[patroclo]

---

West bidding
N S red

[Cyberyeti]

Asssuming W doesn't start with 3♣ at these colours

1N (12-14)-2♣(stayman)
2♥-2♠(enquiry, denies 4♥)
3♦(nat)-4♥(keycard)
5♦(2 without)-6♦

[ggwhiz]

I play 2/1 with 15 - 17 nt so

p - 1♦ - p - 2♦ Natural game force
p - 2nt - p - 6nt

2nt shows a weak notrump or 18+ so north will raise with the big one

[Cyberyeti]

ggwhiz, on 2013-September-24, 13:05, said:

I play 2/1 with 15 - 17 nt so

p - 1♦ - p - 2♦ Natural game force
p - 2nt - p - 6nt

2nt shows a weak notrump or 18+ so north will raise with the big one

Why do I feel you deserve to catch:

KQx
Jx
AQxx
xxxx

Where you have 11 tricks in NT and no real hope of a 12th but can simply ruff a heart in diamonds.

[mike777]

1d=3c
3nt=4h
5c=6d

3c=art/gf in d
4h=rkc in d

[aguahombre]

I rarely weigh in about whether a particular thread is appropriate for a particular forum. However, this time I will. I don't believe this is the place to show different methods, and I certainly don't believe these posts showing continuations after activating those methods are particularly expert.

I also don't know if our continuations after an inverted raise are necessarily any better over the long run, so I won't offer them here...although I would be happy to discuss them in a different place.

[patroclo]

patroclo, on 2013-September-24, 11:27, said:

---

West bidding
N S red

During the weakly tournment at hospice house, all the pairs bidded slam, only one went to 4 nt +3.
My partner, a 83 years old bridge expert, suffering of cataract, opened 3 club.
Our opponents didn t find the slam.
They went to 4 h.
It was a top.
I wanted to know , who between the many expert in this forum, should have done the same

[rhm]

patroclo, on 2013-September-25, 00:43, said:

During the weakly tournment at hospice house, all the pairs bidded slam, only one went to 4 nt +3.
My partner, a 83 years old bridge expert, suffering of cataract, opened 3 club.
Our opponents didn t find the slam.
They went to 4 h.
It was a top.
I wanted to know , who between the many expert in this forum, should have done the same

This hand is from Bali USA-1 (Kranyak) against Italy see:

http://bridgewinners...a-losing-cause/

The author wrote:

“Gutsy preemption at favourable vulnerability is undoubtedly a winning strategy and I am surprised at its relative rarity at the highest level. Kit Woolsey commentating live made an astute observation on the EW effort ”…not quite high enough to make it comfortable for N-S to double but high enough to damage the N-S auction“

I made 2 comments:

1) You do not get to the Bermuda Bowl for comfort.
It is my impression that the team Kranyak (USA-1), who preempted here, ironically earned their right to play in Bali not least, because they were more prepared than their redoubtable opponents in the other room to double and defend ”gutsy preempts".
If I remember correctly 4♣ would have been six down (!) and given N-S 1400!
I am just wondering is 1400 not enough for comfort?
South can see that if he bids 4♥ that will likely be the end of auction.
Who needs to bid slams against gutsy preempts. Just take the money on offer.


2) I am not claiming that the DBL of (3♣)-Pass-(4♣) is or should be penalty.
What I am questioning is what South should do with
♠AT7 ♥KJT4 ♦A963 ♣54 in response to (3♣)-Pass-(4♣)-DBL.

Surely the higher the preempt the more you should be inclined to leave a “takeout” DBL in.
There seems to be a remarkable reluctance to take this action.
It is easy to argue that gutsy preemption is a winning strategy when you almost never call a bluff.

This hand reminded me of a hand when Kranyak played against Nickell in the US team trials for Bali

You pass and LHO opens 3♦ no one vul, and partner doubles, pass, your call?

♠ 10743
♥ 753
♦ A1043
♣ 52

Most would bid a mundane 3♠. John Kranyak passed and collected 800. Yes his partner had a good hand.
In the other room Rodwell did in deed bid 3♠ was raised and went for 300.

Rainer Herrmann

[Zelandakh]

My auction is similar to Yeti's:-
1NT = (11)12-14 balanced (or 4414)
... - 2♣ = Puppet Stayman
2♦ = no 5 card major
... - 2♥ = asks if 4 spades
2NT = min with <4 spades
... - 3♦ = natural, SI
4♣ = good hand for slam with diamond support and a spade control but no club control
... - 4♥ = RKCB
5♣ = 2 without ♦Q
... - 6♦

As far as dealer opening goes, I am strong believer in undisciplined preempts but that suit is to rich for me in first seat. Looks like a normal third seater though.

As an aside, it was nice of Rainer to try and raise this thread up to the level of expert discussion but since the attempt failed I see no reason not to post a response.

[dake50]

“Gutsy preemption at favourable vulnerability is undoubtedly a winning strategy and I am surprised at its relative rarity at the highest level. Kit Woolsey commentating live made an astute observation on the EW effort ”…not quite high enough to make it comfortable for N-S to double but high enough to damage the N-S auction“

1) " .. team Kranyak (USA-1), .. who preempted .. "

2) .. what South should do .. " -- Rainer Herrmann
*** Is this suggesting a re-think of preemption -- at least the pedagogy for what suit quality for preempts?
I'm thinking to start with the status-quo counter to preempts (esp the wa-a-a-y overloaded double) to see what mayhem to sow.
A little biased as I ply DAPO (look it up).

[Zelandakh]

dake50, on 2013-October-22, 05:13, said:

A little biased as I ply DAPO (look it up).

A google on "bridge dapo" returned no bridge-related hits on the first page. Perhaps it would be easier if you added a link.

[ahydra]

Should still get to the slam after 3C? E.g.

(3C)-p-(p)-3NT
4NT (quantitative)-5D (NAT offer to play diamonds)
6D

As for when East raises to 4C, North passing the double looks pretty reasonable. 800 can't be far off, particularly if West is a known aggressive pre-emptor.

ahydra

[CSGibson]

After a preempt, I would probably make a take-out double with N, and then S would have to be restrained to avoid grand - they would definitely drive to 6.