[eagles123]

---

---

just interested in opinion, weak 2's on the above or not?

Spoiler

I thought these were horrible weak 2's but my partner bid the 2nd one in our last session and today at the lesson a weak 2 on the first one was pretty much just presumed

Thanks,

Eagles

[billw55]

Vulnerable both hands? No way, not even for klondike bar.

[gwnn]

I don't like 2H on these suits when you are vulnerable. At least in the first hand you have a singleton, but your suit quality is depressing In 3rd seat maybe with the first hand.

[NickRW]

Way too hot for me red in 2nd seat.

[TylerE]

Not for me. Would do it with the same hands if the suit was ♠ though.

[PhilKing]

Yes to both.

[barsikb]

Exactly same question

---

This hand belongs to diller Isn't it too good for weak 2?

[billw55]

That one looks like a normal 2♥. Sometimes you have a max, that's ok.

[barsikb]

billw55, partner had

---

Can they reach slam?

[jillybean]

No to both, our agreement is for concentrated values in 1st and 2nd seat.
3rd seat Yes.

[Cyberyeti]

I'd be much more comfortable with the first than the second, I don't want that much in the short suits.

To Barsikb, that's a 1♥ opener for me.

[mycroft]

No to both, because second-seat vul preempts promise something, and I don't have it. The first hand, I don't have a suit; the second hand, I have way too much defence (and no suit). Partner will put me in four and I'll go down (maybe not on the second hand, but I could be off three trumps and a trick); at least with the second, partner will not hit the appropriate number of spades when they bid it, and they'll go down "not enough".

First seat, I don't like the second (and probably won't open it 2), but the first is just fine with most of my partners. Third-seat, I'd open it with Kxx of spades and Txxxxx of hearts, and clearly also the second hand - and maybe the same hand with hearts headed by KQ9.

But it's a swings-and-roundabouts thing; the more you preempt within reason, the more disruption you do when it's their hand (and also when it's your hand; but the goal is for it to be their hand more often). Usually more disruption will benefit the "their hand" side; sometimes it won't. The less you preempt, the better your partner is placed to make the final decision right - but so are the opponents, and they're having a nice auction at the 1 level (when you didn't preempt) where your more aggressive colleagues are forcing action at the 3 level.

[inquiry]

No on the first two hands in the original post. On barsikb's hand, not vul, I would open 1♥, vulnerable 2♥ (but that is just me).

[Siegmund]

#1 is substandard, but people often do it and get away with it.
#2 is deeply flawed with two outside cards; I would never preempt with that honour distribution.
#3 seems obvious. (We aren't ALL crazy enough to open 1 just because we have a sound 2.)

[barsikb]

If hard to decide between 1H and 2H would it be a good idea to Pass and try to describe hand later?

[Codo]

Whether you playx a style where one or both hands are weak twos or not is much less important for your scores then playing the same stlyle...

With my regular partners, both are weak twos, but 2. hand red, well on a depressive day, we may pass.

[Vampyr]

barsikb, on 2013-July-19, 22:03, said:

If hard to decide between 1H and 2H would it be a good idea to Pass and try to describe hand later?

Many people believe that there is no such thing as a hand "between" a 1-opening and a weak two, except for hands that are not shape-suitable (eg 4-card major on the side). This idea is probably more useful if your suit is spades instead of hearts.

[mycroft]

My issue is that there are hands that aren't "between" 2 and 1, but that are "too much defence for weak 2, too little offence for 1" as well as those that are "limit raise in other major"-type hands.

I realize that the "other major" reason for not opening with a preempt is going the way of the passenger pigeon, but there are still many who believe in it, and if you open 2, and belong in the other major, and don't get there, partner *will* gripe. Less likely to gripe when you only get +100 in 3♠ undoubled, or 150 or 200 in 4♠ undoubled, but I still think it's more important not to deceive that way.