1S or 4S

[straube]

Partner preempted two hands 4S tonight. He had misgivings about the flat shape and the fact that he held spades and not hearts. He thought 4S described a good 7+ card suit with usually a side ace and that these hands were about right for trick-taking potential. I thought these were clear 1S bids. I'm imagining 4S to be an 8-cd suit or a 7-4 hand with a good 7-cd suit. A side ace would sway me toward opening at the 1-level. What would you open and why? We don't play Namyats :(

 

both are NV 1st seat MPs.

 

AKJT762

64

AQ

T9

 

 

AQJT742

Q7

A5

87

[Hanoi5]

I think 1♠ looks better in both cases. The second one looks better for a 4♠ opening in third seat. Both might be better for a 4♠ opening bid without the side queens.

[aguahombre]

I think 1♠ looks better in both cases. The second one looks better for a 4♠ opening in third seat. Both might be better for a 4♠ opening bid without the side queens.

yep

[mich-b]

I think opening 4♠ is a poor choice on both hands, and I consider doing this "a mistake" rather than a style issue.

Having said that, if you are in need of swings (last segment of a KO match) I believe bidding 4M quickly any time you hold a 7 card suit is a reasonable strategy.

[ArtK78]

In 1st seat, these are both absolutely clear 1♠ openings.

 

Slam is not out of the question.

 

A 4♠ opening should look more like this:

 

KQJTxxxx

x

xxx

x

[wyman]

As others have said, 1S in first seat. You have an opening hand, so open it.

 

In 3rd seat, I have more of an "anything goes" type philosophy and if you switched the majors, I might open 4H. But here you can outcompete them as high as you like since you have spades, and especially at MPs, where -50 v -100 is a big deal, I'm likely to just bid and keep on bidding spades, buying it as cheaply as I can.

 

It can work, but it sucks to open this hand 4S and go down 2 when they don't make 4H.

[neilkaz]

1♠ in first seat, of course. You may wish to ask your partner, just why he is seeing the need to preempt to 4♠ with these hands.

[BunnyGo]

Especially opposite an unpassed partner, I would never preempt a hand with opening strength values, and so I would open both of these 1♠.

 

As wyman said, I'd consider opening them 4♠ in 3rd seat, but would then still open them 1♠ because I have the master suit.

 

The general rule of thumb is, "don't preempt with a hand that has opening strength."

[nigel_k]

We've had a few of these 1 vs 4 problems and I'm feeling more and more confident that I don't need to see the hand before answering that I would open 1.

[nige1]

Partner preempted two hands 4S tonight. He had misgivings about the flat shape and the fact that he held spades and not hearts. He thought 4S described a good 7+ card suit with usually a side ace and that these hands were about right for trick-taking potential. I thought these were clear 1S bids. I'm imagining 4S to be an 8-cd suit or a 7-4 hand with a good 7-cd suit. A side ace would sway me toward opening at the 1-level. What would you open and why? We don't play Namyats :( both are NV 1st seat MPs.

AKJT762 64 AQ T9

AQJT742 Q7 A5 87

IMO 1♠ = 10, 2♣ = 6, 4♠ = 5. If partner holds a flat quackery, 3N may make.

[aguahombre]

We've had a few of these 1 vs 4 problems and I'm feeling more and more confident that I don't need to see the hand before answering that I would open 1.

 

IMO 1♠ = 10, 2♣ = 6, 4♠ = 5.

Do you look at your hand before opening 2♣?

[straube]

IMO 1♠ = 10, 2♣ = 6, 4♠ = 5. If partner holds a flat quackery, 3N may make.

 

2C is insane.

[quiddity]

We've had a few of these 1 vs 4 problems and I'm feeling more and more confident that I don't need to see the hand before answering that I would open 1.

 

I saw an interesting survey of 1 vs 4 hands on Pavlicek's site (linked under "Matches and Exhibits"). These were hands from recent top level play where one team opened 1M and the other team opened 4M. Granted the sample size was small (30 hands each for spades and hearts) but opening 4M was a significant winner.

[wyman]

2C is a psyche.

 

imo

[JLOGIC]

I hate 4S on hands like this.

[billw55]

2C is insane.

I suspect Nige1 was kidding around. Probably he meant 1♠=10, 4♠=0, 2♣=0. Well, at least that's what I mean :)

[neilkaz]

I suspect Nige1 was kidding around. Probably he meant 1♠=10, 4♠=0, 2♣=0. Well, at least that's what I mean :)

I might upgrade 4♠ to a 1 if I can make 2♣ at -5

[straube]

I saw an interesting survey of 1 vs 4 hands on Pavlicek's site (linked under "Matches and Exhibits"). These were hands from recent top level play where one team opened 1M and the other team opened 4M. Granted the sample size was small (30 hands each for spades and hearts) but opening 4M was a significant winner.

