Preempt

[pilowsky]

[hv=lin=st||pn|Me,Jean,Partner,Joan|md|4SKQ43HAQ974DAK7CA,S5HTDQ964CQJT9862,SA987HK2DJT32C543,SJT62HJ8653D85CK7|ev|b|rh||ah|Board%2017|mb|2H|mb|2N|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|]300|300|

This hand came up in the Club yesterday (IMPs).

I was making up a four at the last table and agreed to play partner's card.

EW was playing some sort of multi-everything and East opened 2H - meaning spades and hearts 'weak'.

I bid 2NT which was passed out for 2N+1 and -3

Is there a "rule of table 17" where you can open without points?

Or is this a reasonable preempt?

[/hv]

 

[TylerE]

Looks fine to me if that's their style. You don't specify what jurisdiction.

 

The 2NT bid shows at least an ace less. Your partner should still probably raise but 2N is the grossest bid of the 3.

[mw64ahw]

The original Ekren 2♦ bid opened at least 4-4 in the majors with 3-10 points with something like Jxxxx♠ Qxxx♥ so point wise the above opening isn't lacking

 

Against the 2♥ Ekren style opening I play the following defence

X-4+♠/19+hcp

2♠-Both minors

2NT-15-18hcp

3m-6+ natural

3M-6+ Int+

3NT-Long running minor type

 

In this case X should elicit a 2♠ response and lead to either 3NT/4♠

 

Did West lead a major or ♣s?

[pilowsky]

The original Ekren 2♦ bid opened at least 4-4 in the majors with 3-10 points with something like Jxxxx♠ Qxxx♥ so point wise the above opening isn't lacking

 

Against the 2♥ Ekren style opening I play the following defence

X-4+♠/19+hcp

2♠-Both minors

2NT-15-18hcp

3m-6+ natural

3M-6+ Int+

3NT-Long running minor type

 

In this case X should elicit a 2♠ response and lead to either 3NT/4♠

 

Did West lead a major or ♣s?

Thanks

I'm not allowed to post the link to the hand here because it comes from another site.

the ♣Q was led and I made an easy 2NT+1.

Without interference, others found a nice 4S.

 

 

[Cyberyeti]

Thanks

I'm not allowed to post the link to the hand here because it comes from another site.

the ♣Q was led and I made an easy 2NT+1.

Without interference, others found a nice 4S.

 

I'd probably have overcalled 3N and hated it, 2N is 15-18 ish and you're way too good for that

[mw64ahw]

Thanks

I'm not allowed to post the link to the hand here because it comes from another site.

the ♣Q was led and I made an easy 2NT+1.

Without interference, others found a nice 4S.

Anyone bid the ♠ slam?

[pilowsky]

Anyone bid the ♠ slam?

 

no, no one bid the ♥ slam either!

It was a hot mess!

6 people in 4S with only one making 4S+2

One person going off 2 in 6S

and a scattering of others.

[mw64ahw]

no, no one bid the ♥ slam either!

It was a hot mess!

6 people in 4S with only one making 4S+2

One person going off 2 in 6S

and a scattering of others.

Has anyone else noticed that those who bid a close makeable slam as above often go down, but the game bidders can make 6. I've seen this quite a few times, and wondered if there a sense of caution/lack of caution that leads us to this situation?

[Cyberyeti]

Has anyone else noticed that those who bid a close makeable slam as above often go down, but the game bidders can make 6. I've seen this quite a few times, and wondered if there a sense of caution/lack of caution that leads us to this situation?

 

It's a great slam if the trumps break, if you have an Ekren bid and know they and the hearts don't, you can also make it.

 

For example win A♣, cash ♠KQ, heart to the K, heart to the 9, heart AQ ditching diamonds, diamond AK, heart ruff, club ruff and the spade ace to come for 12

[hrothgar]

[hv=lin=st||pn|Me,Jean,Partner,Joan|md|4SKQ43HAQ974DAK7CA,S5HTDQ964CQJT9862,SA987HK2DJT32C543,SJT62HJ8653D85CK7|ev|b|rh||ah|Board%2017|mb|2H|mb|2N|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|]300|300|

This hand came up in the Club yesterday (IMPs).

I was making up a four at the last table and agreed to play partner's card.

EW was playing some sort of multi-everything and East opened 2H - meaning spades and hearts 'weak'.

I bid 2NT which was passed out for 2N+1 and -3

Is there a "rule of table 17" where you can open without points?

Or is this a reasonable preempt?

[/hv]

 

Rather than worrying about the opponent's method, you might want to focus more on your own.

2NT is an atrocious bid.

