[sceptic]

when is a 4 spade opener a preempt against opps and a pain in the **** for your partner?

this is an example of what I mean, it was played today half the field bit 4 spades and stayed there the other half bid slams

Scoring: IMP

---

West North East South

 -     -     1♠    Pass
 2♥    Pass  4♣    Pass
 4NT   Pass  5♦    Pass
 5♥    Pass  6♥    Pass
 Pass  Pass  


I would just like some opinions as to what is a good 4 spade opener and wht you need to bid on and what is a bad 4 spade opener,

on this example I was missing 3 aces so decided to quit and not bid over 4 spades

[EricK]

There is almost no bid in bridge which has only upsides and no downsides.

When you bid 4♠ on this sort of hand the main upsides are that opponents might miss a good game, slam or sacrifice, or that you will reach the same contract as you would otherwise but get inferior defense because you have revealed less information about your hand.

The main downsides are that you might miss a slam or might propel the opponents into a contract they wouldn't otherwise have reached.

Just like with any other bid you have to accept both the upsides and downsides and not judge it by a single result.

For what it's worth, the bidding to slam which you quoted was less than convining! What if West had ♠K ♥K9854 ♦KQ964 ♣AJ. Now if East breaks discipline and bids on over West's sign-off they are in a slam off two cashing Aces.

In fact East painted himself into a bit of a corner with his bidding sequence (1♠ opener, 4♣ splinter), as he still hadn't got across his extreme shape. That is why he felt compelled to bid on over the 5♥ sign-off.

Eric

[sceptic]

PS our bidding went 4 spades pass by me, I have been at the wine a bit to early and saved wrong persons board LOL

[pbleighton]

"when is a 4 spade opener a preempt against opps and a pain in the **** for your partner?"

Well, sometimes one, sometimes the other

I would have opened 4S with the East hand, putting West in a pickle, since E-W weren't vulnerable.

If vulnerable, I think West bids 6, because pd should have a very good hand (like the one shown), and you have a lot of good cards. 5D is an option, too, if pd will take it as a cue bid. I don't like 4NT because of the decent chance pd will have a void.

NV, I would have passed as West too. It depends on your agreements. I prefer to be able to bid 4S on weaker hands NV, and pay the price of occasionally missing a slam.

Peter

[hotShot]

If you open 4M it should show a hand where you have no interest in playing something else. So having an additional 4card ♥ excludes the 4♠ option to me.

If you splinter with a void, you should have an agreement how to bid on.
What i use:
Over any bid that shows single or void, the next higher suit (that is not our fit!) asks if I'm void or how many aces i have.
4♣ ask bid
4♦ shows void
4♥ single with 30/5
4♠ single with 41/5
4[NT] ....
With a void partner follow up is:
4♣ - 4♦ (void)
4♥ this is our fit, so we'd stop here
4♠ now RKCB excluding ♣ of cause.

[Free]

I would probably open 1♠, but the problem for me is the relayscheme doesn't contain any distributions with an 8 card... So I'd have to describe it as a 7-4-2-0 and we'd still end up in 6♥ by West or a guess when East has to play it... I think I'm lucky and West will bid ♥s first All this ofcourse when opps are quiet, when they intervene I don't know what will happen.

[Chamaco]

A few guidelines:

a. obviously 3rd seat anything goes, and 4th seat you are seldom worried of missing slams;

b. however, there is a big difference between 1st and 2nd seat; 1st seat you have 2 chances out of 3 of preempting opps, and 1/3 of preempting pard; 2nd seat it's 50-50% chances, so in the 2nd seat preempts should be VERY disciplined, regardless of the style you have chosen.
1st seat preempts may instead "take a chance" occasionally.

c. some indications that suggest against preempting when in doubt is about controls (AK or voids; singleton is a control, but most of the time you'll have a singleton when holding a suitable hand for preempts): if you have 2 aces, or an Ace and a void, if in doubt it is better to open 1 of a suit.

[Gerben42]

There are no rules for an 8-4 distribution. Whatever you open it might work out wrongly. 1♠ may give the opponents the required room to find their best contract of 6m for example, and 4♠ may preempt your partner, like here.

After 4♦ - 4♥ - 4NT (1st round ♣ control) it's stil tricky to bid slam.

[Chamaco]

Gerben42, on Mar 21 2005, 10:33 AM, said:

There are no rules for an 8-4 distribution. Whatever you open it might work out wrongly.

That's why, given the randomness, it is better to be consistent, so partner can know what to expect.

When pard is unpassed hand, it is better to try to describe rather than shoot in the dark, at least in borderline cases.
And, opposite unpassed pard, consistency pays off (and helps keeping the trust of pard)

Having an agrement about side controls may be good or bad, but it does help pard if he has a strong hand opposite our preempt.
However, any other agreement is acceptable, as long as it helps pard to decide whether to look or reject slam chances when he has a good hand.

Bottomline: either always open such 84 hands as preempts or always one of a suit, or always as Namyats (if it fits your Namyats requirements) but be consistent.
[Obvious disclaimer: obviously consistency does not mean we have to bid the same at any vulnerability ]

Otherwise we turn a partneship game in a "solo" game, according to our mood (and egoistic players will justify their actions by "table feel" ).

[P_Marlowe]

I would open 4S, always. For the given
vulnerability, I am only one looser stronger
than what I promise with the 4S opener.

I will not regrett missing this slam, since
the slam makes only, because South holds
"magic cards".

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Rebound]

With my regular partners, we will not preempt in 1st or 2nd seat with a side 4-card major so this is a 1♠ opener to me.

[Double !]

This might be faulty reasoning (so what else is new?), but I would open 1♠ in 1st or 2nd seat with the given hand for four reasons: 1) I have the master suit and can always outbid the opps at any one level if necessary, 2) my hand is playable in another suit, 3) my hand is 4 1/2 losers with a void: partner won't know how to value outside controls, and 4) I do have a little bit of defense. Switch the heart and spade suits and most of the above still applies. IMO, the real problem with the 4♠ bid is the void: there's no way to show it. P will likely play you for 7321 or 8221 and value his/her hand accordingly. I don't know which approach, pressure versus discipline, tends to win out in the long run. I tend to be more disciplined except for 3d seat (especially nv vs. v), then it's a case of "caveat emptor"! At least partner doesn't throw his cards at me and leave the room after I've gone down 1100 after opening an undisciplined pre-empt.

[EricK]

Double !, on Mar 21 2005, 08:38 PM, said:

This might be faulty reasoning (so what else is new?), but I would open 1♠ in 1st or 2nd seat with the given hand for four reasons: 1) I have the master suit and can always outbid the opps at any one level if necessary, 2) my hand is playable in another suit, 3) my hand is 4 1/2 losers with a void: partner won't know how to value outside controls, and 4) I do have a little bit of defense. Switch the heart and spade suits and most of the above still applies. IMO, the real problem with the 4♠ bid is the void: there's no way to show it. P will likely play you for 7321 or 8221 and value his/her hand accordingly. I don't know which approach, pressure versus discipline, tends to win out in the long run. I tend to be more disciplined except for 3d seat (especially nv vs. v), then it's a case of "caveat emptor"! At least partner doesn't throw his cards at me and leave the room after I've gone down 1100 after opening an undisciplined pre-empt.

How many times would you have to revoke to go down 1100 after opening 4♠ on the given hand?

Eric