Opening?

[ASkolnick]

I bid 3♥, but we tend to open preempts much more constructively then most people.

 

As for the hand given, great. You have a perfect fitting hand (nothing wasted in clubs, no soft values anywhere, no spade values) and it is at best on a finesse. Yay!

 

There are some advantages to preempting aggressively, but partner can just as easily hold Kx, Qx, QJX of spades or some KQJx of clubs where 4H has no play, but no one is making anything.

 

But, if partner chooses to bid 4H with this hand, it would not be the end of the world.

[han]

In general I'm much more likely to open 4H with 7 hearts than to open 4S with 7 spades.

[BillHiggin]

It seems like the panel may not represent real life,

The panel does not represent a cross section of bridge players. It is dominated by a certain clique (I am not implying that it is an evil clique, but there are bullies that do not entertain opposing views from anything less than famous name players).

 

The panel tends to be much younger than a cross section of bridge players.

The panel tends to be very much more aggressive than a cross section of bridge players.

The panel tends to be very much better at bridge than a cross section of bridge players.

[Guest Jlall]

It seems like the panel may not represent real life...

http://sf.startupweekend.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/o_rly.jpg

 

Edit: What Bill said!

[mikeh]

Now all the answers are in, I can reveal that the majors were reversed (noone bit on Ben's question!!!!) because people here are very smart. The funny thing is that one pair got to 5♥X (the other way of course) and this hand led out its 2 aces for -850. In the hand I posed this means that the 4♥ preempt would lead to a contract of 4♠X and even with the club ruff it would get made. So think about that folks, does a 4-level opening actually push them too easily into making games?

 

 

I simply don't understand this. You are stating that xxx xx Axxx Axxx has a double of a 4♠ overcall of a white v red 4♥ opening bid? At the risk of being called a bully by BillH ( ;) ), that is absurd. If I held that hand, I'd be bidding 5♥ long before I even considered double... I would rate double as one of the silliest bids I have seen in a long time. I'm not saying I would or wouldn't bid 5♥...given that I 'know' too much about the hand, I doubt that I can be objective now... but I am 100% certain that I would think about 5♥ and never consider what I regard as a utterly foolish double.

 

As for preempts sometimes pushing the opps to an otherwise unbiddable contract... yes, this happens. As someone wrote earlier, in this thread, bridge is a game of percentages. My view, and apparently that of virtually all who posted here, is that, overall, 4♥ is more likely to cause the opps to do the wrong thing than it is to cause them to go right. I doubt that any of us would dream of arguing that 4♥ will never cause them to get lucky.

[mikestar]

At these colors, anything except 4♥ is unthinkable to me-- the trump quality makes this a sound 3♥ at equal vul with or without the ♦QJx, so at favorable I bid one more.

 

The doubler desperately needs to read S. J. Simon's Why You Lose at Bridge several times. Calling it a sucker double is being too kind. Two aces and three small trumps opposite a partner advertising zero defense? You don't even have a stiff heart where you might get ♥A and a ruff if partner has the Ace and leads his suit. I expect 4♠X will make 5 most of the time and make 6 more often than it goes down.

 

At least you won't get redoubled in this auction.

[pclayton]

The panel tends to be much younger than a cross section of bridge players.

Yes, I think I can attest most of us are younger than 67.

[sfbp]

I simply don't understand this. You are stating that xxx xx Axxx Axxx has a double of a 4♠ overcall of a white v red 4♥ opening bid?

Nope.

 

i mean it started 3S P P X (x by the strong hand)

 

with the 4H opener it might go 4H P P X P 4S

 

of course with 4S opener it's more complicated

[mikeh]

I simply don't understand this. You are stating that xxx xx Axxx Axxx has a double of a 4♠ overcall of a white v red 4♥ opening bid?

Nope.

 

i mean it started 3S P P X (x by the strong hand)

 

with the 4H opener it might go 4H P P X P 4S

 

of course with 4S opener it's more complicated

Then why did you write that 'the 4♥ preempt would lead to a contract of 4♠X'?

[sfbp]

Exactly as I said the posted hand would go 4H p p X p 4S

 

What I say three times is true! Want me to say it again?

