[jtfanclub]

Scoring: IMP

---

1♦ by LHO, partner passes, and RHO says 1♠, to you.

If it matters, you're subbing with an unfamiliar partner, one of the opps has a star, I suspect the other will before too long.

[han]

Partner passed so you can't have game, I'm bidding 3C.

[han]

Yeah I wouldn't do it when not vulnerable.

[kenrexford]

han, on Aug 15 2008, 08:22 PM, said:

Yeah I wouldn't do it when not vulnerable.

I was thinking the same thing. Is 3♣ here supposed to be weak? I have heard of the 1430 convention. I am not as keen on the 1100 convention.

[jtfanclub]

kenrexford, on Aug 15 2008, 10:38 PM, said:

han, on Aug 15 2008, 08:22 PM, said:

Yeah I wouldn't do it when not vulnerable.

I was thinking the same thing. Is 3♣ here supposed to be weak? I have heard of the 1430 convention. I am not as keen on the 1100 convention.

Yes, that's the joke.

RHO got on my case for bidding 3♣ and not alerting it...I thought that was standard. But then, I've been confused on what's standard before.

Made absolutely no difference: got the mighty 0.0 Imps.

[jonottawa]

Made no difference? Maybe, maybe not. 3N was thin, but cold, on the lie of the cards. I'm not as crazy about 3♣ as y'all seem to be. This is a pretty damn nice hand even RvW.

Edit: Ah, sorry, this is one of those 'argue all sides of an argument' threads. Missed that.

[the hog]

2C for me; I am not going to pre empt on this. Game can most certainly be on even though partner is a passed hand.
Axx
xxx
Axxx
xxx
Would be perfect - unlikely of course, but perfect and not impossible.

[cherdano]

I hope Ron alerts his 2♣ bids when they can have the playing strength of a standard 3♣ jump.

[han]

Agree with Ron, you can certainly have a cold game and 3C will make you miss it too often. Partner isn't even a "passed hand", he could have a decent hand, especially given how some opponents open and respond these days. Whatever the colors are, 3C is still a preemptive bid.

Well, unless you have agreed that it does not show a weak hand, but then you have to alert it. The same is true if you frequently bid it with hands like this even if you haven't formally agreed to do that. (I do think that that is taking a good idea wayyy too far)

[helene_t]

Alert this kind of call when playing as a sub? Someone just clicked on my 2♦ opening in an indy. I explained it as "my p has sayc on his profile". I believe I went beyond my duty by doing so.

Anyway, I would just bid 2♣, not because I am afraid of missing game with 3♣ but because I lack synapses.

[P_Marlowe]

2C.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[Rossoneri]

I would bid 2♣, but I can see how 3♣ works, and I don't think you need to alert it.

[kenrexford]

han, on Aug 15 2008, 11:36 PM, said:

Agree with Ron, you can certainly have a cold game and 3C will make you miss it too often. Partner isn't even a "passed hand", he could have a decent hand, especially given how some opponents open and respond these days. Whatever the colors are, 3C is still a preemptive bid.

Well, unless you have agreed that it does not show a weak hand, but then you have to alert it. The same is true if you frequently bid it with hands like this even if you haven't formally agreed to do that. (I do think that that is taking a good idea wayyy too far)

How on earth could it be required to alert a natural red-vs-white jump overcall to the three-level because it shows a hand worthy of a red-v-white jump to the three-level after the opponents have placed an expectation of at least half the deck combined on the table? I don't get it.

I would have guessed that intermediate jump overcalls red-v-white were standard enough to at least require the opponents to ask rather than to require us to alert.

The only distrubing part is this "How strong can weak be?" I would have titled the post something like "Am I good enough with unprotected Kings?" or "Did I get lucky having only six clubs and not the 10?" Or, maybe "How weak can Intermediate be?"

[han]

kenrexford, on Aug 16 2008, 09:22 AM, said:

han, on Aug 15 2008, 11:36 PM, said:

Agree with Ron, you can certainly have a cold game and 3C will make you miss it too often. Partner isn't even a "passed hand", he could have a decent hand, especially given how some opponents open and respond these days. Whatever the colors are, 3C is still a preemptive bid.

Well, unless you have agreed that it does not show a weak hand, but then you have to alert it. The same is true if you frequently bid it with hands like this even if you haven't formally agreed to do that. (I do think that that is taking a good idea wayyy too far)

How on earth could it be required to alert a natural red-vs-white jump overcall to the three-level because it shows a hand worthy of a red-v-white jump to the three-level after the opponents have placed an expectation of at least half the deck combined on the table? I don't get it.

I would have guessed that intermediate jump overcalls red-v-white were standard enough to at least require the opponents to ask rather than to require us to alert.

I don't know what you mean by "the opponents have placed an expectation of at least half the deck". Before anybody looks at their cards the opponents have an epectation of half the deck, but that doesn't mean you give up on game, does it. What kind of argument is that? When the opponents open and respond they haven't shown nowhere near enough values for us to give up on game, especially when we have a solid 6-card suit.

And what are you arguing for anyway? Are you arguing that intermediate overcalls are a good agreement at these colors (I agree) and that they are not alertable (I disagree)? Or are you arguing that it is good tactics to bid 3C with this hand while playing that 3C shows a weak jump overcall (I strongly disagree)?

[awm]

There's more to defining the meaning of a bid than "number of tricks." Typically preempts are very much about offense-defense ratio. For this reason, while a vulnerable versus not three-level preempt may well show "seven tricks" it would be very surprising for that bid to include as many potential defensive tricks as this hand contains. To give an even more extreme example, the following hand also has seven tricks:

♠AKx ♥AKx ♦x ♣JT98xx

Would you overcall 3♣ on this hand also?

Note that seven tricks is still down two, -500 if you are doubled. For a preempt to be effective, it's not enough that you go for "only 500" -- you also want opponents to be able to make something such that -500 is not a disastrous score for your side! It's good to be able to say "if partner has nothing, opponents are cold for game and possibly slam" as well as "if partner has nothing I won't go for more than 500 at vulnerable versus not."