[ArcLight]

IMPS Vuln against NonVuln

RHO opens 1♥

you hold:
♠Kxx
♥
♦Jxx
♣K Q J T 8 x x

do you bid:
2♣ (showing a good hand, good suit)
3♣ (premeptive)?
4♣
5♣
Pass

What?

[mr1303]

I'm at unfavourable? In that case 3C is enough. Partner should play me for something close to this at unfavourable. I'm allowed to have my pre-empt from time to time

At favourable I'd have 5C on the table

[pclayton]

3♣ red; 4♣ white. Probably 3♣ at equal.

[Apollo81]

3♣ at any vulnerability other than favorable.

4♣ at favorable.

[mike777]

Pass, will try and not warn them about the bad breaks. 3 clubs is a close second choice.

[skjaeran]

Apollo81, on Apr 2 2007, 06:11 PM, said:

3♣ at any vulnerability other than favorable.

4♣ at favorable.

Ditto.

[mikeh]

mike777, on Apr 2 2007, 12:19 PM, said:

Pass, will try and not warn them about the bad breaks.  3 clubs is a close second choice.

Mike, passing here is, I suppose, consistent with your opening bid tendencies, but I have to say that, in my opinion, passing here (as with passing good 12 and decent 13 counts as dealer) simply makes you an easy opponent against whom to play. Bidding space counts: bidding space is invaluable, and your approach hands bidding space to the ops.

Roth got away with his conservatism because:

1) the opps against whom he played in his heyday were, generally, very poor bidders... even the very best opps back in the 1950s and early 60's were seat of the pants bidders and bidding theory hardly existed... which of course is where Dr. Roth came in

2) he had superb table feel, and superb technique: most of us don't have the former and there are far too many players with the latter... which wasn't true back then

If you don't bid on this hand, you may as well give up the game.

For me, 3♣ at this heat: seems ideal. I would bid 2♣ if not vulnerable: I am not taking this hand past 3N unilaterally, and I detest 4-level minor overcalls although one of my current partners has made two of them recently (one got us 130 with 630 available, the other was more successful), and the hand is wrong for a 5-level adventure at any heat, imo.

[han]

3♣.

[mike777]

mikeh, on Apr 2 2007, 12:36 PM, said:

mike777, on Apr 2 2007, 12:19 PM, said:

Pass, will try and not warn them about the bad breaks.  3 clubs is a close second choice.

Mike, passing here is, I suppose, consistent with your opening bid tendencies, but I have to say that, in my opinion, passing here (as with passing good 12 and decent 13 counts as dealer) simply makes you an easy opponent against whom to play. Bidding space counts: bidding space is invaluable, and your approach hands bidding space to the ops.

Roth got away with his conservatism because:

1) the opps against whom he played in his heyday were, generally, very poor bidders... even the very best opps back in the 1950s and early 60's were seat of the pants bidders and bidding theory hardly existed... which of course is where Dr. Roth came in

2) he had superb table feel, and superb technique: most of us don't have the former and there are far too many players with the latter... which wasn't true back then

If you don't bid on this hand, you may as well give up the game.

For me, 3♣ at this heat: seems ideal. I would bid 2♣ if not vulnerable: I am not taking this hand past 3N unilaterally, and I detest 4-level minor overcalls although one of my current partners has made two of them recently (one got us 130 with 630 available, the other was more successful), and the hand is wrong for a 5-level adventure at any heat, imo.

Thank you very much for taking time to respond. Your note is appreciated.

Here is another viewpoint/comment from one of my late night partners.



..."when you have such an excellent suit it's really chicken caca to pass......to bid 3C, you need 7 playing tricks...so it'd be a slight strectch to do that....and besides, it is possible we belong in spades....so i'll go with a conservative 2C....can't get too hurt there...."

[mike777]

I add this since I found this discussion interesting since most if not all here bid 3clubs I thought I would add a counter viewpoint for balance. Please read this exchange starting at the bottom of the page, NOT the top.



