Rebound Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 [hv=d=e&v=n&s=s108hxdqxxxcakqxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMPPass to you, what do you bid?[/hv] Vulnerable against not, I opened this hand 3♣. My partner (a pick-up for a pairs tourney) wasn't impressed. My feeling is that a preempt at this vulnerability should show such a hand. But I'm curious to hear your opinions. I realize that if I open 1♣, I have a simple 2♣ rebid available over any 1-level response by partner. However, it leaves tons of wiggle room in the majors for the opponents. Your thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbleighton Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 3C would be fine in the third seat. In the first seat, you have too much risk of missing game by preempting with an opening one bid. Now, make the DQ a low card, and I would bid 3C at any colors. Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 Three clubs is ok if your partner understands that VUL versus NOT VUL preempts are "strong", hands like this. How many tricks can this hand take in a club contract? Probably six clubs and hopefully 1D, for 7. So 3C bid is not too much of a stretch in trick taking power, and you would love to hear 3NT from partner holding this hand. My preempts like this are generally better, but I would be tempted to open 3C with this hand... For me, 3Club is perfectly acceptable (I surely would not complain if my partner bid thusly), but I guess I would go with 1Club at the table. At matchpoints I open 3C. Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeartA Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 ....and you would love to hear 3NT from partner holding this hand. I wouldn't bid 3N without support with an honor, unless my side stoppers were very good. I wouldn't expect my pd's clubs were THAT good plus a side Q(xxx) (I would expect one more club and less strength). When I bid 3N, it is most likely we missed a slam facing xx, x, Qxxx, AKQxxx. BTW, I am usually aggressive, as some friends here can tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whereagles Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 3C for me, in line with my aggressive style. 1C if I need a swing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbleighton Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 "3C for me, in line with my aggressive style. 1C if I need a swing." I understand 3C, if that is your style. But why would 1C generate a swing? Where I play (ACBL-land) it would be the field bid. Peter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double ! Posted February 12, 2005 Report Share Posted February 12, 2005 I would bid 1♣ with that hand. Partner's hand is still an unknown entity. Why distort your hand and make a unilateral decision for the partnership when you have a normal opener that you can clarify when you rebid? Aggression is fine but, IMO, not at the cost of hand distortion and misinformation to partner who hasn't yet been heard from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted February 12, 2005 Report Share Posted February 12, 2005 If partner expects a modest 7-card rather than almost-solid 6-card, I think you shouldn't open 3♣ at this vulnerability at IMPs, as there is more to loose by destroying your own auction than to gain from destroying the opps auction. At matchpoints, 3♣ would be ok since the stakes are more like the same for both parties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebound Posted February 12, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2005 Thanks for the replies. I have given it more thought and now believe the 3♣ bid was an error. I think 1♣ is better, particularly in the unikely event of a diamond response from partner. I would cry all the way to the next hand if we played 3♣ when missing a diamond game or slam. Incidentally, I gave this hand to my brother, the true expert in the family, and he said he would pass, but I think his bidding is somewhat on the eccenrtic side :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred Posted February 12, 2005 Report Share Posted February 12, 2005 I would bid 1♣ with that hand. Partner's hand is still an unknown entity. Why distort your hand and make a unilateral decision for the partnership when you have a normal opener that you can clarify when you rebid? Aggression is fine but, IMO, not at the cost of hand distortion and misinformation to partner who hasn't yet been heard from. This sums up my thoughts on the matter very well. As I have said before, taking swingy actions that could result in a top or bottom early in the bidding is not my idea of winning bridge. Keep the ball in play! There will be other chances to win the board (good judgment and card play by you and your partner and/or mistakes by the opponents). Fred GitelmanBridge Base Inc.www.bridgebase.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted February 13, 2005 Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 1C in the first 2 seats. Clear cut! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted February 13, 2005 Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 Yes, as long as partner didn't pass, you need to open this constructively imo. 1♣ it is! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.