Hanoi5 Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 [hv=pc=n&w=sqt43hqjt874dk3c6&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=p1d?]133|200[/hv] Would you intervene with 1♥ or 2♥? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesleyC Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 I wouldn't rule out 3♥ either. In my opinion all 3 bids are reasonable, and I'd choose between them based on partner's style/opponents style/state of the match/form of scoring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackshoe Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Playing exclusion doubles I might double, and then bid 2♥ over 2♣. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinksy Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 I don't see any value in bidding 1♥. Are you looking for game? 2-4♥ look plausible to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhm Posted October 12, 2015 Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 I don't see any value in bidding 1♥. Are you looking for game? 2-4♥ look plausible to me.Why can't partner have ♠AKxxxx ♥x ♦xxx ♣xxx or better? Rainer Herrmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesleyC Posted October 12, 2015 Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 Why can't partner have ♠AKxxxx ♥x ♦xxx ♣xxx or better? Because they passed as dealer at Nil Vul. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted October 12, 2015 Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 I am usually quite aggressive here but just 2♥ for me given that we have some defence in both majors. 1♥ never comes into focus at all, it is simply a matter of judging how high to go imho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhm Posted October 12, 2015 Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 Because they passed as dealer at Nil Vul.okay change it to ♠KJxxx ♥x ♦xxx ♣Axxx Rainer Herrmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinksy Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 okay change it to ♠KJxxx ♥x ♦xxx ♣Axxx Rainer Herrmann I'm sure you're capable of bidding to and making game on those (not sarcasm), but I doubt I'm capable of either. If by some mischance the opps kept out of the bidding, I would prob have the auction P (1♦) 1♥ / 1♠ 2♠ / P, and be reasonably content with making my contract. At MPs we might get a better score just for finding a superior spade partial, but it feels more likely to me that the opps are near to game and perhaps slam, and that they'll be able to use whatever bidding space I leave much more effectively than we can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 It would not occur to me to do anything other than bidding 2♥ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhm Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 I'm sure you're capable of bidding to and making game on those (not sarcasm), but I doubt I'm capable of either. If by some mischance the opps kept out of the bidding, I would prob have the auction P (1♦) 1♥ / 1♠ 2♠ / P, and be reasonably content with making my contract. At MPs we might get a better score just for finding a superior spade partial, but it feels more likely to me that the opps are near to game and perhaps slam, and that they'll be able to use whatever bidding space I leave much more effectively than we can.I readily admit there is a stronger case for a preemptive bid when partner has already passed (which I overlooked originally). Nevertheless I dislike locking us into hearts when I have such a good holding in the other major and I have serious doubts that a jump to 2♥ will create serious issues for my opponents.I like preempts, but their effectiveness depends to a large extent on level and whether there was a bid in front of you already. The effectiveness diminishes and the risk increases. Many seem to be oblivious to this simple fact. Rainer Herrmann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 I like 1♥ too. Hopefully partner can preempt them when we need to and we can find spades when we need to. It's a bit of a goldilocks bid. I don't see any value in saying stuff like "I don't see any value in..." but OK. I see the value of any of pass, 1, 2, and 3♥ (4♥ does seem to be a bit nuts), and judge 1 to be the best on this hand. Am I too open minded and my brain will fall out? maybe. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinksy Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 Nevertheless I dislike locking us into hearts when I have such a good holding in the other major and I have serious doubts that a jump to 2♥ will create serious issues for my opponents. That's why I'd be more inclined to bid three or even four, (mainly depending on opps). I don't hate 2♥, though - when they have slam interest, which looks quite likely, it puts quite a dent in their ability to explore for it. I like preempts, but their effectiveness depends to a large extent on level and whether there was a bid in front of you already. The effectiveness diminishes and the risk increases. Sure, but IMO the reward increases more than the risk does when we have such a defensively weak hand opposite P's pass. Sure, the KD is onside, but that doesn't mean they don't have game/slam, perhaps in another strain. And the KD is also insurance against pushing them to a making high-level contract they wouldn't have found. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nige1 Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 [hv=pc=n&w=sqt43hqjt874dk3c6&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=p1d?]133|200|Hanoi5 asks "Would you intervene with 1♥ or 2♥?" I rank1. 3♥ PRE. Opponents are likely to hold the balance of strength, so you should be a dog in the manger, use up bidding space and shut out ♣s, at the remote risk of losing a ♠ contract.2. 2♥. PRE. Similar but less pre-emptive.3. 2♦ ART. Michaels. Might find a ♠ fit but a misdescriptive distortion given the suit disparity.4. Double. T/O. Uses no space. Might reach a 4-3 ♠/ 4-2 ♦ fit but miss a 6-2 ♥ fit.5. Pass. NAT. Avoids the risks of other options[/hv] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhantomSac Posted October 15, 2015 Report Share Posted October 15, 2015 When partner is a passed hand I like 2, if partner were unpassed I'd prefer 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrf2705 Posted October 15, 2015 Report Share Posted October 15, 2015 I'm sure you're capable of bidding to and making game on those (not sarcasm), but I doubt I'm capable of either. If by some mischance the opps kept out of the bidding, I would prob have the auction P (1♦) 1♥ / 1♠ 2♠ / P, and be reasonably content with making my contract. At MPs we might get a better score just for finding a superior spade partial, but it feels more likely to me that the opps are near to game and perhaps slam, and that they'll be able to use whatever bidding space I leave much more effectively than we can. Non vulnerable I would bid 3 clubs (Ghestem) or 2 diamonds to show at least 4+/5+ in majors and pass all coming bids of my partner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggwhiz Posted October 15, 2015 Report Share Posted October 15, 2015 At matchpoints in what can be random or uneven fields I like 1♥ for the ability to find spades or push them up by bidding 3♥ after partner finds a raise either directly or partner doing it after making a bid that I retreat to 2♥ from. After a direct 2♥ you are often endplayed into defending 3 of a minor without knowing if it's a good idea or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveMoe Posted October 18, 2015 Report Share Posted October 18, 2015 3rd seat wide ranging - 3 or 4♥. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted October 18, 2015 Report Share Posted October 18, 2015 With an unpased partner I'd rather play in hearts when partner is 4-2 in the majors, and probably if he is 4-1 as well. So I would preempt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted October 28, 2015 Report Share Posted October 28, 2015 Playing exclusion doubles I might double, and then bid 2♥ over 2♣. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/dry.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted October 28, 2015 Report Share Posted October 28, 2015 I would always preempt either 2♥ or 3♥. It looks much more likely we belong in hearts than spades, and I don't have much defense, so I want to bid to the limit and give them a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhantomSac Posted October 28, 2015 Report Share Posted October 28, 2015 I dont like 3H when I have 4 spades, not cuz I'm worried about missing spades but it makes it more likely they don't make anything (and I've noticed if they happen to get to 4S, partner is likely to misjudge and bid 5H some of the time since he has short spades obv and hopes to push them to 5S. A good example would be like, LHO bids 3S and partner bids 5H to pressure them). I would like 3H a lot with 6-4 with 4 of the other minor and a stiff spade, I'd probably always do that. 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.