[jillybean]

I posted this hand on the other site when I couldn't get in here but want to share it here too.

---

MP - your bid and why?

Bonus question
Many users seem to be having technical problems here. are BBO forums going to be left to die a slow death?

[Gilithin]

As tempting as 4♠ is, I am a 3♠ bidder at these colours. I guess my third choice would be opening 1♥, which probably gives a good indication as to what I think about the other alternatives.

[AL78]

3♠ at red against green. Yes I have been experiencing techincal problems, I couldn't access the forum for half of the day yesterday.

[DavidKok]

I've already replied on the other site but I'll cast my vote here as well: 4♠. If people are interested in discussing the possible upsides and downsides of opening 3♠ versus 4♠ here I'd love to go into more detail, though my experience is that these discussions are of limited value. I think any other choice, e.g. pass-then-bid, 1♠-then-something, or psyching, is considerably worse.

[P_Marlowe]

3S

As it is, you are even a bid light for the call, but not by much.
At any other vul. 4S.
Would I have been in 2nd pos. I would go with 2S, if partner knowes
my style.


As for why: On the other side the 2-3-4 rule got mentioned, not
mentioned but also relevant, you are in first position, i.e. partner
could still be alive.

The problem with 3S at MP is, that 500 beats most games they have,
unless they take all tricks, but you know, that hearts break badly.
If you assume, that 500 is already a bad score, you could double down
and go for it, you are basically sac. against their slam.
On the other hand, given that you are in 1st pos., it is not 100% clear,
that the hand belongs to the opponents.
And if partner has the big hand, it will make it harder for p, if he
should pass 4S or raise 4S to 6S. Game level preempts can be a bit stronger
than the 2-3-4 rule indicates, you dont preempt above game level.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[TMorris]

3 ♠ for me as well.

[shyams]

3♠

[mw64ahw]

 shyams, on 2024-January-13, 04:09, said:

3♠

Not enough for Namyats 4♠ and I'm not risking a bucket load down in 4♠ X vulnerable so 3♠.

[mikeh]

Opening 4S often leads to 4S x when the opps own the hand. Say LHO doubled….it’s normal for this to be left in unless RHO has a very distributional hand.

Same hands….we open 3S and RHO almost always pulls the double.

At unfavourable, assuming the opps have the balance of power and relatively balanced hands, which will likely work out best for us? Imo, 3S is very likely to lead to a good result, compared to 4S

If the hand belongs to us, 3S won’t lead to a missed game. We’re red v white in first seat. Partner should play us for this kind of playing strength…not the void of course but a strong suit seven cards long.

In addition, once in a while 3S leads to 4H doubled, with partner holding a heart stack. Very few players bid 5H over 4S without a great suit and a good hand…but over 3S 4H can prove very tempting with a good but not great 6 card suit and a solid opening hand.

In summary…4S will lead to playing doubled far too often…down 2 will usually be a zero at mps and down 3 usually a zero at imps. 3S is far less likely to be doubled and won’t miss any thing, while sometimes setting a trap for the opps when it’s partner with the good hand.

[pescetom]

I find 4♠ unthinkable at this vulnerability, even playing Namyats or equivalent.
3♠ for me.

[jillybean]

Here's the full hand. It's not that interesting, posted in the wrong forum.

What I have found interesting is, after being unable to initially post the hand here I posted on the other site and that led me to some articles on preempts
written by Andrew Gumperz. Andrew says "The Rule of 2and 3 may be good enough for beginners, but it is a blunt instrument for aspiring tournament players. The rule focuses on one factor--keeping numbers smaller than the value of an opposing game, while ignoring more important considerations. If you follow the rule carefully, you will be taking risks that are too large in some situations, while not taking enough risks in others. To develop an expert understanding of preemption, you must look much deeper"
.and goes into great details, of course written with a focus on IMPs.

---

**vulnerability corrected

Lead ♦10. making 5

[akwoo]

Time for another gadget.

Many experts play that, after a preempt (including a weak 2), 4C asks for keycards (except when the preempt is in clubs; then 4D does the same). The responses are 0-1-1Q-2-2Q.

Given that gadget, South is a bit lazy - opposite a 2 or 2Q response, slam is quite good, and after a 1Q response, you have the 5 level safety to ask partner if they have a red king.

[jillybean]

We don't have that gadget, yet.
I agree, South was very restrained but without methods, there is no sensible way forward.

