Bidding over a peempt

[hutchau]

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sqjhkqxxdkqxxxcxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

3[C]-P-X-??

What do you now bid??[/hv]

[blackshoe]

I don't. I call the Director. :P

 

If you meant the auction to go (3♣)-X-(P) well, that's a different story. Holding the hand you gave, I bid 4 ♦.

[pbleighton]

"If you meant the auction to go (3♣)-X-(P) well, that's a different story. Holding the hand you gave, I bid 4 D>"

 

4H for me. I hate the 5 level :P

 

Peter

[Codo]

easy 4 ♥ after 3 ♣ X p...

If pd has 20 HCPs he will continue, else we have play for the game or he does not have his bid...

[Finch]

Easy 4C after partner doubles 3C.

I have enough to bid game, and I'd like to end in a fit.

I play 4C (initially) shows any two suits. Partner will, in principle, bid his lowest real suit. I shall pass 4H, bid 5D over 4S, and bid 4H over 4D (then pull 4S to 5D).

[Impact]

Frances,

 

With respect, the problem with your plan is that you cue bid to show a 2-suiter and then pass if your partner bids one of your suits!! I may well have misunderstood your methods BUT I do not know how poor doubler is to ever get to slam unless he is forced to return cue with extra values and 2 suits (or balanced) so that you can start suit investigation at the 5level!

 

I know many propound the dogma never to bid a grandslam after a pre-empt but it appears that on the above basis you have virtually no prospect of meaningful exploration.

 

By contrast MHO is 4C: transfer to D and then bid 4H if he merely accepts the transfer.

 

The advantage of the transfer heere is that with extras he may elect to do something else....nothing is perfect but this at least offers both suits with slam prospects....

 

No offence intended BTW

[Walddk]

4♣ here: two places to play. Will pull 4♠ to 5♦.

 

Roland

[Finch]

Impact,

 

Yes, it makes slam bidding harder but game bidding easier whatever the opening. This hand a slightly awkward because it's pretty close to a slam try itself. In fact, it's not as bad as you make out if the doubler has diamonds because he can bid 4D (forcing) over 4C then bid on over my 4H call.

 

If you play 4C as a transfer to diamonds, how do get partner to pick a major when you are 4-4 in the majors (or indeed to get partner to pick a suit when you have any 4-4)?

 

Playing the cue as a 2-suiter works exactly the same way after any 3-level pre-empt: I assume the transfers have to work a different way depending on each opener as I presume you still need 3M and 3NT as natural - what would you do after 3D x holding QJ KQxx xx KQxxx ?

[helene_t]

Agree with Roland and Frances. You can't have everything when opps preempt (that's why they do it) so let's use the available bidding space for the problems that come up most frequently. This is a common hand type so 4♣ followed by a conversion of 4♠ to 5♦ should be available here and not be reserved for some specific slam tries.

[whereagles]

4♥. Wouldn't bid 4♣ unless I had the specific agreement that it shows 2 places to play, in which case it would be a better bid.

[han]

I like 4♣ as 2 places to play.

[Walddk]

Forget about slam for the time being and concentrate on getting to the right strain. That is what 4♣ is for with a hand like this. It seems logical to me that it must be a 2-suiter, because I have natural diamond, heart and spade bids available to show a 1-suited hand.

 

4♥ is unilateral, 4♣ shows doubt. It doesn't promise more than a minimum opener opposite what might also be a normal opening hand with short clubs. I can't see why one must commit to hearts if partner is 4342, possibly 5332 with a weakish spade suit.

 

In the rare case that partner has a very strong hand, he will take action. Which will depend on his shape. To those of you who are not convinced that 4♣ is a 2-suiter, I would like to know what you think it should be.

 

Roland

[hatchett]

Isn't 4♣ normally gerber?

[whereagles]

I would venture to say that 4♣ shows a 44 major, asking pard to pick the right major. You can, of course, extend it to include diams/major 44 or better, but I wouldn't put that inclusion into the default meaning.

 

That is to say that

 

(3♣) .... dbl .. (pass) ... 4♣

(pass) .. 4♥ ... (pass) .. 4♠

 

might be misinterpreted as a heart slam try if pard sees 4♣ as purely a 44 major.

[Chamaco]

A couple of questions here:

 

1) if I happen to play with an occasional partner of reasonable skill and experience, should I assume that the 4C cuebid meaning 2 places to play is "standard" ?

