[awm]

Sure, it is possible to miss a (slightly less than) 50% game by opening 3♥ when partner has xxx xx ATxx ATxx. It must be noted that missing a 50% game at NV is not a huge disaster. And the opponents might be making 4♠ opposite this hand anyway (or at least it may be a good sac against 4♥) so if they let me play 3♥+1 that seems non-disastrous.

Of course opening 4♥ gets you to game opposite ATxx xx xxx ATxx, which is basically a zero percent game (okay maybe opponents underlead ♠K and then hearts and diamonds behave, but it has no real chance against any other lead).

Again, it's a matter of style. If you want to bid all games with a 50% shot at making on these preempt hands you're also going to bid a lot of really terrible games (opposite some of which opponents have nothing, and some of which will be doubled).

[skjaeran]

To me this is an absolutely no-brainer 4♥ opening NV 1st seat.

[sfbp]

So far there is no evidence whatsoever that the world opens this at the 4 level. In fact there is evidence to the contrary. Furthermore there is evidence that the very few (less than 5%) who opened such a hand 4♥ did very poorly.

As this is a subject on which it's clear the established panelists here don't want to hear about, I shall refrain from further details. Interested parties are welcome to pursue it by contacting me privately.

[han]

Thanks, appreciated.

[NickRW]

sfbp, on Jun 14 2008, 01:19 PM, said:

So far there is no evidence whatsoever that the world opens this at the 4 level. In fact there is evidence to the contrary. Furthermore there is evidence that the very few (less than 5%) who opened such a hand 4♥ did very poorly.

As this is a subject on which it's clear the established panelists here don't want to hear about, I shall refrain from further details. Interested parties are welcome to pursue it by contacting me privately.

I think what you're saying is that the silent majoity are bidding 3♥ and that the silent majority sitting the other way find it harder to bid the making 4♠ on their cards after the bidding starts 3♥ than if it starts 4♥.

Your hypothesis is probably correct. I don't think that this inherently means that 4♥ is wrong - just that you don't need to strain to beat poor players. In an analogy with poker, why play to check-raise the nuts when the other dude is going to at least call your raise anyway? Bridge, for all its rules about full disclosure and UI and so on, is still sometimes a game where one has to play one's opponents for what they are.

Does high level preemptive action propel the opps into contracts that they wouldn't have otherwise found sometimes - sure - I was the beneficiary of this effect at the table only last night - 6♣ making rather than 3N - both contracts depending on the same finesse - and, at least, I would likely have been less off than the 3 no trumpers had the finesse failed. So yeah it happens.

Maybe this is a task for Bridge Browser, if you can find some useful way of rating the players involved. I don't know if that is possible.

Nick

[fred]

NickRW, on Jun 14 2008, 03:02 PM, said:

I think what you're saying is that the silent majoity are bidding 3♥ and that the silent majority sitting the other way find it harder to bid the making 4♠ on their cards after the bidding starts 3♥ than if it starts 4♥.

He might also being saying that a significant % of the time you open 4H you will buy the contract (sometimes doubled) and go down whereas, had you opened 3H, you would have also bought the contract (sometimes for +140 and sometimes for a smaller minus score than 4H going down more).

But with all due respect to sfpb, I don't think anyone (including his software) *knows* what the *right* opening is with this hand. IMO that question is just too hard (impossible?) to answer with any degree of confidence.

So for me this problem is PURELY a partnership problem. As far as I am concerned the ONLY thing that matters in terms of opening 3H vs 4H is your partner knowing what to expect. It is DEFINITELY correct to open whatever makes you and your partner the most comfortable.

Furthermore, if you and your partners have been opening 3H for the last 30 years with these hands then you should keep doing it. You are already comfortable playing a certain way and you should keep playing it (until perhaps someone can *prove* that 4H is *right* from a pure bridge point of view).

I am personally more comfortable playing a partnership style where 3H is the expected opening with this hand, but I believe that would be a minority position among the leading USA players these days.

Probably there are some impressive bridge countries (Poland? France?) where the leading players would consider 3H to be completely normal and see 4H as a bid "that only a Junior would make".

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[sfbp]

fred, on Jun 14 2008, 08:48 AM, said:

But with all due respect to sfpb, I don't think anyone (including his software) *knows* what the *right* opening is with this hand. IMO that question is just too hard (impossible?) to answer with any degree of confidence.

Absolutely agree, and good to have your take on this issue too, Fred.

I'm not claiming (nor has BRBR ever claimed) to know what the right opening is. All it (and I) can do is point out "what works and what doesn't" (from the description on my old, lame, website, which I plan to replace when I get time).

The original reason for the posting was that I was trying to figure out whether opener or responder should be making the bid that allowed game. The traveller on that hand was unequivocal: most people (by far) opened 3♠ and most people with my hand raised to 4♠, which I found really surprising. The main conclusion I have at the moment is that the preempter's side playing 3M or 4M (assuming 4M makes) doesn't matter that much, both 3M+1 and 4M= are in the middle of the pack.

The question of 4-level openings by a majority of poster was surprising to me. On this hand 4-level makes. But is the gain from getting there by a speculative raise on xx xxx A109x Axxx better than opening 4 in the first place and maybe pushing opps? (sorry, this isn't expressed well) Even with all 3♠ openers there was a pair that got pushed to 5♥X and made it (rotten defence by someone in my seat).

I would be surprised if you are in that small a minority after all.

[jdonn]

Typical jdonn answer but I don't have strong feelings, I would do whatever I thought partner would expect or want me to do. It depends a lot on the opponents too. Against lols I would certainly 3♥ since I think they will just let me buy it there a lot when they shouldn't.

[kenrexford]

I would never open 4♥ OR 4♠ with a balanced 14-15 count.