[mw64ahw]

Interestingly it's easier to bid 4♠ when unfavourable and responder has a marginal raise than when favourable.

[DavidKok]

I've read the Gumperz' articles about three years ago and really like them, I recommend reading the full 9-part series. He raises a lot of good points about evaluating preempts, and was part of my motivation for writing up my own thoughts on preempts at the time (though somewhat dated).

I think the 4♣ gadget is fine here and you may as well use it, but the odds that it's going to get you to slam are poor. You'll be volunteering playing in 5 dozens of times for every slam you find this way, though at IMPs that might be worth it (while at MPs I'm not so sure). If preempter has outside strength it is very likely to be in clubs. I'd probably still bid it though, but I'm not sure if the expected score from using it is positive. In general I think people put too much constructive emphasis on their preempts, sacrificing frequency to make sure partner can make a safe slam try (and drop us at the 5-level, almost always).

[thepossum]

 jillybean, on 2024-January-12, 20:19, said:

I posted this hand on the other site when I couldn't get in here but want to share it here too.

---

MP - your bid and why?

Bonus question
Many users seem to be having technical problems here. are BBO forums going to be left to die a slow death?

I know some people would be upset but I would consider 2 spades

[Gilithin]

 DavidKok, on 2024-January-14, 03:14, said:

I think the 4♣ gadget is fine here and you may as well use it, but the odds that it's going to get you to slam are poor.

I would agree over a 3♠ preempt but after a red 4♠ opening, I would suggest that slam will often be good. Imagine the ♦3 as the ♠2, say. I do notice that jillybean changed the vulnerability in the second hand diagram though, so perhaps Opener chose 3♠ red and Responder just raised to 4 at Game All.

[jillybean]

Again, we don't have a 4♣ gadget. Vulnerability was R vs. W as in OP.

[pescetom]

 akwoo, on 2024-January-13, 22:17, said:

Time for another gadget.

Many experts play that, after a preempt (including a weak 2), 4C asks for keycards (except when the preempt is in clubs; then 4D does the same). The responses are 0-1-1Q-2-2Q.

Given that gadget, South is a bit lazy - opposite a 2 or 2Q response, slam is quite good, and after a 1Q response, you have the 5 level safety to ask partner if they have a red king.

I find the custom replies an unnecessary complication and prefer that 4C (or 4D if the preempt is in clubs) is a simple Kickback with normal RKCB replies (so effectively 1,0,2,2Q). Standard Q ask and Specific Kings ask remain, so in spades we too can stop in game if opener shows 1 Keycard but denies Q (or shows 2 without Q for that matter) and in hearts we aren't forced to 5 level with 1Q.

As Davidkok said, it's important not to use this gadget over-optimistically and finish unnecessarily in 5M.
It's also important to avoid employing it as a third seat psyche, given that it is effectively protected by system.

[P_Marlowe]

 jillybean, on 2024-January-13, 19:42, said:

Here's the full hand. It's not that interesting, posted in the wrong forum.

What I have found interesting is, after being unable to initially post the hand here I posted on the other site and that led me to some articles on preempts
written by Andrew Gumperz. Andrew says "The Rule of 2and 3 may be good enough for beginners, but it is a blunt instrument for aspiring tournament players. The rule focuses on one factor--keeping numbers smaller than the value of an opposing game, while ignoring more important considerations. If you follow the rule carefully, you will be taking risks that are too large in some situations, while not taking enough risks in others. To develop an expert understanding of preemption, you must look much deeper"
.and goes into great details, of course written with a focus on IMPs.

---

Lead ♦10. making 5

The vul. in the orig. was red vs. green, now it got changed to red vs. red.
The rule 2 and 3 does not take into the account the vul of the opponents, in contrast to the 2-3-4 rule, which advocates 2S,
it is not even close, I miscounted.
If you follow the rule of 2-3-4, responder has 3 sure tricks, and the ruffing value will generate 1-2 add. tricks, this means
you are unlikely to make 12 tricks and due to this you should simply raise to 4S and let it be, the preempt at equal vul.
promised 6 tricks, you have 4-5, the side king is not there, ..., maybe KT... is possible, but unlikely.

The advantage of 3S with the original hand is, it is the mainstream bid, and you are protected by their fear, that 3SX may make,
and just a reminder 4SX will usually cost more than their small slam, it is 1100, the small slam is less.