[shevek]

---

This happened in a recent Swiss Pairs event. I led ♦J as South, collecting +800.
One hand proves nothing but got me thinking.

West asked partner whether he preferred a 1NT response. East said No, just an unlucky layout. Fair enough.
I don't like 1NT much either, wrong-siding your likely game and making it hard to compete in clubs. Maybe some would respond 1♦?

I like a traditional 2♣ on these hands, also on some hands with four trumps:
♠xx ♥xxx ♦Axxx ♣KTxx

3♣ still be preemptive but more shapely, or the actual at favourable.

The supposed gain with inverted comes via those sweet shape-showing auctions you see in books, rare at the table. Mostly you do just as well after a limit jump raise, which also pre-empts the 3NT-killing overcall.
Criss-cross (1♣ - 2♦ & 1♦ - 3♣ as limit-plus) allows you cater for most hands with support.

[Cyberyeti]

This is a judgment problem, I would bid 3♣ on that hand, but my 1♣ shows 4 in an unbalanced hand or 15+ if balanced. You have to make allowances for system and if you're responding to a potential weak no trump with less than 4 clubs, 3♣ is too much. TBF on a diamond lead 1♣-P-1N-X end will dial 500, so they're not in a good spot anywyay. This is one of the few hands where you get doubled after bidding 1♣/1N but don't if you open a weak NT.

[akwoo]

Switch the KQ♣ in South for the A8♣ in East, and 3♣ only goes down 2 while 4♥ makes except on a spade lead from West.

I prefer using criss-cross for a mixed raise. If your 3m jump raise is on anything from a shapely 4 to an average 9, opener has no idea what to do with 18 balanced.

All that said, if you consider the East hand unquestionably an opening hand vulnerable in first (or second) seat, you might not want to play inverted minors at IMPs.

I never had this problem myself because I haven't regularly played inverted minors in a strong NT context.

[rhm]

shevek, on 2014-March-04, 23:17, said:

---

This happened in a recent Swiss Pairs event. I led ♦J as South, collecting +800.
One hand proves nothing but got me thinking.

West asked partner whether he preferred a 1NT response. East said No, just an unlucky layout. Fair enough.

Nonsense.
One hand may not prove everything but is often enlightening.
Just shrugging your shoulder to your disasters will not make you a better Bridge player. Luck and happenstance plays a role in this game, but errors are much more frequent and decisive.
This one exhibits poor Bridge judgment, a type of mistake often encountered at the table.

Ask yourself: Do you really want to preempt with a balanced 5♣332 distribution opposite a quite likely 4M333 weak notrump vulnerable at IMPs?. Even undoubled -300 would hardly have been a triumph
What will you gain and how effective is it to preempt in the lowest suit? You are not even protected by the LAW.
West slow values are mainly defensive and opposite an opening bid make it unlikely that opponents have game and will find it.
East-West deserved what they got.

What is wrong with 1NT? This bid hints at club length. If East has distribution he can compete.
If you do not like 1NT, just temporize with 1♦. This is very unlikely to get you in any harm.
There is nothing wrong with inverted minor raises, but it comes with its share of problems. One is that like any other convention it is prone to abuse.

Rainer Herrmann

[helene_t]

It is very unlucky with both club honours misplaced. Even so, make Wests hand xxx-xx-KQx-Jxxxx and you are -500 against a making game. That said, -500 is not great against a game that is unlikely to be bid.

3♣ is ok in my opinion. I would prefer to play criss-cross on this hand (especially if 1♣ can be a doubleton in which case I would bid 1NT with the West hand if 2♣ is not available).

Criss-cross comes with a cost. I like having 2♦ available for something else.

[MrAce]

I am an aggressive preemptor, at least i think i am, but i would not bid 3♣ with W hand. I agree with everything Rainer said.

[rhm]

helene_t, on 2014-March-05, 03:05, said:

It is very unlucky with both club honours misplaced. Even so, make Wests hand xxx-xx-KQx-Jxxxx and you are -500 against a making game. That said, -500 is not great against a game that is unlikely to be bid.

