[Codo]

Hi Ben, hi free,

you both are afraid about 4 Spade X -3.
Okay, lets think about that: They will get at most a Spade a Heart and a club. To beat you 3 times, they need exactly 3 diamond tricks.
But if all this will happen, then they have a big chance of even making a grand slam in hearts or clubs.

And then it will be nice to steal as much bidding space as possible.
Of course you cannot always win and I had enough hands, where I sacrificed 4 Spade X -2 agains 4 H -1.
But maybe we really need a good silmulation to get the right result. For me 7411 always looks like an eight card suit.

Kind Regards

Roland

[chronos]

Imps all vul

(1C) P (1H)

KQJTxxx x Txxx Q

If you where the opener would you open the 74 4S?
Generally 74 like to be bid at the 4 level so I would be looking at opening this 4S.

I'm happy with (and a going to bid 9/10 times) 4S.

Chronos.

[inquiry]

Quote

Hi Ben, hi free,

Codo said that if they can beat you 3 doubled, they have a great chance to make grand slam in clubs or hearts. Well, that assumes that they have a fit and spade shortage. If that is the case, they will be bidding more rather or not you bid 3S or 4S. But imagine West with a modest hand like (when you have no fit)...
S-A9x
H-xxx
D-Ax
C-Axxxx

They may very well get 3D, a C, a H, a S and a trump promotion on the fourth round of diamonds, so 4S could be down not 3, but 4. Imagine his partner holding something like... S-x H-AJxxxx D-KQxx C-Jxx. If you bid 3S, when your partner is looking at 3 or 4S, he can safely bid 4S. When he has a singleton or void, he can pass. It is the missfits that lead to down 2, 3, 4 your way with only game or maybe not even game on their way. In reply 7 I gave a tame little misfit hand where both sides win exactly 8 tricks. 4Sx rates to be a huge loser then.

Several people, among them Richard and Misho, suggested that once partner passed in first seat, the bidding is left up the "preempter". Misho manifested this theory by preempting in diamonds, with the certainty that his partner would not pull back to diamonds if he is doubled and he runs. Richard bars his partner from bidding 4S if he (richard) bids only 3S. I guess playing that crazy way, bidding 4S is better than 3, but that is no way to bid. Bridge is a partnership game. I like to describe to my partner my holding, let him look at his hand, and apply the Law of Total Tricks to see how high we should compete. If I bid 3S vul, he plays me for a great 7 card suit, and now he does the math. It seems to me to counter productive to try to apply the law from one side without any input from partner. The 4S bidders assume that their partner has to fit their suit. While the odds are fair that he does, Spades is the master suit and you can invite his participation with a 3S bid. I never bar my partner from showing support if the law allows it.

"EricK" suggest, they don't know if you are bidding 4S to make or not...but that is actually a deteriment. Look at the vul again. If West has a nice heart fit, very short spades, and he is thinking you are bidding 4S to make, he is likely to take the "save". Even if he passes, his partner knows that they hold most of the deck, and if he doubles, Opener passes holding 3 or 4S and pulls to game at the five level if he is short in spades.

Codo, Richard, and a few others comment on how "great" it is to steal as much bidding space as possible. Well, I agree... as much as possible on this hand is 3S. If you really wanted to steal space, why not 5S or 6S? I mean, this statement by itself is not sufficient to justify any preempt because one hasn't applied a metric to determine how to calculate what the "as possible" bid is. I think vul with the risk of down 3 or 4 makes 4S not possible.

IMPORTANTLY, Codo and Richard both suggested needing a good simulation to compare the results of the hand to examine 4Sx-2 versus 4H-1 as the losing proposition. One really can add 4Sx-3 to 4H making, etc. But here is the problem with the proposition. If you bid 3S it doesn't mean your PARTNERSHIP will not be bidding 4S over 4H. Your partner will bid 4S with a fit, and pass (or double perhaps) with a misft. The assumption if you bid 3S that is as high as your side can go is wrong (even Misho allows his partner to raise, it is Richard and a few others that bar their passing partner from using bridge judgement.... which is wrong in my mind. People who bid like that assume they can mastermind the hand during the auction, I think Bridge is best when played as a partnership game).

If you bid 3S, the bidding might go....

(1C) P (1H) 3S
(?) 4S

Now partner may be bidding to make (trap type pass over 1C perhaps) or as a reasonable sacrafice -- one where he fits spades. Or it might go...

