[gwnn]

fred, on Apr 29 2009, 09:00 PM, said:

(...)other than 1D (which is REALLY not my style), Pass is the only call that makes it likely you will get a chance to show both of your suits (...)

Except a direct 4NT.

I don't think 4NT is the best bid with this hand but surely it's better than pass?

[jdonn]

Lobowolf, on Apr 29 2009, 03:25 PM, said:

whereagles, on Apr 29 2009, 03:12 PM, said:

fred, on Apr 29 2009, 07:00 PM, said:

(...) a massively unilateral action.

What's wrong with that? We do it all the time when we preempt.

Usually, we (as Philip Seymour Hoffman said in 'Charlie Wilson's War,' "Me and like 3 other guys," at least) don't have a 5-card side suit when we preempt.

Or opening hand strength.

[Fluffy]

This is an obvious 1♦ bid

[fred]

whereagles, on Apr 29 2009, 08:12 PM, said:

fred, on Apr 29 2009, 07:00 PM, said:

(...) a massively unilateral action.

What's wrong with that? We do it all the time when we preempt.

My statement was with respect to the concept of trying to show both your suits (say by opening 1C and later taking an action in a competitive auction that forces the partnership to the 5-level when you have no particular reason to expect the opps can make their game, that you can make 5 of something, or that 5 of something doubled will be a good sacrifice if the opponents can make their game).

That would be a "massively unilateral action" in my view.

But I do disagree with your basic point. There is nothing unilateral about making a preempt when your hand is close to what partner will expect you to have.

To me unilateral means taking partner out of the picture. A preempt is supposed to do just the opposite - put partner in a position to make an intelligent decision.

Quote

I wouldn't dream of opening 3+♣ opposing a non-passed pard, but opposite a passed pard and this weakish a hand, chances for a game are minimal. Why not wreaking some havoc?

I can think of 2 good reasons not to open 3C with this hand:

1) You give up on diamonds

2) There is a good chance your partner will misjudge as it will not occur to him that you have a hand like this

Sure 3C could work wonders, but it is far too random an action for my liking. You (and especially your partner) may not be impressed by the nature of the havoc you wreak.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[mikeh]

nick_s, on Apr 29 2009, 02:09 PM, said:

You've told us how good the opponents are, but not how good you are (apart from that you're playing in the B flight).

This is the sort of hand where I'd expect the experts to take the normal action - 1♣. There's no need for them to do anything outlandish. They expect to win by force.

I, OTOH, am looking for opportunities to go off-road. Accordingly, I'll try 3♣.

One reason non-experts are non-experts is that they have a propensity to make bad bids. You cannot improve your game that way.

Bid like an expert... if you are not one, then you will make enough bad bids as it is....don't intentionally add to your burden.

There is a reason the consensus of the expert opinion on this thread is heavily in favour of 1♣... their combined experience suggests that this is the most effective opening tactic. If it works for them, it should work for you.

[miguelm]

Are we so far of getting a plus by passing...?

I am surprised with this voting results....

[ArtK78]

1♣. I have an opening bid and clubs are my best suit.

I learned a long time ago just to bid my cards and let partner bid his cards, and usually everything will work out just fine.

I have no clue why anyone would want to open a preemptive call on a full opening bid with 2 suits and 2 aces.

[cherdanno]

ArtK78, on Apr 29 2009, 04:38 PM, said:

1♣. I have an opening bid and clubs are my best suit.

I learned a long time ago just to bid my cards and let partner bid his cards, and usually everything will work out just fine.

I have no clue why anyone would want to open a preemptive call on a full opening bid with 2 suits and 2 aces.

Because we are short in the majors. I think most players underestimate how much more likely the opponents have a game one when we are short in the majors.

[whereagles]

fred, on Apr 29 2009, 09:00 PM, said:

To me unilateral means taking partner out of the picture. A preempt is supposed to do just the opposite - put partner in a position to make an intelligent decision.

Well, it's a 3rd seat opener. I'm allowed to be a little bit more liberal in that situation. Especially if responder uses save-suggesting stuff (like the 'useless' 3NT bid) to sort out whether opener has a classic pree or something a little bit off shape.

Agree, though, that hiding the diamonds is quite unilateral. That's the price one pays for the extra levels of bidding taken away.

[MFA]

mikeh, on Apr 29 2009, 04:29 PM, said:

nick_s, on Apr 29 2009, 02:09 PM, said:

You've told us how good the opponents are, but not how good you are (apart from that you're playing in the B flight).

This is the sort of hand where I'd expect the experts to take the normal action - 1♣. There's no need for them to do anything outlandish. They expect to win by force.

