Satisfied with 4H?

[661_Pete]

Here's an amusing one. Love all, dealer S, pairs MPs, I was sitting west:

[hv=pc=n&s=st9652h65dkq8652c&w=skjhajt8732dc9854&n=sq84h94dat97c7632&e=sa73hkqdj43cakqjt]399|300[/hv]

I opened 3♥ - can you blame me? - and my partner quietly raised to 4♥. North led a trump and of course I claimed all 13 tricks.

 

The point is: 7♥ is unbeatable but only if played by East. If West plays it, surely South will have found some way of signalling a ♣ lead during the bidding. So my best bet would have been to pass, let East open 2NT, then I bid 3♦ transfer to ♥. Whether we can reach 7♥ from that point is debatable - I don't think I have the necessary bidding skills.

 

Perhaps someone can point the way?

[eagles123]

would open your hand 1H ... 1H 2C 3C ... then, with respect, fairly trivial to find grand

 

 

your hand is way too powerful to open 3H. Yes, it ticks the "5-10 7 card suit" or whatever you're taught, but the pureness of the suit plus the void, plus the 2704 shape just gives it way too much potential to be preempting it (especially at three hearts) 4H i would kinda understand and then partner has a tricky decision, but I would be opening 1H on that hand

 

 

I have put your hand on Bridge Winners as an opening bid problem: https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/bidding-problem-2-wy74blldrl/

 

Thanks,

 

Eagles

[kuhchung]

Are you trying to find 7H by E because they can't get a ruff on opening lead? What if I reverse the NS hands? Would you be trying to reach 7H by W?

 

Or are you asking how to find 7H in general?

[johnu]

So, if you passed and got to 7♥ by East, and the North and South hands are switched, an opening club lead and ruff would result in down 1. Who is to blame for wrong siding 7♥?

[rmnka447]

7 ♥ makes if the ♣ ruff isn't found, but 7 ♣ is unbeatable.

 

If the bidding goes,

 

1 ♥ - 2 ♣

3 ♣

 

then up to 7 ♥, South might make a Lightner Double and North ought to find the ♣ lead. On the first 3 bids North knows, South can't have more than a stiff ♣.

 

If I preempted with the West hand, I'd preempt 4 ♥.

 

With 8 potential cover cards, East should see the possibility of slam. From East's perspective, the key question is whether there are 2 ♦ losers. After a preempt, I not sure how to figure that out.

 

It should go easier in 2/1 over a 1 ♥ opener --

 

1 ♥ - 2 ♣

3 ♣ - 3 ♥ (Sure you normally have 3, but opposite a ♣ fit and known ♥ suit in partner's hand, ♥ KQ are golden cards.)

3 ♠ - 4 ♣

4 ♦ etc.

 

The other possibility is

 

1 ♥ - 2 ♣

3 ♦ - 3 ♥ (if you play jumps in new suit over 2/1 as splinters)

3 ♠ etc.

[Stephen Tu]

You don't get to peek at partner's and opponent's cards before you decide what to open the bidding.

What if East were an opponent rather than partner?

Personally I think it should go something like 4h-6h, east gambling they find wrong lead if there are 2 diamond cashers.

 

[msjennifer]

SIR,in my personal opinion ,3H was a very poor bid in the First Seat.JUST WHO does one want to preempt with a void and SKJ ?In the 1st seat one just passes or opens 1H, if ones system likes it that way. I politely ask why justify one's bid (in the first seat) saying if partner has nothing then opponents have a laydown game and all that.!.Why these premature assumptions( or presumptions if one likes it that way)? Secondly is it a hundred percent easy to bid grand after the 3H PREEMPT? Lastly, if one does reach 7H it mayl be doubled and go down on a club lead.(Lightner double).

[johnu]

7 ♥ makes if the ♣ ruff isn't found, but 7 ♣ is unbeatable.

 

In Bridge Master, 7♣ goes down because hearts are 4-0 and partner of opening leader is void in hearts, no matter who declares clubs. B-)

 

With no opposition bidding, it's futile to try to come up with bidding to right side a contract to avoid a ruff when you have no idea who might have a void. As for 7♣ or 7♥, 7♥ scores better than 7♣ so it's the right contract at IMPs (+2 Imps) and matchpoints. The exception would be if you knew 1 opponent was very distributional because of a preempt, but you probably aren't getting to 7.

[mdgraham]

This is the kind of thing that can happen if you play a loose pre-empting style. Nothing wrong with that, but sometimes, as here, it pre-empts partner rather than the opponents.

However, you can regard the West hand as way too strong for 3H - you might with (say) Qx of spades, but here the KJ, together with the void diamond, make the hand more like a 1♥ opener. You still have a lot of bidding to do to get to 7♥, though. If they find the ruff, that's just bad luck.

[pescetom]

I too think 3H is a poor bid here. But a 4nt response followed by 6D 6H seems a fairly likely auction in absence of better agreements.

[661_Pete]

I too think 3H is a poor bid here.

I'll acknowledge that (and others who've said likewise). I was already thinking, even before I saw dummy, I'd made the wrong bid. I should have added 3 points for the void and counted an opening hand.

