Defensive Tricks In Pre-emptive Hands

[FelicityR]

When I learnt bridge many years ago I was told "Never pre-empt with a 4 card side suit major." But rules change and I have noticed that pre-emptive bids have become weaker and weaker in recent years but where do advanced/expert players now draw the line? Obviously vulnerability and position come into the equation too, but I'd be interested on your views and comments on the three following hands, assuming all non-vulnerable and dealer. Would you open, pre-empt or pass on the following hands? The main pre-emptive suit I have kept the same in all three, and I have made the suit semi-weak without the top three honours as they were pre-requisites for any pre-empt in yesteryear.

 

[hv=pc=n&n=skt96hjt97654dqcj]133|100[/hv]

 

[hv=pc=n&n=sa54hjt97654da8c2]133|100[/hv]

 

[hv=pc=n&n=s98hjt97654dkqck2]133|100[/hv]

 

Thank you for your replies in advance.

[eagles123]

imo 1 and 2 are clearcut (pass, 1H) the 3rd is kinda ugly, i'd probably open it 3h but I don't like it.

[Phil]

I wouldn't open any of them.

[Jinksy]

You didn't specify scoring or opps' vulnerability. On hand 2 I'm always opening 1♥. For the others:

 

IMPs, favourable

1) 4♥

3) 3♥ (with some discomfort - my regular Ps will know my 3♥ could be much weaker than this)

 

IMPs, love all

1) 3♥

3) 3♥ (with less discomfort)

 

MPs, favourable

1) 3♥

3) 3♥, again with less discomfort) - though I might bid 2♥ if we needed tops

 

MPs. love all

Ditto favourable.

[rmnka447]

1) Pass

 

2) 1 ♥ followed by 2 ♥ followed by 3 ♥. after bidding ♥ 3 times. partner ought to get the picture.

 

3) 2 ♥ -- Not ideal without high ♥, but certainly descriptive 9-11, 1 1/2 QTs. If partner forces with 2 NT, I'll reply 3 ♥ (good hand, bad suit for Ogust, no feature for feature ask because of bad suit).

[ahydra]

I'd pass on all three but there are a number of players around here who would open the second one 1H with the two aces.

 

ahydra

[nullve]

Playing a standard system where 1-of-a-suit openings meet the rule of 20:

 

1),3): 3♥

2): 1♥(!)

[MrAce]

I would not preempt any of them but #2 I can open 1♥.

[eagles123]

I have no strong feelings on 3 in fact i'm leaning towards pass having heard everyones opinions. But 2 just looks like a routine opening bid to me 2 aces 6 card suit singleton i must be missing something.

[nige1]

When I learnt bridge many years ago I was told "Never pre-empt with a 4 card side suit major." But rules change and I have noticed that pre-emptive bids have become weaker and weaker in recent years but where do advanced/expert players now draw the line? Obviously vulnerability and position come into the equation too, but I'd be interested on your views and comments on the three following hands, assuming all non-vulnerable and dealer. Would you open, pre-empt or pass on the following hands? The main pre-emptive suit I have kept the same in all three, and I have made the suit semi-weak without the top three honours as they were pre-requisites for any pre-empt in yesteryear. Thank you for your replies in advance.

I upvoted Phil by mistake but, at the table, I'd open then all :)

[hv=pc=n&n=skt96hjt97654dqcj]133|100| NV as dealer, I rank

1. 3♥ = PRE. I'm told that Zia says it's OK to have surprises for opponents (and partner) when you pre-empt.

2. Pass = NAT

[/hv]

[hv=pc=n&n=sa54hjt97654da8c2]133|100| NV as dealer, I rank

1. 1♥ = NAT. 2 Aces and a seven card suit.

2. 3♥ = PRE.

3. Pass = NAT

[/hv]

[hv=pc=n&n=s98hjt97654dkqck2]133|100| NV as dealer, I rank

1. 3♥ = PRE Reese said "A pre-empt that is known to be weak is a blunt sword."

2. 1♥ = NAT

3. Pass = NAT.

[/hv]

[Vampyr]

3) 2 ♥ -- Not ideal without high ♥, but certainly descriptive 9-11, 1 1/2 QTs. If partner forces with 2 NT, I'll reply 3 ♥ (good hand, bad suit for Ogust, no feature for feature ask because of bad suit).

 

Is it so descriptive? I think that without keeping preempts disciplined, partner will never know what to do. Although perhaps you have different standards with your constructve range, playing it as a light 1♥ opener rather than a weak hand. I am not familiar with this style because I prefer a weak 2♦ to a multi.