3♣ is ok in my opinion.

My eyesight is starting to get worse. Which making game?
Anyone, who believes game for opponents is likely, holding a balanced hand with six HCP opposite an opening bid is fooling him- or herself.
Of course both club honors with South can be considered "unlucky". It so happens about 25% of the time.
In this game it is the opponents decision when to change a double into penalty and when not and they are even allowed to look at their hand first and most take advantage of that.
I know the rules are very unfair, but rules are rules. There is nothing you can do, except taking that into account yourself before you stick your neck out in an endeavour, which is unlikely to gain in the first place.

Rainer Herrmann

[Cyberyeti]

rhm, on 2014-March-05, 04:38, said:

My eyesight is starting to get worse. Which making game?
Anyone, who believes game for opponents is likely, holding a balanced hand with six HCP opposite an opening bid is fooling him- or herself.
Of course both club honors with South can be considered "unlucky". It so happens about 25% of the time.
In this game it is the opponents decision when to change a double into penalty and when not and they are even allowed to look at their hand first and most take advantage of that.
I know the rules are very unfair, but rules are rules. There is nothing you can do, except taking that into account yourself before you stick your neck out in an endeavour, which is unlikely to gain in the first place.

Rainer Herrmann

On Helene's hand, 4♥ by N as long as diamonds are 5-2 which they are on the actual hand. It gets even better if a perfectly normal Q♠ is led.

Also partner could have say Jx, xxx, KQJ, KQxxx where 4 of either major is probably making and you've only got 5 losers, he also doesn't have to be balanced.

That said I don't want to bid 3♣ opposite most weak NTs, and that is a very likely holding for partner. The gains come principally when partner is unbalanced and can bid 5♣ over 4M, give him say x, xx, Kxxx, AKxxxx.

3♣ is not without possibility of gain, I just think it's odds against if 1♣ can be short and/or balanced.

[MrAce]

Cyberyeti, on 2014-March-05, 05:14, said:

I just think it's odds against if 1♣ can be short and/or balanced.

Yes, that is also what i assumed about 1♣ when i said i would not bid 3♣ with W hand, Against a 4+ clubs opening, even if it contains a weak NT opener, i would bid 3♣, knowing that we have 9 cards in clubs and maybe much more.

[mycroft]

This is why I like 3♣ *preemptive*, not just "an old-fashioned 2♣ raise".

You win playing the latter when you win the partscore, or they guess wrong on the suit; you lose when they say "who knows who can make what, let's take the points" - especially at MPs when vulnerable, when they beat all the partscores with down 1. You win playing the former when they have game and they guess wrong and only take 500 out of it, plus the guess wrong (does partner have a flat 12 or a moderately shapely 15? - in other words, do you have game or had you better stop at the 3 level?) and the can't find the right suit because of the preempt. In exchange, when it's wrong, it's 1100+ into game, not 800 into "not likely bid game".

[Vampyr]

A few people have mentioned IMPs. The OP said it was a Swiss Pairs, so maybe people should instead discuss what they think is sensible at Matchpoints?

[mike777]

I will try pass of 1c.....


1nt would be 8-11?

assume a weak raise of 2c is forbidden in the OP>

[granguru]

I just would recommend E to read about zar points. He has no opening bid. 24 zar +1 if you consider that ♠ might be a final contract. What is the sense of opening that hand? Lead-directing? showing strong suit? constructive? Charles Goren wrote in 1950 that all 4333 should deduct 1HCP to evaluate bidding. It is still a good advice.

BTW, partner has also a balanced hand, although 5 card support. But 14+6=20 and no major advantages to play the hand instead of defending. Add to this the vulnerability and that 5 out of 6 HCP are OUT of the trump suit and it is clear that 3♣ is wrong.

[ggwhiz]

I'm feeling schizo looking at this.

I would not have opened the East hand, too weak

I would not pre-empt with the West hand, too (2-way as in defense) strong