I, OTOH, am looking for opportunities to go off-road.  Accordingly, I'll try 3♣.

One reason non-experts are non-experts is that they have a propensity to make bad bids. You cannot improve your game that way.

Bid like an expert... if you are not one, then you will make enough bad bids as it is....don't intentionally add to your burden.

There is a reason the consensus of the expert opinion on this thread is heavily in favour of 1♣... their combined experience suggests that this is the most effective opening tactic. If it works for them, it should work for you.

Well put.

[aguahombre]

My vote is apparently not as weird as I thought. Using Pearson Point Count here is sort of a joke, but pass is just as likely to create a swing as club bids are. Especially in a flight "B", even GNT who says the opponents won't blow it on their own.

Not sure I want to make a call which allows partner to apply the LAW.

[gnasher]

fred, on Apr 29 2009, 10:00 PM, said:

To me unilateral means taking partner out of the picture. A preempt is supposed to do just the opposite - put partner in a position to make an intelligent decision.

My preempts are supposed to put the opponents in a position to make an unintelligent decision.

[cherdanno]

I am going to run some simulations - anybody want to guess how likely it is our hand, how likely they have game, we have game, how often the parscore is a save against their game, etc.?
(It will be purely double dummy.)

[fred]

gnasher, on Apr 29 2009, 11:05 PM, said:

fred, on Apr 29 2009, 10:00 PM, said:

To me unilateral means taking partner out of the picture. A preempt is supposed to do just the opposite - put partner in a position to make an intelligent decision.

My preempts are supposed to put the opponents in a position to make an unintelligent decision.

My opponents tend to make intelligent decisions.

My partners tend to as well and, like most strong players I know, do not appreciate it when their partners take random actions that greatly decrease the chances that their intelligent decisions will succeed.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[dburn]

No real reason I can think of to do other than open 1♣; if I pass or open three or four, I will probably think that I ought to do something on the next round of the auction, but I will not know what. May get more of a feel for this if I start the auction at the one level - why should I be the one to decide how high our side should go, when we might make anything from one club to seven diamonds? 4♣ is the bid of a man who hates his partner; 1♦ is the bid of a man who hates everybody.

[CSGibson]

I was curious. At one table, this hand was opened 1 club, and opponents found their vulnerable heart game. There is a profitable sacrifice in 5 clubs, but there was a break in tempo that caused a director call, and got the score rolled back to 4 hearts making.

At the other table, with the fumble on the right, I decided to bid 4 clubs, figuring 1) it would put pressure on opps, and 2) partner would be able to decide whether to sac or bid on based on the defense in his hand, and based on his club fit (since my clubs are so much better than my diamonds). My LHO decided, with 5-3-2-3 shape, to bid 4 spades, going down 4 (partner wisely not sacrificing or doubling) in their 5-2 fit instead of being in their 6-3 heart fit.

RHO, who thought and fumbled to a small BIT, had:

---

I knew I took a view bidding 4 clubs, which is why I brought the hand to the forum. I like that it worked, but I don't think I'll do it again based on the comments of so many better players.

[jdonn]

dburn, on Apr 29 2009, 07:05 PM, said:

4♣ is the bid of a man who hates his partner; 1♦ is the bid of a man who hates everybody.

I think 4♣ is the bid of a man who hates the other 3 players, and 1♦ is the bid of a man who hates himself.

[Phil]

I really don't have a problem with 3♣. Even Fred's opponents would rather exchange information at the 1 level than the 3 level.

I have a passed partner and an unpassed opponent. I have excellent playing strength and some good intermediates. If partner takes the push to 5♣ of a major I don't expect to go down a lot and you can construct hands where its cold. I doubt partner is ever bidding 5♣ with a lot of soft cards in the majors, no matter what kind of hand he expects.

4♣ is a little out there for me. It might work, but it tends to randomize the results.

[the hog]

jdonn, on Apr 30 2009, 12:49 PM, said:

dburn, on Apr 29 2009, 07:05 PM, said:

4♣ is the bid of a man who hates his partner; 1♦ is the bid of a man who hates everybody.

I think 4♣ is the bid of a man who hates the other 3 players, and 1♦ is the bid of a man who hates himself.

1D for me, so that i can show both minors; and "no" I don't hate myself.

[whereagles]

Seems like fred and I have 'slightly' different views on the 3rd seat preempt style. We'll sort it out at the table. You just wait till we meet at the BB

Actually, 1♦ would have been my 2nd choice, planning to bid clubs next. I would feel uneasy if it came back in 4M, though. I'd have to take a guess there.