[sfbp]

I apologise Mike. I see what you mean, finally. If the other side can get to 5HX (in real life after 3S opener) its not unreasonable that the side with spades (after HEART opener) could get to 4S. What you are saying is they might not manage to X 4S whereas Xing 5H (on the real hand) was easy. Sure.

[kenrexford]

Sure. Everyone knows that a 4♥ preempt is sometimes a Texas Transfer. However, for every Texas Transfer that is accepted, there are undoubtedly a number of unfortunate results for the cute little opponents. Partner is allowed to have real defense (not two bullets and out).

 

There is also a real difference between a 4♥ opening and a 4♠ opening. A 4♥ opening is often a weak positional lunge that forces a 4-level decision and provides partner with maximal information for the five-level decision, with fewer downsides. The 4♠ call, in contrast, is more often the final contract and is a call made with some serious positional strength. Switching analysis between the two is clever, but not necessarily a true revelation of the thinking process of "the panel." Although a 4♠ call is not a Texas Transfer, that reality also reduces some potential gains.

 

Meaning, a 4♥ call occasionally gains by jamming out competition, but it also occasionally gains by inducing unfortunate competition that can be lucratively sent back. A 4♠ call has increased jam potential but also has decreased strike potential.

 

Further, a 4♥ opening has a greater chance of even a partscore victory. 4♥-1 beats 3♠ making, but 4♠-1 is horrible against 3♥ making, as 3♠ would have been enough and would have made.

[sfbp]

Everyone knows that a 4♥ preempt is sometimes a Texas Transfer.

 

I said nothing about Texas. You might be implying something about Namyats, but this pard and I, and probably the majority, don't play it, and there were no 4m openers or lack thereof to cloud the issue since noone opened higher than 3

 

Switching analysis between the two is clever, but not necessarily a true revelation of the thinking process of "the panel."

 

I agree; that wasn't my motive for switching, I simply wanted to avoid post hoc propter hoc analysis. However one pair of opponents did get to 5♥ so it seemed reasonable that one or more might get to 4♠ if I held the hand that 2/3 of the voters said I should open 4♥ (very very far from unanimous despite certain people self-proclaiming unanimity).

 

In fact 1/3 of the votes (the mostly less vocal minority, and I suspect in reality the silent MAJority) said that even with a heart hand they would open 3♥ not 4♥.

[bid_em_up]

Umm, Steven, it has been said that an opening 4H bid is an automatic transfer to 4S.....by the opposing side.

 

Thats what Ken is implying.

[sfbp]

Lol, lost on me. Thx.

[awm]

Sure, it is possible to miss a (slightly less than) 50% game by opening 3♥ when partner has xxx xx ATxx ATxx. It must be noted that missing a 50% game at NV is not a huge disaster. And the opponents might be making 4♠ opposite this hand anyway (or at least it may be a good sac against 4♥) so if they let me play 3♥+1 that seems non-disastrous.

 

Of course opening 4♥ gets you to game opposite ATxx xx xxx ATxx, which is basically a zero percent game (okay maybe opponents underlead ♠K and then hearts and diamonds behave, but it has no real chance against any other lead).

 

Again, it's a matter of style. If you want to bid all games with a 50% shot at making on these preempt hands you're also going to bid a lot of really terrible games (opposite some of which opponents have nothing, and some of which will be doubled).

[skjaeran]

To me this is an absolutely no-brainer 4♥ opening NV 1st seat.

[sfbp]

So far there is no evidence whatsoever that the world opens this at the 4 level. In fact there is evidence to the contrary. Furthermore there is evidence that the very few (less than 5%) who opened such a hand 4♥ did very poorly.

 

As this is a subject on which it's clear the established panelists here don't want to hear about, I shall refrain from further details. Interested parties are welcome to pursue it by contacting me privately.

[han]

Thanks, appreciated.

[NickRW]

So far there is no evidence whatsoever that the world opens this at the 4 level. In fact there is evidence to the contrary. Furthermore there is evidence that the very few (less than 5%) who opened such a hand 4♥ did very poorly.