 

In third, of course, all bets are off.

[sfi]

As others have said, scoring and vulnerability matter, as does partnership style. However, my inclination is:

 

1) 3H

2) 1H

3) Pass

 

The only one I feel strongly about is that #2 is not a 3H bid.

[silvr bull]

All three are easy pass for me. Unless partner has two of the top H honors, opening 1H in #2 would always be a disappointment, and partner will likely overbid with most hands. My approach is to limit my hand as soon as I can, and pass is my first opportunity to do that. There is little chance the hand will be passed out, and then I can bid strongly later without misleading partner about my hand strength. If #2 is passed out, then a score of zero may well be better than the game partner would strain to bid.

 

Preempting to 3H on #1 makes it very difficult to find our 5-4 S fit, and I agree with the guide to not preempt in 1st or 2nd with a side 4 card major. If the black or pointed suits are reversed, then I would open 3H with #1. Opening 3H on #3 could push partner to take a phantom save against an opp game that my surprise defense could be enough to beat.

[RedSpawn]

All three are easy pass for me. Unless partner has two of the top H honors, opening 1H in #2 would always be a disappointment, and partner will likely overbid with most hands. My approach is to limit my hand as soon as I can, and pass is my first opportunity to do that. There is little chance the hand will be passed out, and then I can bid strongly later without misleading partner about my hand strength. If #2 is passed out, then a score of zero may well be better than the game partner would strain to bid.

 

Preempting to 3H on #1 makes it very difficult to find our 5-4 S fit, and I agree with the guide to not preempt in 1st or 2nd with a side 4 card major. If the black or pointed suits are reversed, then I would open 3H with #1. Opening 3H on #3 could push partner to take a phantom save against an opp game that my surprise defense could be enough to beat.

 

I co-sign Silver bull's analysis. Opening weak 3 on #1 is just putting your partner between a rock in a hard place.

 

And IMHO, #1 is just so messy from the poor ♥ suit quality and the ♠ side suit and the non-working honor singletons that any benefit you gain from being the 1st to open is offset by the highly defective nature of this hand and the bidding space you have potentially robbed from your partner. PASS is the most descriptive bid for #1 -- nothing noteworthy to report.

 

#2 I would pass. Though a complete hand evaluation places this hand at 12 total points and I may open 1 ♥, I really like this hand's defensive values. I want to hear more about what my opposition and partner have to say about their hands. If partner opens his hand, then I upgrade mine and compete aggressively. If the opposition open theirs, I might have just the right resources to upset any game contract bids they pursue.

 

#3 A conundrum. It is a preadolescent hand, not a full blown 1 ♥ adult opener and is too strong defensively to be classified as weak 3 ♥. I say Pass but I can see someone making the case for a 2 ♥ bid.

 

I see now that the PASS button is becoming an obsolete auction item. If we get a highly defective, ill-fitting hand from the dealer that doesn't conform to our normal bidding schema, just force fit it somewhere with an opening bid and let partner and the opposition sort out its intended meaning. The PASS button used to be reserved expressly for at least some of these conditions ....no more it seems.

[RedSpawn]

.

[Vampyr]

I am surprised that so few people are concerned about purity. I consider it the most important attribute when considering whether to make a preemptive bid.

[msjennifer]

PASS on all three.A few players may like to open the second one as 1H,since.they will argue" 2 Guaranteed defense tricks and easy rebid " !

[PhilG007]

I wouldn't pre-empt on any of these hands.In each case,the heart suit is too moth eaten...

It should be remembered that when you bid a suit,you are not only proposing it as trumps;

you are also suggesting it as a lead if your side become defenders. On each of these hands,do you

REALLY want a heart lead (?)

[GrahamJson]

1 is a clear pass. Why make a dodgy preempt when you hold the other major. Change your heart suit to one of the minors and I would consider opening three, especially third position, but not as it stands.

 

I wouldn't criticise a 1H opening on 2, but I'd probably pass, although again a preempt comes into consideration in 3rd.

 

I'd definitely open 3H on 3.

[fourdad]

from the variety of responses, you can see that the answer to your question is that there is no right answer other than what agreement you have with your partner.

 

As no one has mentioned position, all three are a 3H bid in 3rd seat.

[RedSpawn]

I wouldn't pre-empt on any of these hands.In each case,the heart suit is too moth eaten...

