5d preempt

[jim420]

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sj7hk952dakqjt75c&w=s852h643d98cakt92&e=sakqt4ha8d632cj43&s=s963hqjt7d4cq8765]399|300|Scoring: IMP

W N E S

- - - P

P 5♦ Dbl P

P P

 

Opening lead: ♠A

Result: 5♦x-1

+5.9 IMP to EW[/hv]

 

I was east and looked forward to bid 1♠ when the bididing starts, but was totally surprised by that 5♦ (apparently preempt) by RHO and doubled him, cashed the ♠A, ♥A, and then the ♠K. The moment the ♠Q hit the table, the declarer claimed down 1.

 

The declarer labelled himself as "expert"... What was that preempt about? Is there any possible reason to justify his 5♦ preempt? Would you do the same in his position?

[hrothgar]

Comment 1: I don't label myself an "expert"

 

Comment 2: I'd make the same 5♦ bid without a second thought

 

Comment 3: What contract do you prefer?

 

5DX -1 by North

4S+1 by East

 

Yes, you might find the Club lead and get your ruff, however, I suspect that most people would the lead the a Diamond or the Queen of Hearts unless their damn sure that partner has a club void.

 

4♠ can certainly be set on a Diamond lead, however, this is largely an artifact of the Spade holding in South and West. Specifically, South has the 9 and West has the 8.

 

BTW, I looked over the travellers for the hand in question. The bidding and play for a lot of these results is suspect to say the least.

[the hog]

I concur with Richard.

[helene_t]

1: Do not take those "expert"-labels too serious. If he doesn't have a gold star he's probably not an expert. In fact, I'm not sure if there's any correlation between skill level labels and real skill level.

 

2: I wouldn't open 5♦ at these colors but it's quite possible that it's the best opening.

 

{Ignore the following, I didn't read the post obviously, tx Frances for correcting me}

3: The claim was premature, it's possible that EW can get a heart ruff. Maybe declarer thought that EW should just reject the claim in that case, but that's the wrong kind of thinking. There is a double check against false claims: you're not supposed to make false claims, and opps are not supposed to accept wrong claims either.

Edited January 24, 2007 by helene_t

[Finch]

3: The claim was premature, it's possible that EW can get a heart ruff. Maybe declarer thought that EW should just reject the claim in that case, but that's the wrong kind of thinking. There is a double check against false claims: you're not supposed to make false claims, and opps are not supposed to accept wrong claims either.

Declarer waited until the third round of spades was played before claiming; that was not premature.

[Guest Jlall]

I don't really like 5D at all, but different people bid differently *shrug*. I really don't like your double at all.

[brianshark]

-14 HCP

-4 cards in an side major

-Solid suit

 

Everything a pre-empt shouldn't be. I think 5♦ is a terrible bid.

 

This is yet another example of people playing solo, falling in love with their hand, not involving partner in the decision making and punting when any number of contracts could be the right one, from partials, games, slams or grands in ♦s, ♥s, or NT, and excuse themselves by claiming that *maybe* opps have lots of spades/clubs and we'll keep them from bidding, forgetting that the reason they will bid loads of ♠s/♣s in the first place is to make you guess at the final contract, which you've done to yourself anyway.

 

/rant

[hrothgar]

-14 HCP

-4 cards in an side major

-Solid suit

 

Everything a pre-empt shouldn't be. I think 5♦ is a terrible bid.

 

This is yet another example of people playing solo, falling in love with their hand, not involving partner in the decision making and punting when any number of contracts could be the right one, from partials, games, slams or grands in ♦s, ♥s, or NT, and excuse themselves by claiming that *maybe* opps have lots of spades/clubs and we'll keep them from bidding, forgetting that the reason they will bid loads of ♠s/♣s in the first place is to make you guess at the final contract, which you've done to yourself anyway.

 

/rant

One thing needs to be made perfectly clear: 7-4 patterns are "special".

 

Swans are extremely offensively oriented.

Swans almost always play best in their long suit.

 

Opening 5♦ with this sort of pattern might be rolling the dice, however, I'm happy to do so when the odds look to be in my favor.

 

As for your comments regarding guessing at the final contract. There is a lot of guessing involved in bridge. The goal on hands like this one is to make sure that you're making reasonable guesses. More importantly, you want to make sure that the opponents are forced to make the last guess without any good information to guide them. Walking the dog ensures that the opponents will declare 4♠ when its right, 5♠ when its right, and double you in 5♦ when its right.

