42, on Apr 9 2004, 03:37 AM, said:
Thx for your replies! Here is what happened:
I played rubber with two local heroes (one was my p) and another man. I went into the books for a while and my favourite bid would have been pass, but I thought that there is a small chance for 3NT and that was what I put on the table.
N had
♠-
♥Kxx
♦AJ109xxx
♣Jxx
The
♦-honours were not both third in E's hand and so 6
♦ was lay-down while 3NT was 2 off (opps simlpy took 6
♠s; unlucky that the man with the 6
♠s was on lead

). And then the big lament began (very, very loud): 5
♦ from me is a must with my hand (I did not even think of it, but another local hero who is a sound player said the same...). As ususal I said not much but to my opinion the opening bid was crazy because it is too strong for a preempt. Do you open with a preempt whith a void?
Hi,
I would not have responded 3NT.... but what do you bid opposite an opening 3
♦ preempt with the hand you posted earlier?
The answer is it depends. First, what is your partnership bidding agreement at a given vulnerability, and seat position? Some people use the rule of 2 and 3. This rule says if you are vulnerable, you are within 2 trick of your preempt, and non-vul within 3 tricks. IF your partner is using the rule of 2 or 3, a vulnerable 3
♦ bid means he expects to be down no more than 2 with normal "Breaks", or that he has 7 tricks in hand. You are looking at 3
♣ and 1
♥ at least, so that = 7 + 4 = 11 tricks. This suggest the combined power is close to what is needed for 5
♦. However, even if he has 7 tricks and you have 4, that doesn't mean they can't take, for instance, 3
♠ before you can enjoy your trikcs, or can't get a
♣ ruff. So you need to investigate game possibilites. One way is to investigate is to start wtih a creative 3
♥ bid. If partner bids 4
♥ correct to 5
♦, assuming (hoping) partner is short in
♠, over 3NT or 3
♠ invite with 4
♦, something like that.
Other people play more agreesive preempt style. Instead of rule 2/3 they use rules like 4432 or 5431, or 4421. These "rules" refer to the vulnerability conditions. The first number is when you are not vul and the opponents are, the second number when neither side is vul, the third number when both vul, and the last number when you are vul and the opponents are not. CAUTION, if you adopt something like the rule of 5431, the wild preempts (can easily go down 5), only apply to first or third seat preempts. A preempt from the second seat should always be "textbook" sound. Since both are vul, here, however, the same rules would apply and a game TRY is not unreasonable.
Now for the hand in question. This hand is WAY, WAY too good for a first seat preempt (I would open this 3
♦ in third chair), even vulnerable. A quick example, if you have been following ZAR Point thread, a count of the hand shows that it contains, 29 ZAR Points, almost a full trick more than an normal opening bid, and if your partner happens to have a doubleton diamond (expected holding), this number will up due to "fit" points. Zar suggest preempts with a hand containing 22 to 24/25 ZAR points. I would have opened, like EricK, this hand 1
♦ even without trying to count ZAR points... this isn't even really close, this is a 1
♦ opening bid and I hope this example shows you why.
As an aside, if you apply the ZAR bidding machine to this hand, you find that it gives a contract of "6.2 Diamonds" (north 29 ZAR points, South 31 ZAR points, plus 3 distributional ZAR points for a total of 63 ZAR points ("62" needed for slam).