123

[Coch Draig]

I believe it is 100% pre emptive. Take this auction 1♥ - P - 2♥ - P - ? With this hand you clearly now want to ask pd specifically about his Club suit regardless of whether he is minimum or maximum:-

 

♠xx

♥AKJ10x

♦x

♣AQ10x

 

But what do you bid in the same auction with:-

 

♠KJx

♥AQ10xx

♦Axx

♣Kx

 

This is the hand I want to make a general invitational raise based on partners overall hcp's.

[mike777]

I believe it is 100% pre emptive.  Take this auction 1♥ - P - 2♥ - P - ? With this hand you clearly now want to ask pd specifically about his Club suit regardless of whether he is minimum or maximum:-

 

♠xx

♥AKJ10x

♦x

♣AQ10x

 

But what do you bid in the same auction with:-

 

♠KJx

♥AQ10xx

♦Axx

♣Kx

 

This is the hand I want to make a general invitational raise based on partners overall hcp's.

you do why?

 

I can understand a general bid of 3nt as a simple game try, but sure your expert pick up partner may misunderstand.

[fred]

I don't undestand the point of "123 stop" - what are you trying to preempt?

 

If you have to get to the 3-level wouldn't you rather let the opponents balance before you do? In this way you will have additional information about how to play the hand.

 

And sometimes the opps don't balance. In this case of course you would rather play 2H then 3H.

 

The only time "123 stop" gains is if Passing will allow the opponents to bid and make a game. In real life that almost never happens since the pervasive philosophy about balancing is "just be happy if you can push them up one level".

 

Even on those hands "123 stop" is unlikely to stop strong opponents since this bid waves a red flag in their faces that says "I think you might be able to make a game".

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[mike777]

I can only respond that yes, I am very worried the opp have a game or at least a very good part score in spades. I am also very worried if I let them push me to 3H they may very very often have an easier double.

 

If I am waving a red flag in the face of Fred and Brad, so be it. I need them to make mistakes for me to have any hope. B)

 

If you are not worried than I agree 100% with Fred's comments.

[neilkaz]

I don't undestand the point of "123 stop" - what are you trying to preempt?

 

If you have to get to the 3-level wouldn't you rather let the opponents balance before you do? In this way you will have additional information about how to play the hand.

 

And sometimes the opps don't balance. In this case of course you would rather play 2H then 3H.

 

The only time "123 stop" gains is if Passing will allow the opponents to bid and make a game. In real life that almost never happens since the pervasive philosophy about balancing is "just be happy if you can push them up one level".

 

Even on those hands "123 stop" is unlikely to stop strong opponents since this bid waves a red flag in their faces that says "I think you might be able to make a game".

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

In suits of lower rank than ♠ 123 stop also gains when it prevents the opps from coming in at the 2 level in a higher suit and then bidding 3 over your subsequent 3 and scoring better than letting you play in 3 of your lower ranking suit. In the case here the idea of 123 stop is to minimize the chances of the opps correctly bidding to 3♠.

 

However, when holding ♠ and hearing ♥ bid the opps so often find a way to stretch into the auction anyhow. There will be hands where all you can make is 2♥ and the opps weren't going to balance or were going to end up in the wrong place after balancing.

 

So I am not a big fan of 123 stop, and really dislike it when ♠ are trump since the opps so rarely are getting to 4 of anything and doing well.

 

I play with advanced pickups very commonly and quite a few experts and the occasional intermediate who lists a few conventions I like so I decide to try him/her. The vast majority of them would play 3♥ as a generic game try.

 

Here I have two control cards, a ruffing value, 9 pts in support of ♥ and just perhaps my D length can be used. I am bidding the vulnerable game at IMPs.

 

There is often lots of confusion about other types of game tries with pickups since they may not be sure what you are looking for or showing. Today the opp opened 1♣ and no opp bid again, I overcalled 1♠ and PD raised to 2 and I bid 3♦ hoping for some fitting cards and PD with A8xx in ♦ and a rather good raise anyhow passed with 4♠ being as cold as February was here in IL.

 

Re: California vs the NE etc.. 123 stop was in vogue with 2/1ers out there 20 years ago when I played in San Diego.

 

Just my opinions and experiences that 123 stop should be used with discretion and that most pd's play a raise to 3 as a game try if undiscussed and no opp bidding.