 

As this is a subject on which it's clear the established panelists here don't want to hear about, I shall refrain from further details. Interested parties are welcome to pursue it by contacting me privately.

I think what you're saying is that the silent majoity are bidding 3♥ and that the silent majority sitting the other way find it harder to bid the making 4♠ on their cards after the bidding starts 3♥ than if it starts 4♥.

 

Your hypothesis is probably correct. I don't think that this inherently means that 4♥ is wrong - just that you don't need to strain to beat poor players. In an analogy with poker, why play to check-raise the nuts when the other dude is going to at least call your raise anyway? Bridge, for all its rules about full disclosure and UI and so on, is still sometimes a game where one has to play one's opponents for what they are.

 

Does high level preemptive action propel the opps into contracts that they wouldn't have otherwise found sometimes - sure - I was the beneficiary of this effect at the table only last night - 6♣ making rather than 3N - both contracts depending on the same finesse - and, at least, I would likely have been less off than the 3 no trumpers had the finesse failed. So yeah it happens.

 

Maybe this is a task for Bridge Browser, if you can find some useful way of rating the players involved. I don't know if that is possible.

 

Nick

[fred]

I think what you're saying is that the silent majoity are bidding 3♥ and that the silent majority sitting the other way find it harder to bid the making 4♠ on their cards after the bidding starts 3♥ than if it starts 4♥.

He might also being saying that a significant % of the time you open 4H you will buy the contract (sometimes doubled) and go down whereas, had you opened 3H, you would have also bought the contract (sometimes for +140 and sometimes for a smaller minus score than 4H going down more).

 

But with all due respect to sfpb, I don't think anyone (including his software) *knows* what the *right* opening is with this hand. IMO that question is just too hard (impossible?) to answer with any degree of confidence.

 

So for me this problem is PURELY a partnership problem. As far as I am concerned the ONLY thing that matters in terms of opening 3H vs 4H is your partner knowing what to expect. It is DEFINITELY correct to open whatever makes you and your partner the most comfortable.

 

Furthermore, if you and your partners have been opening 3H for the last 30 years with these hands then you should keep doing it. You are already comfortable playing a certain way and you should keep playing it (until perhaps someone can *prove* that 4H is *right* from a pure bridge point of view).

 

I am personally more comfortable playing a partnership style where 3H is the expected opening with this hand, but I believe that would be a minority position among the leading USA players these days.

 

Probably there are some impressive bridge countries (Poland? France?) where the leading players would consider 3H to be completely normal and see 4H as a bid "that only a Junior would make".

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[sfbp]

But with all due respect to sfpb, I don't think anyone (including his software) *knows* what the *right* opening is with this hand. IMO that question is just too hard (impossible?) to answer with any degree of confidence.

Absolutely agree, and good to have your take on this issue too, Fred.

 

I'm not claiming (nor has BRBR ever claimed) to know what the right opening is. All it (and I) can do is point out "what works and what doesn't" (from the description on my old, lame, website, which I plan to replace when I get time).

 

The original reason for the posting was that I was trying to figure out whether opener or responder should be making the bid that allowed game. The traveller on that hand was unequivocal: most people (by far) opened 3♠ and most people with my hand raised to 4♠, which I found really surprising. The main conclusion I have at the moment is that the preempter's side playing 3M or 4M (assuming 4M makes) doesn't matter that much, both 3M+1 and 4M= are in the middle of the pack.

 

The question of 4-level openings by a majority of poster was surprising to me. On this hand 4-level makes. But is the gain from getting there by a speculative raise on xx xxx A109x Axxx better than opening 4 in the first place and maybe pushing opps? (sorry, this isn't expressed well) Even with all 3♠ openers there was a pair that got pushed to 5♥X and made it (rotten defence by someone in my seat).

 

I would be surprised if you are in that small a minority after all.

[jdonn]

Typical jdonn answer but I don't have strong feelings, I would do whatever I thought partner would expect or want me to do. It depends a lot on the opponents too. Against lols I would certainly 3♥ since I think they will just let me buy it there a lot when they shouldn't.

[kenrexford]

I would never open 4♥ OR 4♠ with a balanced 14-15 count. :lol: