Preempt?

[gnasher]

Using 3♥ as a preempt has a cost: we're not using it for constructive purposes.  If we don't use it enough to get value for money, we should switch to intermediate jump overcalls.

This logic does not follow, even if 1 is factual:

 

1) If we don't bid 3H on this hand, our frequency is too low and intermediate jump overcalls are better.

 

2) Therefore we should bid 3H with this hand.

That would, indeed, be questionable logic. What I meant was:

 

(a) I think this is a 3♥ bid.

 

and, independently

 

(b) If you play 3♥ as weak, but need more playing strength that this, there are better uses for a 3♥ bid.

 

Edit: Having reread my original post, I agree that it might have seemed that I had my carts and horses mixed up.

Edited June 21, 2008 by gnasher

[sathyab]

Dealer: East Vul: N/S Scoring: IMP

♠ 52 ♥ AK ♦ AT974 ♣ KT52 ♠ T976 ♥ 986 ♦ Q6 ♣ Q986 ♠ AQJ83 ♥ 4 ♦ KJ852 ♣ A7 ♠ K4 ♥ QJT7532 ♦ 3 ♣ J43

I passed, my LHO chose to pass (!!!), and we got to 4♥ after West chose not to sacrifice.

 

The other table took the good save in 4♠, so we won some IMPs.

Passing seems conservative. Even over 2s, your partner has a difficult bid. But if opponents were playing Bergen and bid 3s, he'd have an impossible bid. When opponents play Bergen you have to constantly practice passing in tempo with hands that you would otherwise have acted. It's especially painful if you know that your teammates don't play Bergen, for then you know that the auction there will be different from what's going to transpire at your table.

 

When it goes 3s, a strained pass from your pd and then 4s on your right, you're completely and totally out of the auction.