 

.. neilkaz ..

[foo]

Dealer: North Vul: N/S Scoring: IMP

♠ T96 ♥ K74 ♦ JT986 ♣ A4

Bidding:1♥-p-2♥-p-3♥-p-?

You are playing with a pick-up partner on line. What would you bid?

Depends on what our systemic agreements are as to

a= What kinds of hands can Opener have here?

b= How conservative / mainstream / aggressive have we agreed to be as a pair?

c= Conditions of contest.

and, most importantly for this thread,

d= What have we agreed I should do here?

 

Playing with a novice or "HCP literalist" w/o other discussion, this sequence says "pass with 6-7 HCP and bid 4H with 8-9 HCP."

Since I have 8 HCP, I'm supposed to bid 4H.

 

Playing with a LTC devotee, where w/o prior discussion this sequence shows a 6 loser Opening without a better bid to describe it, I'm supposed to pass with 9 losers and bid game with 8 losers.

Since I have 9 losers, I'm supposed to pass.

 

If playing a system where this sequence is an Invite to be decided based on my trumps and overall hand, I pass =unless= opener is promising a 6th trump. In which case I bid 4H based on a 9 card fit + my HK + being Control rich.

 

The ONLY way I automatically pass is if we have specifically agreed to play 123 Stop.

 

 

Would it make any difference if your partner was intermediate, advanced or expert?

Without other discussion, playing USA "Standard" or 2/1 or BWS this is an invitational sequence no matter what level of partner I have.

 

 

Related question: How mainstream or otherwise is this sequence a command to pass?

Playing this sequence as a "pre balance" or "pre bar" bid is !not! Standard.

(For one thing, if you haven't discussed any other game try structure, this is the most natural sounding Invite, is it not?)

[Guest Jlall]

I don't undestand the point of "123 stop" - what are you trying to preempt?

Thank you! I have always felt this way and people look at me like I'm crazy. If I played 1-2-3 stop I would simply never bid it.

[ArcLight]

What is the best use of the 3 level bid in the sequence 1♥-2♥-3♥ or 1♠-2♠-3♠?

 

Should is be a general purpose game try? (but you already have various game tries)

 

Or focus on Trump support?

 

How would experts play it?

[pclayton]

Fred: I think this is the 1st time in 3 years that I really haven't agreed (or you haven't convinced me) about your viewpoint:

 

I don't undestand the point of "123 stop" - what are you trying to preempt?

 

When we hold the hearts, and they hold the spades; I want to shut out the imminent balancing double by LHO who is sitting behind me with a 4-1-4-4 9 count.

 

If you have to get to the 3-level wouldn't you rather let the opponents balance before you do? In this way you will have additional information about how to play the hand.

 

We may not buy it at the 3 level if we pass. Even if we do, they will also have a better idea how to defend, since your RHO will get a free call and will tell LHO what to lead.

And sometimes the opps don't balance. In this case of course you would rather play 2H then 3H.

 

Well of course; but since RHO didn't prebalance, LHO seems certain to balance with shortness. We have advertised an 8 card fit? We've also advertised that we don't have 100% ownership of the deal? Check both - this is a clear balancing situations, especially at IMPs but usually at IMPs.

 

The only time "123 stop" gains is if Passing will allow the opponents to bid and make a game. In real life that almost never happens since the pervasive philosophy about balancing is "just be happy if you can push them up one level".

 

Even on those hands "123 stop" is unlikely to stop strong opponents since this bid waves a red flag in their faces that says "I think you might be able to make a game".

 

Isn't there 5-6 IMPs at stake for the part score battle?

[Guest Jlall]

When we hold the hearts, and they hold the spades; I want to shut out the imminent balancing double by LHO who is sitting behind me with a 4-1-4-4 9 count.

And how do you know all of this? Even if you have a stiff spade that doesn't mean they hold the spades. Partner can hold them.

 

We may not buy it at the 3 level if we pass.

 

It's right to bid 3H only if they can bid and make 3S and you can make 3H. This is a very narrow window to shoot at.

 

Well of course; but since RHO didn't prebalance, LHO seems certain to balance with shortness. We have advertised an 8 card fit? We've also advertised that we don't have 100% ownership of the deal? Check both - this is a clear balancing situations,

 

Lol so you balance every time it goes 1H p 2H p p ? Ok, maybe you do, but that is really bad and most people do not. If you are playing against opponents like this you can just double them...a lot. There will be a lot of hands where neither player could act.