(1C) P (1H) 3S
(4H) P

When he is looking at a spade void or stiff. Seems like reasonable bridge to me. Let partner know your suit legnth and general stregth (given the vul), and let him apply the law and bid logically.

Ben

[Codo]

Hi Ben,

you are right: Bridge is a partnership game.
But you are wrong if you think that your way is partnership friendly and ours is not.
It is absolute consistent with partnership bidding to have hands which you bid 3 Spade and hands where you bid 4 Spade.

I learned, that to bid 3 Spade with a solid suit and a 74 hand does very often backfire.
Your pd can never judge your hand or you are not allow to preempt 3 Spade anymore with KQJxxxx,x,xxx,xx.
Pd simply cannot judge the hands. As I told before: The 7/4 distribution is a very significant part of the descirbiton of this hand. With 7321 f.e. 3 Spade is the big favourite.

Your examples did just proove nothing. You gave the opps all quick tricks and in another hand your pd the kings in your short suits.
Okay, you will loose then. But then change it, give your pd f.e xx,xxxx,AQx,Axxx
wow, you are making 4 Spade even without a real fit.
Will my pd bid 4 Spade over my 3 Spade preempt?
I doubt that. He will be lucky to give me so good cards, so I will be not down too many tricks or even make it. Will he bid 4 Spade over their 4 Heart?
Maybe/maybe not, he has much defence and does not want the 4 Spade -1 opps. 4 Heart-1 defence either.

So, no real sense in giving examples.

With 3 Spade you are safer, if there is no fit.
With 4 Spade you make it much more diffcult for them to reach their best fit. Esecially a 5-4 fit in hearts or club is difficult, a 5-3 fit is nearly impossible.

So: With a 4 Spade bid, you very often reach: 4 Spade X.
With a 3 Spade bid, they are better placed to locate their fit and make a discission according to your loved LOTT.

Nobody said, that 3 Spade will prevent our side to reach 4 Spade.
But maybe one round too late. You give the opps at least one more opportunity to show fit or strength.

The argument: They do not know, if you bid 4 Spade to make it or not is still valid.
If they think, you can make it, they have serious trouble with no fit established.
If you bid 3 Spade and pd raises, the story is over:
They know for certain, that you guys just preempted.

Of course, you have to pay with a risk for your higher preempt. With misfits all around and valuable opps, you sometimes pays a number opps. nothing.
But what does this proofe?

We all have our "own" simulations running: In your world, it does not pay to bid 4 Spade here, in Richards and mine it does.
(In my small experience it was not even close, 4 Spade for me was much better in similar situations. But I know, that memory is not real an exact tool. Defenitly mine is far away from perfectness...)

Kind Regards

Roland

[hrothgar]

I will try again.

I do not explicitly "bar" partner from bidding opposite my preempt.
However, I do have very tight standard regarding when it is appropriate for partner to raise.

This situation is very much analagous to bidding in the balancing seat.
If my partner has just balanced, I don't raise him simply because I am sitting on 5-6 HCP and three card support. Partner's bid was based on the asusmption that I hold this hand type.

To go back to Ron's example, if the auction starts

(1C) - P - (1H) - 3S
P - ???

I'm going to pass 3S holding any number of hands where you (presumably) would bid 4S
From what I can tell, you preempt much less aggressively but raise more freely.
I prefer to preempt more aggressively, but I am much more conservative about raising.

Please don't trot out inane statements like "Bridge is a Partnership Game".
I have issues with this for a couple reasons:

First, and foremost, this is an exceptionally parochial North American view. Cathy Chua’s book “Fair Play or Foul: Cheating Scandals at Bridge” [recently referenced in another thread] does a very nice job analyzing this issue; describing the North American fetish of “constructive bidding”. I consider this book to be one of the most important in my collection.

Second, as I have tried to point out, this is not an issue of “partnership” trust, but rather one of bidding style [If anything, the style that I employ requires more trust in partner's judgement] Larry Cohen and Marty Bergen’s work in popularizing the Law of Total Tricks was an extremely significant development in competitive bidding. Cohen and Berkowitz provided a simple tool that dramatically improved the ability of ordinary players to make accurate competitive decisions under controlled circumstances. The LTT fanatics promote simple, mechanistic bidding that uses fixed rules in the hopes of generating deterministic results:

1M opening must promises a 5+ card suit
The raise to 2M promises exactly 3 card support
The raise to 3M promises exactly 4 card support
…

Modern competitive bidding theory is all about neutralizing the ability of the opponent’s to successfully employ the Law of Total Tricks. Bid to an acceptable contract as quickly as possible, maximize the opponent’s uncertainty about total tricks, and force the last guess on the opponents.

