[aguahombre]

I don't understand 3C either, and don't have any examples to illustrate the point.

It just looks like a simple 1C opening bid, unless I am one of those sorts who has to "do something" each time. My idea of "doing something" is just staying in the boat and letting the brilliant people do the operating.

[rduran1216]

aguahombre, on Sep 14 2010, 09:19 PM, said:

I don't understand 3C either, and don't have any examples to illustrate the point.

It just looks like a simple 1C opening bid, unless I am one of those sorts who has to "do something" each time. My idea of "doing something" is just staying in the boat and letting the brilliant people do the operating.

well if my diamond and spade holdings were reversed, I think 3C would be clear

[aguahombre]

Any time I have three honors outside my suit, I say: "anything but a preempt". Just my opinion, based on old age ---could be wrong.

[Phil]

rduran1216, on Sep 14 2010, 09:06 PM, said:

I dont understand 3C at all

give partner

AQxxx
Axx
xxxx
x

or anything even close to that.

How on earth will you find 4S after 3C?

4♠ is a serious grind on these cards and probably won't make.

Your points are still valid though.

[gwnn]

rduran1216, on Sep 15 2010, 02:06 AM, said:

I dont understand 3C at all

give partner

AQxxx
Axx
xxxx
x

or anything even close to that.

How on earth will you find 4S after 3C?

One example hand does not an argument make.

I could bring up an example hand where our preempt is the only way to prevent opps finding a game or another one where our preempt is the only way to win a double game swing, or ... (mind you, I prefer 1♣ on the hand in the opening post but I perfectly understand 3♣ as well)

In bridge almost all actions have advantages and disadvantages, there will always be some scenarios (example hands) where they work brilliantly and some where they fail miserably. When you play bridge you hope for the former scenarios and try to avoid the latter scenarios (with some sort of mental rain dance). The fact is, you can't win them all, what goes around comes around and we are all serving the mysterious powers of Yin and Yang. If you don't like it, go multiply integers where you can be sure of exact results (unless you run into arithmetic overflow errors).

[Fluffy]

The_Hog, on Sep 15 2010, 01:39 AM, said:

peachy, on Sep 15 2010, 01:38 AM, said:

This would be a first seat 1C for me, but a second seat 3C. 
What to open with this, depends on the style agreed.

First or third seat 3C and second seat 1C is more logical.

Don't understand this, My logic is reversed.

First & third I preempt light and with bad (awful) suits, so my upper limit for preempting is lower, hence I have to open at the 1 level the limit hands.

Second position I open constructively, and this hand is perfect for that.

[bucky]

This hand is borderline, sort of gray area that can go with either 1C or 3C. When I want to make a decision between them, I usually look at the number of major cards I have. If I have 4 cards or less in the majors, I open 3C. Otherwise (like this hand) I open 1C. Of course we are talking about only 1st/2nd seats.

[lexlogan]

rduran1216, on Sep 15 2010, 02:06 AM, said:

I dont understand 3C at all

give partner

AQxxx
Axx
xxxx
x

or anything even close to that.

How on earth will you find 4S after 3C?

Why would I expect to find 4♠ after 1♣-1♠-2♣-pass? If responder bids again, he deserves to find a stiff spade.

[bucky]

lexlogan, on Sep 15 2010, 12:47 PM, said:

rduran1216, on Sep 15 2010, 02:06 AM, said:

I dont understand 3C at all

give partner

AQxxx
Axx
xxxx
x

or anything even close to that.

How on earth will you find 4S after 3C?

Why would I expect to find 4♠ after 1♣-1♠-2♣-pass? If responder bids again, he deserves to find a stiff spade.

That was a bad example. But partner could have:
AQxxx
AKx
xxxx
x