?

[jillybean]

rduran1216, on 2011-February-19, 11:07, said:

I dont see what info I will learn after 2C. if it goes 2C 4H/4S by LHO and partner dbls or passes, wont i be bidding 5 or 6 diamonds anyway?

So, what happened?

[cherdano]

rduran1216, on 2011-February-19, 11:07, said:

I dont see what info I will learn after 2C. if it goes 2C 4H/4S by LHO and partner dbls or passes, wont i be bidding 5 or 6 diamonds anyway?

Uh, you bid 5♦, but partner can raise with a good hand that would have passed a 5♦ opening bid.

Obviously it's not clear that 2♣ is right or that partner will raise with the right hands, but do we really have to have the discussion on such a primitive level?

[bluecalm]

Whatever GF bid I have in my system. In standard it would be 2♣. In precision and polish club 1♣.
When deciding if I should open with bid which contains GF hands I usually ask myself if I have a gf hand. If the answer is yes then I open it, hence 2♣...

[dake50]

Try 4NT ask. If I get 2xA, then a K, 7D.
Less and I'm on the same guess: 6D/5D.

[the hog]

3NT specific Ace ask for me. Nice to have that bid in your arsenal.
Otherwise 2C I guess.

[hrothgar]

Probably gonna catch flack for this one, but I'm opening 1♦

I use both 5m and 4N to show different single suited preempts, but this hand doesn't qualify for either
I don't like 2♣ (too little defense)
6♣ is too unilateral

[nigel_k]

I would open 2♣.

5♦ is too little and I think 6♦ missing three top cards is too much. When we are making partner will raise a little too often. 4NT doesn't seem right when we are missing two kings and partner can work out for himself that the ♦A will be useful.

So I think it is a choice between 1♦ and 2♣. I think 2♣ then 5♦ comes closer to representing the hand strength and how little I need for slam. The only way I could ever feel content to defend at the five level is if I start with 2♣ then 5♦. I am not that worried about getting my suit in on the first round since it will probably be no higher than the four level next time, and if the bidding is at five of a major I would probably bid 6♦ regardless of whether I started with 1♦ or 2♣.

[Phil]

I would open this 6♦ red/white. I'm worried about a profitable sac at these colors and if they guess right over 6♦ then wdo. However, they may guess wrong and take a phantom as well.

At any other colors, I think 6♦ is pulling the panic button. It assumes we cannot have an intelligent auction to stop in 5♦, or bid the grand. I might get some action over 2♣ and I might not. People do not go out of their way to jump into a 2♣ sequence and even if they do as Cherdano suggests, a later 5♦ is an apt description.

[rduran1216]

here is the full deal. btw, colors were all red.

---

in this case opening 1D or 2C lets opp find 6S sac.

[the hog]

rduran1216, on 2011-February-20, 00:46, said:

here is the full deal. btw, colors were all red.

---

in this case opening 1D or 2C lets opp find 6S sac.

Who bid 6H and why?
Pray tell, how do you make 6NT on a C lead?