BBO Discussion Forums: Pre-emptive Raise versus Limit Raise - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Pre-emptive Raise versus Limit Raise

#1 User is offline   32519 

  • Insane 2-Diamond Bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,423
  • Joined: 2010-December-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mpumalanga, South Africa
  • Interests:Books, bridge, philately

Posted 2012-May-27, 09:14

Pre-emptive raises and limit raises both have their plusses and minusses.

But which one do you think is better, and why?

How is your decision be influenced by the auction?
2

#2 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,274
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2012-May-27, 10:12

If you're asking which is the better use of the jump raise (1-3 for example) I'd say pre-emptive, provided you have a good way to show the limit raise (like say Bergen or Hardy).

If you're asking whether one is better than the other generally, I'd say neither is.

As for the auction, it's fairly standard around here to play weak jumps in competition, even if you play limit jumps otherwise. I like to play 'em weak in all cases.
--------------------
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
Factor in Alzheimers, and I can not recall a bad result from aggessive action in this situation. -- Aguahombre
When I look through the hand records after a club evening, the boards I didn't play are always the ones where I would have done great. -- Cherdano
1

#3 User is offline   phil_20686 

  • Scotland
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,509
  • Joined: 2008-August-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland

Posted 2012-May-27, 10:43

32519 said:

1338131669[/url]' post='641664']
Pre-emptive raises and limit raises both have their plusses and minusses.

But which one do you think is better, and why?

How is your decision be influenced by the auction?


I like to have both. And a mixed raise. And sometimes a second way to limit raise.
The physics is theoretical, but the fun is real. - Sheldon Cooper
0

#4 User is offline   32519 

  • Insane 2-Diamond Bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,423
  • Joined: 2010-December-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mpumalanga, South Africa
  • Interests:Books, bridge, philately

Posted 2012-May-27, 10:44

View Postblackshoe, on 2012-May-27, 10:12, said:

If you're asking whether one is better than the other generally, I'd say neither is.


What do you recommend?
0

#5 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,274
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2012-May-27, 15:22

As phil said. Both. B-)
--------------------
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
Factor in Alzheimers, and I can not recall a bad result from aggessive action in this situation. -- Aguahombre
When I look through the hand records after a club evening, the boards I didn't play are always the ones where I would have done great. -- Cherdano
0

#6 User is online   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,307
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2012-May-27, 16:35

Yes. Have a way to show both types of hands.
London, England
0

#7 User is offline   Cthulhu D 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 770
  • Joined: 2011-November-21
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Australia
  • Interests:Overbidding

Posted 2012-May-27, 18:55

View PostVampyr, on 2012-May-27, 16:35, said:

Yes. Have a way to show both types of hands.


How do you guys actually do this? I'm currently playing 2/1 with a 14-16 NT and raises like this after 1S:

2C: GF Balanced, clubs or 3 card limit raise (10-12)
(2DH) are game forcing hands
2S: Weak, constructive
2NT: Limit+
(3CDH): Invitational with 6 baggers
3S: Mixed - 8-10 4 card support

1NT is essentially not forcing, and I think you need that as forcing to do all raise types, both because it buys you some sequences, and there is less pressure to show the invitational 6 baggers straight away.

What are other people doing? Or are you just changing the 3S bid according to vulnerability.
1

#8 User is offline   Statto 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 636
  • Joined: 2011-December-01
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:UK
  • Interests:Bridge, Poker, but not in conflation.
    Statistics, but not massaged by the media.

Posted 2012-May-27, 20:35

Pre-emptive raises seem to be the norm these days, and probably for a reason.

There a lots of potential bids available to show a good raise: various splinters, and a non-GF 'Jacoby' 2NT amongst the most popular.
A perfection of means, and confusion of aims, seems to be our main problem – Albert Einstein
1

#9 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,274
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2012-May-27, 22:19

Hardy Raises:
2M: 5+ to 9-, 3 or 4 trumps.
3M: 0 to 5-, 4 trumps.
4M: 0 to 8, 5 trumps, possibly 4 and a void, no A or K
3C: 9+ to 12-, three trumps and a singleton, or four trumps no singleton (3D asks which).
3"under" (3D/1H, 3H/1S): 9+ to 12-, four trumps and a singleton or void (3M asks which).
3"over" (3S/1H, 3NT/1S): 12+ to 15-, four trumps and a singleton or void (not enough room to ask, here).
4C: 12+ to 15-, 4 trumps with 2 of the top 3 honors, balanced
4D: 12+ to 15-, 4 trumps not as good as 4C, balanced.
1NT: may include 9+ to 12-, 3 trumps, balanced (rebid 3M), or a raise to 4M with an A or K (rebid 4M).
2NT: 15+, 4+ trumps, not necessarily balanced (Jacoby 2NT)
2/1: GF, natural, unlimited, may include 3 card support for opener's M.

