ATB

[Jinksy]

[hv=pc=n&w=sat98632h8654dcat&e=skqj75haqjdat5cj7&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=p3sp4sppp]266|200[/hv]

 

We hadn't discussed much about our style in 2nd seat. Elsewhere our preempts are quite aggressive.

 

No methods available over 3S. 4m would be natural and F1.

[wank]

that west hand is ridiculous for a pre-empt: 3 first round controls, an absurd amount of defence, a dodgy suit, amazing playability in hearts, blah, blah. if you don't like opening 1M with this, just pass.

 

people pre-empt far too much when they have the other major - not just because it might be your best fit, but the more cards you have there, the less chance that the opps were actually going to make anything. yes they might have a fat minor fit, but 11 trick games are disproportionately difficult to make.

[Free]

I prefer a 1♠ or 4♠ opening instead of 3♠, especially if you don't have style agreements at this vulnerability.

[mr1303]

The textbook comes into play with this one.

 

Don't open with an outside 4 card major

Don't open with 2 aces

Don't open with a void.

 

This hand broke 3 rules.

 

If you decide the throw the textbook out of the window with your pre-empts, then you take the responsibility.

[aguahombre]

I believe 1S or pass would have gotten the job done on this hand, and one of those would be an acceptable choice. Opening either 3S or 4S creates the same problem. Our expert East will know from his KQJXX of spades that something is afoot, but he can't do anything about it. We preempted ourselves.

[Phil]

Open 1♠ with most partners. Getting to 6 looks routine.

 

Pass with a few partners. Probably get to 6 after a splinter.

 

Opening 3 is terrible. Opening 4 is a little better. Neither gets you to 6.

[Codo]

My partners know that we break these old rules quite often and it works- with the right follow ups.

 

 

But in 2. seat w/r? Come on this is b...*****. You cannot hold this hand if you are a bridge player, you may hold it if you are a gambler or use to play some egoshooters...

[CSGibson]

I've tracked my preempts in a spreadsheet, and come up with the following:

 

When I open a preempt that is flawed, but only slightly, it turns out to be a big winner in the long run. When I open a preempt with 2 or more flaws, it turns into a big loser.

 

Flaws are:

 

not a traditional number of cards in the suit

First round controls outside of my suit

undisclosed four card major

 

Even not counting the crappy suit quality and the worst seat position, this is an absolute hole of a preempt, with 3 flaws to it. I wouldn't actually mind if you were ATxxxxx xxx x Ax, though I would consider that a non-standard preempt as well, and be prepared to take responsibility if it didn't work out, but this hand has an absurd amount of playing potential and defense not expected by partner.

[aguahombre]

interesting you don't count queens and jacks outside as flaws. Wonder what the stats are on hands you consider unflawed.

[CSGibson]

interesting you don't count queens and jacks outside as flaws. Wonder what the stats are on hands you consider unflawed.

 

 

Break even.

[mike777]

[hv=pc=n&w=sat98632h8654dcat&e=skqj75haqjdat5cj7&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=p3sp4sppp]266|200[/hv]

 

We hadn't discussed much about our style in 2nd seat. Elsewhere our preempts are quite aggressive.

 

No methods available over 3S. 4m would be natural and F1.

 

 

 

3s is insane based on YOUR style and agreements..don't waste our time.

[Trinidad]

My $0.02:

 

The biggest flaw for a preempt with the West hand is the position.

 

In third seat, this would have been a 4♠ preempt.

 

In first seat, this would have been a 4♠ preempt, if the red suits were reversed.

 

In second seat, this is a pass.

 

Rik

[dake50]

You may be onto something. If this is your 3S preempt, flesh out the expected responses.

Especially 4m MUST-?? have 2xA and Qxx+?? fit, looking up?

You don't lose way much if responses cater to 2xA +side void +one-top 7-suit -

the very deviations this hand has.

Can your fleshed-out responses get to 6S on this immediate hand?

Or just accept the losses when responder has a good hand, but not good enough-??

[keylime]

I think the group is being a bit hard here.