[LBengtsson]

your opps. play the 2♥ ekren instead of 2♦ opening. I have played against scandi players who use this convention and play multi 2♦ also. without any defence to 2♥ opening I would just bid 3nt with south hand. 2nt suggest near 17-19, not 22

[hrothgar]

your opps. play the 2♥ ekren instead of 2♦ opening. I have played against scandi players who use this convention and play multi 2♦ also. without any defence to 2♥ opening I would just bid 3nt with south hand. 2nt suggest near 17-19, not 22

 

If the opponents are playing 2♥ as Ekrens, you really want a penalty double available. (And this hand certainly qualifies)

[nullve]

I must have bid a zillion hands against my own 2-level artificial garbage preempts (but very possibly without learning anything of value :() and my favourite defense is to pretend RHO has opened a Weak Two. So Ekren 2♦/♥ are treated like Weak 2♦/♥, respectively. This makes it easy to find the spade fit and even the spade slam.

[mycroft]

As I have repeatedly said on this site, almost always in relation to preempts, there is nothing in the rules that says they have to make the same judgements you do. It is almost always worth asking about preempt style if you don't know it; you might be playing against the "we haven't discussed it. But it'll be 2/top 3 of course" people; you might be playing the old rubber hands that will almost certainly have an outside control; you might be playing E. and me who think first seat all white that Jxxxxx and a king somewhere (but not two!) is a 2♥ opener, or that Jxxxx 9xxxxx x x is a 2♥ overcall (or, with other partners, Mathe double) of your strong 2♣.

 

The Laws allow regulation of ultra-weak *1 bids* (okay, they allow whatever the RA wants to regulate, but, really, nobody does regulate natural preempts on strength). You live in Australia, home of Myxo 2s (originally called that because "they kill rabbits"; but for the last 20 years, the rabbits have been playing them!) and other artificial preempts that are deemed too hard for MeckWell to defend with out a written defence over here. If you're not used to artificial preempts, usually incredibly aggressive, then you've been living in a sheltered club there, and need to learn to defend against it, because it's everywhere (and then come here, with your written defences, and prove that they are too hard for MeckWell!)

[pescetom]

okay, they allow whatever the RA wants to regulate, but, really, nobody does regulate natural preempts on strength).

 

Even the EBU steers clear or regulating strength ("There is no restriction on the strength of a natural two-level or higher opening bid but similar requirements for full disclosure apply"). But in Italy at least, the problem comes back in through the window as a 2 ♦/♥/♠opening should be announced as "weak" if it is natural 6-10 HCP.

[TylerE]

Has anyone else noticed that those who bid a close makeable slam as above often go down, but the game bidders can make 6.

 

Defenders against slam tend to just take their two cashing tricks, whereas against again they will often defend more passively, because they're trying to beat _4_.

[Cyberyeti]

Even the EBU steers clear or regulating strength ("There is no restriction on the strength of a natural two-level or higher opening bid but similar requirements for full disclosure apply"). But in Italy at least, the problem comes back in through the window as a 2 ♦/♥/♠opening should be announced as "weak" if it is natural 6-10 HCP.

 

they do however define natural as 5+ cards, our 4 card weak 2s are alertable which causes problems when we correctly alert, opps assume we're playing a multi and they use the wrong defence.

[pescetom]

they do however define natural as 5+ cards, our 4 card weak 2s are alertable which causes problems when we correctly alert, opps assume we're playing a multi and they use the wrong defence.

 

In Italy you also announce Multi (!), which I guess Meckstroth would consider obscene, and I'm no fan either. It does have the advantage that 2♦ alerted must be pretty weird. On the downside (for multi fans, at least) in announced Multi the weak major option must be 6-10 HCP, which also implies there must be an undisclosed strong option (which is not so if you alert it).

[Cyberyeti]

In Italy you also announce Multi (!), which I guess Meckstroth would consider obscene, and I'm no fan either. It does have the advantage that 2♦ alerted must be pretty weird. On the downside (for multi fans, at least) in announced Multi the weak major option must be 6-10 HCP, which also implies there must be an undisclosed strong option (which is not so if you alert it).

 

Alerted 2♦ in the UK will be Benji/reverse or more rarely mexican if not multi which it is most of the time (or precision/roman), along with ours

[cherdano]

Focus on your cardplay first. Not making 10 tricks after getting an Ekrens opening is impossible to explain - did you think they were psyching?

You should also ask whether 2♥ promises 44 only or 54/45.

 

Then, as others have said, focus on your bidding. The only options after 2♥ are pass and 3N in my view, or maybe X (but I don't see what it would gain). 2N is not an option.

