Ballancing enemy's preempt

[helene_t]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sjxxhjt8xxxdatxcx]133|100|Scoring: MP

pass (3♣) pass (pass)

?[/hv]

I thought: I am short in clubs so it's my obligation to do something. My hand is not that terrible, given my initial pass. P may have a balanced 15 HCP, for example. Is it OK to bid 3♥ with this hand?

 

Most of you would probably havce opened this hand 2♥ but this p expects a little more from a first-seat preempt.

[whereagles]

Need details on opps and state-of-match :)

[Chamaco]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sjxxhjt8xxxdatxcx]133|100|Scoring: MP

pass (3♣) pass (pass)

?[/hv]

I thought: I am short in clubs so it's my obligation to do something. My hand is not that terrible, given my initial pass. P may have a balanced 15 HCP, for example. Is it OK to bid 3♥ with this hand?

 

Most of you would probably havce opened this hand 2♥ but this p expects a little more from a first-seat preempt.

To reopen vs an enemy preempt you need opening hand strength, either in hcp, or in distribution.

 

With shortness in enemy suit you can stretch a bit, but even if you want to balance only on distributional values, and not on hcp, you will need a 7-loser's hand.

Here you have a 9-loser hand, so the hand does not qualify (it doesn't even accounting for the much aggressive Zar points! :) ).

You should pass. Never bid over a preempt with a preemptive hand urself.

 

Cautiosness like this will bring you sometimes a few matchpoint bad scores, but that's life. Sometimes preempt do work ! :-)

 

In the long run, however, it will save you from other poor scores, as well as avoid major disasters and argues with partner.

[helene_t]

Need details on opps and state-of-match :)

Opps were smoking and one of them brought her little puppy to the bridge club.

 

State of the match I dono. Had been drinking too much, maybe.

[Trpltrbl]

Something funky on this hand.

I have 9 loser hand and pd passed 3♣. My pd's tend to bid with something looking like a bid.

This is just not feeling right so I pass.

 

Mike :P

[EarlPurple]

I would have opened 2♥. It's tempting to bid just because it's matchpoints and nobody's vulnerable.

 

If partner has a trap-pass then he may have some values, but then we may be beating 3♣ with 3♥ going down. In that case I'd better double but I'm not going to. Not today.

[luke warm]

probably not popular, but i'd double.. i'll know soon enough whether or not partner wants them in 3C

[whereagles]

Hum.. if opps are too absent-minded to double me, I might scrap a 3 ♥ bid :P

[the hog]

PASS! Hearts are poor, my hand is poor. 3H is fare too dangerous and X is insane.

[luke warm]

why is it insane? say you x and pard bids 3D... or 3H, or 3S

[Chamaco]

why is it insane? say you x and pard bids 3D... or 3H, or 3S

Read this article of Mike Lawrence on bidding over preempts.

It is not specific to *balancing*, but you get the point, just assume that in balancing seat you can nudge the required strength by 2-3 hcp (according to optimism and luck :D )

 

http://www.bridge-forum.com/Archives/Lawrence_lecture.html

[the hog]

Luke what if partner takes you seriously and passes the x or bids 3N - he does have C you know. Your meagre additions to your side's defensive quota are well below what should be expected. Sorry but you are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think partner can find a 3H bid here. You might get lucky and he might find a S bid, but even then you do not have much of a hand.

[Chamaco]

why is it insane? say you x and pard bids 3D... or 3H, or 3S

if you double with your hand and pard has this very good hand:

 

♠AQTx

♥xx

♦KQJx

♣xxx

 

He will jump to 4 spades, when a forcing defence in hearts may be a disaster if you get doubled (remember, , after preempts you must assume bad trump splits, here 4-2 in spades- if you are lucky - most likely 5-1).

 

 

 

Then you may wish you had balanced 3 hearts, but your pard, with an opening hand will raise ur 3 hearts to 4 hearts most of the time.

E.g.Say you balanced with 3 hearts. With the following hand pard can do nothing but raise to game.

 

♠AQTx

♥Qxx

♦xxxx

♣AJ

 

 

Even this "dream hand" loses at least 2 trumps and 2 diamonds, probably not a spade.

 

There are many other even worse scenarios (you double, opps redouble, you have to bid and get crushed because responder of the preemptor had a nice -for them- 15 hcp with a void in pard suit) but I think u get the picture.

 

The bottomline is that if pard holds any hand that woould allow you to realize a partscore, he will raise you to game and you will go down.

If he passes your bid, you do not have enough for yuor partscore.

In both case, better pray not to be doubled and that your pard has not violent tendencies.... :D

[luke warm]

ok, ok, i said it wouldn't be popular... and maybe it's even wrong... hell, maybe it's insane ... oh, on the lawrence link chamaco gave, i recognize the example 2S hand lawrence posted... bergen opened that 2S and the ops were cold for (i think it was) 6S

 

chamaco wrote:

if you double with your hand and pard has this very good hand:

 

♠AQTx

♥xx

♦KQJx

♣xxx

He will jump to 4 spades, when a forcing defence in hearts may be a disaster if you get doubled (remember, , after preempts you must assume bad trump splits, here 4-2 in spades- if you are lucky - most likely 5-1).

