Any takers?

[the_dude]

[hv=pc=n&s=s73hkj63daj8cqt86&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=p3spp]133|200|IMPs[/hv]

 

Playing 2/1, it is not your partnership's style to open balanced 11 with no 5 card suit. Opponents are an unknown quantity.

[farrnbach]

Urgh

flat, no source of tricks -> pass

 

shows that you should open all opening hands :)

[BunnyGo]

Double. I can't let this go when partner could easily have an opening hand with spades or a flat opening hand.

[jillybean]

Having decided not to open, I'm passing now. 2nd seat vulnerable preempts should be sound and I doubt that we have anywhere to play at the 4level

[P_Marlowe]

Pass, sry voted double.

 

If you want to bid this hand, open 1NT.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[wyman]

X for me also. Partner will know that I have a max pass and short(ish) spades. I'd much prefer to have a stiff spade (and wouldn't even think twice about this if my ♠3 was the ♦3), but we could easily be making 4H here or collecting 200 or 500 on defense if partner's hand is suitable (though I doubt LHO will be too out of line at these colors). And if I'm wrong, I don't think I'll be too wrong, and at least we're NV.

[VM1973]

Too rich for me. It wasn't an opening hand to start with and it hasn't gotten any better.

[JLOGIC]

Absolutely double not even close.

 

Sorry didn't see what forum this was. I think any time you are a passed hand and a non 4 level preempt comes back to you, you should double with a stiff in their suit and a near max opener (9-11, maybe some 8s if it's like 2 aces), and with a doubleton if it is a small doubleton with a super max non opener as long as it has reasonable D. It's hard to quantify this, obviously you should balance more over a 2 level opener than a 3S opener. Having 4 hearts is a big plus to me since it becomes more likely we have a game, and being white is always a big plus.

 

Overall we have a lot of those things:

 

-Complete max non opener

-No spade honor

-Good defense

-Four hearts

-Not vulnerable

 

So I think this is a clear balance even though we don't have a stiff spade. Basically, I think sometimes it's right to balance with a doubleton spade, and if that's true this is pretty much the hand for it. Too many good things can happen, partner can bid a game, partner can pass and we can get a number, etc. The downside is very small when white, they would have to be able to double us and get us a number, or partner would have to bid when they were down and we were down. The former is not that likely, if their hand was that good they'd have raised their partner's 2nd seat r/w preempt to game most of the time. The latter would be a small loss, and is more likely to happen, but the big upside makes up for it imo.

[ggwhiz]

Double here too. My range at imps is to consider -5 or 6 imps petty cash. I'm not going to lose more than that very often and the upside is winning that many or more.

[Phil]

Double. Its important to realize this is better than an 11 count because of the tenaces over the preemptors partner.

[Siegmund]

Shame that "get a new partnership style" wasn't one of the poll choices.... I feel much safer coming in at the 1-level than the 4-level on hands like this.

[ggwhiz]

 

I feel much safer coming in at the 1-level than the 4-level on hands like this.

 

After you open and they bid 3♠, your partner doesn't.

[aguahombre]

Shame that "get a new partnership style" wasn't one of the poll choices.... I feel much safer coming in at the 1-level than the 4-level on hands like this.

There are situations where the idea is valid that a hand which did not want to open at the one-level should not be trying for the 4-level. This is not one of them.

[jdeegan]

:P Pass, more than likely. I hate to disagree with the majority of esteemed responders, but LHO preempted red vs white at IMPs. Sure, I might lose a partscore swing or even a game swing, but I can't lose the match by passing. The mindset of the opps, and the state of the match, and the table action are all of some consequence here. A second seat preempt of 3♠ in this vul is a little unusual, and it should signal either a somewhat unusual hand or a somewhat unusual opponent. At other forms of scoring or different vul, I can see being aggressive with this hand.

