when to raise 3H opening

[nospam]

Dealer east passes. Partner (south) opens 3H showing a 7 card suit
and roughly 6 to 10 points. Right hand opponent (west) bids 3 spades.

I have

10 8 (spades)
A (hearts)
A J 10 7 2 (diamonds)
K 10 5 3 2 (clubs)

Should I pass or bid 4H ?

[nospam]

Forgot to say - no-one is vulnerable.


On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 22:49:32 +1300, nospam <nos...@nospam.nospam>
wrote:

[lsfei...@gmail.com]

yes bid

[David Stevenson]

nospam wrote

Pass looks routine.

--
David Stevenson Bridge RTFLB Cats Railways
Liverpool, England, UK bluejak on BBO Mbl: +44 7778 409 955
<webj...@gmail.com> EBL TD Tel: +44 151 677 7412
bluejak666 on Skype Bridgepage: http://blakjak.org/brg_menu.htm

[Will in New Haven]

I would pass but my choices would be double or pass. My partner will
not have enough to make 4H a good contract very often. I don't double
because partner's entry is going to be hard to find or nonexistent
after I cash the Ace of Hearts. I might double 4S.

Of course, my partner doesn't show some number of points. At this
vulnerability, he probably has KJTxxxx and out or similar.

--
Will in New Haven

[Jennifer Murphy]

On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 15:11:14 +0000, David Stevenson
<bri...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>nospam wrote
>>Dealer east passes. Partner (south) opens 3H showing a 7 card suit
>>and roughly 6 to 10 points. Right hand opponent (west) bids 3 spades.
>>
>>I have
>>
>>10 8 (spades)
>>A (hearts)
>>A J 10 7 2 (diamonds)
>>K 10 5 3 2 (clubs)
>>
>>Should I pass or bid 4H ?
>
> Pass looks routine.

What about bidding 4H to raise the preempt?

The N hand has at least 2 tricks in hearts. The AH might set up
partner's suit, yielding another trick, no? And the AC is more 50%
likely in W making N's K good. So 4H should go down 1 or at most 2.

On the other hand, NS has at least 18 HCP, so may EW has no game to
preempt.

[judyo...@gmail.com]

You have no reason to bid for a minus.

If you have some knowledge of the opponents that tells you that bidding 4H will increase the chance they will bid on, maybe it's right.

But if they are sensibly conservative after an opposing pre-empt, raising is a bad idea without more hope of a make.

Carl

[HoneyMonster]

Pass

[Will in New Haven]

On Jan 27, 2:02 pm, Jennifer Murphy <JenMur...@jm.invalid> wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 15:11:14 +0000, David Stevenson
>

> <brid...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >nospam wrote
> >>Dealer east passes.  Partner (south) opens 3H showing a 7 card suit
> >>and roughly 6 to 10 points.  Right hand opponent (west) bids 3 spades.
>
> >>I have
>
> >>10 8     (spades)
> >>A         (hearts)
> >>A J 10 7 2     (diamonds)
> >>K 10 5 3 2     (clubs)
>
> >>Should I pass or bid 4H ?
>
> >   Pass looks routine.
>
> What about bidding 4H to raise the preempt?

If they guarantee not to double, it might be ok. Continuing the
preempt without a fit is not a great idea. For constructive purposes,
the singleton Ace of Hearts is a fit but it also adds substantially to
our defensive potential.

>
> The N hand has at least 2 tricks in hearts. The AH might set up
> partner's suit, yielding another trick, no? And the AC is more 50%
> likely in W making N's K good. So 4H should go down 1 or at most 2.

I would hope partner has more than two tricks in Hearts. Non-
vulnerable, a conservative partner might be envisaged to have a decent
Heart suit and the Ace makes it better, of course. So that means six
or seven tricks if we play it in Hearts. Our outside Ace is a trick
and the King of Clubs has a good chance. So we have seven or eight
tricks if we play it. Looks like down two or three.

>
> On the other hand, NS has at least 18 HCP, so may EW has no game to
> preempt.

