[lesh]

Hi Everyone,

Statistically speaking, when is a good idea to open 1M in 1st and 2nd position with 7+cards and between 11 to 15 points? What are your thoughts on that?

Let me give you the following extreme example: would you ever open 4♠ in 1st or 2nd position with: Love all, ♠KJ1086543 ♥K2 ♦KJ ♣K -

[steve2005]

Even more extreme example ♠KJ1086543 ♥K2 ♦K2 ♣2 -

still would open 1♠. My partners won't look for slam over my 4♠ pre-empt with 3 Aces and no ruffing potential. Will yours?

[Phil]

Depends on vulnerability but reasonable 8 card suit or 74 and maybe one,outside card.

[awm]

I'd open 4S. Are the odds to miss slam really so high? For partner to have three aces is only 11%, and slam does not always make opposite three aces (it may well be on a finesse in spades or the like). Partner may also bid on with a little more than three aces (say AQ Axx AQxxx xxx)?

Against this opponents have many chances to go wrong over the 4S preempt.

[WesleyC]

lesh, on 2015-May-07, 14:07, said:

Hi Everyone,

Statistically speaking, when is a good idea to open 1M in 1st and 2nd position with 7+cards and between 11 to 15 points? What are your thoughts on that?

Let me give you the following extreme example: would you ever open 4♠ in 1st or 2nd position with: Love all, ♠KJ1086543 ♥K2 ♦KJ ♣K -

There's been a bit of discussion on this topic recently, and you might be interested to check out Richard Pavlicek's analysis of this (and similar decisions) in high level play.

Pavlicek Major Tournament Analysis

Pavlicek 1S vs 4S Analysis

My personal conclusion is to open 4S on more hands in the 10-12 HCP range if they fit all the other criteria.

However your sample hand isn't a 4S opening for me because it has the wrong ratio of defence to offence. If we give partner scattered values and short spades, we'll go down in 4S, and the opponents probably weren't making their contract either. I'm confident enough in my methods that I can open this hand at the 1 level and stop in a part score most of the time that it is right.

[gszes]

Vulnerability will always play an important part in any decision making process but let us ignore vulnerability for now and go with the following question. If your hand were
KJTxxxxx xx x xx what would you prefr to open in 1st or 2nd seat? I would much prefer to open 4s. Little to no defense and virtually no chance the combined hands will be better off in another suit.

Note that if the above example hand is a reasonable minimum imagine how totally impossible you make partners future decisions if you also include such hands like
KJTxxxxx Kx Kx (K or x). The very type of hand p might wish to double the opps at the 5 level are the hands that are most likely to allow us to make slam yet we would hardly dare to pull 5hx to 6s (it would border on madnss to do so).

Try to temper your preempts to ones that not only hinder the opps but help p make rational decisions as well. It is the thinking part that generally makes this a fun sport and always running and gunning might win some hands along the way but takes away a LOT of the fun of the game for your poor partner who essentially becomes a puppet to your whims.

FWIW I open 1s with your examples 1/2 seat now 3/4 is a different story when slam possibility is essentially gone so 4s is great then since the only players really affected are the opps (yes yes p will still sac some when they should not but the odds are way in our favor of that not happening).

[jdonn]

I don't know that I would open 4♠ on the example hand, but I definitely think Adam has the right idea. Opening 4 of a major leads to SO many mistakes by the opponents - generally bidding and going for a number when they don't catch well. These are good results out of nowhere and they happen all the time. You also catch a lot of misdefenses against your contract since they are leading and defending largely blind. I think it's a good idea on quite a few hands that are strong enough to be 1 level openers but 'look' like 4 level openers. People just don't open 4 of a major often enough.

To be fair, I don't even think missing slam is the biggest risk in opening at the 4 level on that hand. If partner is 11% to hold 3 aces, we still won't always make slam. There may be a trump loser, or one ace may be opposite our singleton and we still lose two tricks in a Kx suit, of partner has the 3 outside aces and we lose 2 trump tricks. To me the much more likely risk is that we go down in 4♠ when we could have stopped in 2 or 3 on some auctions if we had opened 1.

[PhilKing]

How about this one ....

♠AT9xxxx ♥xx ♦Axxx ♣-

First in hand at game all. Shocking, isn't it? But it was opened at two out of four tables in the USBC semis last night, and it gained a game swing once and broke even the other time.

[Phil]

PhilKing, on 2015-May-15, 02:22, said:

How about this one ....

♠AT9xxxx ♥xx ♦Axxx ♣-

First in hand at game all. Shocking, isn't it? But it was opened at two out of four tables in the USBC semis last night, and it gained a game swing once and broke even the other time.

I was surprised at this too. JLall could have made 5C if he played for 72 spades and 40 clubs but who preempts 4S red on AT-7th?

Apparently everyone.