pre-empt over a pre-empt

[el mister]

[hv=pc=n&s=s63hqjt8754dq53c8&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=2d]133|200[/hv]

 

Club game, MPs, I saw fit to bid 3♥ here. Multi was weak 2M, 20-21 bal, and (I think) strong acol 2m.

The final contract was played out in an uneventful fashion, in 4♠, but 3♥ wasn't rated by the players at the table in the subsequent discussion, so wondering how far off beam it was? Does a pre-emptive bid over multi exist, and if so what should it look like?

[helene_t]

It is of course a matter of agreement but if 3H is weak what do you do with a strong hand? Double followed by some number of hearts shows the same strength but maybe it suggests a more flexible hand. And especially over a multi the strong jump overcall is useful because it removes doubt about which suit opener has so that 3S becomes available as a cuebid.

 

I would have some sympathy for 4H being preemptive though

[mikeh]

As a general rule, one never pre-empts over a pre-empt.

 

A jump to game over a pre-empt is a special case, in that it might be based on a hand with a lot of playing strength rather than high card strength. Say you held KQJ10xxxx x Kx xx and RHO opened a weak 2 bid.....one could make a case for 4♠ as a 2-way shot....it might make or it might be a good save. Since you have double, then spades, and an immediate 3♠ as ways of differentiating some of your stronger spade overcalls, allowing 4 to be a strong pre-empt makes some sense.

 

However, 3♠ should definitely not be pre-emptive. Yes, there will be hands on which one would like to be able to pre-empt, but bridge is a game of probabilities, in system design as well as play. When an opp announces weakness on your right, you are more likely to own the hand than you are to need to jam their bidding, so your auctions need to cater to that reality.

[nige1]

[hv=pc=n&s=s63hqjt8754dq53c8&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=2d]133|200|

Club game, MPs, I saw fit to bid 3♥ here. Multi was weak 2M, 20-21 bal, and (I think) strong acol 2m.

The final contract was played out in an uneventful fashion, in 4♠, but 3♥ wasn't rated by the players at the table in the subsequent discussion, so wondering how far off beam it was? Does a pre-emptive bid over multi exist, and if so what should it look like?[/hv]

IMO, it's OK to treat this 3♥ as pre-emptive, if you agree it with partner. The default agreement, however, is to treat single-jumps over a pre-empt as strong.

[neilkaz]

"Multi was weak 2M, 20-21 bal, and (I think) strong acol 2m."

 

So in this case we really can't be certain that we aren't preempting over one of the strong multi hands.

[helene_t]

So in this case we really can't be certain that we aren't preempting over one of the strong multi hands.

True, if the strong option is quite frequent (which is the case for some weaker pairs who over-use fancy two-openings) then it might be an optimal agreement to play jump overcalls as weak. They can create quite a lot of havoc if responder bids on the assumption that opener is weak but he happens to be strong. For example:

(2♦)-3♠-(4♥)

and now poor opener, having eight playing tricks and a long minor, has to guess weather his partner bid 4♥ on the basis of opener's hearts, or whether responder has long hearts himself.

[P_Marlowe]

The multi gives you another round, just wait.

 

Common conventional defences against the multi try to tiden the range of an

overcall.

If your overcalls are too wide ranging, your partner is quite often guessing,

if he should raise to game, investigate slam or pass.

The whole thing becomes a bit different, if you face a passed hand as partner,

in those scenarios you try to make some poker overcalls, partner is only expected

to act, if he has a fit, in which case you dont mind.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[fourdad]

You do not really know if you are "pre-empting a pre-empt", do you?

As you get another chance, I would pass here.

 

As a general rule, preempting a preempt works out poorly because the strength will lie to your left and you are stepping into it's teeth.

 

Along the same lines, bidding again, unforced, after preemting is an equally bad idea.

[jdonn]

I think this whole "don't preempt over a preempt" tip is often misconstrued as "don't bid over a preempt with a hand with which you would have opened a preempt", when it actually means "jumps over a preempt show good hands not preemptive hands". It's ok to make a simple overcall here on a hand with which you might have opened 2♥ or 3♥ (or spades), although this particular hand is clearly too weak and should pass. It would look more like x KQJxxx Kxx xxx.

[The_Badger]

As many commentators have said never bid directly a pre-emptive hand over a pre-empt.

 

If the opening bid had been a weak 2♠, or a 3♣ or 3♦ pre-empt, would you bid 3♥? Of course not.

 

Actually on this hand, the multi 2♦ opening helps as West will have to ask East (in most scenarios) to clarify his hand with either 2♥ or 2NT. Partner may step in with his own bid at that point.

 

Bidding 3♥ direct may work well in some cases, but on reflection it provides far too much information to the opponents so should be avoided. And I can hardly see it stopping the opponents reaching a game or slam whatever hand the multi 2♦ opener has.