[gwnn]

KT8xx
xx
x
T9xxx

All white IMP

You deal and pass, LHO bids an 11-15 1♥, then:

p-1♥-X-p
1♠-3♥-4♦-p
??

your partner is an 80 y.o. player whom you've seen lots of the time to double and bid a new suit on mediocre 17 counts with a 5c suit. he's a good cardplayer, he might get a trick more than your average contender.

[awm]

I think this is pretty close to the prototype for a preemptive 3♠ response to partner's takeout double. If I don't think partner will understand that call, then 1♠ is okay. Bidding 2♠ initially would show a better hand.

In the given auction I would try 4♠. No guarantees, but I'd rather play in the best strain at the game level (admittedly game may be too high) than play in a possibly inferior strain in four of a minor. Hopefully partner will realize I don't have six good spades or anything like that, since I would never respond 1♠ to a takeout double with such a hand.

[ArtK78]

awm, on Dec 17 2007, 04:05 PM, said:

I think this is pretty close to the prototype for a preemptive 3♠ response to partner's takeout double. If I don't think partner will understand that call, then 1♠ is okay. Bidding 2♠ initially would show a better hand.

In the given auction I would try 4♠. No guarantees, but I'd rather play in the best strain at the game level (admittedly game may be too high) than play in a possibly inferior strain in four of a minor. Hopefully partner will realize I don't have six good spades or anything like that, since I would never respond 1♠ to a takeout double with such a hand.

Pardon me for not responding to the original poster, but rather to the response.

I have played this game for 35 years, but until recently the idea that anyone should make a preemptive response to a takeout double was unknown to me. My introduction to this idea was in another thread, and no one commented on it at that time.

Does anyone share Adam's view that a 3♠ response to partner's takeout double is preemptive? And, if so, does anyone share the view that the given hand is a typical preemptive response to a takeout double?

[pclayton]

ArtK78, on Dec 17 2007, 01:21 PM, said:

awm, on Dec 17 2007, 04:05 PM, said:

I think this is pretty close to the prototype for a preemptive 3♠ response to partner's takeout double. If I don't think partner will understand that call, then 1♠ is okay. Bidding 2♠ initially would show a better hand.

In the given auction I would try 4♠. No guarantees, but I'd rather play in the best strain at the game level (admittedly game may be too high) than play in a possibly inferior strain in four of a minor. Hopefully partner will realize I don't have six good spades or anything like that, since I would never respond 1♠ to a takeout double with such a hand.

Pardon me for not responding to the original poster, but rather to the response.

I have played this game for 35 years, but until recently the idea that anyone should make a preemptive response to a takeout double was unknown to me. My introduction to this idea was in another thread, and no one commented on it at that time.

Does anyone share Adam's view that a 3♠ response to partner's takeout double is preemptive? And, if so, does anyone share the view that the given hand is a typical preemptive response to a takeout double?

If you go through some old threads, there's a few about the 2♠ / 3♠ philosophy. I believe most of the American players would agree with Adam, but many Europeans (Fluffy for one) would take 3♠ as roughly the same strength as 2♠, but guaranteeing at least 5.

I don't agree with Adam that this is a 'prototypical' 3♠ call. For me, 3♠ shows something more like QJxxxx, xxx, xxx, x.

[mike777]

ArtK78, on Dec 17 2007, 04:21 PM, said:

awm, on Dec 17 2007, 04:05 PM, said:

I think this is pretty close to the prototype for a preemptive 3♠ response to partner's takeout double. If I don't think partner will understand that call, then 1♠ is okay. Bidding 2♠ initially would show a better hand.

In the given auction I would try 4♠. No guarantees, but I'd rather play in the best strain at the game level (admittedly game may be too high) than play in a possibly inferior strain in four of a minor. Hopefully partner will realize I don't have six good spades or anything like that, since I would never respond 1♠ to a takeout double with such a hand.

Pardon me for not responding to the original poster, but rather to the response.

I have played this game for 35 years, but until recently the idea that anyone should make a preemptive response to a takeout double was unknown to me. My introduction to this idea was in another thread, and no one commented on it at that time.

Does anyone share Adam's view that a 3♠ response to partner's takeout double is preemptive? And, if so, does anyone share the view that the given hand is a typical preemptive response to a takeout double?

See Lawrence old books esp the one about doubles....nothing new here.

One can argue what standard or "generally accepted" bidding means but Lawrence's books seem like a good start if, of course, not perfect.

[mr1303]

Getting back to the original hand, I bid 4S because if I have to contract for 10 tricks, I'd rather contract for one that has a chance of a game. Partner can still have 3 spades on this auction.

[han]

I'd bid 4S as well.


For me 3S shows about this strength but a 6-card spade suit. I think.

