[effervesce]

2♦ for me.

Things in favor of bidding:
-3rd seat. You know it's the opp's hand, and want to preempt them from the right place
-6/4 shape

against bidding:
-poor suit at adverse vul

We may go for a number, but the 3rd seat and 6/4 tilt it enough to make bidding outweigh the sizable risk of going for a large number.

[effervesce]

keylime, on Dec 7 2008, 07:17 PM, said:

I pass. Bidding 2D when pard didn't open....nah.

It's when partner's a passed hand that makes it even BETTER to preempt than worse - because you are so much more likely to

a) not have game
b ) partner is more likely to have a fit given he did not preempt himself
c) the opps are more likely to have game/slam

[ochinko]

Would anyone consider 2NT if it shows both minors and a weak hand?

[gnasher]

So, continuing my new role of discussion policeman:

Winstonm, on Dec 8 2008, 04:17 AM, said:

IMHO, any partner worth the name would understand the 3rd-seat aspect of a weak 2-bid and never hang you so you go for a number.  It's kind of like balancing - partner should know you already bid his cards when you opened 2D.

The main risk of preempting isn't that partner will overcompete. The risks are that:
- You are already too high and get caught.
- You tell them how to make a contract that would otherwise have gone down.
- You encourage them to play in a making 3NT instead of a non-making suit contract.

[Flameous]

Easy 2D. All white 3D.

[benlessard]

Quote

When I preempt, it isn't because I want to buy the hand, and lead-direction is only a secondary objective. The main purpose of preemption is to take away the opponents' bidding space, in the hope that this causes them to play at the wrong level or in the wrong strain

If you are hoping than your 2D is going to stop them for slam or push them in the wrong game more often than you will suffer a bad big number its either because you think opps can relay the hand a reach a tough to bid slam or you play against weak players.


I believe that vs better than average players it will help them more (in the play and in the bidding) then it will annoyed them. So you are risking a penalty for nothing.

[655321]

2♦

Agree with gnasher's posts (except I bid instead of passing )

Definitely would not bid 2NT for the minors if it were available.

[Fluffy]

ochinko, on Dec 8 2008, 09:42 AM, said:

Would anyone consider 2NT if it shows both minors and a weak hand?

Not at all, I've played some 2 suiters for a while, and the only time you want a 6-4 to sound like a 5-5 is when the suit qualities are extremelly biased towards the 4 card suit.

On this hand not only does it not happen, it also commits us to the 3 leve AND it gives LHO a free bid of double to penalice us.

[ochinko]

gnasher, on Dec 8 2008, 01:10 PM, said:

So, continuing my new role of discussion policeman:

Winstonm, on Dec 8 2008, 04:17 AM, said:

IMHO, any partner worth the name would understand the 3rd-seat aspect of a weak 2-bid and never hang you so you go for a number.  It's kind of like balancing - partner should know you already bid his cards when you opened 2D.

The main risk of preempting isn't that partner will overcompete. The risks are that:
- You are already too high and get caught.
- You tell them how to make a contract that would otherwise have gone down.
- You encourage them to play in a making 3NT instead of a non-making suit contract.

The difference between balancing and third seat preempting is that you are pretty much obliged to balance, whereas preempting is more a matter of personal choice and evaluation. That said, I am on Winston's side here.

Competent opponents are certain to get to their best contract when we don't intervene. Taking away valuable bidding space from them decreases their chances significantly.

It is true that I may help the declarer but more often my bid serves to guide partner not to blow a trick on the lead. Furthermore, since partner is a passed hand my strength can vary very much, up to an opening hand, so the declarer can still use only the distribution info, and even that is not certain, because I could even have a side 4CM which I wouldn't have in first seat.

You could go for a number, but percentagewise your distribution practically compels you to preempt.

[the hog]

If I had a 2D bid available - and I don't that is what I would bid. Passing a 6-4 if you have available mechanism is ridiculous.

[brianshark]

A 2♦ pre-empt will get in the way no matter who your opponents are. Even Meckwell would rather have a nice tidy uncontested auction starting at the 1-level. I think I would bid 2♦. You may go for a number, but your 6-4 shape is a pretty nice feature. A calculated risk that I think is worth it.

[benlessard]

Just for the fun of it.

What % of times do you think that your preempt will put them in a bad contract (that lose imps vs the contract they would reach if they had a free run.

What % of times do you think that your preempt will put them in an good contract.

What % do you expect to get nailed and lose at least 9 imps (-800 vs a game or -500 vs a partscore).

What % do you expect that because of the overcall declarer can read and go plus instead of minus.

[brianshark]

Wild guess: 8%, 2%, 2%, 0.5%.

[Winstonm]

benlessard, on Dec 8 2008, 11:23 AM, said:

Just for the fun of it.

What % of times do you think that your preempt will put them in a bad contract (that lose imps vs the contract they would reach if they had a free run.

What % of times do you think that your preempt will put them in an good contract.

What % do you expect to get nailed and lose at least 9 imps (-800 vs a game or -500 vs a partscore).

What % do you expect that because of the overcall declarer can read and go plus instead of minus.

The more important question, IMO, is how often will good players reach the correct contract given an uncontested auction...

[benlessard]

its included.

Quote

What % of times do you think that your preempt will put them in a bad contract (that lose imps vs the contract they would reach if they had a free run

So if they reached a bad contract with or without your 2D is doesnt count

So if they reached a good contract no matter what is doesnt count.

[gwnn]

as usual I agree with The Shark.

[han]

I opened 2D, I wasn't sure if this was sane at these colors, so thanks all for your responses.

This time it worked out well. LHO bid 4S and RHO passed. I don't think either of them did something crazy but the hands fit well and 6S was laydown. It is not clear to me that they would have found slam if I had passed, but I think they would have had a better shot.

[whereagles]

Whenever they have a game, it's fairly safe (that's the case here). Not that it's really less dangerous when they have a game, just that, when they don't, you might get into the "dbled vs nothing" problem. That shifts the odds towards safer openers.

[mtvesuvius]

I put in a reluctant vote for 2♦... As painful as it is, I want my partner to be able to bid 3♦ with any decent support. It will also create a problem for LHO when he has a huge hand, or a notrump opener... I will live with the risk of going for -800 occaisionally. If 2♦ is already used for another conventional bid, it seems logical to pass...

AJK

[xcurt]

Pass. Pass Pass Pass Pass.

You have neither major so preempting is not going to put LHO to any difficult decision since he's almost always going to have both majors and can double, or one major than he can overcall.

Sure you might push them to an inferior strain but

* you have an ace which severely limits the chances they can make a slam
* you aren't playing matchpoints so the opponents can take the safest game-sized plus (any of 500, 600, 620, 630) even if it isn't the maximum plus, and the most they will lose is 4 IMPs (500 vs 630-660)
* your call is going to increase the chance they play NT, which is probably their safest game
* and you are running the risk that they check 2♦x out for 800-1100 when either of them has 4 of the 7 missing trumps
* if partner raises, you are going to throw up

Note that I would be much more tempted to preempt with, say, 1462 shape.