 

Finally, yes 2♥ on this hand is normal for many who play Ekrens. Some think, why not, it shows their hand in one bid, and then also bid 2♥ on ♠QT98 ♥KQJTxx ♦ x ♣ xx. How that is supposed to work I have no idea but that's not our concern.

[mw64ahw]

Focus on your cardplay first. Not making 10 tricks after getting an Ekrens opening is impossible to explain - did you think they were psyching?

You should also ask whether 2♥ promises 44 only or 54/45.

 

Then, as others have said, focus on your bidding. The only options after 2♥ are pass and 3N in my view, or maybe X (but I don't see what it would gain). 2N is not an option.

 

Finally, yes 2♥ on this hand is normal for many who play Ekrens. Some think, why not, it shows their hand in one bid, and then also bid 2♥ on ♠QT98 ♥KQJTxx ♦ x ♣ xx. How that is supposed to work I have no idea but that's not our concern.

Typically I wouldn't open 2♥ with 6♥ and suit quality >7 so that would be a pass for me. 45♥♠ are fine, but I tend not to open 4♥♠ with a mid-range point count

[johnu]

I bid 2NT which was passed out for 2N+1 and -3

Is there a "rule of table 17" where you can open without points?

Or is this a reasonable preempt?

 

As long as you are going to overcall 2NT with 22 HCP, there are no rules :lol:

[pilowsky]

Focus on your cardplay first. Not making 10 tricks after getting an Ekrens opening is impossible to explain - did you think they were psyching?

You should also ask whether 2♥ promises 44 only or 54/45.

 

Then, as others have said, focus on your bidding. The only options after 2♥ are pass and 3N in my view, or maybe X (but I don't see what it would gain). 2N is not an option.

 

Finally, yes 2♥ on this hand is normal for many who play Ekrens. Some think, why not, it shows their hand in one bid, and then also bid 2♥ on ♠QT98 ♥KQJTxx ♦ x ♣ xx. How that is supposed to work I have no idea but that's not our concern.

All good points.

Card-play - I'm battling through BridgeMaster, which is helping a lot.

Bidding - I agree with the 'adjectivals' on this one - as someone gently pointed out months ago ", your bidding needs a ton of work" - they were right.

And yes, 2NT is egregiously atrocious and appalling etc. I thought of doubling, which would have led West to bid 3♣ (another table), and we would still be in the dunny.

3NT may be best in this situation. It was number 3 on my list.

 

I did think it was a psych when I saw my hand.

It was alerted as "weak could be 5/4".

I had never played with my partner before and was following her card.

I had never heard of 'Ekrens' till now but will be sure to look it up.

 

Half the people on this site pre-alert "we play Multi's" some of the more adventurous ones used to say they played Myxi two's - (yes, spelled and typically used incorrectly) until it was banned.

Still, it is a Club tournament, so when people say things, they (including me) typically get it wrong, or their bid has a different meaning to their partners understanding.

A few get it consistently right.

 

In retrospect, I should have just ignored the bid and focussed on my own hand, but given that I was playing with someone that I had never played with before and it's unlikely we would have found the right spot after the 2♥.

 

I still think 2♥ is a disgraceful bid. It doesn't accurately describe the hand and its main benefit because it will prevent opps from finding their best spot.

Maybe that's fair, but if it is, why not just allow 2♣ multi - "could be strong, could be weak, might have 13 cards, some night be hearts or spades".

 

Let's put it this way suppose East had posted the hand - would you say (without seeing the other hands) that it was a reasonable bid, within the rules, and you would be enthusiastic to partner someone that played this system?

Alternatively, would you say it is something that I should incorporate into my repertoire?

[TylerE]

I think you need to get over your ego. 2♥ is a bid. It's not against the laws of bridge.

 

Frankly, with an attitude like that, I expect the sharper players in the club have you pretty well figured out, which makes bids like that even more likely to win.

[pilowsky]

I think you need to get over your ego. 2♥ is a bid. It's not against the laws of bridge.

 

Frankly, with an attitude like that, I expect the sharper players in the club have you pretty well figured out, which makes bids like that even more likely to win.

 

Wow, you have completely misunderstood my point.

Most of the players in the Club are better than me.

Something I am completely aware of - and so are they.

 

Myxomatosis is a system that was invented by a mate, Bob, at my pre-COVID club.

It's a HUM that was outlawed.

 

My 'attitude' as you rather quaintly put it is not that the bid is outrageous - only that it is uncommon - which is true.

And that I am trying to be less 'dull' as you imply so I can better cope with it.

 

I'm not the one that needs to get over himself.