[Gerben47]

Scoring: IMP

---

2nd seat unfavorable in a Team match against weaker opponents. Your bid?

[inquiry]

To no one's surprise, I open 1♥

[whereagles]

I open 3♥. Perhaps not a good strategy against weakish opposition, but I like to make pressure bids as often as I can and this hand qualifies.

[cherdano]

whereagles, on Feb 10 2005, 01:33 PM, said:

I open 3♥. Perhaps not a good strategy against weakish opposition, but I like to make pressure bids as often as I can and this hand qualifies.

Wow. Even in second seat and vulnerable vs not? No thanks, for me it is a choice between pass and 1♥.

If I would be playing with you, Gerben, I would probably pass, as it's clear from your posts that you expect good defensive strength for an opening bid. Otherwise, I open 1♥ without much thought.

Kieran Dyke gave a good rule on RGG about opening light distributional borderline hands: Open whenever you would go to game opposite a limit raise (and you are too strong to preempt). I think this hand just about qualifies.

[Free]

Aren't we allowed to bid something else, like 4♥, or perhaps even 1♠?

Anyway, for once I won't chose the non-existing "OTHER"-option, but I chose for 1♥.

[mila85]

2♦: multi
It's solid in first two seats.

[Gerben47]

@mila: If you choose Multi please vote 2♥. Multi is not part of the system for this hand.

@Free: If someone wants to vote "other" (s)he is in my humble opinion "crazy", that's why there is no "other" category. I made the list and checked it twice, and found no reasonable bid missing.

@cherdano: I like to open light but not on junk, which is conservative compared with some frequent posters Unless, of course, I am playing a system that is taylormade for weak opening bids. In the league in 2004 I played Magic Diamond and in that system I would have opened ALL the Zar-hands, but not in a standard approach.

[pclayton]

1♥. I prefer my 2nd seat weak 2's to be 2/3 honors.

So it finally happened....there exists a hand that is TOO weak for a weak 2, but can be opened with ONE.

[mr1303]

1H without even thinking about it.

1) 2H is dreadful, as you have a 7 card suit. Partner will not expect this, and as a result misjudge the auction

2) This is a rule of 20 opening. Hence this isn't light: this is a full opening bid.

Incidently I wouldn't consider a 4H opening crazy. Hence I think that should be considered as an option. I wouldn't make it, but in a poll like this it should be an option.

[cherdano]

Gerben47, on Feb 10 2005, 03:52 PM, said:

@cherdano: I like to open light but not on junk, which is conservative compared with some frequent posters Unless, of course, I am playing a system that is taylormade for weak opening bids.

Yes, I understand. So did I guess right that you would just about pass this hand?

[MickyB]

Yes, I'm not sure why 4♥ is considered more crazy than 2♥.

[Free]

MickyB, on Feb 10 2005, 05:22 PM, said:

Yes, I'm not sure why 4♥ is considered more crazy than 2♥.

agree...

[inquiry]

Free, on Feb 10 2005, 12:44 PM, said:

MickyB, on Feb 10 2005, 05:22 PM, said:

Yes, I'm not sure why 4♥ is considered more crazy than 2♥.

agree...

Well... my second choice is 2♥... but like Phil, at this vul, this hand is too weak for 2♥ but not too weak for 1♥. An opening bid of 3♥ is, imho at this color and at imps, wacky... there is not a term for how insane an opening bid of 4♥ at this vul is.....

You should be able to take at least 9 tricks for such a bid at this vul. Here yoiu have 5 "sure" hearts (you could end up winning only 4 but that would be REALLY unlucky, 1Diamond. That is six. You are a full three tricks short.

[whereagles]

Ben, why do you require 9 tricks to open 4♥ at 'red'? I thought the idea of preemption was to take out the enemy single-handedly, not to bid 1 trick below what you think you can make.

Looking at this hand and RHO having passed, chances are points split something like 9-10(you)-11-10 or similar. So statistically you're looking at a part-score deal, with some chances for major suit game if there's a fit. Don't you think there's a real risk of it going

pass..1♥...1♠...2/3♥
3♠.....4♥...4♠ <--- it might make!

or

pass..1♥...2♠...4♥
4♠ <--- probably goes down, but 5♥ might make

or

pass..1♥...1♠...dbl
2♠.....3♥...3♠..pass
pass <--- and now? Pard can have many hands.. ones that fit nice, others that don't

All this will become

pass..3/4♥..pass..pass
pass

if you skip "constructive" bidding in favor of a bid that inhibits intervention while conveying a decent amout of information. The point here is you have hearts and they rate to have spades. If it were the other way around, a 1♠ would be much more attractive.

[cherdano]

whereagles, on Feb 10 2005, 05:59 PM, said:

Ben, why do you require 9 tricks to open 4♥ at 'red'? I thought the idea of preemption was to take out the enemy single-handedly, not to bid 1 trick below what you think you can make.

I am sure Ben was only talking about red vs white.

