Open

[kfay]

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sxhkqj9xxdq9xxxcx]133|100|Scoring: IMP

P-(P)-?[/hv]

 

Junior Match

[Guest Jlall]

3H or 2H depending on opps, usually 3H.

[Echognome]

3 thingies. Turn up the pressure.

[helene_t]

Was about to vote for 4 but then I saw the vulnerability. 3 should be ok though.

[SoTired]

I voted 3H, but 2H is still a preempt that prevents LHO from opening at the 1-level, but allows you a better chance to bid diams later. Depending on the auction, either may work better.

 

So to me, neither 2H or 3H is "wrong".

 

1H sucks as it gives opps too much room. Plus, if we bid diam later, partner may play us for a strong 2-suiter :)

[neilkaz]

3♥ inspite of vul as am 6-5 ..ie good offensive potential and likely poor defensive potential.

[pigpenz]

I like the playing strength of the 3♥ call more chances for partner to raise to game. On a good day passing and bidding some two suit take later my be a good alternative.

[pclayton]

3 at r-w is just too much for me.

At equal its fine. I'll content myself with 2.

[jdonn]

5♥

[kenrexford]

Hey! I'm in second place!

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

I would go with 3H.

 

Given that we are in 3rd seat Pass is out.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[andy_h]

3H or 2H depending on situation/opps.

[655321]

3♥

[skjaeran]

3♥.

[MickyB]

3H, closely followed by Ken Rexford. Nothing else is worthy of consideration.

[han]

3H, Ken Rexford is my distant second choice.

[cherdano]

I voted Ken Rexford, but I admit at the table I might rather bid 3♥.

[mr1303]

I was going to vote Ken Rexford as well, until I saw the vul. 4H is too much at this vul so will be happy with 3H. Any other vul 4H looks good to me.

[Free]

Lets psych!

[awm]

3NT, showing 6+♥ and a 5+ minor with a weak hand. Yes I actually play this convention.

 

AKA Ken Rexford in the poll?

 

Otherwise, I think both 3♥ and then pass throughout or 2♥ planning to bid 3♦ later if possible are reasonable actions.

[jdonn]

3NT, showing 6+♥ and a 5+ minor with a weak hand. Yes I actually play this convention.

What a fix it would be to come up against you on this hand lol. Unless of course you were just going for a number on the 4 level B)

[Guest Jlall]

3NT, showing 6+♥ and a 5+ minor with a weak hand. Yes I actually play this convention.

What a fix it would be to come up against you on this hand lol. Unless of course you were just going for a number on the 4 level :)

tbh I would be happy to be playing against someone who opens this hand with a bid that forces them to the 4 level red/white. Even if I played Adam's convention I think it is kamikaze to use it at these colors (but would be happy to be playing it at other colors!).

[Gerben42]

If the ♦ were ♣ this is an obvious 1NT, but as it is I choose 3♥.

[awm]

I feel that generally when given the choice between:

 

(1) Showing a two-suiter as a one-suiter at a particular level.

(2) Showing both suits a level higher

 

That the second option is likely to be more effective. Note the strong support for 3♥ on this particular hand.

 

Admittedly there are some hands where it's a true misfit and opening at the four-level (effectively) will cause me to go for a number... but there is another set of hands (perhaps of comparable size) where the 3♥ bidders go for a number but opening 3NT gets me to the substantially safer 4♦. And there is also a set of hands where preempting 3NT instead of 3♥ gives the opponents more trouble (i.e. they have to bid 4♠ instead of 3♠).

[Lobowolf]

2♥ on the vulnerability