 

but my partner couldn't have that hand... he's already passed... the same with the other he posted:

 

♠AQTx

♥Qxx

♦xxxx

♣AJ

 

and as for what ron said, i guess it's possible partner has nothing to say but 3N or 4S or 5D or pass... why he can't bid 3D or 3H or 3S, i don't know... in any case, maybe x is wrong :D

[Chamaco]

but my partner couldn't have that hand... he's already passed...

Yes, your pard with a 12-14 hcp hand, balanced, SHOULD pass in direct seat over a 3-level preempt.

Read better Lawrence's article about the "Rule of seven": in direct seat you bid assuming you find your pard with 7 "normal" hcp.

That means, usually that if you have a balanced hand you need a hand close to a reverse (not a minimum 12-14 opener hand, with a minimum opener you pass and wait for pard to balance), if have an unbalanced hand you need a 5.5 losers hand(you may stretch to 6 losers if you really like your hand) , more or less.

 

You can adjust the requirements but hat is important is that OVER A 3 LEVEL PREEMPT, IN DIRECT SEAT, A 13 COUNT PASS 99% OF THE TIMES.

 

the corollary to this is that if you hold a minimum opener and you pass, if your pard reopens you will bid game (in NT or in a suit).

 

Of course if you have the habit to play with bad partners that feel the urge to bid with 13 hcp over a preempt in direct seat only because they have a minimum opener, well... that does not apply :D

 

----------------

 

One more thing: your reopening has no logic even if you believe your pard to have less than an opening hand, otherwise with a minimum opener he would have bid, which I believe is a terrible agreement.

 

But let's assume you have this poor agreement.

Then your pard has at most about 10 hcp. You have 6 hcp.

 

That means that the opponents have at least 24 hcp, in the best scenario.

Why do you think your RHO passed his pard preempt if the has the strongest hand at the table ?

If he is a good player, he passed with a strong hand because he has nowhere to go: he does not see a major suit game, 5 of a minor gets too high, and 3NT in misfit in clubs rates to score no clubs if the opponents duck the first trick.

These misfit auction are terrible: who plays the hand is in trouble.

If you stick your nose in, I will hear the sound of your RHO shouting "DOUBLE!!" from my hometown in Italy. :D

 

If your opps are bad players, then RHO has passed because he does not have the skill and judgment to reach game even if it is there.

Balancing from you will reopen the bidding and give them a chance to bid game (how many times does that happen with palookas?) or to be doubled : they 'd score maybe less than game but still better than just 3C making.

[luke warm]

oops, sorry looked at the bidding wrong

[Cave_Draco]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sjxxhjt8xxxdatxcx]133|100|Scoring: MP

pass (3♣) pass (pass)

?[/hv]

I thought: I am short in clubs so it's my obligation to do something. My hand is not that terrible, given my initial pass. P may have a balanced 15 HCP, for example. Is it OK to bid 3♥ with this hand?

 

Most of you would probably havce opened this hand 2♥ but this p expects a little more from a first-seat preempt.

I'm not keen on opening 2♥ on this but Non-V v V, I might give it a go, :D

 

One way of looking at this hand is "What will P infer from what I did NOT bid?"

 

1) You did not bid at the 1-level, therefore you do not have an opening hand.

2) You did not bid 2♥, therefore you do not have a Weak Two.

 

If you now bid 3♥, you are promising a 6-card ♥ suit but, in view of 2) above, not a Weak Two! The most likely reason is that you have a 4-card ♠ suit!

P will bid 3♠ if s/he is 4-1 in the majors!

 

If you double 3♣, you are doubling opponents into game! Where do you expect partner to run to?

Even if partner has a ♣ stack, you have ONE defensive trick! 3♣X looks to make; never gift your opponents a good score.

 

 

If it turns out that a number of ♥s is the best contract... Apologise to partner and add "I didn't think that I was good enough for a Weak Two in ♥s, :D "

[whereagles]

Nobody cares anymore about side 4-card majors when preempting. I don't think pard is entitled to draw that inference unless your agreements specifically forbid the side spades.

 

Still, remember this is matchpoints. At imps it's a clear pass (at least to me).

[Cave_Draco]

Nobody cares anymore about side 4-card majors when preempting. I don't think pard is entitled to draw that inference unless your agreements specifically forbid the side spades.

 

Still, remember this is matchpoints. At imps it's a clear pass (at least to me).

For an Advanced/Expert player... fair comment, :lol:

 

For a Beginner/Intermediate? I would maintain that Weak Twos should be disciplined!

 

The exact limits of a Weak Two are open to partnership agreement, but if I am playing with a Beginner/Intermediate player; my partner can trust that I have:

 

6-10hcp, mostly in the named suit.

6 cards in the named suit.

Less than 4 cards in the other major.

 

Yes, I will relax the discipline with a more advanced player, but I think Beginners/Intermediates appreciate a partner that they can trust.

[Chamaco]

Still, remember this is matchpoints. At imps it's a clear pass (at least to me).

Matchpoints or IMPs, the important thing is to be consistent with agreements with pard.