 

As it happens, five of the six tables playing this hand were in 4♥ - some making +3 (like us) and some +2, courtesy of the club lead. The sixth was in 6♥ making the top. I'm not complaining, though I could have done better.

[FelicityR]

You don't get to peek at partner's and opponent's cards before you decide what to open the bidding.

What if East were an opponent rather than partner?

Personally I think it should go something like 4h-6h, east gambling they find wrong lead if there are 2 diamond cashers.

 

Dear Mr Tu. I recognise your expertise on this forum, and I am always interested in your answers on the various subjects posted here, but I honestly cannot agree with what you write this time round.

 

Yes, East gambling to 6H I can agree with, but given all the high cards that East has, I think it is more than likely that the opponents will find a diamond lead if there are two losers in the suit.

[Stephen Tu]

Yes, East gambling to 6H I can agree with, but given all the high cards that East has, I think it is more than likely that the opponents will find a diamond lead if there are two losers in the suit.

 

I didn't say they wouldn't ever find the lead. I'm just saying combined chance of partner having a diamond stop + some chance they don't find the lead make bidding 6 percentage.

Probably they find the diamond lead more often than not, but from East's point of view it's not impossible that North is dealt something like SKQJ? and DK????. As North do you find the diamond lead when declarer was 2821?

 

I think this kind of thing happens enough that blasting is better than trying a scientific say 5d asking bid pinpointing the lead but avoiding 6 when partner has small doubleton diamond.

 

[apollo1201]

I agree with all the 4H bidders at first. 7420 shape + very good values make it too strong for 3H. 1H as a second chance if any.

 

Given the absence of D honors, E should fear someone has AK, KQ, or even Q-high suit which could be an attractive « natural » lead.

 

I play 5D as interrogative (1st step no control, 2nd step 2nd round, 3rd step 1st round). Given partner opened 4 without the KQ and max 1 other ace, we shouldn’t be too much at risk at the 5 level. Probably Xed by S, but partner is non-plussed and conveniently bids 5NT, 1st round control so I bid 7H.

 

Ok, S Xes again for a non-D lead and non-trump. Unfortunately N as more C than S and finds the killing lead.

 

In another world, D opens 2S 5M+4m, I pass, N bids 3 given his weakness and minor fits. Partner bids 3NT hoping sth good happens in D, whereupon I bid 6H. Done. Or maybe I just bid 5 and partner adds the 6th.

 

I think that unopposed, it is easier to bid to 7 and be defeated there. Opposed it seems dubious to reach 7. Who said preempt always work?

[nige1]

Over 4M, with concerns about another suit, the Sharples brothers bid the suit below the suit, about which they were worried. Here 5♣ would show worry about ♦. then you might reply

• 5♥ = denies ♦ control
• 5♦ = 2nd round ♦ control but no other side-suit control.
• 6♦ = 1st ...
• 5N = ♦ control + good ♥s.
• Other bids = ♦ control + this control.

Stephen Tu makes a strong case for just booting the slam, You hope defenders won't find the ♦ lead. Although, here, you should be careful what you wish for :)

[miamijd]

Unlike others, I don't think 3H white v. white is so bad with a six-loser hand, although personally, with 7/4, I'd probably open 4H. I think it's really close. Make your spades xx and your clubs Kxxx, and it's a no-brainer for 4H.

 

No, I think the key mistake here was your partner's. If you open 3H, I don't see why partner should settle for 4H. Your partner knows you don't have solid hearts, so you probably have something outside. Why can't you have the Kd or diamond shortness? That's not too much to ask, and it probably won't hurt to go to the 5 level to find out.

 

If I were your partner, I would bid 5D to ask about diamonds. After a preempt below game, a jump in a new suit is a control-ask in that suit (you can just make a non-jump bid to show a good hand with that suit -- any bid is forcing at least one round). After a preempt at the game level, any bid of a new suit is a control-ask.

 

It's pretty unlikely you have three small diamonds (though possible). So the risk is there but not that bad. You would bid 5H with no control, 5S with second round control, and 5NT with first round control. Here, you'd bid 5NT. Since you wouldn't preempt 3H with a suit headed by the Jack (at least, I hope you wouldn't), I'd then bid 7H. Yes, it goes down on a club ruff if South makes a Lightner double, but that's unfortunate. 7H is where I would want to be.

 

If you open 4H, your partner has a choice. He can bid 6H and put the opponents to a guess, or he can bid 5D to ask about a diamond control just like over 3H. At MPs, I would be tempted to blast to 6H and put the opponents to a guess. At IMPs, I'm using science (5D).

 

Cheers,

Mike

[Winstonm]

I don't understand why the bidding can't go:

3H-4C

4D-

[yveslebrec]

We have a system where we open these hands 2h. It’s not a standard weak 2, though it can be, but it can also be this type of hand, too strong for a pre-empt but not enough hcp for a sound opening bid. One of the reasons for doing this is to avoid bidding too high without a fit.

