[32519]

32519, on 2012-November-28, 05:17, said:

What should your partnership agreement look like when responding to a 3-level minor suit pre-empt? We play 5-11 NV, 8-11 V, 7-card suit.

Partner needs to have a very good reason to remove a 3-level pre-empt, more so with a good hand short in the pre-empt suit. The pre-empters hand is inevitably useless outside of the pre-empt suit whereas responder has good trick taking potential in the other suits.

At our local club recently, partner opened 3♦ in first seat, 2nd seat passed, to me. I held a good 16 count, short in the suit opened. Gritting my teeth, I decided to pass as well. Now the pressure was on the player in 4th seat, to pass or to balance. With a 5-card ♠ suit, (and I think a 14 count) 4th seat bid 3♠ which just so happened to be my longest and strongest suit as well. The X card came out and we scored a top. 3♦ was left in at the other tables which made.

[32519]

mikeh, on 2012-December-03, 10:40, said:

The only other comment I have is that I do think that one should play a form of keycard optimized to the fact that RKCB really has no role. When was the last time anyone opened a minor preempt with 3 or 4 keycards?

The version I've seen and used is: 0, 1, 1 with the Q, 2, 2 with the Q. 4 om is the ask (and 4♣ is the ask over 3M).

MickyB, on 2012-December-03, 10:49, said:

I play something similar; 1, 0, 2 w/o Q, 2 with Q. I call it, "RKCB 10".

Thanks for this. I will be experimenting with mikeh's suggestion. If the reply is 0 keycards (the 1st step), you pretty well know that opener has the QJ(10?) of the suit opened. If not, then it is a truly reckless pre-empt with NONE of the top honours in the suit opened!