Deviations are allowed within a reasonable range.

 

Balancing 3H should show an opening hand, either in strength or distribution.

But:

- if pard has a decent hand he will raise to 4H for sure and we'll go down even in hands where 3C goes down,

- if he has a bad hand we'll be doubled in 3H and get a bottom even at MP.

 

The sad truth is that here, even when 3H can be the par of the hand, there is no longer any way to reach it, as pard will go overboard.

 

Passing will save you from going overboard and from all the other hands where the hand simply belongs to the opps.

Needless to say, sometimes you'll get a zero, that's why people preempt.

One needs to learn to accept the occasional bad results from opps preeempt, and be disciplined to avoid the "bidding fever" that makes people bid with insufficient value just because opponents preempted.

 

Nevertheless, in bridge one should play the odds, and here the odds are that:

- bidding is wrong much more frequently than passing

- the cost of bidding when it is wrong is much higher than the cost of passing when it's wrong.

 

The lesson from these difficulties is : PREEMPT MORE OFTEN YOURSELF, and be less restrictive on the criteria for preempting; you 'll put opps in trouble much more often (and sometimes your pard, but with good agreenments preempting aggressively pays off more than the losses).

[EarlPurple]

Nobody cares anymore about side 4-card majors when preempting. I don't think pard is entitled to draw that inference unless your agreements specifically forbid the side spades.

 

Still, remember this is matchpoints. At imps it's a clear pass (at least to me).

For an Advanced/Expert player... fair comment, :)

 

For a Beginner/Intermediate? I would maintain that Weak Twos should be disciplined!

 

The exact limits of a Weak Two are open to partnership agreement, but if I am playing with a Beginner/Intermediate player; my partner can trust that I have:

 

6-10hcp, mostly in the named suit.

6 cards in the named suit.

Less than 4 cards in the other major.

 

Yes, I will relax the discipline with a more advanced player, but I think Beginners/Intermediates appreciate a partner that they can trust.

I think I have to disagree: Beginners and Intermediates should be taught to pre-empt more aggressively.

 

They should learn the principle of "in quick out quick". If you'd opened 2♥ on this hand you wouldn't have a problem now because you've "shown your hand".

 

JT8xxx is actually quite offensive. I'll take a likely 3 tricks with it while I'll take nothing with it defending. That is different from AQxxxx where I will usually take 1 and sometimes 2 tricks in defence with it if partner has no fit.

[nikos59]

I assume i just stepped in, because I would have opened the

hand with a 2H.

 

Well, I would bid 3H.

 

nikos

[Chamaco]

I assume i just stepped in, because I would have opened the

hand with a 2H.

 

Well, I would bid 3H.

 

nikos

If you bid 3H here, which promises either an opening hand in hcp or a 7 loser hand in distribution, 2 things may happen:

 

1- pard has a minimum opening hand and bids 4H, which is not a candidate to make while 3C was probably gooing down

 

2- pard has less than this, the hand belongs to the opponent (RHO passed with 14/15 hcp in misfit), they double you and you get a zero anyways.

 

 

As I said beffore, there is no chance after this sequence to stop in 3H if it is the right contract, because, when your pard has the hand that alklowa 3H to make, he raises to 4, since he assumes you have a better hand for your balancing.

 

Another bad thing, more subtle, may happen if you start balancing these kind of hands (even if you get the occasioinal lucky strike):

pard will never know what type of hand you have when you balance.

If you keep a firm agreement on strength of balancing, you make life easier to your pard to accept game invitations (and sometimes even slams!) when you reopen after preempts; if your range can vary so much, pard will never know what to do.

 

Bidding 3H shows lack of discipline and of sense of partnership.

I agree with all the posters who point out that opening 2H would be recommended and would have avoided this problem.

[nikos59]

To Chamaco: Which "discipline"? This is a clearly aberrant situation that

I was found at, I mean having passed with a clear

opening bid. To be consistent, I have to show my suit.

 

For instance, if you bid 1NT with 20 points aren't you

later going to show the extra ace if you can? It is the

same here: Someone passed with a sixth heart,

he then gave me his cards, I cannot not show the

sixth heart. After the board, if there's a disaster,

I explain to pard.

[Chamaco]

To Chamaco: Which "discipline"? This is a clearly aberrant situation that

I was found at, I mean having passed with a clear

opening bid. To be consistent, I have to show my suit.

You do not have an opening hand.

This is a "weak 2", a semipreemptive bid which does not promise full openign values.

 

even when one decides to evaluate an opening hand just in terms of distribution and not hcp (which can also be relatively dangerous because your pard will overrate your defensive strength), the criterion universally accepted is that a 7-loser hand has the playing strength (in offense) of a regular opening hand.

 

This is a 9-loser hand, not even close to an opening hand: it is a weak 2 at most, and a bad one.

Having not opened weak 2, we have lost the chance to show our feature (heart length and little else).

 

If you like to consider these 9-losers hands as opening hands, I won't argue with you (but I would if I were you pard :) ), but in a Beginner-intermediate section, I think people learning bridge should know that this one is not even close to an opening hand and not even close to have the strength (no matter if hcp or distrubution) to balance at the 3 level.