Help
opening 1d might be "safe" but I find it difficult
to see it as "effective". What can you possibly do
after opening 1d that will help p make rational
decisions about the bidding?? Given that p can't make
rational decisions how can you trust their judgements?
your bidding goes 1d 1s 2d 3n are you going to bite the
bullet and pass or are you tempted to overrule???
If you open 1d opps bidding p passing are you willing
to remain quiet or will you try a delayed preempt??
What if p x in a competitive auction??? can you pass?
IMO opening 1d with this collection leads to far more
nonsense than starting with a simple preempt.
Opening 3d has one major benefit here. It shows a
1 suited hand with little defense and around 8 tricks
at this vulerability. Seems to be exactly what you
have so go for it. P will know you either have
exceptional length or a trick on the outside for this
bid and hopefully they can make a more reasoned
decision on how to proceed.
2d is out of the picture because it makes the range
of a 2d bid so wide as to make it impossible to use.
4d is a close approximation but has 2 drawbacks.
1. It bypasses 3n (this is a rather large problem)
2. The 2 aces make it a low % the opps have a high
level contract so making a huge preempt at this vul
short of playing tricks seems overly aggressive.
MSC problem discussion 8 diamonds to open
#22
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,611
- Joined: 2006-March-18
Posted 2012-April-25, 08:36
Just to clarify a few things.
I am not proposing that one bid 2♦ on everything from 6322 KQTxxx♦ and out, to an 8 bagger with two aces. I am suggesting that you might have a playable system in which you bid 2♦ on the "normal" hands (5-10 pts, ok 6 card suit, no 4cM), and also on some freak preempt hands that might normally bid 4-5♦ except they have some flaws (too good to bypass 3N, too many aces make slam more likely than partner would expect, etc). The latter hand type would bid again if possible.
I was planning to bid 4♦ if the opponents have not clearly found or shown their major suits at the point were I can bid, such as the auctions listed in OP. It's possible that it comes back to me at 4M (and I'm passing for the same reasons I'm not opening 5♦), but with both majors in play and the opponents expected to have diamond shortness, I think it will be much more likely that they will start slow with a double to keep both majors in play. I wouldn't suggest doing this if my suit were a major, for example, because (among many other good reasons) there's no major-suit ambiguity to the opponents' takeout doubles - a factor that makes preempting more effective in diamonds than in other suits.
Yes, I am in the camp that 2 level bids are more constructive than 3 level ones. This is why, if I didn't bid 1♦ on this hand (which is fine), I would bid 2♦ to keep partner in the loop about forward-going possibilities.
gszes, on 2012-April-25, 06:43, said:
2d is out of the picture because it makes the range
of a 2d bid so wide as to make it impossible to use.
of a 2d bid so wide as to make it impossible to use.
I am not proposing that one bid 2♦ on everything from 6322 KQTxxx♦ and out, to an 8 bagger with two aces. I am suggesting that you might have a playable system in which you bid 2♦ on the "normal" hands (5-10 pts, ok 6 card suit, no 4cM), and also on some freak preempt hands that might normally bid 4-5♦ except they have some flaws (too good to bypass 3N, too many aces make slam more likely than partner would expect, etc). The latter hand type would bid again if possible.
MrAce, on 2012-April-24, 17:32, said:
When are you planning to bid again ? You hold an 8 card suit, at which level are you expecting the biding come in front of you ? Seriously ? If i was forced to make a guess i dont expect anything less than 4-5 level majority of the time when i hold an 8 card suit. You will have to probably bid 5♦ on your next turn, or just pass it out.
I was planning to bid 4♦ if the opponents have not clearly found or shown their major suits at the point were I can bid, such as the auctions listed in OP. It's possible that it comes back to me at 4M (and I'm passing for the same reasons I'm not opening 5♦), but with both majors in play and the opponents expected to have diamond shortness, I think it will be much more likely that they will start slow with a double to keep both majors in play. I wouldn't suggest doing this if my suit were a major, for example, because (among many other good reasons) there's no major-suit ambiguity to the opponents' takeout doubles - a factor that makes preempting more effective in diamonds than in other suits.
MrAce, on 2012-April-24, 17:32, said:
i assume you are in the same camp with those who plays weak 2 bids are more constructive than weak 3 bids. To me only difference is the 3 level preempts has 1 more card than 2 level preempts.
Yes, I am in the camp that 2 level bids are more constructive than 3 level ones. This is why, if I didn't bid 1♦ on this hand (which is fine), I would bid 2♦ to keep partner in the loop about forward-going possibilities.