 

Anyway, our 2h opener can be 6+ h but can also be 5h and 4+m. So 2n by responder is either gf without 3h or invitational with 3h. Responder can also bid 3d with a gf hand with 3+h.

 

After either 2n or 3d, opener with 6+h shows losers, which will be in the range from 6 to 8. With 6 losers, opener bids 3n (3h with 8, 3s with 7, 4 any with freakish distribution).

 

After openers rebid and h agreed, responder can start bidding controls or sign off in 4h.

 

So here it would have gone (with odd no of keycards void showing responses)

 

2h-2n-3n-4c-4d-4n-6d-7h (with 8 cover cards opposite 6 losers the grand is a good bet).

 

Hands don’t always fit your system but when they do it needs to be pointed out.

[Vampyr]

would open your hand 1H ... 1H 2C 3C ... then, with respect, fairly trivial to find grand

 

South then doubles and North leads dummy’s suit... but that’s just unlucky. It’s a goos contract that happens to go down.

 

Many will play 3♣ as non-forcing, and after 2♣ West definitely wants to be in game. 4♦ takes up a lot of space, but is pretty descriptive.

[HardVector]

This just highlights why most bridge authorities recommend that preemptive bids do not include voids or outside 4 card majors. The hand is too strong. It also is NOT strong enough to open. Why is everyone in such a hurry to bid with this?

[jjsb]

Here's an amusing one. Love all, dealer S, pairs MPs, I was sitting west:

[hv=pc=n&s=st9652h65dkq8652c&w=skjhajt8732dc9854&n=sq84h94dat97c7632&e=sa73hkqdj43cakqjt]399|300[/hv]

I opened 3♥ - can you blame me? - and my partner quietly raised to 4♥. North led a trump and of course I claimed all 13 tricks.

 

The point is: 7♥ is unbeatable but only if played by East. If West plays it, surely South will have found some way of signalling a ♣ lead during the bidding. So my best bet would have been to pass, let East open 2NT, then I bid 3♦ transfer to ♥. Whether we can reach 7♥ from that point is debatable - I don't think I have the necessary bidding skills.

 

Perhaps someone can point the way?

 

it will not make u feel better but i dont have the bidding skills also to bid the slam here :)

im surprised to hear so many opening 1H with that hand and apparently for some its actually normal i can see that the standard opening is getting weaker and weaker :) honestly even i know how bridge has changed the last couple of year in term of agressivity i just cant make a 1H opening . personally i am into a 4H bid and so of coruse will not do any better than what happened with u... may i ask what is the score u had for 4H +3 ? i would be super surprised if u tell me u get 10% with every table bidding 6 or 7 . i will take risk but i would actually think u get super close to 50% if not more.

as for the question bidding 7 "by the good side" is totally irrelevant as some other point out

im pretty sure we(bridge player) in a bridge season are doing much more bigger mistake than not finding a 7H with those hands....

 

regards

syl

[pescetom]

This just highlights why most bridge authorities recommend that preemptive bids do not include voids or outside 4 card majors. The hand is too strong. It also is NOT strong enough to open. Why is everyone in such a hurry to bid with this?

Because otherwise it's not going to be easy to convince partner that I hold this hand when opponents are already in there bidding spades, which is likely.

 

To look at it another way, we have 6 different ways of opening a hand of hearts (8 if you include nt). Just how many more do you need before you can open this hand? :)

[pescetom]

im surprised to hear so many opening 1H with that hand and apparently for some its actually normal i can see that the standard opening is getting weaker and weaker :) honestly even i know how bridge has changed the last couple of year in term of agressivity i just cant make a 1H opening .

 

I don't think it is particularly aggressive to open this hand as 1H, although some RAs might disallow it on basis of HCP, ignoring the distribution.

Kaplan and Rubens evaluates it as 13.6 points, which was considered enough for a 1-level suit opening even a century ago.

[MatthiasK]

... It also is NOT strong enough to open. Why is everyone in such a hurry to bid with this?

 

Seriously? Look again. A good 7 card suit + a side king + a void. 9 very good HCP and great distribution.

And why open? It is an advantage to open the bidding, because it makes opponent's life harder. But you probably know this already.

[Y383]

Seriously? Look again. A good 7 card suit + a side king + a void. 9 very good HCP and great distribution.

And why open? It is an advantage to open the bidding, because it makes opponent's life harder. But you probably know this already.

 

for me, the 1st priority of bridge is to bid our (me and my partner) to the max allowable. 2nd priority is to disturb opponents bid or to create chaos/minor sacrifice bid.

 

thats why, i rarely bid preemptive, too vague and double edge sword effect. and sometime just useless...

 

in this case, in my opinion, 3h bid opening is poor, due to its void and potency. the 1h or 4h opening is the better options, both meaning is similar (in this case). and to reach the slam/grand,.. u need 'guidance' from your 20 pts partner. there's 7h or 7c contract possible, or at least slam.

 

similar:

1h,: ur partner think u have 12 pts, and should be thinking slam possible (30+ pts total).

4h,: 7cards strong, if your partner passed with 20 pts.. find another partner.