[pescetom]

MP

---

Your call as Dealer in South?

[DavidKok]

4♠. Nespresso convention.

[jillybean]

4♠ wtp

[pescetom]

It's an automatic 4♠ to me, but I am concerned that I am used to having a Namyats/Notyats alternative available and also an RA that is tolerant as far as 1♠ and (especially) 2♣ then spades are concerned, which may bias my view of 4♠.

[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2024-October-18, 12:28, said:

It's an automatic 4♠ to me, but I am concerned that I am used to having a Namyats/Notyats alternative available and also an RA that is tolerant as far as 1♠ and (especially) 2♣ then spades are concerned, which may bias my view of 4♠.

2C : 2x
♠

Tolerant or legal?

[DavidKok]

For what little it's worth, at my local clubs the rules for opening 2♣ based on shape, for Namyats, and for light 1-level openings are all very generous. I think it is better for my score to make use of none of those though, so it doesn't have an impact on my decision whether or not to preempt.

[mw64ahw]

I play Namyats so don't have 4♠ available and 3♠ isn't pre-emptive enough.
Best I can do is 2N which is pre-emptive ♣, strong xx54 (not xx64) or 4-level pre-empt. I have few system restrictions in the clubs I play at, not that this sequence has come up yet!

[johnu]

mw64ahw, on 2024-October-18, 15:24, said:

I play Namyats so don't have 4♠ available and 3♠ isn't pre-emptive enough..

???

In standard Namyats, 4♦ shows a strong 4♠ preempt, and 4♠ shows a weaker preempt. Why don't you have a 4♠ preempt available?

[mw64ahw]

johnu, on 2024-October-18, 16:44, said:

???

In standard Namyats, 4♦ shows a strong 4♠ preempt, and 4♠ shows a weaker preempt. Why don't you have a 4♠ preempt available?

I want 2/3 honours for Namyats max. 1 loser opposite a void

[mycroft]

So, that's your 4♦ opener. Your 4♠ opener denies that, right? So, again, why is this not a (n even better) 4♠ opener?

[pescetom]

Just finished a regional tournament and still need to drive home and eat, before Jillybean complains about the BIT

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2024-October-18, 13:04, said:

2C : 2x
♠

Tolerant or legal?

With this hand, you mean?
It would fail to obtain my tolerance as TD, but only just... swap the 2 with Q and I would let it pass.


For a 1♠ opening, any agreement to open with less than 10 HCP is illegal at most levels, but I would turn a blind eye to AKQxxxx x xxx xx as a deviation.

[mw64ahw]

mycroft, on 2024-October-19, 09:34, said:

So, that's your 4♦ opener. Your 4♠ opener denies that, right? So, again, why is this not a (n even better) 4♠ opener?

https://www.bridgebum.com/namyats.php

[Cyberyeti]

mw64ahw, on 2024-October-19, 12:38, said:

https://www.bridgebum.com/namyats.php

And KJ 9th isn't 7 tricks ? I know it promises 7-8 but everybody opens 4♠ even playing NAMYATS

[mw64ahw]

Cyberyeti, on 2024-October-19, 12:54, said:

And KJ 9th isn't 7 tricks ? I know it promises 7-8 but everybody opens 4♠ even playing NAMYATS

I think this raises an interesting point re preempts. I always find it easier to reach game when unfavourable versus favourable given trick count expectations.


I have seen a treatment out there which uses 2N as a different strength preempt compared to a direct one. In my case I can differentiate suit quality via 2N.

Extending that I guess you can use a variety of bids to define the quality of a preempt at the 4-level

[mycroft]

Quote

4♠: 7+ spades and 7-8 tricks. Weaker than 4♦. Example: AKJ65432 Q32 J T

Lots of wasted values in that example. LHO bids 5♥, what does partner do? You might have it set in your hand! They might make 7!

I'd much rather have, I don't know, KJ9876432 4 8 72 for my "7-8 tricks". Sure, on a horrible day, ♠AQT will be behind you and you'll only have 6 tricks. How likely is that? (oh, and is 7♥ on for them?)

I think you should look for a better Namyats description than that page, as well. Both of their examples of a 4m opening are clear 1 bids(*); and there's no vulnerability discussions, or even "why do this". Oh, and the followups are - "guess and hope"? Bid the relay, and opener "describes his hand" "using normal methods - cue bids, Blackwood, etc". Sure, I'm happy to try to show my 1-3 outside controls between 4♠ and 5♥. Should have *lots of room*.

(*)Okay, no they're not - to this person. A 1 bid is "not strong enough" for a 4 bid (because only 5 spades, for instance). Makes me want to play this even less. 4♣-(4♠)-??? How much defence do you have? Sure, it looks like 2-3 tricks is "normal", but is it KQJxxxx and three outside tricks, or AKQTxxxx and a card?

I wouldn't say my Namyats agreements are better or worse than any other (except I'd much rather play them my way than that way). I got them from Preempts from A to Z:

• 4m: 8 solid (AKQxxxxx or better) in the corresponding major, or 8 one-loser (AKJxxxxx - KQJTxxxx) with an outside control (A or K). Bidding the intermediate step asks for the outside card; bid 4M with the solid suit.
  
• 4M: good 7, usually 8, (bad 9? :-), doesn't meet the requirements for 4m. Range is (especially with spades) the same as 3M, with one more trick. Whatever that means for your partnership, seat, and vulnerability.

Sure, it doesn't come up much. But:

• When it does, partner knows to within a question how many tricks your side is taking.
  
• When you bid 4M, partner knows that your suit isn't (semi-)solid, and you need real support and tricks to make slam.
  
• When they bid over your 4-level preempt, again, your partner is in the right place.

I like MikeH's responses in this BW thread, but I would suggest that my responses are complicated enough for a very rare hand; the chance you find the magic grand vs the chance one of you forgets the system (vs the improvements to your system that the time to learn and remember them could be used for in more common auctions) seems small for all but "aiming for national/world championship" pairs.

[pescetom]

mycroft, on 2024-October-19, 14:16, said:

I wouldn't say my Namyats agreements are better or worse than any other (except I'd much rather play them my way than that way). I got them from Preempts from A to Z:

• 4m: 8 solid (AKQxxxxx or better) in the corresponding major, or 8 one-loser (AKJxxxxx - KQJTxxxx) with an outside control (A or K). Bidding the intermediate step asks for the outside card; bid 4M with the solid suit.
  
• 4M: good 7, usually 8, (bad 9? :-), doesn't meet the requirements for 4m. Range is (especially with spades) the same as 3M, with one more trick. Whatever that means for your partnership, seat, and vulnerability.

Sure, it doesn't come up much. But:

• When it does, partner knows to within a question how many tricks your side is taking.
  
• When you bid 4M, partner knows that your suit isn't (semi-)solid, and you need real support and tricks to make slam.
  
• When they bid over your 4-level preempt, again, your partner is in the right place.

My agreements are similarly tight in principle, but more flexible in terms of outside controls versus losers in trumps (we are going to control-bid if responder is interested).
I continue to think that the real benefit of any such agreements is in being able to pass 4M comfortably and bid it a bit lighter.