 

2) This seems to work well when the preempt is in clubs, the lower ranked suit, which leaves more room to explore;

But, if the preempt had been in a higher ranked suit, e.g. 3D or 3H or, worse, 3S, would the cue (4D/H/S) be still 2 places to play ?

[bid_em_up]

Isn't 4♣ normally gerber?

Was this a serious question?

[Finch]

1) if I happen to play with an occasional partner of reasonable skill and experience, should I assume that the 4C cuebid meaning 2 places to play is "standard" ?

Goodness knows. Reading BBO forums should be sufficient to tell you that very little, particularly in competitive auctions, is 'standard'. In particular, there are treatments that are extremely common in particular parts of the world - so much so that posters will confidently say they are expert standard - that are virtually unheard of elsewhere.

 

If I were playing with an English player I haven't played with before who is pretty good and under 50 I would assume that's what it meant, but only because when it came up in the middle of the auction I'd have to assume something.

 

2) This seems to work well when the preempt is in clubs, the lower ranked suit, which leaves more room to explore;

But, if the preempt had been in a higher ranked suit, e.g. 3D or 3H or, worse, 3S, would the cue (4D/H/S) be still 2 places to play ?

 

I still play it as 2 places to play after any 3-level pre-empt. After 3S it's likely to be both minors (I play 3S x P 4NT as natural), but if you bid 5H next that's a 2-suited slam try in hearts (nearly forcing, as if the doubler doesn't have heart support you will have to play 6-minor anyway).

[Impact]

Frances,

 

When advancing a double of 3C, I only use transfer advances from 4C with the remainder natural...so I concede a guess with 44 and just game strength - but figure I gain on most other shapes.

 

Actually, I have a bizarre scheme over doubles of other 3-level bids to use 3NT as a somewhat Lebensohlish scheme in conjunction with transfer advances. Not only is it counter-intuitive (as it frequently prevents you playing 3NT from responder's side as a direct response to the takeout double) but it gives much more definition for almost all other game/slam auctions.

 

My thought initially was that this would be too great a loss (since 3NT seems intrinsically worthwhile over pre-empts) but a friend's simulation of 1,000 hands (perhaps an insufficient sample size) with the constraints specified for the takeout double, suggested otherwise.

 

On that basis I have persuaded a partner to play the method (mad as it sounds) - with no major losses over 2 years (due to the method) but only playing once a week on average...

 

THe most obvious potential loss is the game with the positional stopper and minor values in responder's hand (note with reasonable values and without a relevant 4card Major appropriate to the takeout) where neither 5minor nor a penalty double works.

As I noted I thought such hands would be more frequent than both have been shown by sample and by anecdote to date....

 

I still have difficulty with your knowing to pass partner's 4H on the earlier stipulated auction, or would doubler be presumed to have bid a a higher level if he had greater ambitions if H was one of your suits (in which case what do you do with a stronger singlesuiter?)

 

Like all bridgebidding you have to compromise somewhere....

[Finch]

I still have difficulty with your  knowing to pass partner's 4H on the earlier stipulated auction, or would doubler be presumed to have bid a a higher level if he had greater ambitions if H was one of your suits (in which case what do you do with a stronger singlesuiter?)

 

Like all bridgebidding you have to compromise somewhere....

The easy answer first: we don't double on strong single-suiters. Double always shows tolerance - 3+ cards in principle - for both majors. Tthere are nightmare hands where you have to double without that as the least of all evils, but as a matter of principle we don't double-then-bid on single-suited hands so e.g. 3D x P 3H P 3S is roughly 5-3 in the majors, NF but with significant extra values.

 

Now, about this debate about what to do after (4C) - 4H. In common with most people I would stretch to reach the right denomination, so I would just about bid 4C on xx KQxx Kxxxx xx. I imagine you would follow your 4C - 4D - 4H scheme similarly on a weaker hand. That means the doubler needs a real powerhouse to want to make a slam try. If he doesn't have diamonds opposite my 4C cue - or they opened 3D - it is difficult for him to try for slam in one suit but not others. He could bid 5H to show a slam try in either major, if applicable, though I do agree that's clumsy. If he has a slam try opposite only hearts he's in trouble.

