Ballancing enemy's preempt

[Chamaco]

Well... knowing I'd score 25% on a board is good enough encouragement for me to "try" something ;)

 

Of course, if I knew this particular pard was bound to take 3H too seriously, I'd certainly pass. Bidding 3H does require an experienced partner in front, who knows better than burying me for over-competing :P

Expecting a hand like the one Earl posted:

♠A9

♥J976532

♦KJx

♣x

 

Is it taking too seriously?

This hand is the right minimum for distributional balancing by book standards.

Regardless of the experience of your pard :)

 

the hand posted by helene_t is 2 tricks weaker than this one :)

[luis]

Pass, I think that bidding may win in 10% of the cases, in the other 90% either pd or RHO will bid something that we may not like at all.

Maybe RHO is "fishing" and that combined with a "heavy" 3♣ opening bid might indicate that they have game and didn't bid it. Looking at my hand I think they can make 3N or my pd is sleeping.

[whereagles]

Expecting a hand like the one Earl posted:

♠A9

♥J976532

♦KJx

♣x

 

Is it taking too seriously? This hand is the right minimum for distributional balancing by book standards. Regardless of the experience of your pard :P

Probably it is, yes. With that hand I might just manage to scrap up a 1H opener ;) The trouble with "book standards" is they deal mostly with clear-cut situations, and disregarding scoring methods and table presence.

 

Of course, I expect 3H to carry us overboard in many cases... BUT... (and this is the whole point)... since I'm booked for a near-zero if I sell out to 3C, I might as well "try" something.

 

Technically, 3H is probably a wrong bid. It definitely is at imps, but at matchpoints things are different, and it might be just what you need to go from bottom to top (as was the case).

[Chamaco]

Expecting a hand like the one Earl posted:

♠A9

♥J976532

♦KJx

♣x

 

Is it taking too seriously? This hand is the right minimum for distributional balancing by book standards. Regardless of the experience of your pard :)

Probably it is, yes. With that hand I might just manage to scrap up a 1H opener ;) The trouble with "book standards" is they deal mostly with clear-cut situations, and disregarding scoring methods and table presence.

 

Of course, I expect 3H to carry us overboard in many cases... BUT... (and this is the whole point)... since I'm booked for a near-zero if I sell out to 3C, I might as well "try" something.

 

Technically, 3H is probably a wrong bid. It definitely is at imps, but at matchpoints things are different, and it might be just what you need to go from bottom to top (as was the case).

In book standards they refer to both IMPS and MP scoring.

A 9-loser hand is below std even for MP.

An 8 loser hand may be a MP stretch (a 1 trick stretch).

A 2 trick stretch is definitely a poor bid even at MP and even when it works, if the percentage of success is below 30%. :P

[whereagles]

Well, I agree with all you say... BUT my instinct told me "bid 3H", and 'he' was right B)

[Chamaco]

Well, I agree with all you say... BUT my instinct told me "bid 3H", and 'he' was right B)

LOLL alright, when such kind of arguments start to come up, it reminds me of the last debate I had with my ex-girlfriend :P

And I had promised not to fall for this debates anymore B)

[Cave_Draco]

Interesting...

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.

And

The good news is that p had a good 6-card spades

So, I have the freedom to bid 3♥ and partner will know that I probably have ♠ support, :P

The old-fashioned rule about not bidding a Weak Two with 4-cards in the other major... I think I will stick with that rule... mostly, B)

 

 

I agree with Chamaco on many of his posts, in my experience there are few things that confuse a beginner more than an undisciplined partner.

However,

But that is the plain truth: they bid like a beginner.

Give me a beginner, everytime!

 

 

Finally, with respect to MP...

Well... knowing I'd score 25% on a board is good enough encouragement for me to "try" something

To score 50% over two hands? 25% + 75% OR 0% + 100%?

Sometimes it is best just to take your lumps!

 

Dragon Rule of MP scoring: It takes two tops to overcome a bottom.

[jtfanclub]

I'm an intermediate, so don't take what I say seriously.

 

I had the same thing come up, except it was P (2D) P (P). Switch the diamonds and clubs on the original hand, and it's close enough not to matter.

 

My rationalization was "Unless somebody dropped an ace on the floor, partner has to have a trap pass". So I bid 2H, and my partner bid 3NT. My heart sank into the floor, but sure enough, partner had 18hcp with 5 diamonds AQT or somesuch, and we made it.

 

I think the real question is, what did your partner's pass show? Your partner almost certainly has a balanced opening count...would he be more likely to double with 13 hcp or 16? In my case, I knew my partner would double with a 12-15 count, so he had to have either 16+ or 11-, and with my hand it couldn't be the 11-. With a different partner I play with, I would have passed.

 

In short, with a regular partnership, I don't think there's a right or wrong answer. It just depends upon how likely your partner is to trap pass. With a new partner, I pass without hesitation- 3H may be the right bid but if it goes wrong partner will never trust me again.

 

P.S. I have GOT to see this hand with 6 spades that passed the 3C bid. I mean, if he bid 3NT he's got to have 16 hcp or so, so why in the world did he pass?

[Chamaco]

I had the same thing come up, except it was P (2D) P (P).  Switch the diamonds and clubs on the original hand, and it's close enough not to matter.

 

At the 2 level, it's totally another matter, especially at MP it is almost mandatory to compete strongly for te partscore to avoid lettimng them play at the 2 level.

Besides, if you compete at the 2 level, you are *much much much* less likely to be doubled ;)

The same does not hold at the 3 level.

The obvious risk here is that RHO has 14/15 hcp stacked in misfit and has nowhere to go.

 

I think the real question is, what did your partner's pass show?

 

This is a good question.

But the main question is what will be par'd choice if you reopen.

E.g. if he has a minimum opener (say 13-14 hcp) and 3-4 card support, should he bid game over your reopening at the 3 level ?

In standard bridge, yes, even if you are a passed hand, even at matchpoints.

 

The corollary of this is that if you reopen with 9-loser, your pard will have to guess every time if passing misses a good game or if bidding on misses a good partscore.

If instead you are disciplined, you accept the occasional bad results, you avoid the much more common disasters, and above all you jeep the trust of your partner, much more important than avoiding one 25% board.

 

P.S.  I have GOT to see this hand with 6 spades that passed the 3C bid.  I mean, if he bid 3NT he's got to have 16 hcp or so, so why in the world did he pass?

 

YESS!!! me too ! :D

[EarlPurple]

My rationalization was "Unless somebody dropped an ace on the floor, partner has to have a trap pass". So I bid 2H, and my partner bid 3NT. My heart sank into the floor, but sure enough, partner had 18hcp with 5 diamonds AQT or somesuch, and we made it.

Trap-passing over a pre-empt on a hand like that is overrated. How often will partner reopen with a double?

 

The best chance for a good penalty comes when you have trump length but little outside. Now you can hope that partner will reopen with a double and you will pass. Not only that but partner's values will lie over pre-empter's partner (the one more likely to hold the side suits), and your partner will be on lead more often to lead through declarer's hand.

 

With 18 points your best bet is probably to bid 2NT and hope partner can raise you. If the opps are vulnerable you might settle for an undoubled penalty.