 

Isn't there 5-6 IMPs at stake for the part score battle?

 

Yes, and it's more likely you'll win them by going +110 instead of pushing yourself to the 3 level than by going +140 when the opps can make 140. If the opps have not bid yet it is not very likely they can make 3S and you can make 3H.

[fred]

What is the best use of the 3 level bid in the sequence 1♥-2♥-3♥ or 1♠-2♠-3♠?

For me it just means "do you like your hand?".

 

For me the typical hand for using this sequence would be 6322 and 15 HCP or so (yes I might open 1NT with this hand, but more often than not I would open 1 of my long major).

 

Of course partner can bid 3NT if he likes his hand and thinks that 3NT might be better than 4H.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[jdonn]

The entire 1-2-3 stop convention amounts to paranoia in my view. They let you play on the 2 level all the time, and even when you get pushed to 3 they rarely bid over that, and even when they do they have to be right, and meanwhile you lose a bid that can be used for constructive purposes. How can this be right on general principles, to "preempt" opponents who have both passed already when we are very often just raising ourselves a level that we wouldn't have needed to?

 

Also fwiw I think if they balance and push me to 3, their bid is more useful to me in the play of the hand than to them in the defense.

[fred]

Answer for PClayton:

 

Most of the people I play against:

 

1) Do not believe in the concept of the "prebalance"

2) Do not religously balance when the opponents stop in 2H with a known 8-card fit

3) Rarely if ever compete above the 3H level after the opponents stop in 2H and they balance

4) Sometimes go for a number when they balance

5) Sometimes end up in the wrong suit when they balance

6) Tend to make pretty good opening leads even if they don't know what their partner's longest suit is

7) Tend to take fewer tricks on defense against 3H if they tell me about their distribution before we reach that contract

8) Tend to be able to win 5 tricks on defense when they are available

 

Hope this helps. I agree with most of your posts too by the way :P

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[paulg]

So Justin, Josh and Fred are in agreement. That means that they are certainly right, not only are they better than me but they also see a zillion more hands than I do every year.

 

So who has been lying to us competent players about this auction? I feel a need to blame someone!

 

Thanks guys,

 

Paul

[fred]

So Justin, Josh and Fred are in agreement. That means that they are certainly right, not only are they better than me but they also see a zillion more hands than I do every year.

 

So who has been lying to us competent players about this auction? I feel a need to blame someone!

 

Thanks guys,

 

Paul

I don't think it is necessarily the case that we are "right" just because 3 successful players agree. Look at the Master Solvers' Club in The Bridge World. In just about every problem you can find 3 famous experts who all agree on an answer while 30 other experts think that some other answer(s) are better.

 

But in general I have found it useful to pay attention to the views of players who are more experienced and/or more successful than I am. Sometimes I still end up disagreeing with them, but more often than not I find that such people generally have a better understanding of certain aspects of the game than I do.

 

Note also that the arguments that we are making are largely based on behavior we have seen from our opponents (that they don't always balance, that they don't tend to bid again after pushing me to the 3-level, etc...). So even if we are "right" in the universe we currently live in, the universe can change.

 

For example, people probably started to make ligher preempts partly as a result of the success of Edgar Kaplan's "takeout doubles are for takeout" campaign. Then the lighter preempts made it more attractive for people to sit for more takeout doubles. Then people stopped preempting on such light hands out of fear of being penalized...

 

Perhaps there exist defensive bidding strategies that make "123 stop" a winner for the opponents, but my experience suggests that such strategies (if they exist at all) are far from mainstream.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[Al_U_Card]

I have only ever used that 3H bid as opener to show a 6th H and to show a max (13-14) not worth a game try (so 6322) doesnt come up much if at all (maybe 5 times in.....a whole lot of years....which is why the bidnocrats couldn't stand to let an idle bid lie.... :P

[jtfanclub]

So Justin, Josh and Fred are in agreement. That means that they are certainly right, not only are they better than me but they also see a zillion more hands than I do every year.

Or it could be that they play mostly IMP/Team games.

