[Flame]

csdenmark, on Apr 9 2004, 12:22 PM, said:

Flame, on Apr 9 2004, 04:53 PM, said:

"3NT is any 7 solid and this is solid."
I thought 7 card solid is AKQXXXX.
and maybe AKJ10XXX
And like Ben i dont play that premptives to show weak suits, actually its the first time i hear something like that.

How does your 5♣♦ openers look like?

My guideline is what qualifies for Namyats in MAJOR qualifies for Gambling 3NT in minor.

My 5c/5d look like this KQJXXXXXX
but my Namyats in MAJOR also look like AKQXXXX, so we agree on that part.
Im not saying you're wrong, its just the way i was tought to play and never seen anyone play differently till today.

[csdenmark]

There are not so much help in this area so it is a bit some personal habits deciding. I use the Belladonna/Garozzo version for Namyats:

10-14, 8 cd solid or 7 cd solid headed by ace or king

-I am also using 3♦ Sharif for preempts - 9-12, any 7 solid, no ace or king
-3♣ 9-13, 6-7 cd, stopper outside

I will therefore open 5♣♦ holding something like you call solid.

[Flame]

"I am also using 3♦ Sharif for preempts - 9-12, any 7 solid, no ace or king"
You mean no As or K outside i hope.
Anyway i play the same just for me the word solid mean headed by AKQ.
One thing that let me think that MR sharif ment solid to be AKQ is that on the continuation process you dont have any trump honors asking or showing.

[csdenmark]

No I dont - that was really why I continued here. I dont think the explanations for such art. definitions are very precise in the book. I came in doubt caused by this discussing whether I was interpretating correctly or not.

Thank you for help for now. I will try to study again and return with a solution and documentation.

[the hog]

Still think 5D is off with the pixies. Swop the Major suit kings in the 3D opener's hand. Incidentally I don't necessarily disagree with 3D if you are playing a sound style, especially if vul.

I would open 4D if not vul.

Claus you are misreading your conventions.
If you play Sharif 3D it means some solid 7 card suit, ie headed by AKQ and no OUTSIDE Aces or kings!

[csdenmark]

The_Hog, on Apr 10 2004, 02:02 AM, said:

Claus you are misreading your conventions.
If you play Sharif 3D it means some solid 7 card suit, ie headed by AKQ and no OUTSIDE Aces or kings!

By a quick glance it looked like both you and Flame here are right. It looks like what I have interpretated as solid is more like undisciplinary action. - The informations looks a little tricky and I have not been suspicious as I think I have been lucky partner had the missing card. Looks like solid means 8+ points in the preempt suit missing only queen or jack bot not both.

I also need once again compare to Namyats - in Precision preempts are something like a sub-system. As my principle is to let the others make the thinking work - it is for me only, but sometimes hard enough, only to take advantage from that. The basic is of course to interpretate correctly - and here it looks like I have been mistaken. But I need some more time to investigate.

Thank you for help!

[the hog]

'As my principle is to let the others make the thinking work '

That is an excellent principle Claus - one I thoroughly support!
Happy Easter.

Ron

[GijsH]

It has been interesting to see the diversity of the replies here.
I honestly can say my reply at IMP would be 5♦ and at matchpoints: pas.
(I don't even want to discuss 3NT here, disgusting!)
At rubber I would even more readily bid 5D, because:
1. vulnerable partner is supposed to have a good suit
2. nobody can blame you after the event, if it goes down it is opener's fault.
3. at rubber. vulnerable preempts are especially sound

I have played with some professional rubber players (never for money though ), e.g. the winner of the Dutch Master pairs competition last year. He likes heavy preempts, especially in rubber and would not hesitate on:
♠ x ♥ Kxx ♦ AKJxxxx ♣ Jx
to open 3♦! especially in 1st or 3rd seat and I would like to say you young players can learn something from that.
This only shows the importance of knowing partner's style of peempting.

[Trpltrbl]

PASS

Mike

[lbyer]

I would not bid 3♦ with this hand. I would agree with those who would open this hand 1 diamond. A weak 2 diamonds is second best.

My preference is to pre-empt with BAD hands - not good ones, and I like my partner to do the same.

[mikestar]

Even assuming partner isn't too strong for 3D, I believe pass is correct at either scoring. The hands are a miracle fit and you can't play for miracles. Imagine if partner's majors were interchanged: 5D is probably down off the top, never mind 6.

Your don't have enough trumps and have too much defense for 5D as a sacrifice, so there is no reason to bid.

[lbyer]

mikestar - if you read the earlier threads you would notice that 6 diamonds was a laydown. Do you think one should play in 3♦ when 6 diamonds is a laydown - without even the opportunity to explore??

I agree that Pass is the correct bid over 3♦; The initial 3♦ bid is not good - see my earlier post.

I remember reading about a hypothetical hand in a book by Reese. The hand consisted of all 13 diamonds and Reese's question was what's the best bid. I think he opted for four diamonds (tactical underbid) with the idea of moving up in slow increments - likely to end up in 6 or 7 diamonds doubled.

Although this was only a theoretical discussion - I think it brings out an interesting point about bidding distributional hands. Sometimes it is better to start low with good and distributional hands - ops may not fully understand the HCP vs distributional strength of the hand. At the same time partner is able to contribute to the final contract.

[Fluffy]

Pass and pass to me as well, 3NT may be the right bid sometime, not because you´ll make it, but because your opponnts will fail to bid and make 4♠

[Trpltrbl]

42, on Apr 9 2004, 03:37 AM, said:

N had
♠-
♥Kxx
♦AJ109xxx
♣Jxx

Another great hand for ZARpoints, we just open 1♦ and will get to game for sure and likely to slam. 6.2 ♦ is fairly good slam.

Mike