5C?

[Guest Jlall]

I'm with the "automatic" camp. If partner bid 6C I would really expect to make it. I don't agree with these "dont preempt over a preempt" arguments, it's much different when the preempt is at the game level. Who would not bid 4S over 4H with AKxxxxx x xxx xx and this is just a normal 3S opener. The fact that your overcalls are wide range by necessity of 4M doesn't mean that it's right to pass with weak hands. Partner's not going to reopen enough, especially when youre void.

[cnszsun]

I passed at table. I do have ideas like "dont preempt over a preempt', but maybe it's time to change it. Just like justin said, it should not be applied to game level preempt.

My partner held: ♠QJ10x ♥xx ♦AKxx ♣A98.

Result is 4♥-1, 6♣ is very good contract and will make.

[mike777]

I passed at table. I do have ideas like "dont preempt over a preempt', but maybe it's time to change it. Just like justin said, it should not be applied to game level preempt.

My partner held: ♠QJ10x ♥xx ♦AKxx ♣A98.

Result is 4♥-1, 6♣ is very good contract and will make.

Well if you do pass, partner may bid with that hand over 4H. I do not think passing is 100% clear with partner's hand. :D

[hrothgar]

I passed at table. I do have ideas like "dont preempt over a preempt', but maybe it's time to change it.

For what its worth, I had always associated the expression "Don't Preempt over a Preempt" with a very different type of auction.

 

Suppose that the opponent's open 2♦ or some such:

 

"Don't Preempt over a Preempt" means that a jump overcall to 3♥ or 3♠ should be used to show a strong hand and not a weak hand.

 

In this example, we have a somewhat different argument: What range should a simple overcall of a highly preempt show. Associated with this, how strong must one have to advance a simple overcall.

[Fluffy]

Partner had an automatic bid, and it wasn't pass if you didn't notice :)

[P_Marlowe]

I passed at table. I do have ideas like "dont preempt over a preempt', but maybe it's time to change it. Just like justin said, it should not be applied to game level preempt.

My partner held: ♠QJ10x ♥xx ♦AKxx ♣A98.

Result is 4♥-1, 6♣ is very good contract and will make.

I could live with 5C, but if partner makes any

negative comment about my pass, he should

be carefully, ... he has to act, quite often I

will have a hand with which I cant act over 4H,

but 4S makes easily.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

PS: In other words, if you want to change your

opinion with regards "dont preempt over a preempt"

thats fine, but the given hand is not a good example.

[foo]

2x post

[foo]

I passed at table. I do have ideas like "dont preempt over a preempt', but maybe it's time to change it. Just like justin said, it should not be applied to game level preempt.

 

My partner held: ♠QJTx ♥xx ♦AKxx ♣A98.

Result is 4♥-1, 6♣ is very good contract and will make.

This is a beautiful balancing T/O X of (4♥) in my world.

 

Admittedly a min or very close to a min for the action, but still automatic

 

♠QJTx ♥xx ♦AKxx ♣A98 has 15 points in support of either pointed suit; and rates to have 15 support points for ♣'s as well.

 

pd's expectation is a little better than 10 points here.

 

♠ Ax ♥ ♦ Qxx ♣ QTxxxxxx

has 13 playing points. IOW, it's ~ a full trick stronger than it's expectation.

More than that given the 10+ card ♣ fit a balancing T/O X here will tell us We have.

 

Given a balancing T/O X, I'd probably bid 6♣ as an Advance with the OP hand due to my considerable extras.

 

 

Bottom line: pd should have balanced and did not.

 

Give pd awm's 2nd example of KQxx Qxx Kxx Kxx, and this would've been a much more problematic discussion.

 

But ♠QJTx ♥xx ♦AKxx ♣A98 (or Kxxx xxxx AKx Ax for that matter)

should be an automatic balance given what 2nd chair is expected to hold for playing strength.

[han]

I passed at table. I do have ideas like "dont preempt over a preempt', but maybe it's time to change it.

For what its worth, I had always associated the expression "Don't Preempt over a Preempt" with a very different type of auction.

 

Suppose that the opponent's open 2♦ or some such:

 

"Don't Preempt over a Preempt" means that a jump overcall to 3♥ or 3♠ should be used to show a strong hand and not a weak hand.

 

In this example, we have a somewhat different argument: What range should a simple overcall of a highly preempt show. Associated with this, how strong must one have to advance a simple overcall.

This is also how I've understood the advice: a jump over a preempt shows a good hand.

[helene_t]

My first impulse was to pass but thinking more about it, I think I'd bid 5♣. Partner raising to 6 will only be really bad if we can make exactly 11 tricks and opps can't make 4♥. It could also happen that partner doubles 6♥ and it makes but that's a lesser accident.

[nige1]

Dealer: East Vul: Both Scoring: IMP

♠ Ax ♥ [space] ♦ Qxx ♣ Q10xxxxxx

(4♥) ?

Is this an automatic 5♣?

IMO 5♣ = 10, _P=9.

Not automatic for me. Its close which parrot cry to heed

• 
   
  
• 1, Don't preempt over preempts... Normally, immediate actions are sound.
   
  
• 2. Riddle: What do you call an eight card suit? Answer: trumps
  ...Unless, of course, your name is Jlall and you hold
  ♠ - ♥ K Q J T x x x x x ♦ x x ♣ x x :( :( :( -- however,
  
  • that is 9 cards :),
    
  • the context is slightly different :) and
    
  • his argument was reasonable I suppose :)
     
    

   

I passed at table. I do have ideas like "dont preempt over a preempt', but maybe it's time to change it. Just like justin said, it should not be applied to game level preempt.

My partner held: ♠ Q J T x ♥ x x ♦ A K x x ♣ A 9 8.

Result is 4♥-1, 6♣ is very good contract and will make.

Partner had an automatic bid, and it wasn't pass if you didn't notice :)

Fluffy has a good point, IMO