 

Pretty interesting site and survey. I still think 1S for both these hands, but it was interesting to see that 1) opening 4S seemed to be attractive (at least imps) and 2) that world class players were willing to open 4S with a wider variety of hand types than I would have expected. A lot to be said for making the opponents guess.

[HighLow21]

Sorry to arrive late to the party, but I'm here to just concur with (most of) what's already been said by the other party guests. 2♣ is a massive overbid and 4♠ is a massive underbid. Two different ways to think about it:

 

-Using basic HCP and 1 additional point for each card longer than 4, Hand #1 is worth 17 points and #2, 16 points. A normal opening 1 bid has 13+ and 2♣ typically has 23+. These hands are comfortably in between these two extremes; game is unlikely opposite a hand that cannot respond, and opposite one that can, it's quite likely. So something like 1♠-(???)-3♠ or 1♠-(???)-4♠ sounds like the right first 3 bids for your side. A preemptive bid, not including length points (i.e., HCP only), is usually 6 to an absolute maximum of 10 or 11 points. HCP here are 14 and 13 respectively. Too rich.

 

-Using the losing trick count, which is completely appropriate without any input whatsoever from partner (your suit is independent; it will play fine opposite a small singleton or even a void), hand 1 has 5 losers and hand 2, 5 and a half. Typical minimum opening bids have 6.5-7 losers; preempts usually have 6-8 losers. These hands are too strong. (They're also too weak for 2♣. This opening bid usually requires at most 4 losers if unbalanced, or 22/23+ HCP if balanced.)

 

Another thing (and maybe some advanced/expert/pros here will disagree, but this is only my opinion), is that other than in 3rd seat, opening 4♠ with fewer than 8 spades is criminal. How can partner judge how high to compete (or bid unopposed) if he can't even determine your spade length with any certainty? Sure, 4♠ with 9 or even 10 weak spades has a lot to argue in favor of it. Taking it the other direction, with fewer than 8? No, not in my book. Those hands need to be opened 1♠, 2♠, or 3♠. Others may disagree but I just don't like it.

 

Maybe as importantly, I can tell you that opening 4♥ or 4♠ is one of the most common and infuriating mistakes that beginners and novices make. They do it with hands that are too strong, suits that are too short, or both. When they do this, they are essentially saying to their partner, "I don't care what you have, partner; I want to play game in spades." What do you do if you're holding, say, a small doubleton in spades, AKxxx in a side suit, and another ace? It's possible that, if partner has a proper 4♠ opener, then 10 tricks is our limit; but if partner has one of the aforementioned hands, it's also possible that 12 tricks is unstoppable.

 

So, whenever I hear partner open 4 of a major opposite my 2-3 quick tricks and duly claim 12 tricks after 3-4 tricks have been played, I stand up and move to a different table. Always.

 

Infuriating!!! :-/

[mgoetze]

IMO 1♠ = 10, 2♣ = 6, 4♠ = 5. If partner holds a flat quackery, 3N may make.

 

 

I suspect Nige1 was kidding around. Probably he meant 1♠=10, 4♠=0, 2♣=0. Well, at least that's what I mean :)

 

Actually, nige1 normally operates on a scale where 10 is the highest score and 7 is the lowest. If we normalize this so that nige1's "7" is the same as a standard "1", then what nige1 actually meant was 1♠ = 10, 2♣ = -2, 4♠ = -5.

 

As it happens, I disagree. I think 2♣ is worse than that.

[nige1]

Actually, nige1 normally operates on a scale where 10 is the highest score and 7 is the lowest. If we normalize this so that nige1's "7" is the same as a standard "1", then what nige1 actually meant was 1♠ = 10, 2♣ = -2, 4♠ = -5. As it happens, I disagree. I think 2♣ is worse than that.

I recommend

• Award marks to the calls that you consider.
• The call you judge to be best gets 10. You may think that is all that matters. Typically, however, the person asking is interested in another call that was chosen at the table, and wants to know how relatively good or bad you judge it to be. Hence...
• Give marks from 5-9 for other calls that may well work. Players' views on the desirability of calls are polarised. In a magazine bidding competition, a world-champion may claim there is only one sensible call. All other calls deserve zero. Although his long-term partner usually agrees in principle he has sometimes chosen a different call :).
• Calls that, on reflection, you deem unlikely to work get 0-5. This can be a matter of fashion. Decades ago, Swinnerton-Dyer sometimes earned poor marks in bidding competitions. His answers would score much higher today :)
• It may be a good idea to state what is your bidding-system. Not everybody plays Benjaminised Acol. Some contributors are still slumming it with 2/1 :)

[MrAce]

Not everybody plays Benjaminised Acol. Some contributors are still slumming it with 2/1 :)

 

:D