[badderzboy]

Scoring: MP

---

What would you open and what do you think of the alternatives

Steve

[paulg]

Easy 1♦ for me, with pass being the obvious alternative. No other option.

p

[gwnn]

No way I'm preempting on this, way way way too good spades, way too few clubs. And way too weak to open on 1 level (in terms of defense).

[P_Marlowe]

Pass.

The alternative being 3D / 4D.

This is more a matter of partnership agreement,
my partner prefers to pass with this type of hand
in 1st and 2nd seat, in 3rd seat 4D would be clear,
and since I am neutral, I comply.

I dont like a 1D opening.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[helene_t]

1♦, 2nd choice pass, 3rd choice 4♦.

This hand is waaaayyyyyy too strong for 3♦.

[cjames]

Pass

[Gerben42]

Pass, or 2♦ intermediate with my regular partner.

[nik1998]

I will open 3♦

[Roupoil]

Either 1♦ or 4♦, depanding on my mood. But I can't resist bidding with this hand.

[TimG]

Is there other than anecdotal evidence that preempting with a side four-card major leads to bad results? (This hand may well be too strong for a 3♦ opening bid, but to me that argues in favor of 1♦ rather than pass.)

[hrothgar]

I'm normally happy to open at the game level with virtually any 7-4 pattern.

This hand is the exception. I have soft values, a side 4 card major, a side void, and a weak Diamond suit.

I still open 5♦ mind you.
But I don't feel happy about it...

I neither expect not do I deserve support for this bid, but its what I'd do at the table.

I'll be interested to see the actual hands...

[Apollo81]

I'd pass and almost certainly bid later.

[jdonn]

TimG, on Feb 1 2008, 01:38 PM, said:

Is there other than anecdotal evidence that preempting with a side four-card major leads to bad results? (This hand may well be too strong for a 3♦ opening bid, but to me that argues in favor of 1♦ rather than pass.)

I'm not sure what other sort of evidence you think is missing. I have seen it work badly (and well) a number of times to preempt with a four card major. Personally, for me this major is too good and I would pass. 1♦ is not horrible to me. 4♦ is the right preempt on playing strength, but I don't think this is right for a preempt at all.

[whereagles]

Well, I'll just open 3♦ and I don't care what you think

[TimG]

jdonn, on Feb 1 2008, 02:51 PM, said:

TimG, on Feb 1 2008, 01:38 PM, said:

Is there other than anecdotal evidence that preempting with a side four-card major leads to bad results?  (This hand may well be too strong for a 3♦ opening bid, but to me that argues in favor of 1♦ rather than pass.)

I'm not sure what other sort of evidence you think is missing. I have seen it work badly (and well) a number of times to preempt with a four card major. Personally, for me this major is too good and I would pass. 1♦ is not horrible to me. 4♦ is the right preempt on playing strength, but I don't think this is right for a preempt at all.

I wondered if anyone has taken the time to note hands where they have preempted with a side four-card major and determined through a bunch of results that it is a losing action. Or, sifted through a database of hands and results to come to some sort of conclusion regarding the merits.

[jdonn]

TimG, on Feb 1 2008, 03:49 PM, said:

jdonn, on Feb 1 2008, 02:51 PM, said:

TimG, on Feb 1 2008, 01:38 PM, said:

Is there other than anecdotal evidence that preempting with a side four-card major leads to bad results?  (This hand may well be too strong for a 3♦ opening bid, but to me that argues in favor of 1♦ rather than pass.)

I'm not sure what other sort of evidence you think is missing. I have seen it work badly (and well) a number of times to preempt with a four card major. Personally, for me this major is too good and I would pass. 1♦ is not horrible to me. 4♦ is the right preempt on playing strength, but I don't think this is right for a preempt at all.

I wondered if anyone has taken the time to note hands where they have preempted with a side four-card major and determined through a bunch of results that it is a losing action. Or, sifted through a database of hands and results to come to some sort of conclusion regarding the merits.

My partner did it twice in the LM pairs in San Francisco (both times I would have done it too.) Both times we played 3NT when a 4-4 major suit fit would have made more tricks. But no I've never done a detailed analysis of hand records. It's a difficult thing to analyze since maybe on hands where it looks like it breaks even, the fact you preempted really gained or lost in some subtle way, such as which opponent declares or helping them play the hand.

[han]

I have no problem opening with a side 4-card major when it has no honors or when I'm in third seat (duh!). I'm less strict about it when favorable in first seat.

With this hand I'd pass though.


I'm sure that Ben (inquiry) could easily run a bridgebrowser search to see what the results are when preempting in a minor with a side 4-card major (maybe even prescribing that it has 0, 1 or 2 honors in the side suit).

Another idea would be to look at vugraph records from major tournaments and see what the top players do with such hands and what their results are. Of course for those results to be significant you'd have to take a large database.

[joker_gib]

Pass, second choice : 1♦

[pclayton]

I'd probably open 1♦. I don't know that this hand is going to be any easier to describe after I pass. It's certainly borderline but I do have a bunch of 10's.

About the only thing that happens with any kind of frequency is that pard bashes into 3N on a 12 count without a diamond fit.