What is your plan?
SF3
#1
Posted 2012-November-25, 13:09
What is your plan?
#2
Posted 2012-November-25, 13:15
#3
Posted 2012-November-25, 13:36
#6
Posted 2012-November-25, 13:52
#7
Posted 2012-November-25, 16:25
However failing that approach bidding 4♥ directly has a lot to recommend it.
6 of a red suit seems to require much from partner: x xx KQxxxxx Axx - maybe on a good day...
Trust demands integrity, balance and collaboration.
District 11
Unit 124
Steve Moese
#8
Posted 2012-November-25, 16:36
#10
Posted 2012-November-25, 16:42
mike777, on 2012-November-25, 16:39, said:
4h would be natural to play.
Playing 4♣ RKB over 3-level preempts with responses something like" 0, 1, 1+Q, 2, 2+Q ??
Good idea!
Trust demands integrity, balance and collaboration.
District 11
Unit 124
Steve Moese
#11
Posted 2012-November-25, 16:43
wyman, on 2012-May-04, 09:48, said:
rbforster, on 2012-May-20, 21:04, said:
My YouTube Channel
#12
Posted 2012-November-25, 21:59
#13
Posted 2012-November-26, 00:14
x
xx
KQJxxxx
Axx
However this is extremely unlikely. I would bid 4H and expect to make.
(Just saw Steve's post - same example hand).
#14
Posted 2012-November-26, 04:33
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#15
Posted 2012-November-26, 05:06
4H would be a fit jump for us.
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
#16
Posted 2012-November-26, 08:08
void x Kxxxxxx xxxxx
x x Kxxxxxx Axxx
there is almost no distributional leeway here so
that is TWO hand out of umpty ump. It is such a tiny
chance of reward that making it more difficult for the
vul opps to find their black suit fit is much more
important. This is a rare hand where we do not
value p opinion of their hand and we merely bid what
we think we can make while preempting as much as
possible.
4H (even if we were togo down there is a huge chance the
opps can make 4+ of a black suit and it will be a ton easier for
them to bid if we pass or bid 3h).
#17
Posted 2012-November-26, 09:51
I come from a aggressive preempt style (thanks Ben) where W vs. R this is a fine preempt.
My partner on the other hand, likes 1st and 2nd seat to be conservative, solid, 2 of the top 3 honors.
I know preempts are very effective against weaker players and obviously less effective against
stronger players. Is there any benefit in adjusting your preempt style according to the level of
the opposition, is it legal?
#18
Posted 2012-November-26, 10:41
jillybean, on 2012-November-26, 09:51, said:
stronger players. Is there any benefit in adjusting your preempt style according to the level of
the opposition, is it legal?
Yes, it is legal, but I'm not sure that doing it in the way you suggest is right. I think it's right to preempt more aggressively against the strong players. They are more likely to get to the right spot if given a free run, and you frequently are on track to win the board against weak players anyway.
#19
Posted 2012-November-26, 11:01
"We don't make anything" is not the same as "nothing works". Since we haven't seen the opponents' hands, we don't know what scoring opportunity they may or may not have missed. North looks like a crystal-clear w vs r 3♦ opener to me.
#20
Posted 2012-November-26, 11:22
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."