Do you bid after partner's preempt?

[cinvent77]

Your LHO passes and partner opens 4♠ white vs. red. After your RHO passes you give your cards a good stare:

[hv=d=e&v=e&s=s10hak98dq1053caq96]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

Back in your junior days your three quick tricks would mean that there is a slight chance 4♠ goes down for just less than a thousand ...

Those were the days you'd pass lightning fast.

 

Do you bid now?

[mike777]

Your LHO passes and partner opens 4♠ white vs. red. After your RHO passes you give your cards a good stare:

[hv=d=e&v=e&s=s10hak98dq1053caq96]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

Back in your junior days your three quick tricks would mean that there is a slight chance 4♠ goes down for just less than a thousand ...

Those were the days you'd pass lightning fast.

 

Do you bid now?

Yes I bid 100%, I bid pass. partner has 6 or 7 tricks Good Luck partner!

[luke warm]

i guess it depends on what 4s means... do we play namyats? :) ... i'd pass also

[cinvent77]

Mike: Can partner really have only 6 tricks in second position?

Luke: Suppose you do play Namyats. Can you give a hand which opens 1♠, 4♥, 4♠?

 

In other words what to expect as a minimum?

[luke warm]

playing namyats i'd pass even faster.. i don't understand the rest of your question... are you asking for a minimum for 3 different opening bids, or are you asking what

 

1s : 4h

4s

shows?

 

if the second option, it shows an opening hand not interested in slam opposite a heart splinter.. if playing namyats, a 4M bid should be the same as a 3M bid with maybe another trick and 8+ cards :) ... iow, a bid designed to preempt the opps (assuming namyats)

[cinvent77]

I'm sorry if the question was unclear. I meant to ask what the minimum for the three different opening bid was.

 

In this case opener had ♠AKQxxxxx, singleton ♥, void ♦ and four ♣. It seems to me that opening 4♠ is about right: a good pre-empt, 8 playing tricks, in second position. Opening 1♠ is not good I think. I saw that some responders raised to 6♠ and frankly I don't see why. Next time I'm going to pass again.

 

Have to admit I prefer a more solid style these days :)

[P_Marlowe]

Pray, that you can make the contract and Pass.

 

I would expect to make more often tan not, but

the contract can fail.

 

Marlowe

[P_Marlowe]

I'm sorry if the question was unclear. I meant to ask what the minimum for the three different opening bid was.

 

In this case opener had ♠AKQxxxxx, singleton ♥, void ♦ and four ♣. It seems to me that opening 4♠ is about right: a good pre-empt, 8 playing tricks, in second position. Opening 1♠ is not good I think. I saw that some responders raised to 6♠ and frankly I don't see why. Next time I'm going to pass again.

 

Have to admit I prefer a more solid style these days :)

Hi,

 

in the end it is a style isssue,

how aggressive are your 4S

openings green vs. red.

 

Marlowe

[Gerben42]

Mike: Can partner really have only 6 tricks in second position?

 

Naturally! Pass and put dummy down with the words "I hope this is enough"

 

In this case opener had ♠AKQxxxxx, singleton ♥, void ♦ and four ♣. It seems to me that opening 4♠ is about right: a good pre-empt, 8 playing tricks, in second position.

 

Way too rich for me for 4♠, which is why I prefer to have Namyats on my card.

 

Gerben

[joker_gib]

Pass

[Finch]

I'm sorry if the question was unclear. I meant to ask what the minimum for the three different opening bid was.

 

In this case opener had ♠AKQxxxxx, singleton ♥, void ♦ and four ♣. It seems to me that opening 4♠ is about right: a good pre-empt, 8 playing tricks, in second position. Opening 1♠ is not good I think. I saw that some responders raised to 6♠ and frankly I don't see why. Next time I'm going to pass again.

 

Have to admit I prefer a more solid style these days :)

Partner has a maximum 4S opener (while the 8 card spade suit is not unexpected, he certainly didn't have to have an albatross or 8-4).

 

Partner also has the right void, opposite our Q-high suit.

 

So after partner has a maximum with the right shortage, slam is still slightly worse than the club finesse.

 

That implies it must be right to pass.

[beatrix45]

:) PASS wtp?