[joshs]

The standard meaning for a double jump over a takeout x, is a 6 card suit and about 7-9ish HCP (maybe slightly less with approriate shape/location of values).

In this auction a hand like KJxxxx Kxx Qx xx would be pretty typical.

Its sort of the equivalent of a mixed raise. Enough trumps and values that you expect that you will have to compete to the 3 level anyway, with playing strength at the upper end of the single jump range.

[Apollo81]

4♠, I'm sort of hoping pard bids 4N (which I think here would show something like 1-2-6-4) so I can correct to 5♣ I dont think this 4NT is keycard...

[jdonn]

joshs, on Dec 17 2007, 07:06 PM, said:

The standard meaning for a double jump over a takeout x, is a 6 card suit and about 7-9ish HCP (maybe slightly less with approriate shape/location of values).

In this auction a hand like KJxxxx Kxx Qx xx would be pretty typical.

Says who? I thought I had never met an American who played it as anything but preemptive. From other countries I'm not that sure. I would still have bid 1♠ on the hand in the original post though, I would want either that hand with another spade or maybe the same shape with KQxxx, which seems like about the right playing strength to me.

[Codo]

1. For Spain, France and Germany, 3 Spade had surely been 8-10 HCPs and 5 Spades.

2. With the given agreements ( doubling and new suit shows 17+) I pass. I have no tricks and no fit. Okay, maybe pd does have 3 Spades, then 4 Spade may even make. But if he has Axx,xx,AKQJxx, Ax, we are still down. And if he looks at x,xx,AKQJxxx,AKQ, I prefer 4 Diamond to 4 Spade.

[joshs]

jdonn, on Dec 17 2007, 11:49 PM, said:

joshs, on Dec 17 2007, 07:06 PM, said:

The standard meaning for a double jump over a takeout x, is a 6 card suit and about 7-9ish HCP (maybe slightly less with approriate shape/location of values).

In this auction a hand like KJxxxx Kxx Qx xx would be pretty typical.

Says who? I thought I had never met an American who played it as anything but preemptive. From other countries I'm not that sure. I would still have bid 1♠ on the hand in the original post though, I would want either that hand with another spade or maybe the same shape with KQxxx, which seems like about the right playing strength to me.

Really? It was like that when I learned bridge. Perhaps the range here has changed. I am certain that its still played as a 6 card suit (pre-empting on a 5 card suit when partner might have a x then bid again hand might not be the best idea....)

[bid_em_up]

ArtK78, on Dec 17 2007, 04:21 PM, said:

Does anyone share Adam's view that a 3♠ response to partner's takeout double is preemptive?  And, if so, does anyone share the view that the given hand is a typical preemptive response to a takeout double?

Yes, and yes.

Although I would prefer a 6th spade, it cant always be perfect and if you are playing this style, its probably the most descriptive bid available.

[Apollo81]

ArtK78, on Dec 17 2007, 04:21 PM, said:

Does anyone share Adam's view that a 3♠ response to partner's takeout double is preemptive? And, if so, does anyone share the view that the given hand is a typical preemptive response to a takeout double?

Preemptive is the standard meaning of that bid. I'd prefer better spades to make a preemptive 3♠ bid on the given hand - at the table I would bid 1♠ since I'm pretty sure pard has a big hand double and I want to leave him room.

[ArtK78]

Apollo81, on Dec 18 2007, 12:31 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Dec 17 2007, 04:21 PM, said:

Does anyone share Adam's view that a 3♠ response to partner's takeout double is preemptive?  And, if so, does anyone share the view that the given hand is a typical preemptive response to a takeout double?

Preemptive is the standard meaning of that bid. I'd prefer better spades to make a preemptive 3♠ bid on the given hand - at the table I would bid 1♠ since I'm pretty sure pard has a big hand double and I want to leave him room.

Please provide some authority more than 10 years old for this statement.

It is certainly not "standard" in my understanding of the meaning of the word.

Thanks.

[pclayton]

ArtK78, on Dec 18 2007, 10:12 AM, said:

Apollo81, on Dec 18 2007, 12:31 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Dec 17 2007, 04:21 PM, said:

Does anyone share Adam's view that a 3♠ response to partner's takeout double is preemptive?  And, if so, does anyone share the view that the given hand is a typical preemptive response to a takeout double?

Preemptive is the standard meaning of that bid. I'd prefer better spades to make a preemptive 3♠ bid on the given hand - at the table I would bid 1♠ since I'm pretty sure pard has a big hand double and I want to leave him room.

Please provide some authority more than 10 years old for this statement.

It is certainly not "standard" in my understanding of the meaning of the word.

Thanks.

Does something have to be more than 10 years old to become standard?