 

Pre-balancing is a MP tactic...getting -100 instead of -110 isn't going to be real useful in IMPs. An automatic balance after 1♥-P-2♥-P-P is an MP tactic as well. I don't know if 1-2-3-stop is a good idea in MPs or not, but on the face of it it seems better there than IMPs.

 

For me, it shows a 6th heart and 13-14 hcp. I've heard (and believed) theories that a 6-3 fit where the 3 card hand has a singleton only requires 21 hcp for game, so if the guy with the 3 card suit has outside shortness he should bid game. On the other hand, since we have about half the hcp, I suppose it's also pre-emptive.

 

So is what I play 123 stop or an invitation?

[BebopKid]

Pass either way

[whereagles]

So Justin, Josh and Fred are in agreement. That means that they are certainly right

nah.. them infidels are just being polluted by impure thoughts

 

repeat after me: "123 stop is GO(O)D" ;)

[foo]

What is the best use of the 3 level bid in the sequence 1♥-2♥-3♥ or 1♠-2♠-3♠?

 

Should is be a general purpose game try? (but you already have various game tries)

 

Or focus on Trump support?

 

How would experts play it?

The "best" use of a sequence depends on what useful hands you don't have other sequences for.

 

Here the "best" use of 1M-2M;3M depends on the rest of your Major suit structure. Particularly your Major suit Game Try structure.

 

One thing you can be sure of: experts are not going to be "hung up" on or addicted to HCP as their sole evaluation mechanism.

 

What hands will an expert make a Game Try with playing a "natural" system like SA or 2/1? Hands of medium playing strength for the bidding so far.

 

What general features will experts put into their Game Try structure?

Information that indicates how well the hands "fit" and how many tricks we rate to lose between the 2 hands.

 

So whatever a specific expert pair decides each of

1H-2H;2S

1H-2H;2N

2H-2H;3m

means, the hands worth inviting on that are not covered by the above are what

1H-2H;3H

should show.

 

If the 1st 3 sequences cover all your game tries to your satisfaction, then there may be some justification for allowing specific hands to use 1H-2H;3H as a "protect against them balancing" sequence.

[neilkaz]

So Justin, Josh and Fred are in agreement. That means that they are certainly right

nah.. them infidels are just being polluted by impure thoughts

 

repeat after me: "123 stop is GO(O)D" :P

If you think 123 stop is good when ♠ is trump ..even at MP and most certainly at IMPS think again.

 

At MP 123 stop when ♥ is trump and opener is shortish in ♠ is OK, but at IMPs I really need to be short in ♠ and expect a 2♠ balance and have concerns 3♠ makes.

 

123 in minors makes more sence since there are two majors to be blocked out, but INVM solves that issue in general.

[fred]

So whatever a specific expert pair decides each of

1H-2H;2S

1H-2H;2N

2H-2H;3m

means,  the hands worth inviting on that are not covered by the above are what

1H-2H;3H

should show.

No offense intended, but I think this is nonsense (but you are in good company because a lot of people would agree with your thinking here).

 

Why should it have to be "best" that any of these bids should to be used as "game tries"?

 

Maybe "best" is to not use any game tries at all.

 

Maybe "best" is that 3H is your only game try.

 

Maybe "best" is to play 3H as a choice between 3NT and 4H, asking for specific Queens, or a slam try containing any void.

 

The "best" system is not necessarily the system that describes your hand the most accurately or asks your partner the perfect question - it is often the case that such descriptions and questions help your opponents more than they help your partnership decide between 3H, 4H, and 3NT.

 

Even if it could be demonstrated that there exists some objectively "best" use of these bids, it is not unlikely that whatever that these definitions consist of would be too difficult for anyone to remember and might vary greatly according to things like vulnerability, form of scoring, and your opponents' tendencies.

 

As far as I am concerned, "best" is whatever makes you and your partner the most comfortable. It is likely you will never win a tournament because your superior game try methods allow you to hit a home run. It is likely that you will lose a lot of tournaments because the methods you have agreed to play, even in the unlikely event that they are close to "best", are too much for you to handle and have a negative impact on the rest of your game.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[fred]

What general features will experts put into their Game Try structure?

Not many in my partnerships.

 

Here is what my regular partner and I play after 1H-2H:

 

- 2NT="I think we might belong in 3NT. What do you think?"

- 2S/3C/3D="I have 4+ cards in this suit. What do you think?"