[bearmum]

Once again a "trust your partner" answer -- PASS why in the h### would you do anything else ?? WTP? :) :unsure:

 

(Mind you If P has made a totally stupid bid and you make a slam then GET SHOOT PARTNER{joke} :huh: )

[Echognome]

If partner was 2nd in hand vulnerable vs not, i'd really have to think about it. Otherwise, there's no problem.

[han]

In my junior years I learned that preempts work, and bridge is not for the meek.

 

Pass.

[Al_U_Card]

Regarding NAMYATS, the 4D bid would show a hand that has no potential and the 4S hand has something to gain by being declarer........so I would say that pard expected to preempt them out of game by going down the correct number on a H? lead perhaps? So with the equivalent of a strong NT opposite a long suit, game bid and made seems likely........or maybe they'll balance and I can ring the dinner bell.

[Fluffy]

Vulnerability asks for precaution. Sure partner can have 8 good ♠. Yet that is not enough for winning 6.

[han]

Just read "Albatross". Never heard this before and I love it!

[Winstonm]

Pass and hope the club king is onside.

 

Winston

[Gerben42]

n my junior years I learned that preempts work

 

But they work more against weaker opponents.

 

I used to play that white vs red 3 of a major would show a hand too WEAK to make a weak two (think Qxxxxx and out). Almost always opponents bid something after that, after all they were red vs white and couldn't imagine setting us 4 times against their vuln. game. Except exactly ONCE. One lady made a TO double and the other passed thinking it was penalty. Anyway, I DID have exacly 6 to the Queen and out at this point, but partner had 3 to the King and some helpful shape. Down ONE for a top ;)

 

Now that I think of it, why am I not playing this anymore? Must be getting old...

 

And bridge is not for the meek.

 

Ron Klinger said: The meek will inherit the Earth, but they don't win at bridge.

 

Regarding NAMYATS, the 4D bid would show a hand that has no potential and the 4S hand has something to gain by being declarer

 

No, it would simply show a better hand, trickwise.

[bearmum]

n my junior years I learned that preempts work

 

But they work more against weaker opponents.

 

I used to play that white vs red 3 of a major would show a hand too WEAK to make a weak two (think Qxxxxx and out).

 

QUOTE edited

 

 

Is it legal to have specific agreements according to vul? (DIRECTORS please reply )

 

AND did you either pre-alert (in F2F) or selfalert in BBO as to what your agreements are?

[P_Marlowe]

n my junior years I learned that preempts work

 

But they work more against weaker opponents.

 

I used to play that white vs red 3 of a major would show a hand too WEAK to make a weak two (think Qxxxxx and out).

 

QUOTE edited

 

 

Is it legal to have specific agreements according to vul? (DIRECTORS please reply )

 

AND did you either pre-alert (in F2F) or selfalert in BBO as to what your agreements are?

I am no director, but the answer is yes.

Just look at the old 2-3 rule for preempts,

-3 if non vul. -2 if vul., also it is legal

to switch agreement according to seat

some play mini NT if non vul in 1st and

2nd (?) seat.

 

Marlowe

[han]

Gerben, I agree with all that you write here of course. I don't think that I've ever opened 3S on Q-6th, perhaps I never was a junior.

 

It is of course true that preempts work better against weak opponents, heck, everything works better against weak opponents! But it seems equally clear to me that an aggressive preempt style is still a winner against the very best.

[cinvent77]

Aggressive pre-empt may work beter against weak opponents but ... when asked what say 2♠ means it is a bid awkward when you have to explain: "Pre-empts are normally solid, but may be shaded if partner thinks you are so-so." :)

[luke warm]

Gerben, I agree with all that you write here of course. I don't think that I've ever opened 3S on Q-6th, perhaps I never was a junior.

 

It is of course true that preempts work better against weak opponents, heck, everything works better against weak opponents! But it seems equally clear to me that an aggressive preempt style is still a winner against the very best.

most of us remember or have read about bergen's preempt, playing with cohen, of 2S with ♠9 5th and about 4 hcp.. other pair ended in 3nt and 6♠ was cold, even with the bad split

 

that's only one example, there are lots more... but most of us don't have ice water in our veins, or partners as understanding as cohen was