[ArtK78]

pclayton, on Dec 18 2007, 01:15 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Dec 18 2007, 10:12 AM, said:

Apollo81, on Dec 18 2007, 12:31 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Dec 17 2007, 04:21 PM, said:

Does anyone share Adam's view that a 3♠ response to partner's takeout double is preemptive?  And, if so, does anyone share the view that the given hand is a typical preemptive response to a takeout double?

Preemptive is the standard meaning of that bid. I'd prefer better spades to make a preemptive 3♠ bid on the given hand - at the table I would bid 1♠ since I'm pretty sure pard has a big hand double and I want to leave him room.

Please provide some authority more than 10 years old for this statement.

It is certainly not "standard" in my understanding of the meaning of the word.

Thanks.

Does something have to be more than 10 years old to become standard?

It probably does, in this context. Maybe 20 years.

I have been playing longer than that and I haven't taken any time off. I play in the Northeastern US for the most part, and I have never seen a preemptive response to a takeout double. It makes little sense to me. Who are you preempting?

Now, jumping to game on shape is one thing. But defining a below game jump as preemptive - and by preemptive, I mean weak - seems silly to me.

Some said it shows length and 6-10 HCP or so - in other words, a shape invite. That makes some sense. But it is not weak.

Besides everything else, you are playing with an 80 year old partner. I assume that he has been playing for a few years and his standard is at least 20 years old.

I have recently played with a 95 year old partner (David Treadwell), and I doubt very much that he would consider a double jump to 3♠ to be preemptive.

[Fluffy]

It cannot be standard, it is not largelly played outside US.

[whereagles]

I don't have a clue what to bid, so I might try 4♥... LOL

[inquiry]

pclayton, on Dec 18 2007, 01:15 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Dec 18 2007, 10:12 AM, said:

Apollo81, on Dec 18 2007, 12:31 PM, said:

ArtK78, on Dec 17 2007, 04:21 PM, said:

Does anyone share Adam's view that a 3♠ response to partner's takeout double is preemptive?  And, if so, does anyone share the view that the given hand is a typical preemptive response to a takeout double?

Preemptive is the standard meaning of that bid. I'd prefer better spades to make a preemptive 3♠ bid on the given hand - at the table I would bid 1♠ since I'm pretty sure pard has a big hand double and I want to leave him room.

Please provide some authority more than 10 years old for this statement.

It is certainly not "standard" in my understanding of the meaning of the word.

Thanks.

Does something have to be more than 10 years old to become standard?

In bbo tournament/team game play (most recent bridgebrowser database), the auction ...

1H-DBL-Pass-3S

has occurred 269 times. Of these, 38 auctions the 3S bidder had 6 hcp or less. We will assume these were all preemptive. The shortest of the spade suit for this jump was five card suit, the longest 7 card suit. The worse five card suit was a straight flush..... 65432 on a six hcp hand. Only 8 of the 3S bidders held 5 spades, (five of them with 5 hcp, the other 3 with 6 hcp). Of these bidders, 5 played 4S and 1 played 5Sx (making), the other two defended 4Hx (making) and 5Dx (down 1100). Only 7 of the 38 3S bidders held a seven card suit. This included the only person to bid it with 1 hcp, then 3-2-1 for 4, 5 and 6 hcp respectively. 6 out of the 7 played in 4S, the other killed a 6D contract by opponents. The average result for the jump to 3S with 1 to 6 hcp was -0.98 imps (28 hands) and 56.43 MP (10 hands).

3S was also bid a total of 71 times with 11-14 hcp, mostly with 11 and 12 hcp as with 13 and 14 hcp only totalled 5 times. It was bid 50 times with 11 hcp (the second most for any hcp total). Clearly these 11-14 bidders were not preempting. There was no 7 card suits in this group, six 6 card suits, 19 five card suits, and 45 four card suits.

Then there was the 7-8 hcp and 9-10 hcp ranges. For 7-8 hcp, there was 60 total hands. 7 card suits 3 times, six card suits 14 times, five card suits 35 times, and a surprizing 4 card suit 8 times. The people with 4 card suits did very poorly only 2 of them getting average or better on the board. Of the 14 six card people, only 3 got worse than average. The 35 times with 5 card suit, 12 got worse than average.

As for 9-10 hcp, 100 people held that count, 69 of which held five card spade suit or longer. IF we agree the 31 pairs with 4 cards were not preempting, we have to decide what these with five plus suits thought they were doing. But a few typical hands with five card suits would be...

AQ762 5 T8 K97xx
and
KQJ83 75 862 KT9

I don't thnk these were "preemptive" bids.

So, even if you allow the 7-8 points to be "preemptive", the non-preemptive use of the jump to 3S clearly outnumbers on BBO the preemptive raise. Of course, this type of analysis is partially flawed in that the frequency of hands might vary. So it might be a good idea to do a quick look at hands with 5+ spades and 7 or less hcp to see what people bid after 1H-x-p....