 

But doesn't your method have the complementary problem? What if responder decides he has a slam try opposite heart support? It's a matter of valuation, not method, that I chose to pass 4H by the doubler, but if I was a little stronger I can easily make a try agreeing whatever suit the doubler has last bid. But if you bid 4C-4D-4H I assume doubler is expected to pass with heart support unless he has an exceptional hand - so how do you show 5 diamonds, 4 hearts and a slam try? (while we're at it, what does 3C x P 4D mean in your methods - how about 4-4 in the majors, choice of games?)

 

I have to admit to being dubious about the merits of losing responder's natural 3NT bid, particularly at matchpoints, but am prepared to be convinced if you can be suitably convincing. I would guess the loss is least when opponents are vulnerable, and greatest when you are vul against not?

[Impact]

I still have difficulty with your  knowing to pass partner's 4H on the earlier stipulated auction, or would doubler be presumed to have bid a a higher level if he had greater ambitions if H was one of your suits (in which case what do you do with a stronger singlesuiter?)

 

Like all bridgebidding you have to compromise somewhere....

The easy answer first: we don't double on strong single-suiters. Double always shows tolerance - 3+ cards in principle - for both majors. Tthere are nightmare hands where you have to double without that as the least of all evils, but as a matter of principle we don't double-then-bid on single-suited hands so e.g. 3D x P 3H P 3S is roughly 5-3 in the majors, NF but with significant extra values.

 

Now, about this debate about what to do after (4C) - 4H. In common with most people I would stretch to reach the right denomination, so I would just about bid 4C on xx KQxx Kxxxx xx. I imagine you would follow your 4C - 4D - 4H scheme similarly on a weaker hand. That means the doubler needs a real powerhouse to want to make a slam try. If he doesn't have diamonds opposite my 4C cue - or they opened 3D - it is difficult for him to try for slam in one suit but not others. He could bid 5H to show a slam try in either major, if applicable, though I do agree that's clumsy. If he has a slam try opposite only hearts he's in trouble.

 

But doesn't your method have the complementary problem? What if responder decides he has a slam try opposite heart support? It's a matter of valuation, not method, that I chose to pass 4H by the doubler, but if I was a little stronger I can easily make a try agreeing whatever suit the doubler has last bid. But if you bid 4C-4D-4H I assume doubler is expected to pass with heart support unless he has an exceptional hand - so how do you show 5 diamonds, 4 hearts and a slam try? (while we're at it, what does 3C x P 4D mean in your methods - how about 4-4 in the majors, choice of games?)

 

I have to admit to being dubious about the merits of losing responder's natural 3NT bid, particularly at matchpoints, but am prepared to be convinced if you can be suitably convincing. I would guess the loss is least when opponents are vulnerable, and greatest when you are vul against not?

Paragraph 1: thanks for the clarification - not a compromise I am thrilled to make but at least I begin to understand your style here.

 

Paragraph 2: no -generally I continue the transfers and play specialised bids from jump up to show enormous 2 suiters and single-suiters.

Generally one of the advantages of the loss of the natural 3NT by advancer (on auctions other than over 3C X) is the puppet allows a cue bid where you can show strength with 4 cards in the relevant Major (and utilise the follow up of 4NT as slam-try balancedish as no transfer without 4 cards in the relevant major(s)).

 

Accordingly, whereas there is always a judgement issue as to the appropriate range "to come again" or boost the auction a level, there are more "safeguards" in place - albeit at a cost as you note.

 

Notwithstanding your explanation at paragraph 1, it would make me queasy to have to bid as you specify with anything from a very bare push to game with M44, through the sort of hand we talk about here up to and including presumably quite decent 5+5+ - and doubler knowing that such possibilities aboundhas to make a decision whether he will simply make a non-forcing game bid or does he now punt on the same style as responding to European multi 2D (ie pass or convert)???

 

Paragraph 3: 100% correct: the worst position is we are vul and they are not and the risk that 3NT played from advancer's side after a takeout double is correct.....I might add that having the style of agreement we do, it places greater focus on overcalling rather than doubling in close cases with a decent suit - whereas my guess is that the corollary to your style would be the reverse inference (ie lends itself to the double rather than the overcall on the close cases).

 

"It's simply a case of Chacun a son Gout" (or "shocking awesome gout" if you recognise the reference to my favourite pun from Flanders & Swan Madeira M'dear - and being English you have a chance but I was dragged up on such alternating with Tom Lehrer instead of the more usual nursery rhymes and jingles) cf http://www.nyanko.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/fas/hat_mader.html