If we can make eight or nine tricks, I don't expect them to make more
than nine. The only reason to bid is the hope that they will misjudge
and bid a game and we would double it if they did.

[Paul Hightower]

"nospam" <nos...@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:njt9g8h942enb3nbp...@4ax.com...

What I do is picture partner with two of the top three honors, and possibly
a side card; for a three bid, I assume he does not have a good 10 hcp or two
Aces. So, I expect 7 trump winners. Partner is not likely to have a
singleton opposite my doubleton, so we probably have two fast spade losers
and a club. Perhaps partner has:
xx KQxxxxx ?(x)(x) ?(x)(x), where one of the ? may or may not be a high
card. Partner may need a side high card or singleton for us to beat 4S,
otherwise he can't get in to cash his heart winners and they can perhaps set
up a discard in clubs. So, we don't know whether they can make 4S. As for
4H, he probably needs a side high card to make that. So we don't know if we
can make 4H. This looks like 19 total tricks -- if we can't make 4H, they
can make 4S, and vice-versa. Bidding 4H might push them into a 4S bid we
can't beat.

I think I'll gamble they can't make 4S and hope 4H makes or is down one.
Some of the time when that isn't true they were going to bid 4S anyway. With
some partners I would have the understanding that my 4H bid (under their
expected 4S bid) invites the preemptor to double or bid with unusually good
defense or extra playing strength. This would be a good bidding poll uestion
IMO.

[judyo...@gmail.com]

You have described a VULNERABLE 3H opening.

[patmp...@gmail.com]

I'd bid four and hope partner has two diamonds. Make the ten of diamonds an eight and I'd pass.

[dake50]

Partner has DQx(x) +HKQ, so 10 tricks likely.
Or CQxx +HKQ, and DA takes DK for two D-tricks, so 10 tricks likely.
Bid 4H with chances to make. If relaying then to 4S, double.

[nospam]

I bid 4H because I expected them to make 3 spades. We went 1 light -
my partner is a good player, but he jumped on me for bidding 4H with
the knowledge that we would go light. It turned out that he wasn't
good enough for his 3H opening and the opposition can only make 1
spade or something. It's still not amazingly clear to me why 4H is
wrong if the opposition are likely to make 3 spades.

Here is the hand.

10 8
A

A J 10 7 2

K 10 5 3 2

A Q J 9 5 6 3 2
9 K Q 5 2
K 6 3 9 5 4
A 9 7 4 Q 8 6

K 7 4
J 10 8 7 6 4 3
Q 8
J

From looking on Richard Pavlicek website about pre-empts, south isn't
even good enough for 2H opening with both non vulnerable.

I reasoned that the opposition have the majority of points and a good
fit in spades so would make 3 spades.

[Adam Beneschan]

On Monday, January 28, 2013 2:15:56 PM UTC-8, nospam wrote:

> I bid 4H because I expected them to make 3 spades. We went 1 light -
> my partner is a good player, but he jumped on me for bidding 4H with
> the knowledge that we would go light. It turned out that he wasn't
> good enough for his 3H opening and the opposition can only make 1
> spade or something. It's still not amazingly clear to me why 4H is
> wrong if the opposition are likely to make 3 spades.
>
> Here is the hand.
>
> 10 8
> A
> A J 10 7 2
> K 10 5 3 2
>
> A Q J 9 5 6 3 2
> 9 K Q 5 2
> K 6 3 9 5 4
> A 9 7 4 Q 8 6
>
> K 7 4
> J 10 8 7 6 4 3
> Q 8
> J
>
> From looking on Richard Pavlicek website about pre-empts, south isn't
> even good enough for 2H opening with both non vulnerable.

That's not going to help you any if your partner's style isn't the same as Richard Pavlicek's. This is an area where each partnership (and player) has its own style. I'd guess that a significant number of good players, if not a majority, would go ahead and open 2H or 3H on the South hand at this vulnerability. There are some who would pass specifically because of the spade holding--but would open if the spades were switched with one of the other side suits. Others don't worry about things like that. (I lean toward being in the latter group.)