Quote

Looking at this hand and RHO having passed, chances are points split something like 9-10(you)-11-10 or similar. So statistically you're looking at a part-score deal, with some chances for major suit game if there's a fit. Don't you think there's a real risk of it going

pass..1♥...1♠...2/3♥
3♠.....4♥...4♠ <--- it might make!

If it does make, then probably because of a big fit, which they may well find over a 4♥ opening, too. If it does not make, partner may be in a good position to double.

Quote

or

pass..1♥...2♠...4♥
4♠ <--- probably goes down, but 5♥ might make

or

pass..1♥...1♠...dbl
2♠.....3♥...3♠..pass
pass <--- and now? Pard can have many hands.. ones that fit nice, others that don't

Yes. But you have described your hand well, and so partner will be in the best position to make the final decision. He passed. 4♥ isn't making, and 3♠ is probably down.

Quote

All this will become

pass..3/4♥..pass..pass
pass

if you skip "constructive" bidding in favor of a bid that inhibits intervention while conveying a decent amout of information. The point here is you have hearts and they rate to have spades. If it were the other way around, a 1♠ would be much more attractive.

The most likely result of this is -200 against a partscore. Your ♣Q is very likely to be useless in offense, but may score a trick in defense. ♦A is also a sure defensive trick, so with 4♥ you have IMHO seriously misdescribed your OD ratio.
Hence it might go

pass 4♥ X pass
4♠ pass pass 5♥
X

with 5♥ down two and 4♠ not making.

If you open 1[HE[ the bidding might also go
pass 1[he] pass 1♠
pass 2♥ AP.
Isn't it nice to score +110 than -200? I really think this is a partscore deal.

Now add the possibility of going for 800 in 4♥...

[inquiry]

whereagles, on Feb 10 2005, 01:59 PM, said:

Ben, why do you require 9 tricks to open 4♥ at 'red'? I thought the idea of preemption was to take out the enemy single-handedly, not to bid 1 trick below what you think you can make.

Looking at this hand and RHO having passed, chances are points split something like 9-10(you)-11-10 or similar. So statistically you're looking at a part-score deal, with some chances for major suit game if there's a fit. Don't you think there's a real risk of it going

pass..1♥...1♠...2/3♥
3♠.....4♥...4♠ <--- it might make!

or

pass..1♥...2♠...4♥
4♠ <--- probably goes down, but 5♥ might make

or

pass..1♥...1♠...dbl
2♠.....3♥...3♠..pass
pass <--- and now? Pard can have many hands.. ones that fit nice, others that don't

All this will become

pass..3/4♥..pass..pass
pass

if you skip "constructive" bidding in favor of a bid that inhibits intervention while conveying a decent amout of information. The point here is you have hearts and they rate to have spades. If it were the other way around, a 1♠ would be much more attractive.

My esteemed friend is right.. my 9 tricks (at least) for opening preempt of 4H is for when we are RED and they are white at imps.

What good is -200 or -500 versus 420 for them? But what diaster to be -800 or -1100 versus nothing make....

As I ahve said before, my preempts tend to be like hand patterns.. 5431... where not vul versus vul, I can go down 5 if partner provides nothing. Not vul verus not vul, I can go down 4 if partner provides nothing, vul verus vul, I am down two or three if partner provides nothing, but vul versus not vul? I will darn near make my bid against a busted misfit. Works for me... (third seat preempts can be different from this)....

Ben

[MickyB]

[quote name='cherdano' date='Feb 10 2005, 08:51 PM'] [quote name='whereagles' date='Feb 10 2005, 05:59 PM']Ben, why do you require 9 tricks to open 4[he] at 'red'? I thought the idea of preemption was to take out the enemy single-handedly, not to bid 1 trick below what you think you can make.
[/quote]
I am sure Ben was only talking about red vs white.
[QUOTE] [/quote]
Many refer to vul against not as "red", NV against vul as "green", both vul as "amber" and neither vul as "white".

[Gerben47]

I was about to pass when I decided that I could get away with something here and I bid 3♥ instead. That didn't work the way I wanted as partner raised to 4♥ (opps silent) and tabled:

AKQxxx
Axx
xx
Kx

12 tricks later...

Anyway, the opponents at the other table managed this auction:

1♥ with my hand
1♠ by responder after long thought
2♥
More long thought by responder.
6♥ <so much for science>

Oh well...
Finding the slam legitimately is not so easy as the ♣Q is very important.
You might want to bid it 'on momentum' though:

Pass - 1♠
2♥ - 3♥
4♦ - 4NT
5♠ - 6♥

[fred]

This is a style and partnership question. My style is to open 3H, but I have no problem with either 1H or 2H as long as your partner expects you to do that with a hand like this. I don't like 4H myself, but again it is more important that your partner likes your bid than that I like it.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[Free]

fred, on Feb 10 2005, 10:22 PM, said:

My style is to open 3H

inquiry said:

An opening bid of 3♥ is, imho at this color and at imps, wacky...