[Hanoi5]

Red vs White, Butler:

♠x
♥AKQ9xx
♦8x
♣T6xx

What do you open?

[mike777]

2h but HAVE NO issue if you play a lite style that opens 1h.

[nige1]

Hanoi5, on 2013-July-03, 18:38, said:

Red vs White, Butler: ♠ x ♥ A K Q 9 x x ♦ 8 x ♣ T 6 x x

IMO 2♥ = 10, 1♥ = 8, 3♥ = 6. 4♥ = 4.

[aguahombre]

Why look for a reason not to do the obvious? Oh, wait...maybe a 2H bid should have everyting except hearts.

[wank]

3♥ - this hand is all offense so i'll go for a pre-empt of some variety.

i like a heavy pre-empting style, but with a 6421 shape this is too heavy for 2h even for me, unless i'm second in.

[MrAce]

I voted 3♥ just because of the vulnerability. I could open 4 w/r.

[Zelandakh]

1♥ looks wrong. Between 2♥ and 3♥ is a matter of partnership style.

[inquiry]

2♥. The strength of the heart suit might prevent the opponents a penalty double of 3♥, but a 3♥ bid at these colors might convince partner to bid 4♥ to make and too often he will, be disappointed. An equally problematic situation with 3♥ is if I buy the contract, all might be lost anyway. The opponents can not make 3NT (PRESUMABLY we can run hearts), and if they can't make 4♠ we have just won the partscore hand but we might easily go down two vul when there is at most a part-score for them,

Maybe I am too old, but when vulnerable I play preempts much closer to the vest. And when vulnerable against non-vulnerable, even more so. Not vulnerable, who knows, I might open 4♥, but at these colors? 2♥ is enough for me.

[ArtK78]

If this is not a "book" 2♥ bid at unfavorable vul, then the bid does not exist.

[Fluffy]

I told hanoi 3>4>1>2, but I am thinking pass is better than 2, so 3>4>1>pass>2


EDIT: The vulnerability on the problem hanoi gave me was not vul vs vul, here I'd still bid 3♥ rather than 2, but 2 is not ridiculous.

[rmnka447]

2 ♥ gets my vote at red vs. white.

Partner will picture your hand almost exactly as it is. So whatever action partner takes is likely to be right.

[Hanoi5]

My mistake. As usual. I meant they're red, we're white.

[blackshoe]

Hanoi5, on 2013-July-05, 21:08, said:

My mistake. As usual. I meant they're red, we're white.

This is why I like the British paradigm: we vulnerable, them not is red; them vulnerable we not is green. Hard to confuse the two.

[Free]

Easy 2♥ unfav. When NV it's more difficult between 1♥ and 3♥.

[Zelandakh]

rmnka447, on 2013-July-05, 14:31, said:

2 ♥ gets my vote at red vs. white.

Partner will picture your hand almost exactly as it is. So whatever action partner takes is likely to be right.

The issue is not so much which action partner takes so much as LHO. If bidding 2♥ allows them to find a spade contract that they would not find over 3♥ then it was almost certainly the wrong decision. On the other hand, if it is partner that holds the spades then 2♥ was probably enough.

[Codo]

There are two opponents who can hold spades but just one partner, I go for 3...