At vul versus not, I expect a 3C call to be 7 tricks...not 9 and not 6......It's rare to be sure....just like hands that we open 3C vul versus not.....we had that discussion recently....those hands tend to have a weird shape (perhaps 7-4 or 7-5).......or an eighth club, or maybe a side slow trick such as this hand:

xx x QJT KQJT8xx : for offensive purposes, this is a better hand, yet defensively, it is worse....it's ideal for 3C at unfavorable.

I call it given hand 6 and a half....if you want to bump it up to 7, fine....but you aren't going to score that King of spades all the time, especially if you lack a dummy entry.....I consider 3C the aggresive bid, and 2C to be conservative.....and passing to be brainddead (sorry, Mike).

You didn't read entirely what I said about overcalling with an opening hand....if you reread what I said, it was an opening hand with a suit this good.....Vulnerable 2 level overcalls have always required us to have a good suit....KQJT8xx is an excellent suit...Kxxxx is not.


Think about what you would do with this hand in first position at these colors......Switch the spades and hearts, and you might be more tempted to open 3C...but with Kxx of spades, we are happy as can be to open 1C.....so with an opener AND an excellent suit, I think we should be happy to overcall 2C over a 1H opener.

I'm MUCH more inclined to overcall 3C over a 1 SPADE opening bid....Now, we have more confidence of 7 playing playing tricks, and we have no desired to hear anyone bid the unbid major.







-----------------------------------


I guess we must agree to disagree.



You see, to me, bidding 2C on this just because you think you must, is a violation of partnership trust.



If your agreements include that you can overcall on anything at any vulnerability, then so be it, and you can do as you wish.



If you your agreements are to "have an opening hand" when vulnerable, would you overcall 2H vul versus not holding Qxx,Kxxxx,AQ,xxx ? This is an opening bid.......2 quick tricks, etc. Add the Q of clubs. What about that?



Bidding like that is a death wish in my opinion. All must use there judgment.



What hand do you think partner would expect for a 3C call at IMPs at these colors from me.........9 tricks in hand?



I think you will find your example hand very close to what you would expect.



I don't think it is chicken stuff to have what your partner expects.



Granted, if you go for 800 then the certainly should have a slam. Whether they bid it or not, that may be another question since you do have a ripe 10 count. Oh, and BTW, I counted 7 playing tricks......



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Actually , I have a deathly "respect" for the 3C overcall where it's easier to get punched out vul versus not and you go fer an extra 300 points........Here is what I wrote to Mike when he asked why i didn't pass or bid 3C:



"when you have such an excellent suit it's really chicken caca to pass......to bid 3C, you need 7 playing tricks...so it'd be a slight strectch to do that....and besides, it is possible we belong in spades....so i'll go with a conservative 2C....can't get too hurt there...."



I think all three of us agree this is an opening 1 club bid....So it is most logical for us to venture a 2C overcall when the

baddies get the first strike in on us and we have an opening hand with a suit that is this good.........but to go to the 3 level with less than 7 playing tricks is inviting desastare, to quote the french...




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[han]

Somone please write a summary.

[Winstonm]

Hannie, on Apr 2 2007, 01:36 PM, said:

3♣.

What he said.

[kenrexford]

If as is suggested 3♣ is preemptive, 3♣ must be the call here.

That being said, I personally dislike red-on-white single jumps as preemptive. My personal preference is intermediate, something with game possibilities. So, maybe AKJxxx of clubs, AQx in spades, and I'm bidding 3♣.

[cherdano]

Hannie, on Apr 2 2007, 04:57 PM, said:

Somone please write a summary.

3♣.

[ArcLight]

Thank you all for responding.

At the table I bid 3♣, opps ended up in 4♥ down 1.
My pard thought my hand was too good for 3♣ and thought 2♣ was a better bid.

[twcho]

I have to bid 2♣ because 3♣ for me is roman two suiters (♠ + ♦)