[Jinksy]

I feel like I should understand this better. From what I gather, the archetype would be something like this hand:

AQJx
xx
xx
KJxxx

Where say RHO is dealer, and the bidding goes

1D P 1H P /
2H 2S

Showing a decent four card suit and probably a playable spot in the fourth suit. Is that approx right?

What I'm not at all sure about is whether it's supposed to apply in these types of situations, where people talk about it:

1) Same sort of hand, LHO dealing

1H P 2H 2S(?) (why would you not just double or pass?)

2) Same sort of hand, without the 'pre' - RHO dealing,

1H P 2H P /
P 2S(?) (what would be the difference between 2S and X here? Should X deny 4!S?)

3) Similar hand, original auction

AQJx
xx
xxx
KJxx

or

AQJx
xx
xxxx
KJx

1D P 1H P /
2H 2S(?) (in what circumstances is P expected to pull to 3C?)

4) Good holding in their suit

AQJx
xx
xx
KJTxx

1C P 1H P /
2H 2S(?) (can this suggest their suit as a place to play? Does it matter whether they're playing short or prepared club, 4 card minors etc?)

5) Others?

[Tramticket]

It's not a term that I tend to use, but my understanding is that pre-protection involves bidding in the direct seat as if you are in the protecting (balancing) seat. This will be based on the fact that (1) opponents have found at least an eight-card fit (making it likely that you also have an eight-card fit) and (2) RHO has limited their hand. If you are sitting in the direct seat and hold shortage in their suit, it will often be right to compete because partner may hold some length in their suit and find it difficult to call in the pass-out seat.

A typical auction might be (you are dealer): Pass, (1♦), Pass, (2♦)*, Dbl [*2♦ is a natural, not an inverted raise].

With a singleton diamond and 4-4 in the majors you might double on 8-10 points - depending on vulnerability and form of scoring of course.

I'm not sure about some of your examples - on your first hand you ask "why would you not just double?" - I would double.

[gordontd]

I don't think it has anything to do with the style of action you choose to take, like overcalling four-card suits rather than doubling, but about coming into the auction with protecting values when you are not in the pass-out seat.

It's really just a phrase used to justify the desire to bid in risky situations

[Tramticket]

gordontd, on 2017-December-20, 03:32, said:

It's really just a phrase used to justify the desire to bid in risky situations

This is often very true. But ...

---

Pairs: Is it more risky for South to double or north to bid something? The main risk in South bidding on this junk is that North might take him seriously ...

[hrothgar]

FWIW, I first encountered this theory reaidng Better Bidding with Bergen v2 under the name OBAR BIDS

Opponents
Bid
And
Raise

Balance
In
Direct
Seat

There is some reasonable discussion in that book.

[nige1]

Like Jinksy, I find pre-protection a puzzling area. Because you have already passed, a 2♠ overcall seems OK, but double is a reasonable alternative.

---

If partner has 3 ♥s, then he might be reluctant to protect, so this hand is a good candidate for "pre"-protection. I prefer double to 2♠. The latter seems to show 5+ ♠s when we're not a passed hand

---

As Jinksy points out this is not pre-protecton. But 2♠ seems OK. Perhaps, double should deny 4♠, as Jinksy suggests.

---

Pre-protection is more dangerous but still OK, IMO. Partner might pull to 3♣ if opponents double 2♠.

---

Marginal decision.

---

I wouldn't pre-protect with this.

---

But I double with this, implying I might have ♣s over the opener.

---

[rmnka447]

nige1, on 2017-December-20, 08:08, said:

Like Jinksy, I find pre-protection a puzzling area. Because you have already passed, a 2♠ overcall seems OK, but double is a reasonable alternative.

---

If partner has 3 ♥s, then he might be reluctant to protect, so this hand is a good candidate for "pre"-protection. I prefer double to 2♠. The latter seems to show 5+ ♠s when we're not a passed hand

---

There is some risk here because West is still unlimited and with 4-4 majors would bid ♥ first. If you had ♠ AQJxx or similar, wouldn't you just make a 1 ♠ overcall? So, I think it's not clear that 2 ♠ has to show 5. If not, then why take the risk and bid on 4? There's a secondary reason besides just competing in this instance. If the opponents play in ♥, partner will be on opening lead and you have a strong preference for a ♠ lead. So 2 ♠ may force them up a level and guide the defense as well as find your fit when partner has 4+ ♠ that are just too bad to reopen with. That has to be tempered with the realization that RHO is still unlimited and there is some risk in competing at this point.

Quote

As Jinksy points out this is not pre-protecton. But 2♠ seems OK. Perhaps, double should deny 4♠, as Jinksy suggests.

---

It seems less likely opener or responder have ♠ length and, in this case, RHO is limited, but LHO (opener) is not. But this is a similar situation to the previous auction.

Quote

Pre-protection is more dangerous but still OK, IMO. Partner might pull to 3♣ if opponents double 2♠.

---

Marginal decision.

---

This is just a standard balancing situation in pass out seat. The opponents have found a fit with limited values. They have somewhere between 17-23 value and you're side likely has values falling into the same range. IMO, this is a clear cut 2 ♠ balance. At favorable or both non-vul, I'd even bid 2 ♠ with ♠ AQJx ♥ xx ♦ xxx ♣ xxxx.

Quote

I wouldn't pre-protect with this.

---

This is a hand where you might consider making a 1 ♠ overcall -- length and strength in opener's suit and good 4 card suit. Between opener and you there are presumably 8+ ♣, so partner is more likely to have a fit for your ♠.

Quote

But I double with this, implying I might have ♣s over the opener.

---

I'm doubling with this one also. If I catch partner with some values and 4 decent hearts -- 2 ♥ doubled might be the premier spot. If partner bids a suit, you've got some support.

[nige1]

https://www.youtube....h?v=x0wP9faQTwg