There's also the full Bergen Raise structure, and the Romex structure, which I won't go into right now.
--------------------
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
Factor in Alzheimers, and I can not recall a bad result from aggessive action in this situation. -- Aguahombre
When I look through the hand records after a club evening, the boards I didn't play are always the ones where I would have done great. -- Cherdano
0

#10 User is offline   Cthulhu D 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 770
  • Joined: 2011-November-21
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Australia
  • Interests:Overbidding

Posted 2012-May-27, 22:23

View Postblackshoe, on 2012-May-27, 22:19, said:

Hardy Raises:


1NT has to be forcing to play this though right? You absolutely don't want partner passing 1NT with some balanced 11 if you were planning on bidding 4H with some expectation of making! Also with the 3"over" bid couldn't you just use the cheapest bid to ask and 4M is a stiff in the suit you cannot show? (clubs over 1S and spades over 1H)
1

#11 User is offline   32519 

  • Insane 2-Diamond Bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,423
  • Joined: 2010-December-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mpumalanga, South Africa
  • Interests:Books, bridge, philately

Posted 2012-May-28, 01:45

View Postphil_20686, on 2012-May-27, 10:43, said:

I like to have both. And a mixed raise. And sometimes a second way to limit raise.


Looking at the various ways to show a raise truly makes the game of bridge fascinating. I can choose from the following but cannot have them all.

Without Opposition Intervention
1. Jacoby 2NT Raise = 12+ HCP and 4-trump support
2. Limit Raise = 10-12 total points and 4-card support, typically 1M-3M
3. Fit Jump Raise = 10-11 HCP, good 5+ card suit, 4-cards in partners suit if a major (5 if a minor)
4. Bergen Raise = 3: 7-9 HCP, 4-trump support, 3: 10-12 HCP, 4-trump support, 3M: 0-6 HCP (4-6 HCP?), 4-trump support
5. Pre-emptive raise = minimum values, 4-trump support

With Intervention from either side
1. Mixed Raise = 8-11 (6-10?) total points, jump cue-bid of the suit opened by the opponents on the 3-level, 4+ trump support
2. Cue-bid Raise = Cue-bid of the suit overcalled promising 10-12 HCP and 3+ card support for the suit opened when a major, 4+ for and 5+ for

Mixed raises and cue-bid raises are not to be confused.

But everything comes at a price e.g. If I include Fit Jumps and Mixed raises, I need to rethink my agreements and/or lose one of the following:
1. Weak Jump Shifts
2. Negative Free Bids
3. BROMAD
4. Splinters/Mini-splinters

What do others recommend to retain and what gets sacrificed?
2

#12 User is offline   fromageGB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,616
  • Joined: 2008-April-06

Posted 2012-May-28, 05:07

I think you pays your money and you takes your choice. But whatever, you need to keep both preemptive and constructive raises, the latter in different degrees of strength.

My choice at the moment is to have a forcing next step (1 1 or 1 1NT) and put 0-6 hcp 3 card raises through that, with a direct 2M a full-bloodied 7-10. The forcing next step also covers 11-12 3 card raises. With 4 card support I like Bergen, but use the red suits when spades are trumps, and have the 3M-2 cheaper bid 7-10, where there is room for a next step invitation, and 3M-1 as solely 11/12. Yes, that hand my well bid game anyway, but it's good to get the strength across when opener has a good hand. A 13+ goes via the Jacoby 2NT bid, or, rather, 2M+1.

After opposition overcall I am an adherent of transfers up to 2M, so 2M is a preemptive 3 card raise, and 2M-1 ("transfer to 2M") is a constructive 7-10, while 2NT is 11+. With 4 card support 3M is up to 6, 7/8 transfers like a 3 card suit but then rebids 3M if partner does not invite or trial, and 9+ cue bids the opposition suit. This is of course invitational+, and responder can bid game if opener doesn't. The important thing is to show both your length of support and strength, so that partner can make the right judgement as to game, or action after further competition. We also play fit jump, and if a passed hand, fit non-jump, with good suits and support.