 

Playing 2/1 methods, one does not open 1♠ here (unless you're playing Zar points I suppose, but how many players actually know about this?). If pard has minor suit lengths here, you'd rather have him open and have you table this hand. It's a nice hand...as dummy.

 

Opening 3♠ here is a bit excessive. I'd hate to miss 4♥ when 4♠ is off.

 

I'd open 2. Yes, 2. I have a 7th spade, but my suit isn't all that snazzy, and if pard makes a forcing bid, I can get my hearts into the mix. FTR, if I have an honor in hearts, like J-8-x-x, I'd pass to start.

[aguahombre]

I didn't consider opening 2S. I still won't.

[gnasher]

Playing 2/1 methods, one does not open 1♠ here (unless you're playing Zar points I suppose, but how many players actually know about this?).

I don't know anything about Zar points. Does that mean that I'm not allowed to open 1♠?

[aguahombre]

Playing 2/1 methods, one does not open 1♠ here (unless you're playing Zar points.

 

I don't know anything about Zar points. Does that mean that I'm not allowed to open 1♠?

Maybe he meant "one" literally.

[HeartA]

Opening 3♠ at second position, just absurd, period.

[Vampyr]

interesting you don't count queens and jacks outside as flaws.

 

A void is usually considered a flaw as well.

[gszes]

We try to learn methods that allow us to produce good results from

the cards we are dealt. Some have a treasure trove of systems and

pet conventions that are used for the specific purpose of getting every

imp possible out of a specific card combination. One thing all of these

gadgets need is space. When you bid 3s with w/r with KQJxxxx xx x xxx

this eats up a lot of space from both sides BUT it has the advantage

of allowing p to immediately size up their hand opposite what our hand

probably looks like and allows them to generally come up with a pretty

close approximation of not only our sides potential but the opps as well.

 

When we decide to open a hand such as the one presented we have left the

realm of scientific bidding and entered the EHAA zone. Noone has any clue

(except maybe an opp that wants to x your 3s for penalty) the offensive/

defensive capabilites of anyones holding. We may indeed disrupt the opps

with a 3s bid but we may also disrupt poor partner. As we learn more about

this game the more we want to be able to use that information and using a 3s

bid this way makes it impossible.

 

Some are arguing aginst 3s due to the side 4 card heart suit to me it is irrelevant

it is the overall hand pattern that creates the problem. With space your hand is

so good that 7 level might easily be reached by using a touch of scientific bidding

that is gone once you bid 3s.....Another way to look at this---would you play a system

where you open 1n with a range of 12-19 balanced? its unplayable and thus avoided.

It would have its tops and a ton of downs.

 

Another thing--do you really expect the bidding to get passed out and you never having

a chance to bid? This hand is so good the opps might go to 4h and you could still bid

4s on your own w/o expecting to take a huge loss. Opps in slam? very unlikely missing

2 aces. Can you say the same about our side and will p every consider a slam???

 

The more you learn the less you will want to preempt your side trust me and your patners

will not hate to hear your preempts because right now they are little better than a coin flip.

[han]

Maybe he meant "one" literally.

 

A man needs a name.

[cherdano]

I did not imagine someone would manage to suggest a worse opening bid than 3♠.

[Codo]

I think the group is being a bit hard here.

 

Playing 2/1 methods, one does not open 1♠ here

 

I would...

 

Take it this way: You have 8 HCPS in aces, 3 Length points, both majors, no rebid problem, and more playing strength then your usual balanced 12 count. And as a bonus: at LTC this hand just holds 6 losers...

[aguahombre]

I did not imagine someone would manage to suggest a worse opening bid than 3♠.

I thought so too, until I saw 2S suggested.

[jallerton]

Playing standard methods, this hand has enough playing strength and defence to open 1♠.

 

I didn't consider opening 2S. I still won't.

 

It seems from some of his other threads that Jinsky is playing the Fantunes system (2-level openers are natural and about 10-13 points). Playing that style, 2♠ you should strongly consider opening 2♠.