badderzboy Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 [hv=d=s&v=b&s=sq1062ha10dqj106532c]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] What would you open and what do you think of the alternatives Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulg Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Easy 1♦ for me, with pass being the obvious alternative. No other option. p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 No way I'm preempting on this, way way way too good spades, way too few clubs. And way too weak to open on 1 level (in terms of defense). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jlall Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 I'd pass, 1D isn't bad though, depends on style. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Pass. The alternative being 3D / 4D. This is more a matter of partnership agreement,my partner prefers to pass with this type of handin 1st and 2nd seat, in 3rd seat 4D would be clear,and since I am neutral, I comply. I dont like a 1D opening. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 1♦, 2nd choice pass, 3rd choice 4♦. This hand is waaaayyyyyy too strong for 3♦. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjames Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Pass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerben42 Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Pass, or 2♦ intermediate with my regular partner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nik1998 Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 I will open 3♦ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roupoil Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Either 1♦ or 4♦, depanding on my mood. But I can't resist bidding with this hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Is there other than anecdotal evidence that preempting with a side four-card major leads to bad results? (This hand may well be too strong for a 3♦ opening bid, but to me that argues in favor of 1♦ rather than pass.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 I'm normally happy to open at the game level with virtually any 7-4 pattern. This hand is the exception. I have soft values, a side 4 card major, a side void, and a weak Diamond suit. I still open 5♦ mind you. But I don't feel happy about it... I neither expect not do I deserve support for this bid, but its what I'd do at the table. I'll be interested to see the actual hands... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo81 Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 I'd pass and almost certainly bid later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Is there other than anecdotal evidence that preempting with a side four-card major leads to bad results? (This hand may well be too strong for a 3♦ opening bid, but to me that argues in favor of 1♦ rather than pass.) I'm not sure what other sort of evidence you think is missing. I have seen it work badly (and well) a number of times to preempt with a four card major. Personally, for me this major is too good and I would pass. 1♦ is not horrible to me. 4♦ is the right preempt on playing strength, but I don't think this is right for a preempt at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Well, I'll just open 3♦ and I don't care what you think :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Is there other than anecdotal evidence that preempting with a side four-card major leads to bad results? (This hand may well be too strong for a 3♦ opening bid, but to me that argues in favor of 1♦ rather than pass.) I'm not sure what other sort of evidence you think is missing. I have seen it work badly (and well) a number of times to preempt with a four card major. Personally, for me this major is too good and I would pass. 1♦ is not horrible to me. 4♦ is the right preempt on playing strength, but I don't think this is right for a preempt at all. I wondered if anyone has taken the time to note hands where they have preempted with a side four-card major and determined through a bunch of results that it is a losing action. Or, sifted through a database of hands and results to come to some sort of conclusion regarding the merits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Is there other than anecdotal evidence that preempting with a side four-card major leads to bad results? (This hand may well be too strong for a 3♦ opening bid, but to me that argues in favor of 1♦ rather than pass.) I'm not sure what other sort of evidence you think is missing. I have seen it work badly (and well) a number of times to preempt with a four card major. Personally, for me this major is too good and I would pass. 1♦ is not horrible to me. 4♦ is the right preempt on playing strength, but I don't think this is right for a preempt at all. I wondered if anyone has taken the time to note hands where they have preempted with a side four-card major and determined through a bunch of results that it is a losing action. Or, sifted through a database of hands and results to come to some sort of conclusion regarding the merits. My partner did it twice in the LM pairs in San Francisco (both times I would have done it too.) Both times we played 3NT when a 4-4 major suit fit would have made more tricks. But no I've never done a detailed analysis of hand records. It's a difficult thing to analyze since maybe on hands where it looks like it breaks even, the fact you preempted really gained or lost in some subtle way, such as which opponent declares or helping them play the hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 I have no problem opening with a side 4-card major when it has no honors or when I'm in third seat (duh!). I'm less strict about it when favorable in first seat. With this hand I'd pass though. I'm sure that Ben (inquiry) could easily run a bridgebrowser search to see what the results are when preempting in a minor with a side 4-card major (maybe even prescribing that it has 0, 1 or 2 honors in the side suit). Another idea would be to look at vugraph records from major tournaments and see what the top players do with such hands and what their results are. Of course for those results to be significant you'd have to take a large database. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joker_gib Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 Pass, second choice : 1♦ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted February 2, 2008 Report Share Posted February 2, 2008 I'd probably open 1♦. I don't know that this hand is going to be any easier to describe after I pass. It's certainly borderline but I do have a bunch of 10's. About the only thing that happens with any kind of frequency is that pard bashes into 3N on a 12 count without a diamond fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdeegan Posted February 4, 2008 Report Share Posted February 4, 2008 :rolleyes: 1♦. Old time bridgeplayer's saying - most 7-4 hands belong in game. Imho, best way to get that going is to start with an opening bid, UNLESS I have a picture bid for my particular hand. I DON'T. Therefore ..................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted February 4, 2008 Report Share Posted February 4, 2008 I'm normally happy to open at the game level with virtually any 7-4 pattern. This hand is the exception. I have soft values, a side 4 card major, a side void, and a weak Diamond suit. I still open 5♦ mind you. But I don't feel happy about it... I neither expect not do I deserve support for this bid, but its what I'd do at the table. I'll be interested to see the actual hands... Youv'e got one supporter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted February 4, 2008 Report Share Posted February 4, 2008 I'm normally happy to open at the game level with virtually any 7-4 pattern. This hand is the exception. I have soft values, a side 4 card major, a side void, and a weak Diamond suit. I still open 5♦ mind you. But I don't feel happy about it... I neither expect not do I deserve support for this bid, but its what I'd do at the table. I'll be interested to see the actual hands... I normally consider 4minor 'at the game level' for this 'rule' about opening 7-4 hands. Vulnerable though I think I am a spot or two away from 4♦. Also we open also open this sort of hand at the one-level sometimes. We reserve 5♦ for fairly decent hands that have some prospect of making 11 tricks opposite a fairly ordinary (average) hand opposite - something that can contribute a couple of tricks or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.