Do you preempt?

[whereagles]

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=saxxhkxdxxxxcqxxx&w=sxxhaqjtxxdtxxxcx&e=sqxhxxdqjcakjxxxx&s=skjtxxxhxxxdakxcx]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

1S 2H 2S 3C

3S (all pass)

 

1S 3H 3S 4C

4S (all pass)

[PriorKnowledge]

Except that partner may bid 4C or 4H over 3S and then dbl 4S because you made a 2/1 overcall and partner has 13.

 

Trying to divine all 4 hands and results seems over-thinking to me. Just bid what you have.

[Free]

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=saxxhkxdxxxxcqxxx&w=sxxhaqjtxxdtxxxcx&e=sqxhxxdqjcakjxxxx&s=skjtxxxhxxxdakxcx]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

1S 2H 2S 3C

3S (all pass)

 

1S 3H 3S 4C

4S (all pass)

Hmmm, over 2♥ overcall, I like the north hand a lot more than just a 2♠ bid... I'll Dbl and support ♠ later, South should be smart enough to bid distributional games. So weither you bid 2♥ or 3♥, I'll end up in 4♠. Pass might be the best to keep us out of 4♠...

[whereagles]

Trying to divine all 4 hands and results seems over-thinking to me. Just bid what you have.

You wanted an example of how 3H could push opps into game while 2H would not. This is it. Granted, it's perhaps not that good an example, but unfortunately I don't have time to think of something better.

 

Bidding what one has is all fine 'n stuff, but does NOT exempt one from thinking.

 

I would however agree that it is perhaps too much masterminding trying to argue that 2H should work better than 3H. Still, if you want to bid 3H, you should be aware of the risks. That's just what I wanted to say :D

[the hog]

"Still, if you want to bid 3H, you should be aware of the risks. That's just what I wanted to say "

 

Whereagles are these risks similar to partner doubling a contract because he trusted your bidding and thought you had your bid when in reality you didn't, or are they different risks which you are talking about?

[whereagles]

I mean the risk of pushing opponents into a making game on marginal values.

[EricK]

I mean the risk of pushing opponents into a making game on marginal values.

What is the purpose of pointing out, in isolation, the risks of this pre-empt?

 

Nearly all bids have risks, and nearly all players know that. Pre-empts are especially risky.

 

The risk of their bidding a game which they would otherwise miss and that game making don't seem particularly high on this hand. I think it is about as likely as their bidding a game which they would otherwise miss and it failing.

 

But if their fit is in another suit pre-empting makes a big difference to their abilities to diagnose the fit and find the right level.

 

Eric

[EarlPurple]

clear 3♥ but I voted for clear 2♥ by mistake...

[EarlPurple]

- At MP, when neither side is vulnerable this is actually the optimal time to pre-empt. Even better than opps vulnerable, because if opps are vulnerable, defending could give us +200 if things fall well for us.

 

- There is a big advantage in having hearts when they have spades in this situation. Although they can outbid us at whatever level we choose to play, partner can pick his best response when raising, in particular can bid a suit for a lead. So partner could, perhaps, bid 4♣ or 4♦ over 3♠ by them. If 4♣ we know to defend - a club lead could beat this. If 4♦ then it's a double-fit and we should consider bidding 5♥ over 4♠ by them.

 

3. The only danger is that we are doubled and go 300 down with them only making 3♠. This might happen if we have club ruffs and partner has a singleton heart. However MP is about percentages and they'd do well to double 3♥.

[EarlPurple]

Interesting tactical situation. A 3H is standard, BUT... it runs the risk of pushing opps into overbidding 4S and that might just make! Spades will break, and all finesses seem to be in (pard sits under the opener).

If partner has either black ace I can get a club ruff. And declarer could, in addition, have 2 unavoidable heart losers.