A preempt question

[thepossum]

Hi all

 

Recently had this hand opposite a 3-level pre-empt - described as 7+ hearts and 5-9 HCPs

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sakt7654h65d9cak9&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=3h(7%2B%20H%205-9%20HCP%20Q%2B%20H)p]133|200[/hv]

 

I'm not sure exactly but I think you would generally describe North's pre-emptive style as sound, also on the 234 pre-empt method they would be close to a 3 every time. ie 3 bid -> 6 tricks whatever, maybe 7 losers if you have a fit

 

What would you do with the above hand. What extra would it take to consider a slam

I was rather too ambitious and ended in 5H. How do you safely explore after a pre-empt

 

I considered bidding Spades but decided to go with hearts

 

Occasionally my partner has bid a pre-empt with a hand I would consider opening 2C

[LBengtsson]

Occasionally my partner has bid a pre-empt with a hand I would consider opening 2C

 

That does not help!

 

But to answer your question I would just raise to 4♥ and not explore slam.

 

If your partner has made a genuine pre-empt, then his hand should not be ♥AQxxxxx + ♦A or ♥KQJxxxx + ♦A, so I play the combined hands for two losers.

 

There are a combination of hands where slam may be possible. But most of those are so close to a one level opening bid, that the only advice I can give is to tell partner to only open with a pre-empt when he has a pre-empt. That is 7 cards and 5-9 points at the three level.

 

Edit: A new suit bid after a pre-empt is forcing and shows a good 6+ card suit. As for exploring slam after a pre-empt, that is difficult as obviously bidding space has been taken away. There is a convention where 3NT is not to play, especially over a major three-level pre-empt, but is a Ogust-type bid asking about the quality/controls of the pre-empt suit, and there is a similar bid of 4♣ over 3M that asks also I think.

[thepossum]

Thx

 

So over a genuine pre-empt unless you had some really unusual monster slam should never be considered

 

How about calls on whether your suit may be better or 3NT?

 

I ran a small sim and 4S is better odds than 4H. Sadly I didn't bid it

 

But you hope that 4+6 is a good chance

[Cyberyeti]

That does not help!

 

 

There are a combination of hands where slam may be possible. But most of those are so close to a one level opening bid, that the only advice I can give is to tell partner to only open with a pre-empt when he has a pre-empt. That is 7 cards and 5-9 points at the three level.

 

 

There are plenty of hands like xxx, AKxxxxx, xx, x that will make 12 in spades but only 11 in hearts if they're 3-1, I don't see the harm in 3♠ particularly at MPs to see if partner raises

[thepossum]

Sorry I didn't say it was MPs

[AL78]

There are plenty of hands like xxx, AKxxxxx, xx, x that will make 12 in spades but only 11 in hearts if they're 3-1, I don't see the harm in 3♠ particularly at MPs to see if partner raises

 

That is an example of slam being good with the perfect hand opposite. The danger if you go looking is that if opener does not have an ace, you stop in 5♠, it goes heart to the ace, heart ruff, diamond ace.

[Cyberyeti]

That is an example of slam being good with the perfect hand opposite. The danger if you go looking is that if opener does not have an ace, you stop in 5♠, it goes heart to the ace, heart ruff, diamond ace.

 

Not saying I necessarily go looking, I'd rather take 480 than 450

[DavidKok]

There are plenty of hands like xxx, AKxxxxx, xx, x that will make 12 in spades but only 11 in hearts if they're 3-1, I don't see the harm in 3♠ particularly at MPs to see if partner raises

This hand opens 4♥, it's too strong for 3.

[Cyberyeti]

This hand opens 4♥, it's too strong for 3.

 

Many people (including by the looks of it the OP's partner) in first seat without vulnerable opps would consider this a very normal preempt and might have another quack too, AK 7th and out is pretty standard.

[DavidKok]

The diagram says not vulnerable. AK-7th and a queen is a 1-level opening in my opinion.

