Saturday, April 23, 2005 6:04 PM

Hand Evaluation - Opening Bids ( Defense )

PITBULLS:

This hand came up which drew Tom Gandolfos ire when discussing the merits of whether the hand qualified for an opening bid ♠Qxxxxxx ♥x ♦QJx ♣Ax . The people at the table contended that this hand was an opening bid of 1♠ . Tom & I disagree very strongly that this is anything near an opening bid. Why , because it is a semi-psyche that erodes partnership discipline due to its lack of defense. An opening bid by definition shows defense. If you open 1♠ on this hand & 1♠ on a real opener how is partner to know the difference ? It just like defining a word in the English language to mean something , then use the word to mean something else in another conversation. Instant confusion & ambiguity . An opening bid is a control showing bid via quick tricks for defense. Why ? because quick tricks must have a control ( Ace or King ) associated with it. Kx , Ax , KQx , AK , AQ all have a control combination. This is why ♠QJx ♥QJxx ♦QJx ♣QJx is not an opening bid despite having 12 HCP’s. HCP’s are not the sole criteria for an opening bid. Keep the same HCP’s for the hand above but arrange them in quick trick combinations & you do have a 9 HCP opening bid.. This transformation was due to controls & suit length ♠KQxxxxx ♥x ♦xxx ♣Ax .

You are vul & hold ♠Kx ♥J10x ♦xxx ♣AK109x so is this an opening bid with your 11 HCP ? Of course it is , as you have a 5 card suit with 2 ½ quick tricks. Give yourself one more HCP with the same distribution ♠Kx ♥J10x ♦KQx ♣QJxxx is this an opener ? Of course not , it pales in comparison with the 11 HCP hand & is almost useless if partner doubles a contract. You may only contribute one trick to the defense. If I doubled the opponents into game with my 5 defensive tricks & they made it because you opened that collection , find another partner. To where do you pull the penalty double with this hand ? You are between a rock & a hard place . You go for –800 if you pull or they make the doubled contract if you do not. To make matters worse , both the above hands are described with a 1NT rebid. How is partner to field the difference ? Make them guess indeed L

When Bridge was first invented , it was thought that 2 ½ defensive tricks was a basic requirement for an opening bid. This requirement is etched into standard bidding & passed the test of time. This concept originated in the Culbertson system but was carried over when Goren popularized HCP’s. Game tries , slam tries , penalty doubles & all situations where judgment is required in competitive auctions rely on this simple basic requirement for an opening bid. You may not consciously know that this is ingrained into your Bridge judgment , but believe me, it is there. If partner does not have the required controls for an opening bid this is another variable that has to be considered in Bridge judgment . Is partner opening with only 1 control ( hand above ) ? This lack of discipline throws the partnership off in penalty double situations , game tries , slam tries & overall Bridge judgment. You reduce the effectiveness of bidding as a tool to make the correct decision in the game of Bridge . Simple as that. It has the same effect on a partnership as a blatant psyche does. Trust gets eroded so partnership discipline evaporates. 4NT Blackwood is a control asking bid . When you try this bid , you assume partner has a minimum of two for her opening bid. If not , there will be a lot of aborted slam tries going down at the 5 level ! Anarchy reigns supreme .

The notion of defensive tricks as a requirement for an opening bid is as old as the game of Bridge itself. It is not an archaic idea as most present day Bridge theorists still make it a basic requirement for an opening bid . In the 1940’s another requirement was added to the quick trick requirement for an opening bid. This is the notion of HCP’s . In addition to the quick tricks , 13 HCP’s was the stated norm for an opening bid. Over the years this requirement was lowered if distribution was present . However, the idea of having defensive tricks never went away. Charles Goren who popularized the new HCP notion always taught that points only augment the quick trick requirement for an opening bid. There is no Bridge literature on the face of the earth that drums up the notion that defensive tricks are no longer needed for an opening bid. In recent years, there have been rules of 20 or 24 that if your HCP’s & long suits add up to those numbers you have an opening bid. This is fine in theory as long as you have your defensive tricks . There is an article in this month’s Bridge bulletin saying that the rule does not have merit if they do not emphasize the quick trick requirement . ♠Axxxx ♥QJ10xx ♦QJ ♣x is not an opener but ♠AKxxx ♥K109xx ♦xx ♣x is even though they both have 10 HCP’s . Openers are not just moving your beads on an abacus so if they reach a certain number , it is an opener. People who do that just do not understand the costs to the partnership by doing so. They are out to con the opponents & take partner with them . It is that simple.

If you have a choice between opening or not, the criteria of HCP’s is the last thing I look at. I look for controls so if they are present , I now consider an opening bid. I now look to see if these controls are in quick trick combinations. Next criteria is patterns . If I have a flat hand , I need the HCP’s . If I have distribution with the defensive tricks , I look at suit quality or whether my meager HCP’s are located in the suits or not. A good suit with defensive tricks is an opening bid no matter how low the HCP’s. ♠Kxx ♥x ♦xxx ♣AK109xx is a club opener . ♠KJxx ♥AJxx ♦Jx ♣Qxx is not an opening bid unless on the terrorist vulnerability. Why because you only have 1 ½ defensive tricks ! Your club suit cannot stand an opening lead & you do not have an offensive distribution. Yes you do have 12 HCP’s with 4-4 in the majors but so what ? I would hazard a guess that 90 % of the club players would open this hand. I would also say 90% of the club players are wrong !! Change the hand to the same HCP’s , same distribution but controls & I would open ♠Axxx ♥AKJx ♦xx ♣xxx . ( 1♥ though but not 1♣)

There is a tactical advantage to opening non openers in club games , sectionals & even regionals. Weak players have trouble getting to their correct spot because you are confusing them. Sometimes you make it difficult for them to enter the auction. However , like Steve Willard etc partner can not trust your openers so partnership discipline is a thing of the past. If opening non opening bids was a criteria , Steve Willard , Osama & Ray Grace would win every event they played in. Instead it is boom or bust with them as they are swinging with their opening bids. Good players take advantage of these bad openers . Huge sets are frequent & they assist greatly in playing hands your way. You get free information not received at the other tables. Since the partnership do not trust each other , they must rely on the opponents bidding to judge further competition. If you throw them a curve ball , they can end up +200 for 3♠ making 5 !

In single handed bidding , who cares if you have an opening bid as partner is not invited to the party anyway ! However, in partnership Bridge , a lack of an opening bid is also considered a lack of respect. Leave non openers to those players with that style or for the terrorist vulnerability. Guessing whether partner really has an opener when she opened is too tough on me. Opening non openers by rationalizing that Bridge is a “bidders game” or make them ( including partner ) guess is downright drivel. My partner’s & I bid very much thank you , but we bid a lot as a passed hand also !! Partner does not get conned that way .