[mikestar13]

A clear pass. Just because he might have a balanced 11 doesn't mean he does. an even so, what game looks good opposite ♠Ax♥Axxx♦Txxx♣Kxx? (remember hearts are likely to split badly on this auction) And even if you pass flat 11's normally, would partner pass this 5-control beauty?

[MrAce]

I thought i am an agressive balancer, i guess not.

 

I agree in general what Justin said about preempts lower than 4 level and balancing them by max passed hand. But this is 3♠, not 3m, almost as heavy as a 4m preempt, i am forcing my pd to bid at 4 level. Is it bad thing ? Not neccesarilly, vulnerability is tempting in one way incase we get doubled, on the other hand it reduces the profit of finding a game and reduces the damage of a missed game. I think it is close, i just disagree that it is clear or obvious DBL. I asked myself and tried to be honest about what i would do at the table, i guess i would just pass. After all i still see a 2434 11 hcp and i can't see an obvious reason to commit to 4 level at imps.

[han]

You are not forcing partner to the 4-level, partner will often pass and may still bid 3NT.

[Bbradley62]

If you want to bid this hand, open 1NT.

Unless, of course, you play 15-17 and are posting in the B/I Forum looking for helpful advice...

[Fluffy]

I would probably double without ♣Q also

[VM1973]

I've got to say that I really disagree with balancing with this hand just because you've got ♠xx and you're not totally broke. Ok, maybe with a stiff, I can see the point.

 

I just think that the opener (at these colors) should have something like:

 

♠KQJxxxx with an outside K somewhere.

 

Since you have 2 spades, and RHO didn't raise it's probably spades 7-2-2-2 all around. So basically I see no reason to believe that you have more than 17 trumps on the deal. I'm not comfortable doubling this hand for what will be, for all intents and purposes, a penalty double unless partner has an extreme shape (and if that's the case, why didn't he bid immediately?).

 

If you double it and set it 1 you pick up an extra +100 whereas if they make it, you lose a lot of IMPs. At matchpoints, maybe it could work out since +200 would be a top whereas if it goes 3S**+4 it's just one bad board.

 

This has been another controversial, out of nowhere, trolling response made solely for the purpose of getting a rise out of you.

[ggwhiz]

This has been another controversial, out of nowhere, trolling response made solely for the purpose of getting a rise out of you.

 

:lol: Well said.

[aguahombre]

Well, VM it is hard to get a "top" at IMPs. Against a good team, I expect the same action to come over to my seat at the other table, and that the player in my seat will double. I don't want to swing it for the odds involved, since passing can't really gain much. I have a partner who won't be leaving a double in when he shouldn't.

 

Against a weaker team, I expect that the small loss which might occur because the other side didn't double will come back to us on other boards of the match; but would expect somewhere between +1 IMP and +11 IMPs if I double and my counterpart doesn't.

[MrAce]

You are not forcing partner to the 4-level, partner will often pass and may still bid 3NT.

 

If one did not know pd has these options, we would not be discussing this topic. It would be a pass for all of us. Thats why i said it was close, still this doesnt make it an auto DBL, at least not for me. I just cant see myself strongly disagreeing with my pd if he chooses to pass or DBL, thats all i am saying.

[Phil]

This has been another controversial, out of nowhere, trolling response made solely for the purpose of getting a rise out of you.

 

Acknowledgement is the 1st step toward recovery. Good luck!

[BunnyGo]

Acknowledgement is the 1st step toward recovery. Good luck!

 

Be nice, that was a thoughtful, well written post. While I don't agree with his conclusion, it's an honest post that raises reasonable points.

 

On that note, VM, there's one main reason I don't agree with your conclusion. The double is simply meant to give partner the chance to do something good. I believe that more often than not he'll leave the double in when we'll set it, and he'll bid when we'll make something, and the times when neither is possible is, oh well, then we're hopefully getting a cheap sac against 3S making.

 

In fact, most of the time I disagree with you seems not to be in your ability to analyze the deal from your hand, but that I think you don't appreciate all the ways to utilize your partner's input in the auction. Just my two cents on the pattern of when we disagree.