Preempting by the seat

[Winstonm]

[hv=d=w&v=e&s=s8hj109dk2ck1097532]133|100|Scoring: IMP

There is a theory that 1st and 3rd seat are "anything goes" seats when it comes to preempts, especially NV, but second seat should be more of a "picture" bid. This theory is based in first seat on having two opponents to bother but only one partner.

 

How strongly do you alter preemptive hands according to seats and seats/vulnerability?

 

Is the presented hand a 3C second seat preempt in your views? [/hv]

 

If so, what do you bid opposite a 3C opening with:

 

[hv=d=w&v=e&s=s8hj109dk2ck1097532]133|100|Scoring: IMP

There is a theory that 1st and 3rd seat are "anything goes" seats when it comes to preempts, especially NV, but second seat should be more of a "picture" bid. This theory is based in first seat on having two opponents to bother but only one partner.

 

How strongly do you alter preemptive hands according to seats and seats/vulnerability?

 

Is the presented hand a 3C second seat preempt in your views? [/hv]

[foo]

You are asking a tough question because the answer is highly dependent on what makes the partnership most happy.

 

I've played with people who insist on "classic" preempts in all seats and all vulnerability ratios. I've also played with the "get in Their face whenever you can." wide ranging style players (although I've never played with someone as extreme as MartY Bergen and Larry Cohen were in the 1980's...).

 

Sorry not to give you a simple answer.

 

 

With the sample Responding hand, I'd get Us to 3N or 5C opposite any 3C preempt in any seat except when playing the widest ranging preempt style opposite a 3rd seet 3C opening. That's why those players have to open a Gambling 3N or 4C opposite me in 3rd seat with the given Preempting hand.

[luke warm]

i think it's a borderline 3♣ opening... it'd be nice to play 4♦ (or even 4♣) here as rkc, since i'd bid 5♣ anyway (rather than 3nt... it's possible someone can hold up in clubs and i'll never reach them)

[Free]

Basicly we alter our preempts according to Vulnerability, not so much on seat:

 

NV vs V: 0-7hcp, 5+ card suit

NV vs NV: weak, 6+ card suit

V vs V: semi solid suit, 6+ card suit

V vs NV: good suit, usually with outside values, 7+ card suit

 

The 0-7 preempt is not efficient in 3rd seat, since partner usually has some values, and an opponent has already passed. Same goes for 2nd seat.

 

This hand is too strong for a NV vs V preempt, and too weak for a V vs NV preempt. It's good for NV vs NV, but no other vulnerability. So here I'd pass the north hand, and hope my partner opens a strong 1♣ in 3rd seat ;)

[helene_t]

I alter preempts a lot according to seat. There are more reasons why a 1st seat preempt should be more diciplined than a 2nd set:

- Preempts are less effective in 2nd seat because opps can take advantage of the fact that RHO is a passed hand

- If you're in 1st seat, partner is in 3rd so he likes to preempt on all kind of rubish. If you have shortness somewhere, it may be a good idea to preempt before he does.

 

As for vulnerability, it's more important at IMPs than at matchpoints. At IMPs, favorable vulnerability means more at stake for opps than for us, so it's a good strategy to mess things up. At matchpoints, vulnerability is less crucial.

 

I have a theory that the best preempt style is a different one for IMPs and for MPs. At MPs, partscore battales are important, so sound and lawfull preempts are preferable. At IMPs, it's important to mess up the opps slam auctions so you should preempt on trash. Not sure about what to do with the intermediate hands at IMPs, though :-)

 

With my regular p, we have the agreement that at favorable vulnerability we preempt with trash. So with a normal preempt, we open at the 2- or 4-level (with clubs we can open 1NT which is a wide-range transfer to clubs). I think the North hand is a maximum 3♣ opening with this agreement, and South has an easy pass.Personally I prefer to open the North hand at equal colors as well, but then South will have to do something.Not sure what. Maybe just 6♣.

[nickf]

I think the hand is a mandatory 3C opening but I should qualify this by saying I also have a strong belief that you mix up your pre-empts as well. It's no good your opponents getting a grip on your style because they'll know when to nail you when it's right or brush aside your pre-empts when they'll profit from playing the hand.

 

As for the responding hand given, I think you will gain more than you lose in the long run by bidding slam.

 

nickf

sydney

[pbleighton]

Yes, I would open 3C, and not just in my "anything goes" partnership. I have 7 cards (I will bid 3m on 6), am at favorable, don't have much defense, and am 3-1 in the majors.

 

I would respond 3NT or 5C, depending on my mood.

 

Peter