The important thing here is to discuss your opening preempts with your partner and make sure you're on the same page. There isn't any "right" or "wrong". Implying that your partner made an error because his preempts don't match the recommended style of any particular expert just doesn't cut it.

To address your earlier point: Bidding 4H because you expected them to make 3S is aiming at too narrow a target. Aside from the hands where 4H makes (for which you have to get lucky and find a running minor and a sound preempt, or something close to that), the bid wins only if both sides make exactly 9 tricks in their major; otherwise it loses. I don't think the odds are in favor of the bid.

-- Adam

[nospam]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:12:07 -0800 (PST), Adam Beneschan
<ad...@irvine.com> wrote:

>
>To address your earlier point: Bidding 4H because you expected them to make 3S is aiming at too narrow a target. Aside from the hands where 4H makes (for which you have to get lucky and find a running minor and a sound preempt, or something close to that), the bid wins only if both sides make exactly 9 tricks in their major; otherwise it loses. I don't think the odds are in favor of the bid.
>

Not true. 4H wins if NS make 8, 9 or 10 tricks and E/W can make 9 or
more tricks.

[Will in New Haven]

I bet he wouldn't advocate your 4H bid.

> I reasoned that the opposition have the majority of points and a good
> fit in spades so would make 3 spades.

You also reasoned that you wouldn't be three off doubled. Of course,
you were wrong on all counts. Your partner's actual hand is a
ridiculous preempt with more defense than he should have and a
horrible suit. Your 4H bid is worse.

Well, not much worse, but he didn't start a whiney "look what my
partner did" thread.

--
Will in New Haven

All change for round five, slow players please go home

[Will in New Haven]

On Jan 28, 6:45 pm, nospam <nos...@nospam.nospam> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:12:07 -0800 (PST), Adam Beneschan
>

> <a...@irvine.com> wrote:
>
> >To address your earlier point: Bidding 4H because you expected them to make 3S is aiming at too narrow a target.  Aside from the hands where 4H makes (for which you have to get lucky and find a running minor and a sound preempt, or something close to that), the bid wins only if both sides make exactly 9 tricks in their major; otherwise it loses.  I don't think the odds are in favor of the bid.
>
> Not true.  4H wins if NS make 8, 9 or 10 tricks and E/W can make 9 or
> more tricks.

Unless they bid 4S and make ten tricks. Then it either breaks even, if
they were going to bid game anyway, or loses.

[Adam Beneschan]

On Monday, January 28, 2013 3:45:20 PM UTC-8, nospam wrote:


> >To address your earlier point: Bidding 4H because you expected them to make 3S is aiming at too narrow a target. Aside from the hands where 4H makes (for which you have to get lucky and find a running minor and a sound preempt, or something close to that), the bid wins only if both sides make exactly 9 tricks in their major; otherwise it loses. I don't think the odds are in favor of the bid.
>
> >
>
>
>
> Not true. 4H wins if NS make 8, 9 or 10 tricks and E/W can make 9 or
> more tricks.

"8 tricks" is assuming the opponents are wimps who are afraid of their red cards. Dream on.

As for E/W making 9 "or more" tricks, I don't think so--unless you think they weren't going to bid the game. If they were always going to bid the game, your 4H doesn't matter except that it might induce partner to save, in which case I'd call it a win if your side makes 9+ tricks and a loss if they don't. So I guess that's another way to win. If your 4H pushes them into a game they weren't going to bid otherwise, and they make it, it's a loss. Anyway, that's why I didn't consider E/W making 10 tricks to be one of the possible ways to win. I figured it was likely that they'd bid it if they have it.

-- Adam

[HoneyMonster]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:44:03 -0800, Will in New Haven wrote:

> He didn't start a whiney "look what my partner did" thread.

Which is, of course, the greatest sin of all.

[nospam]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:44:03 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
<bill....@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:

>
>Well, not much worse, but he didn't start a whiney "look what my
>partner did" thread.

