BBO Discussion Forums: Strong hand opposite preempt - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Strong hand opposite preempt What's your response to 3C?

#21 User is offline   FrancesHinden 

  • Limit bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,483
  • Joined: 2004-November-02
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England
  • Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those

Posted 2008-October-05, 14:28

gwnn, on Oct 5 2008, 10:08 AM, said:

Seriously Andy, 0-9 is not really mainstream (well not what I would consider mainstream). No outside aces sounds like a good idea but not as an absolute restriction, just as a guideline. I don't think a majority of players would pass on

Ax xxx x QJTxxxx

or

KQx x xx JTxxxxx

but automatically open on

xx xx xx JTxxxxx

which seems to be your description. With that said, your description seems to be much closer than Arc's.

His 0-9 HCP doesn't exactly fit with "2 of the top 5" honours in clubs
0

#22 User is offline   FrancesHinden 

  • Limit bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 8,483
  • Joined: 2004-November-02
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England
  • Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those

Posted 2008-October-05, 14:29

ironyuppie, on Oct 3 2008, 11:14 PM, said:

This hand generated some discussion at another forum, and I wanted to see what you fine gentlemen had to say:

Ah, someone else not interested in my opinion.
0

#23 User is offline   P_Marlowe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,204
  • Joined: 2005-March-18
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2008-October-05, 14:42

3H.

Assumes of course, that partner thinks this is forcing.
Otherwise bid 3NT.

With kind regards
Marlowe
With kind regards
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)
0

#24 User is offline   JoAnneM 

  • LOR
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 852
  • Joined: 2003-December-04
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:California

Posted 2008-October-05, 15:25

FrancesHinden, on Oct 5 2008, 08:29 PM, said:

ironyuppie, on Oct 3 2008, 11:14 PM, said:

This hand generated some discussion at another forum, and I wanted to see what you fine gentlemen had to say:

Ah, someone else not interested in my opinion.

I noticed it was this person's first post and thought maybe they just didn't know women are allowed here. :blink:
Regards, Jo Anne
Practice Goodwill and Active Ethics
Director "Please"!
0

#25 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2008-October-05, 15:28

gwnn, on Oct 5 2008, 10:08 AM, said:

Seriously Andy, 0-9 is not really mainstream (well not what I would consider mainstream). No outside aces sounds like a good idea but not as an absolute restriction, just as a guideline. I don't think a majority of players would pass on

Ax xxx x QJTxxxx

or

KQx x xx JTxxxxx

but automatically open on

xx xx xx JTxxxxx

which seems to be your description. With that said, your description seems to be much closer than Arc's.

Yes, I should probably have excluded J10xxxxx. I wasn't really trying to write a set of rules for evaluating a possible preempt, just an approximation for use in a simulation.

I hope, though, that if you limited your sample to good players - which is what I always assume my partner is - you wouldn't get many people preempting with Ax xxx in the majors, or with KQx in a major. Yuck.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users