- 3H="Do you have a minimum or a maximum?"

 

For us bidding a new suit is not likely to be a "game try" (though that is how partner treats it). More likely:

 

- A natural slam try that opens up the possibility of playing in 6 of the suit bid if a 4-4 fit exists

- A psych intended to disuade the opponents from leading the suit bid against what you know will be the inevitable 4H contract

- The bid of a suit you want led against the inevitable 4H contract (this is useful if you think your opponent might think that you are psyching)

- Giving partner a chance to bid 3NT if he has a maximum with all of his cards outside of your suits

- Giving the partnership a chance to get to 4 of the other major where a 9-card fit may be present while you have only an 8-card fit in the suit that has been bid and raised.

 

Partner responds as if your bid is a natural game try while catering to slam if he has 4+ cards in the suit you bid, typically by raising the "game try". Occasionally partner will show a source of tricks in yet another suit or bid notrump in response to the "game try".

 

More often than not, if we are dealt what most people think is a perfect hand for a natural game try, we will just bid game or maybe pass if we are playing against people we know are religious about The Law (especially if the vulnerability is right).

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[sceptic]

2S/3C/3D="I have 4+ cards in this suit. What do you think?"

 

I dont quite understand how this can not be a game try, surely with (for example you bid 3 clubs, then if you have a double fit and hcp to justify the hand, your partner would bid game or if he does not he would bid 3 of the agreed major?

 

unless it is asking for help in that suit in which case it would still be a game try?

 

For us bidding a new suit is not likely to be a "game try" (though that is how partner treats it). More likely:

 

I am confused by what you are saying here Fred

[fred]

2S/3C/3D="I have 4+ cards in this suit. What do you think?"

 

I dont quite understand how this can not be a game try, surely with (for example you bid 3 clubs, then if you have a double fit and hcp to justify the hand, your partner would bid game or if he does not he would bid 3 of the agreed major?

 

unless it is asking for help in that suit in which case it would still be a game try?

 

For us bidding a new suit is not likely to be a "game try" (though that is how partner treats it). More likely:

 

I am confused by what you are saying here Fred

Sorry that my explanation was not clear. I will try again.

 

In my partnerships when the bidding goes, for example, 1H-2H-3C:

 

1) Most of the time opener is always planning on bidding game. In such cases the reason he is bidding 3C could be:

 

1a) He is interested in slam (including perhaps 6C as opposed to 6H)

 

or

 

1b) He wants partner to help make the decision between playing in 3NT vs. 4H

 

or

 

1c) He wants to try to direct or inhibit a particular opening lead

 

2) Some of the time opener really is trying for game (ie he will Pass a 3H rebid by responder).

 

Responder tries the cater his rebid to the possibility that opener's real intention might be either 1a, 1b, or 2. If opener's true intention is 1c that is none of responder's concern - responder is just along for the ride in this case.

 

So here is a brief summary of what responder's decision procedure should be:

 

- If responder has 4+ clubs he should give serious consideration to raising to 4C (to cater to possibility 1a)

 

- If responder has a notrumpy maximum with a lot of strength in the unbid suits he should bid 3NT (to cater to possibility 1b)

 

- If responder has a hand that evaluates to a minimum given what he knows about opener's distribution, he should bid 3H (to cater to possibility 2)

 

- If responder has a hand that evaluates to a maximum given what he knows about opener's distribution, he should never stop short of 4H (to cater to possibility 2) but he might want to bid something other than 4H at his 2nd turn (to cater to possibilities 1a or 1b). For example he might bid a new suit to suggest a concentration of strength or a source of tricks in that suit.

 

When responder reevaluates his hand after 3C, any honor in clubs becomes more valuable. Aces in the other suits and honors in trumps are always good cards, but Kings (and especially) Queens and Jacks in the other suits become less valuable.

 

Note that I managed to get through that without using the word "help" once :P

 

To summarize, responder treats 3C as a "game try" even though it is usually the case that opener is unwilling to play below game. However, responder will often bid something other than 3H or 4H at his second turn in order to cater to some of the intentions that opener might have.

 

Opener's intention is usually not to try for game (this has nothing to do with system - it is purely a matter of style).

 

However, a major part of responder's strategy in choosing his rebid is to assume that opener did in fact intend 3C as a game try.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com