preemptive trap?

[jim420]

Just a hand on MBC...

 

[hv=d=s&v=b&n=s643hk65d65cakqt9&w=sqjht932d972cj764&e=sa2haqj8dkqt3c832&s=skt9875h74daj84c5]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

 

Both sides have 20 HCP...

 

If u were South, would u preempt 2♠?

Facing S's preempt, would u now raise 4♠ as N? or what would u bid?

[skjaeran]

I'd open the south hand 2♠. That shows 8-11 hcp and a 6c suit in my methods. With the north hand I'd either pass, planning to bid 3♠ if opps balance or raise directly to 3♠, preemptive/tactical. I'd expect the hand to belong to our side, although on some layouts opps might have the highest making contract (if partner's got ♣ support).

[mike777]

1) lightish opening, I open one spade...no problem yet.

2) roth/ stone...=2s=3c=3d=?

[paulg]

I'd open the hand 1♠ as 6-4 with concentrated values is too good for 2♠. This opening would lead us to bid and go down in game.

 

p

[pbleighton]

"lightish opening, I open one spade...no problem yet."

 

Unless of course you are having one of those days where you routinely pass 13 counts :)

 

In my 2/1 partnership I open 2S, and my partner tanks, then bids 4S.

 

In my other partnership I open 1S (8-11), my partner responds 2S (0-14), and there it rests, unless we are pushed higher.

 

Peter

[BillHiggin]

Open 2♠ (clear cut in my style)

Responde 3♣ - my agreements - shows clubs as a source of tricks, spade tolerance, forcing for one round. Change the ♥K to ♥A and it would be 4♣ fit jump.

Rebid 3♦ - descriptive, nothing to be ashamed of

Most likely we now get too high at 4♠. I have gone down before.

 

Reduce the ♥K to any lesser ♥, and I still start with 3♣, but now will clearly stop at 3♠. The ♣ suit does not need to be THAT good for the 3♣ call.

[Fluffy]

When too good for 2♠ but not too strong I like to open 3♠, vulnerable is less likelly though.

[MickyB]

When too good for 2♠ but not too strong I like to open 3♠, vulnerable is less likelly though.

Yes, likewise. 1, 2 and 3 aren't ridiculous here, but I think I'd go for 2♠.

[mcphee]

I do not like when partners open these hands 1S, it's no a 1 level opening for me, and I am not a shy bidder. Now I look to the next option of 2S and this falls into that group except for the no so great suit. I reason that if I was to pass this I may not be well placed later in the auction and may face being shut out of showing S. 6-4 hands play well most times.

 

As for opening 3S, it would never ever be a first or second seat option for me. My feelings are that players who open these hands 3S play alone. This is nothing that resembles a 3 opening and on a 1 to 10 scale I mark it as minus 43 as I feel gracious with my scoring table.

[jim420]

A special note was that "Go down in 4♠" here does result in a quite large IMP loss contrary to intuition that this might be a "common" overbid - about 6-7 for 4♠-1 and 8-9 for 4♠-2

 

One tricky thing was 4♠ (South declarer, of course) does not necessarily go down, although in the score table there are at least 5 4♠S-1ers. The reason was West might be mistaken to lead ♣ instead of ♥. Facing a ♣ lead, declarer can play clubs to pitch ♥s immediately afterwards and 4♠ will make, probably with an overtrick as well!

 

In fact, in the scoreboard there is one 4♠xS= and a 4♠xS+1...

 

Now this is getting more complicated...leading us to another question: will u lead ♣ or ♥ as West against a spade contract? How will the bidding affect ur action?

[SoTired]

Normal 2S opening bid for me. 1S would not enter mind. I may or may not bid 4S as North. Phase of moon thing.

 

I might bid 2N first. If playing "feature" and opener rebid 3D, then I would sign off in 3S knowing my ♥K was vulnerable.

[jim420]

Btw, doesn't "classical teaching" requires two of the top 3 honors to make a preempt?

 

What do u think about this requirement?

[whereagles]

2♠ would be my opening. What to do with North's hand depends on the weak 2 style. If disciplined, a straight 4 seems fair. Else trot out the 2NT gadget.

[SoTired]

Btw, doesn't "classical teaching" requires two of the top 3 honors to make a preempt?

 

What do u think about this requirement?

i don't adhere to that view.

[matmat]

I pass

[han]

I'd open 2S, and I think that this is clear. Who cares what bridge teachers in the 50's taught, this is now.

[Winstonm]

I would open 2S.

 

As North, I would bid 2N (Losing trick count ask)

Opener would repond 3C (7 losers)

North would ask for shortness with 3D

Opener would deny a singleton diamond with 3S.

 

End of auction.

[cherdano]

Btw, doesn't "classical teaching" requires two of the top 3 honors to make a preempt?

 

What do u think about this requirement?

It may be a good teaching method for beginners, but I think anyone who wants to become intermediate or better should throw this out in order to be able to preempt more.

[dake50]

Under a 1C force umbrella, weak openings like this abound.

Open 1S get 2C; rebid 2S(7L) get one more push to 3S; quit with wrong Clubs.

[brianshark]

I don't like misdescribing my hand, so I pass.

[jim420]

Thanks for the responses so far. Now we come to what happened to my table... B)

Preempting 2♠ is not surprising here, but what could happen if we didn't preempt?

 

With some fluke bidding (that's what I thought at least :P ) We found out the best contract here for NS was not 2♠, or 3♠, or 4♠ (a ♥ lead could easily take you down, as in the majority of cases) It is...

 

3NT(N)!!! :blink: :ph34r:

 

Here comes the auction and the play...

 

 

[hv=d=s&v=b&n=s643hk65d65cakqt9&s=skt9875h74daj84c5]133|200|Scoring: IMP

West North East South

 

 -     -     -     Pass

 Pass  1♣    1NT   2♠

 Pass  3♣    Pass  3♦

 Pass  3NT   Pass  Pass

 Dbl   Pass  Pass  Pass

 

 

H8 H4 H2 H5

HJ H7 H3 HK

S3 S2 SK SQ

C5 C4 CQ C2

CA C3 D4 C6

CK C8 D8 C7

S4 SA S5 SJ

HA DJ H9 H6

HQ S7 HT D5

D3 DA [/hv]

 

Comment plz, I was North btw... :wacko:

[SoTired]

i don't know if I can comment on north's bidding without being offensive.

1) North bid over 2S with a bare minimum, North should pass

2) North did not support South's spade suit with 3-card support, but rebid a 5-card minor suit at the 3-level

3) North refused again to support South's spade suit and bid 3N

4) 3N is a lunatic bid

5) After 3N is doubled, North had one more chance to bid 4S, but refused again

North's bidding is below Novice

 

Added Edit: North's bidding is impossible even for a subbing non-bridge player, so I must assume that either the hands are wrong or the bidding is mistyped.

Edited February 26, 2007 by SoTired

[Apollo81]

The only way this auction makes any sense is if North thought that two of his spades were clubs.

[jim420]

no. the hands were correct, it's just me half sleeping (ah, and also must have been alt-tabbing between other games). This was the last hand of the day...lol that's why i said it was fluke...

 

actually i felt strange that this could make...

 

but could u reach 3N in other ways...except being drunk?

[brianshark]

It's nothing to do with 3N being the right contract, it's to do with North being declarer and thus protecting the ♥K from the lead. 4♠s is a vastly superior contract that was unlucky because it was off-sided.