I am not saying this combination is best, and it won't suit everyone, but I am giving it as an example if the sort of functionality you should be looking for to suit your system and methods.
0

#13 User is offline   fromageGB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,616
  • Joined: 2008-April-06

Posted 2012-May-28, 05:21

To complete the picture, I should say that a 13+ 3 card support starts with 2/1 if there is good 5 card suit, but without one, 2M+2 is 13-15 and 16+ starts with 2 (normally opener follows with a 2 relay)
0

#14 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,274
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2012-May-28, 07:00

View PostCthulhu D, on 2012-May-27, 22:23, said:

1NT has to be forcing to play this though right? You absolutely don't want partner passing 1NT with some balanced 11 if you were planning on bidding 4H with some expectation of making! Also with the 3"over" bid couldn't you just use the cheapest bid to ask and 4M is a stiff in the suit you cannot show? (clubs over 1S and spades over 1H)

Yes, 1NT is forcing in this method. No, that won't work. 1-3NT-4 asks, and now you have three bids to show the types (4, 4, 4. You need four (void, singleton club, singleton diamond, singleton heart). Not to mention the room you'd need to ask where the void is. So 4 asks where the shortage is, and you can show that, but you can't differentiate between void and singleton (which you can do with the 3under bid. BTW, Hardy called these "under jump shifts" and "over jump shifts".
--------------------
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
Factor in Alzheimers, and I can not recall a bad result from aggessive action in this situation. -- Aguahombre
When I look through the hand records after a club evening, the boards I didn't play are always the ones where I would have done great. -- Cherdano
0

#15 User is offline   phil_20686 

  • Scotland
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,509
  • Joined: 2008-August-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland

Posted 2012-May-28, 09:05

My preferred structure without intervention is something like, after 1H opening:

2H = simple raise 5-9
2S = three card limit
2N = 4 card inv+
3H = mixed 4-8 (but more shape than 2H)
4H = to play

3N,4c,4d = splinters 10-14
3S = void splinter any suit

Gf three card raises start with a 2/1

I like that a 1N response denies three card support always. I think it gains in competitive decisions.
The physics is theoretical, but the fun is real. - Sheldon Cooper
0

#16 User is offline   Zelandakh 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,670
  • Joined: 2006-May-18
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2012-May-29, 03:02

If you had to choose only one then I think it is clear to pick a limit raise. However, better is to have both. A structure that does this, as well as including splinters at all levels, a mixed raise and a GF raise is:-

1M+1 = relay, invite or better without 4 card support
2M = normal weak raise
2M+1/3M-4 = mini-splinter or "in-between" (~16-19) splinter (any side suit)
2M+2/3M-3 = GF raise
2M+3/3M-2 = limit raise
2M+4/3M-1 = mixed raise
3M = preemptive raise
3M+1 = splinter with a void (any side suit)
3M+2, +3, +4 = splinter with a singleton

I play all of the direct raises above 2M to show 4 card support. With 3 card support and a limit raise you relay and then show support on the following round. Obviously you do not have to split 3 card and 4 card raises up in this manner if it does not fit with the rest of your system.
(-: Zel :-)
0

#17 User is online   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 5,307
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2012-May-29, 03:37

All of the suggested schemes are lovely, but really you can get by with 1M-3M weak raise and 1M-2NT invitational raise or better.
London, England
1

#18 User is offline   mikl_plkcc 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 219
  • Joined: 2008-November-20
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:sailing, bridge

Posted 2012-May-29, 06:43

I am trying to play the following structure:

1
- 2 = 6-11
- 3 = 12+ (This keeps the bidding low for opener's slam potential)
- 4 = preempt

If opener has 15 points, he raises 2 response to 3, then responder raises again if holding 9 points.
1

#19 User is offline   fromageGB 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,616
  • Joined: 2008-April-06

Posted 2012-May-29, 15:15

View Postmikl_plkcc, on 2012-May-29, 06:43, said:

I am trying to play the following structure:

1
- 2 = 6-11
- 3 = 12+ (This keeps the bidding low for opener's slam potential)

I think the problems here are that :

3 is too high for much useful slam investigation. It would work better if you used the Jacoby 2NT bid, and adopted one of the suggested sequences of continuations you can find on the internet. This means that 3 is then available as a weaker pre-emptive bid. This is as Vampyr gave above.

2 is really cramming too many options into one bid. Presumably the length may be 3 or 4? The huge range makes it very difficult for opener to know what to do when the 4th seat bids something over 2 - For just one hand it could be right to double for penalty, to bid on, or to pass, and he does not know what is best. He has to guess. If you could narrow the options - perhaps putting the 6-8 hands with 4 hearts into the now vacant 3 bid - his guess is more accurate. Acquiring another free bid and using that would make it even better.
0

#20 User is offline   Statto 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 636
  • Joined: 2011-December-01
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:UK
  • Interests:Bridge, Poker, but not in conflation.
    Statistics, but not massaged by the media.

Posted 2012-May-29, 20:30

View PostVampyr, on 2012-May-29, 03:37, said:

All of the suggested schemes are lovely, but really you can get by with 1M-3M weak raise and 1M-2NT invitational raise or better.

Yup, the mini-Jacoby-2NT I mentioned earlier. Seems to be increasingly popular in the UK...
A perfection of means, and confusion of aims, seems to be our main problem – Albert Einstein
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users