I hope that phrase has some resonance with you given the extent to which you idolize Robson and Segal.

[inquiry]

Roland, my partnership comments were aimed at others, not you. Nothing in what you said implied taking partner out of the loop. So I will not respond to your issue of partnership bidding.... as i have no issue there.

With your example hand (KQJxxxx,x,xxx,xx) I would bid ony 2S, not 3S. For like you I judge the four card suit worth something. So I bid 2S/3S with the pair of hands vulnerable, while you bid 3S/4S.

As for my example proving "nothing", since I gave you and and your partner a misfit.... Well, that was the point. When I preempt 3S, especially in the sandwich position as this bid was, I will come darn near making my bid (this will be important for another of your views below)... So partner, with a fit, will almost automatically carry on to 4S. So when 4S GETS into trouble (my example hands), I will not be there. When 4S is relative save (we have a fit), partner will put me there. That is the entire point. Why show a hand where partner will bid 4S over my 3S, you and I both get to that contract. It is the misfits where 3S is the winner. And when a fit exist, 3S doesn't have to lose... after all you do have a partner at the table to judge the right response.

Okay, you will loose then. But then change it, give your pd f.e xx,xxxx,AQx,Axxx wow, you are making 4 Spade even without a real fit. This is true. But now partner with two and a half tricks, when I said I can come DARN close to making 3S will surely carry on to game. I mean, come on, it will be automatic.

Your comment that "He will be lucky to give me so good cards, so I will be not down too many tricks or even make it. Will he bid 4 Spade over their 4 Heart? is a non-starter with me, because my VULNERABLE preempts are this good. And will he bid it over 4H by the opponents? In a flash. As for giving examples (you said no sense in it), it was to illustrate that a partner can use bridge logic to decide what to do.

You said "So: With a 4 Spade bid, you very often reach: 4 Spade X." Which is true. Sadly, sometimes 4Sx is going to happen when neither side can make anything, or when you go for more than the value of their game. You only reach 4Sx when your partner raises 3S to 4S when it is right to be there.... Now what is the downside to the slow 3S-(4H)-4S auction? It is not that they have found their fit, it might be that they have a forcing pass available to invite continuation as a mild slam try. But, since they are vulnerable, if you bid 4S immediately and they bid 5H over that, that has to be at least mild slam try anyway, after all one of them committed to 11 tricks without hearing much from his partner. So if his partner has extra's particularily with a spade control, they might bid the slam. So, while vulnerable, I don't put much stock in the you give them too much info if you wait for your partner to take the push to 4S as opposed to bidding it yourself.

The argument: They do not know, if you bid 4 Spade to make it or not is still valid.

My actual reply to you was directed toward the simulation issue. If you build one to test results, you have to include the ability of partner to bid 4S with the appropriate hand. That is all.

Now to Richard. If I misunderstood your view earlier, when you said "On this deal, partner is a passed hand. Following a preempt by me, partner is expected to remain a passed hand. We are in a pre-balancing situation.", I apologize. I had just read Misho's post about barring his partner after he is a passed hand, and naturally read "expected to pass" in this situation as to bar.

Ben

[hrothgar]

Now to Richard. If I misunderstood your view earlier, when you said "On this deal, partner is a passed hand. Following a preempt by me, partner is expected to remain a passed hand. We are in a pre-balancing situation.", I apologize. I had just read Misho's post about barring his partner after he is a passed hand, and naturally read "expected to pass" in this situation as to bar.

No worries

Different emphasis on the work "expected"

[Free]

Hmmm, the way I usually pre-empt is according to LTC (Loser Trick Count). This hand has a -6LTC value, and that means I can bid V at 3-level, NV at 4-level. Partner knows exact what I have, and if we're -14 or better together, we have to play 4S.

Using LTC, all this crap about "a 4-card is worth something" is allready counted in, because you can only have 3 losers in each suit.

This way, I normally won't go down doubled too much (V -2, NV -3) if partner has nothing, and we can reach 4S if partner has the right hand.
Ofcourse he passed, but with a -8LTC hand, he normally passes if he hasn't got 12HCP. I don't consider partner as a pass-all-the-time-hand.

It is true that opponents may find a way to 4H after a 3S bid, but they will reach 5H the same way if you bid 4S. And 4S has too much danger to go down -3 in my opinion. If opponents can play 4H, then it's up to partner to descide if he defends in 4S or not...

That's how I play it: as secure as possible, but still agressive when possible