It's not remotely a whiney thread. The guy is doing me a favour by
playing with me for 3 sessions for which I'm very grateful. I'm
trying to make an effort to learn as much as I can from it. Judging
by the answers I got my question was perfectly legitimate. I never
once complained about what my partner bid.

[nospam]

I wow, so I have some other sins do I. BitchMonster

[nospam]

Gee, that's helpful. Do you have any more pearls of wisdom?

[HoneyMonster]

The question was "Should I pass or bid 4H ?". I answered it.

[Will in New Haven]

On Jan 29, 6:07 am, nospam <nos...@nospam.nospam> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:44:03 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>

> <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>
> >Well, not much worse, but he didn't start a whiney "look what my
> >partner did" thread.
>
> It's not remotely a whiney thread.  The guy is doing me a favour by
> playing with me for 3 sessions for which I'm very grateful.  I'm
> trying to make an effort to learn as much as I can from it.  Judging
> by the answers I got my question was perfectly legitimate.  I never
> once complained about what my partner bid.

Good. Your question wasn't _illegitimate_ but the answer was pretty
obvious to most of us.

--
Will in New Haven

"The true mystery which should be addressed in fiction is the unknown
thing behind other peoples' eyes,"

[patmp...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, January 31, 2013 9:44:36 AM UTC+8, Will in New Haven wrote:
> On Jan 29, 6:07 am, nospam <nos...@nospam.nospam> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:44:03 -0800 (PST), Will in New Haven
>
> >
>
> > <bill.re...@taylorandfrancis.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >Well, not much worse, but he didn't start a whiney "look what my
>
> > >partner did" thread.
>
> >
>
> > It's not remotely a whiney thread.  The guy is doing me a favour by
>
> > playing with me for 3 sessions for which I'm very grateful.  I'm
>
> > trying to make an effort to learn as much as I can from it.  Judging
>
> > by the answers I got my question was perfectly legitimate.  I never
>
> > once complained about what my partner bid.
>
>
>
> Good. Your question wasn't _illegitimate_ but the answer was pretty
>
> obvious to most of us.
>

Experts play differently from hackers like me. My partners always play sound preempts regardless of vulnerability. Experts will preempt on weaker hands. I've tried doing that with my partners but they hate it.

[RonfromLao]

You have an obvious pass. Fwiw I would also open 3H nv vs vul. (I realise that is not the given vulnerability). This is not a "terrible" 3H opening; it is one many aggressive players would make.
Ron

[Fred.]

On Sunday, January 27, 2013 4:49:32 AM UTC-5, nospam wrote:
> Dealer east passes. Partner (south) opens 3H showing a 7 card suit
>
> and roughly 6 to 10 points. Right hand opponent (west) bids 3 spades.
>
>
>
> I have
>
>
>
> 10 8 (spades)
>
> A (hearts)
>
> A J 10 7 2 (diamonds)
>
> K 10 5 3 2 (clubs)
>
>
>
> Should I pass or bid 4H ?

I assume you are non-vulnerable since you are sacrificing
against a part score. Facing a sound preempt you expect
to add 2.5- tricks to partner's promised 6.

4H is right if you and RHO each can take exactly 9
tricks (unlikely), or you can take 10 tricks (very unlikely) or
the opponents guess incorrectly over 4H. Personally, I would
rather hope that they guess incorrectly over 3H.

I am inclined to bid 4H only if I think we can make it and
can beat 4S.

I pass.

Fred.

[Eric Leong]

On Sunday, January 27, 2013 3:49:32 AM UTC-6, nospam wrote:
> Dealer east passes. Partner (south) opens 3H showing a 7 card suit
>
> and roughly 6 to 10 points. Right hand opponent (west) bids 3 spades.
>
>
>
> I have
>
>
>
> 10 8 (spades)
>
> A (hearts)
>
> A J 10 7 2 (diamonds)
>
> K 10 5 3 2 (clubs)
>
>
>
> Should I pass or bid 4H ?

A great source of partnership bad results is for one partner to make a descriptive bid that the other partner would not remotely bid himself.

Eric Leong