[shanbari]

Scoring: IMP

1N (3C) ??

---

North open 1N (15-17), east preempty 3C, what south do now ? thanks

added: we play negative x at this auction.

[SchTsch]

Pass

I don't see a game.
I will be happy with plus score.

No need to endplay partner for a partscore.

[CSGibson]

depends on your agreements. If you play negative doubles, I might do that, even if the hand is a little light on HCP. If you play penalty doubles and all bids forcing, I'm passing and pulling partner's double to 3♦.

In reality, passing is probably your best bet, although I wouldn't be surprised to learn that other actions also score well on the hand if partner interprets it correctly.

[whereagles]

Dbl. Happy to be playing that as take-out. Yes, pard can pass and they can make. That's why preempts work.

[mikeh]

A good hand for adjective-bridge... '3 to play ♦'

I wouldn't negative double. It might work brilliantly, but it is a high-variance bid. You will get a lot of great results and a lot of horrific results.... whatever happens would be an abnormal contract.

I might double if playing on a team where we were outgunned..... down the middle would be losing bridge most of the time, so swing for the fences.. but that isn't my style.

For me, this is a reluctant but clear pass.

[Fluffy]

I would like to be able to play 3♦, however I am not so sure this is not forcing.

[mikeh]

Fluffy, on Mar 17 2008, 01:24 PM, said:

I would like to be able to play 3♦, however I am not so sure this is not forcing.

it is definitely forcing in standard methods... it is customary to lose the invitational hands after a 3 level preempt (certainly, the i nvitational one-suiters) and either underbid or overbid, since there is no room. And to use a 3-level bid as 'to play' is far too narrow a target, offering far to narrow a reward when 'right'. Game bidding becomes even more of a guess... say you had a slightly stronger hand.. where some game was probable... would you have to bid 4♦ to force? Thereby avoiding 3N? Etc.

[jillybean]

I hate it but have to pass

[han]

Pas, I would double at MPs.

[Cascade]

3♦ natural and non-forcing.

I play the same way in a major. Why should their 3♣ prevent me from competing for the hand. If I had six hearts or spades like this then I expect partner to pass but she can raise with a super fit.

[Cascade]

mikeh, on Mar 18 2008, 08:06 AM, said:

Fluffy, on Mar 17 2008, 01:24 PM, said:

I would like to be able to play 3♦, however I am not so sure this is not forcing.

it is definitely forcing in standard methods... it is customary to lose the invitational hands after a 3 level preempt (certainly, the i nvitational one-suiters) and either underbid or overbid, since there is no room. And to use a 3-level bid as 'to play' is far too narrow a target, offering far to narrow a reward when 'right'. Game bidding becomes even more of a guess... say you had a slightly stronger hand.. where some game was probable... would you have to bid 4♦ to force? Thereby avoiding 3N? Etc.

As i said in my other post we play non-forcing bids here. Our style is:

Dbl - takeout with double and bid being strong (forcing below game)

new suit at the three-level not forcing but at least semi-encouraging

3NT to play

cue - both majors

4♦ leaping michaels ♦ + Major

4Major to play

It seems bizarre to me to have partner open the bidding and after a 3minor bid from the opponents that we cannot compete for a part-score.