[bid_em_up]

[pclayton]

I don't like 5♦, but I don't think there's anything nefarious here. Don't like the double either (what does it accomplish?).

[pbleighton]

I would bid 5D here.

 

I know this isn't everyone's style, but it's a reasonable action.

 

Peter

[jim420]

first of all, thx a lot for all previous comments

 

i just doubled hoping to cash 2 high spades and the ♥A, but now i could imagine the disaster of partner possibly bidding 6♣, or declarer making 5♦

 

btw, some of the other results are really strange and are just defenders making mistakes... like 4♥N

[whereagles]

I prefer

 

1♦ 1x

3NT

 

5♦ is a bit pessimistic, though in practice it works more often that we'd like. Especially against overbidders :)

[HeartA]

I may not open 5D, but it is OK.

As for 4S by East, there is still chance to set it even with D lead. 4S+1 only against weakest defense.

[BebopKid]

1♦ is perfect in SAYC.

 

As I tell all my beginner partners, "Don't lie to your partner. They have to trust you as you trust them."

[Badmonster]

This is yet another example of people playing solo, falling in love with their hand, not involving partner in the decision making and punting when any number of contracts could be the right one, from partials, games, slams or grands in ♦s, ♥s, or NT, and excuse themselves by claiming that *maybe* opps have lots of spades/clubs and we'll keep them from bidding, forgetting that the reason they will bid loads of ♠s/♣s in the first place is to make you guess at the final contract, which you've done to yourself anyway.

The thing is his p was a passed hand. Isn't there a huge difference between this bid in third seat and this bid in first or second?

[hrothgar]

As I tell all my beginner partners, "Don't lie to your partner. They have to trust you as you trust them."

What does this have to do with the problem at hand?

 

The core of the discussion is what is the best bid with a 1-4-7-1 freak, not whether its appropriate to break partnership discipline. I assure you that (most) of us who chose to open 5♦ are chosing an action that is consistant with our partnership agreements.

[the hog]

1♦ is perfect in SAYC.

 

As I tell all my beginner partners, "Don't lie to your partner. They have to trust you as you trust them."

This is perhaps one of the most foolish comments I have ever read in these forums. A lie is only a "lie" if it goes against what you have agreed with your partner is an acceptable 5m opening. If pd knows perhpas to expect this hand type, then perhaps you can explain to us why it is a lie.

[awm]

A fair number of people bid 5♦ on this hand. There's a school of thought that favors opening a preempt on a good hand with a long/strong suit, especially opposite a passed partner. This hand doesn't give any evidence that north is not an expert (especially by the rather low BBO standards of expert).

 

On the other hand, my personal observations indicate that this kind of bid usually doesn't work out. Recent posts on these forums (such as this one) seem to back my interpretation. Certainly this would be an interesting (and relatively easy) target for a bridge browser study.

[hrothgar]

Here's an amusing piece of serendipity:

 

The following hand cropped up during BBO's broadcast of the Norweigian Open Teams:

 

[hv=d=s&s=s4hqj93daqjt764c5]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Michael Courtney chose a 5♦ opening. (The other table opened 1♥. Presumably, they were playing some combination of 4 card majors and canape)

[keylime]

Playing canape these days I enjoy opening my heart suit....only to get preempted the heck out in the blacks before it's back to me to show my diamonds.

 

At the table it pays to bid: 5D for me for these reasons:

 

1) You're willing to go it alone with this hand.

2) Your hand is diamonds, diamonds, diamonds, and then side suit of hearts.

3) If you open 1D, when it comes back to you at 3S (or more), surely you're endplayed in the bidding.

4) Pass did not open and I am in 3rd seat. Prime time for a burying call. 4D is just not enough of a preempt most likely.

5) 5 level slam aspirations when you've been snatched of 21 spaces to probe is a lot like learning Korean. Very hard.

[the hog]

"Michael Courtney chose a 5D opening." He would, of course! He, he! I wonder how many posters know of Michael. He is one of the best rubber bridge players in the world when he is sober. Don't ever play him for money!

[jikl]

5♦ for me also. Maximum pressure. If it doesn't work out, sometimes opponents screw up the next hand because of over-confidence, or if a period of maximum pressure has been applied it can also work out.

 

Sean