Is there any merit to this call?

[ArtK78]

I am not going to ask you what you would open with this hand. I suspect that 99% of you would open 1♥. But the question is: Is there any merit to this call?

 

First seat, all vul. Matchpoints. You hold:

 

x

AKQTxxx

QT9

Ax

 

My partner, a good player, opened 4♥. On account of his opening, we missed an easy slam, as I held:

 

AKxxx

xxxx

Ax

xx

 

When I asked him about his opening bid, he said he was trying to shut the opps out of a spade contract.

 

So I ask you, is there any merit to the opening 4♥ call?

[TWO4BRIDGE]

4H should be a preempt call -- long suit with NO outside controls ( A or K ).

 

The given hand is just shy of a 2C opener .

[Quantumcat]

I think 4♥ will work (stopping the opponents finding a spade fit and bidding 4♠) more often than it will fail (missing a slam). If you are concerned, you can always play Namyats (bid 4♣ with a heart pre-empt that only needs a couple of particular cards for slam, and bid 4♥ with less). You still get to pre-empt a bit, and partner isn't left completely out of the loop.

 

I don't think the given hand is anywhere near a 2♣ opener by the way.

[han]

I think there is a lot of merit to opening 4H in first seat. I don't think it is a good bid though, and I would not do it.

[bluecalm]

I think there is a lot of merit to this style. Sometimes you shut them down, sometimes you nail them for a number.

Is it better than standard 1H opening ? I have no idea.

[billw55]

There very well could be merit to this, as an agreement. As masterminding in the absence of such agreement, no.

[gnasher]

If I opened 4♥, the objective would be to encourage the opponents to misjudge by taking away their bidding space, rather than specifically to keep them out of 4♠. If they get to 4♠, it doesn't mean they have done the right thing - they may go for 800, or maybe neither game makes.

 

The opening obviously has some merit, because it may succeed in this objective. But I think it's also a bad bid, because it has too much slam potential, and more defence than partner will expect.

[paulg]

My first thought is that it is completely insane. Reading the comments I see others are less convinced or more diplomatic.

[TimG]

I think it has some merit, though not quite for the reason your partner put forth. When I open 4♥, I am hoping the space I have taken away was critical to the opponents to judge where they should play (or whether it is their hand in the first place) -- I'm not hoping to shut them out, I'm hoping to cause the opponents to misjudge. The opponents are more likely to misjudge if my preempts are wide range (or contain distributional or defensive surprises).

 

Like others, I suspect that this particular preempt is more likely to cause my side to misjudge (maybe we already have). But, that doesn't mean it has no merit.

[Phil]

What do you think Art?

[hrothgar]

One point that folks haven't touched on:

 

I suspect that there is more merit to the 4♥ bid at the start of a long team match than during a two <--> three board team event.

[ArtK78]

In my opinion, I worry less about the opponents' ability to judge a hand correctly and more about my side judging the hand correctly. Of course, the relative weight of these considerations changes during the auction. If I held my partner's hand in third seat after two passes I might very well open 4♥, since the chance that we are going to miss a good slam has decreased with partner's pass in first seat.

 

I would open this hand with 1♥. If that allows the opps to properly judge the hand, so be it.

[paulg]

If the opponents bid 4♠, was your partner planning to double?

[bluecalm]

I see others are less convinced or more diplomatic.

 

I am honestly not convinced. Here is an interesting link:

http://www.rpbridge.net/9x16.htm

 

Small sample to be sure but something to think about.

 

If the opponents bid 4♠, was your partner planning to double?

 

I surely hope he did, that's the whole idea of this style imo.

[billw55]

If the opponents bid 4♠, was your partner planning to double?

 

I surely hope he did, that's the whole idea of this style imo.

To me it doesn't look like opener has a double of 4♠ on his own. Which is part of the point of opening 1♥: partner will know you have some defense and can whack 4♠ himself; or he will offer a modest bid along the way (neg x, 1NT, etc) and then opener can consider doubling. But even when 4♥ shows this hand or could show it, opener knows nothing about partner's hand.

[ArtK78]

In my experience, when a good player makes a big preempt intending to make, if the opponents bid over it opener will double to indicate that the preempt was bid on power and not solely on distribution, and then partner makes the decision whether to bid on or defend. The double has nothing to do with trump, and not strictly speaking with defensive tricks - it merely states that the opening bid was made expecting to make and not just as an obstruction bid.

 

So, on this hand, if the opps had bid 4♠ (or anything else for that matter) and it came back to opener, he would double.

[paulg]

Here is an interesting link:

http://www.rpbridge.net/9x16.htm

 

Small sample to be sure but something to think about.

There is only one four hearts opener that I would call insane in this sample (H Weinstein) and even this one looks like it is the BBO operator just putting in the final contract rather than the auction.

 

But I agree it is always interesting to see the different strategies of world-class players.

[JLOGIC]

This is awful

[ArtK78]

This is awful

Could you be a little more specific? For example, what are you referring to by "This?"

[JLOGIC]

Opening 4H?

[gnasher]

My first thought is that it is completely insane. Reading the comments I see others are less convinced or more diplomatic.

Or we just answered the question that was asked. If there is any argument in favour of opening 4♥, that means it has some merit.

[ArtK78]

Opening 4H?

OK. I don't disagree with you. Others have at least some sympathy for the 4♥ opening, even to the point of providing a detailed history of the success or failure of opening 1♥ vs. opening 4♥ in high-level competition (no pun intended). So, while it would never have occurred to me to open 4♥ on this hand, the issue does not appear to be free from doubt.

[Phil]

Could you be a little more specific? For example, what are you referring to by "This?"

 

Could you be a little more trollish?

[awm]

Pavliceks examples are interesting. At some point I used bridge browser to analyze hands opening 4M with 7+M and 13-15 hcp and got similar results (4M a big winner) with a much weaker field but a much larger sample size. Same if restricted to tables of four "good players" by Lehman rating.

 

Certainly this can happen (missed slam). But opponents can also go for a number, or misdefend on the low info auction, or fail to find a sacrifice (or even making game).

 

I think the 4h bid here is fine. :P

[ArtK78]

Could you be a little more trollish?

Phil, what is your problem? Your comment is completely out of line. If you have a problem with my comment, you can address me directly. But since you did this publicly, I am responding publicly.