It should be remembered that when you bid a suit,you are not only proposing it as trumps;

you are also suggesting it as a lead if your side become defenders. On each of these hands,do you

REALLY want a heart lead (?)

 

Amen! Can you imagine the puzzled look on your partner's face if he gets the chance to lead hearts but the opposition holds the A,K, & Q ♥ and are sluffing losers over your bid suit?

 

The optics of that situation are not good and partner may be justified in giving you a menacing "side-eye". And reminding your partner that you said WEAK 3 will not adequately address his utter disappointment and shock.

[aawk]

Hand 1 :

 

100% pass in seat 1, 2 and 4.

In seat 3 3♥ is ok (I would pass because of the 8 LTC).

A good agreement is that after first passing a jump overcall (or response on partners 1♣/♦ openings bid) shows at least 6-4 in the majors.

 

Hand 2 :

 

If you agree that no aces are allowed outside the 7 card than pass or 1♥ (not a fan) is your only option.

I would open 3♥ in seat 1-3 (0-10 HCP 6-7 LTC) and on agreement 2♥ in seat 4.

 

Hand 3 :

 

I would open 3♥ in seat 1-3 (0-10 HCP 6-7 LTC) and on agreement 2♥ in seat 4.

[Jinksy]

Amen! Can you imagine the puzzled look on your partner's face if he gets the chance to lead hearts but the opposition holds the A,K, & Q ♥ and are sluffing losers over your bid suit?

 

The optics of that situation are not good and partner may be justified in giving you a menacing "side-eye". And reminding your partner that you said WEAK 3 will not adequately address his utter disappointment and shock.

 

You know you're allowed to discuss these things beforehand, right? Agreeing 'aggressive preempts' is no more untoward than agreeing '4-card majors', and partner should defend accordingly. That doesn't mean it's winning bridge to preempt on all or any of these hands (or to play 4-card majors), but 'partner won't expect it' is a poor argument.

[RedSpawn]

You know you're allowed to discuss these things beforehand, right? Agreeing 'aggressive preempts' is no more untoward than agreeing '4-card majors', and partner should defend accordingly. That doesn't mean it's winning bridge to preempt on all or any of these hands (or to play 4-card majors), but 'partner won't expect it' is a poor argument.

 

I respectfully disagree. Bridge is war and it behooves me to adequately equip my partner for battle where possible. We may attack (declare) or we may defend. I don't know how the auction will end from 1st seat.

 

Since the question says I am dealer and in 1st seat and nonvulnerable, I want to make a bid that represents our assets well and also prepares my partner for a sound opening lead should we have to defend.

 

I may say my preference is aggressive preempts and if my partner agrees to that upfront, cool. ... then my partner is equipped at the point of style agreement. But these "undisciplined" preempts cut both ways....you get 1st strike in the auction and get to make your statement crisply and quickly. However, your partner has to unpack your bid and figure out is it plain vanilla or is it the aggressive preempt. Navigating that question means he has another decision point where he could make a bidding/interpretation error.

 

Also, I believe there are times that the element of surprise in the auction may benefit the partnership but I personally don't think it should be predicated on knowingly writing a personal check drawn on insufficient funds.

[msjennifer]

You know you're allowed to discuss these things beforehand, right? Agreeing 'aggressive preempts' is no more untoward than agreeing '4-card majors', and partner should defend accordingly. That doesn't mean it's winning bridge to preempt on all or any of these hands (or to play 4-card majors), but 'partner won't expect it' is a poor argument.

Sir,You presume that the hand is from a team event,a fact nowhere mentioned.The type of event the vulnerability etc nothing is mentioned.I take it as first seat problem.It is becoming,as I have noticed in these columns recently,a fashion to make so called Ill judged preemptive bids of 3/4 level with 7pawns in the suit.I will not be surprised at all that an opening of 6H/S be suggested on VOID,QJxxxxxxx,xx,xx on the basis of some unacceptable secret agreements made before the start of the event.I fully agree the sentiment expressed by Redspawn.The so called peremptory may be deviliously enjoying the game this way.Certainly it is not the authentic bridge at all.The game is no more the gentlemens game.None of the text books written by genuine experts will have or will advise arrogant (not aggressive,mind you) openings of 3Hearts on any of these hands in any seat.Felicity,I say,you must have had all the amusement reading all these NEW UNDEFINED definitions of preemptive bids.Should partner holding Kx of the preemption suit on lead never lead it as partners preemption is based on a holding of xxxxxxx and nothing more ? The experimental bidding at perhaps its best!