[LBengtsson]

There are plenty of hands like xxx, AKxxxxx, xx, x that will make 12 in spades but only 11 in hearts if they're 3-1, I don't see the harm in 3♠ particularly at MPs to see if partner raises

 

That I agree with, but how do you know partner has this hand and not another hand with 2 card ♠ support and ♥AQJxxxx or similar? Do you only raise a 3♠ bid here with only 3 card support, not 2 card support? That is why I did not mention in my original post bidding 3♠ here. The other small consideration is if West has any sort of minor suit-oriented hand, it makes it easier for him to enter the auction a level lower, and for the opps. to find their possible 10 card ♦ fit for a probable sacrifice of -300 depending how the cards lie.

[akwoo]

The diagram says not vulnerable. AK-7th and a queen is a 1-level opening in my opinion.

 

For me, only playing Precision.

 

Playing 2/1, this is incredibly dangerous. Partner will game force on ♠KQx ♥x ♦AJxxx ♣Kxxx (and that's not even a minimum to game force) and you will have a choice of hopeless games.

 

(I suppose there are some light-opening Acol-ish systems where I'll open at the 1 level.)

[DavidKok]

Thanks for explaining, I had never considered that. That's devastating.

[Cyberyeti]

The diagram says not vulnerable. AK-7th and a queen is a 1-level opening in my opinion.

 

Your opinion doesn't matter, OP implies that would be a preempt for their partner (I open 1 also unless the Q is stiff, but a stiff Q♠ is still good)

[DavidKok]

Fair enough.

 

Regarding the original question, over a preempt there is simply not enough space to explore safely. Your best bet is having solid agreements on what does and does not constitute a preempt (ideally in more detail than 'rule of X'). Lacking that you simply have to guess, though it is important to keep in mind that the stronger your hand, the more likely it is that partner's hand is near the bottom of the range. Some pairs play specific gadgets (such as 4♣ modified keycards) to facilitate some slam investigation, but mostly you are just limited by the amount of remaining bidding space. In my opinion the example hand is far too weak to make a slam try, even opposite sound preempts.

 

As an aside, opening 2♣ on a hand with not that many HCP but a long solid suit tends to combine the worst aspects of preempting and opening. Your partner will overvalue their points opposite your likely shortness, the opponents are likely to have both shape and values to intervene, you haven't shown your suit(s) yet, you reduce the amount of bidding space available for slam investigation and if partner doubles something for penalties you are left with an impossible decision. 2♣ is more of a last resort opening, when you fear that an opening at the 1-level will be passed out because all other three hands are likely broke.

[thepossum]

I should have clarified my rather tongue in cheek 2C. They often preempt with what I would have used to open as a strong 2 possibly in the past :) AKQJxxxxxxxxxxxxxx etc At least a 1 bid :)

 

Sadly this one was a genuinely weak 3 with barely 5 tricks so making 4 was a struggle. Spades made 5 easily

[thepossum]

I just faced another 3H pre-empt (from the same partner) which was a definite 1 bid in my book

 

I managed to make all 13 tricks as did most of us and one person even bid slam

 

Would you bid 6 or even risk 3NT???? MPs -there were entries galore

 

[hv=pc=n&s=sq73ha3da32caqj65&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=p3h(7%2BH%205-%20points%20)p4hppp]133|200[/hv]

 

Both should be red

[mw64ahw]

On the above hand; after revaluation South's hand looks strong enough for a slam try assuming the 3♥ bid shows 6+playing tricks at equal vulnerability

 

At this vulnerability 3NT may also be makeable, but I would favour ♥

[pescetom]

I just faced another 3H pre-empt (from the same partner) which was a definite 1 bid in my book

 

I managed to make all 13 tricks as did most of us and one person even bid slam

 

Would you bid 6 or even risk 3NT???? MPs -there were entries galore

 

 

It's a good advert for playing 4♣ as kickback over 3M, then passing on less than 2 keycards: if he really does have ♠A without ♥K then he is paying the beer in any case.