[ochinko]

After the hand has been passed to me, and I am in 4th position I always want to overbid slightly so that the opponents can't enter the bidding cheaply. All that I've seen mention in the literature is that you shouldn't open with a weak hand (at least 15 Pearson points, 14 in the Encyclopedia).

So what I did was shifting the NT one level:
1NT is now 12-14
2NT - 15-17
3NT - 18-19
20-21 can be covered by 2D(Multi) because we play it the same way in all other positions.

Now for the suit openings. All that I'm able to think of is 2H/Sp - 15-17 with a 6 card suit, and less than 4 cards in an unbid major (although these could be covered by Multi as well). This still leaves free the 3 level openings. Should I use them for something, or that would be stealing our own bidding space?

Do you like the idea of special agreements for the 4th position, and what else would you suggest?

Many thanks.

Petko

[slammer]

My partnership agreements are

One of a suit is a good hands otherwise we pass.
We also revert to 4 opening card majors using a modified Drury for any 4 card raise.
1NT stays the same strong 15-17 as does 2NT 20-21
(Do you really want to open a 12 pt NT Vul v. NVul? Also Opening 2NT with 15 and going down two when everyone else is down 1 in 1NT hardly seems a sound strategy.)
2C is strong
2D remains Flannery (but a good one) as we play 2/1
2H/S are opening bids with 6 cards-not strong enough for a jump rebid
3c/d/h/s are opening bids with 7 cards-not strong enough for a jump rebid
4c/d is namyats (you play it)
4H/S is I play it

[ochinko]

Jlall, on Sep 8 2005, 06:57 PM, said:

3N 18-19 could get you to 3N with 19 opp 0 and denies you of stayman or transfers below 3N.

2N 15-17 could also get you too high and deny you of invitational auctions.

No doubt that such risk exists. But as I haven't been burnt badly, and it makes the defense harder, and most of the time you go down, you are not doubled, it doesn't seem like a bad strategy so far. I could be totally wrong, of course, but you could go for a number with a preempt too, yet preempts work most of the time.

Shouldn't it be useful at least in MP?

Petko

[ochinko]

slammer, on Sep 8 2005, 07:01 PM, said:

Do you really want to open a 12 pt NT Vul v. NVul?

I am aware that many pairs which play weak NT switch to a strong one in those vulns, but percentagewise it should be the safest of the other NT openings, because with today's aggressive openings the opps can't have more than 22 HCP combined (and that's the worst case).

Petko

[Al_U_Card]

Irrespective of scoring method, your choice to open in 4th seat has to be predicated on GOING PLUS. Keeping the opps out of the bidding is more of a phantom fantasy. Even 1NT on a nice 14 count is fraught with danger when comparison scoring might penalize a wrong-sided contract. The Pearson rule was created to prevent you from opening and having the opps buy the contract in S and go plus, when you could have passed.

[han]

Although I share Justin's fear about being too high with these 15-17 and 18-19 balanced hands, an even stronger objection is the lack of room to investigate for the best (game) contract.

For me, 2H and 2S are still "weak" 2's but very good one, close to a minimal opening, say 10-12 points or even a very nice 9-count. Passing with a good 6-card major (especially spades) is unattractive even in pass-out seat.

2D is not Flannery, just like in any other seat.

[ochinko]

Al_U_Card, on Sep 8 2005, 07:23 PM, said:

Irrespective of scoring method, your choice to open in 4th seat has to be predicated on GOING PLUS.  Keeping the opps out of the bidding is more of a phantom fantasy. Even 1NT on a nice 14 count is fraught with danger when comparison scoring might penalize a wrong-sided contract. The Pearson rule was created to prevent you from opening and having the opps buy the contract in S and go plus, when you could have passed.

I guess, I wasn't clear enough. I don't intend to violate the Pearson's rule, on the contrary. Just in case, I'll mention also that my bidding will be alerted and explained properly.

Petko

[han]

ochinko, on Sep 8 2005, 11:04 AM, said:

Jlall, on Sep 8 2005, 06:57 PM, said:

3N 18-19 could get you to 3N with 19 opp 0 and denies you of stayman or transfers below 3N.

2N 15-17 could also get you too high and deny you of invitational auctions.

No doubt that such risk exists. But as I haven't been burnt badly, and it makes the defense harder, and most of the time you go down, you are not doubled, it doesn't seem like a bad strategy so far. I could be totally wrong, of course, but you could go for a number with a preempt too, yet preempts work most of the time.

Shouldn't it be useful at least in MP?

Petko

Especially at MP it will be costly to play in 2NT when the field is in 1NT. You'll have to play a trick better just to score average.

edit: well, not quite true of course, but the objection still holds. This is worse at MP's than at IMPs imo.

[MickyB]

In 3rd+4th seat, I like to make lead directing bids on weakish balanced hands, and for the weak NT to not be worried about being in 3NT opposite a flat 11, so I play 4 card suits and 14-16 NT. A 2/1 response shows 8-11 and a 5 card suit, so the weak NT can pass it knowing there is a fit.

[Al_U_Card]

ochinko, on Sep 8 2005, 11:27 AM, said:

Al_U_Card, on Sep 8 2005, 07:23 PM, said:

Irrespective of scoring method, your choice to open in 4th seat has to be predicated on GOING PLUS.  Keeping the opps out of the bidding is more of a phantom fantasy. Even 1NT on a nice 14 count is fraught with danger when comparison scoring might penalize a wrong-sided contract. The Pearson rule was created to prevent you from opening and having the opps buy the contract in S and go plus, when you could have passed.

I guess, I wasn't clear enough. I don't intend to violate the Pearson's rule, on the contrary. Just in case, I'll mention also that my bidding will be alerted and explained properly.

Petko

I don't wish to stifle innovation but similar to natural selection, methods that work tend to get adopted....(like Pearson points and rule of 20 and LOTT) This idea is unlikely to be new and has lots to be held against it, so IMHO don't trot this out in a money game....

[inquiry]

How aggressive is your partner. What kind of hands does she open in second seat. Sound preempts in second seat? Will she open weak two with four cards in the other major. How aggressive is your RHO with light third seat openers? Is he the type who will bid 1♥ on xxx AKxx xxx xxx to get a heart lead?

All these factos should weigh in on RATHER TO OPEN or not. If you are thinking open something very clever to keep fthm from bidding and stealing the contract, maybe you should rethink your opening bid.

IF you have a balanced hand, open 1NT. But here is a bitter lesson. If you open a little "light" it is not only your oppoenets who might nail you. Your sweet partner who mgiht have passed a near opening hand, might hang you as well.

And if you are ever unlucky enough to have to sit across the table from me and I pass is second seat... try to have a little extra when you open, as I open very light... with one exception. I don't like 4333 hands, and I tend to be passing them with point count that otherwise suggest I might bid with my light style (no I don't pass 13...).

My suggestion, leave your NT range alone, play normal bridge.

[Gerben42]

In 4th seat I play 14 - 16 NT (it's the most frequent range in this position, and otherwise my standard range vuln.), if I feel like opening weaker balanced hands I do so with 1m. Weak 2-openings have the same meaning as in other positions but are constructive, about 10-14.

[Clinch]

ochinko, on Sep 8 2005, 11:04 AM, said:

No doubt that such risk exists. But as I haven't been burnt badly, and it makes the defense harder, and most of the time you go down, you are not doubled, it doesn't seem like a bad strategy so far. I could be totally wrong, of course, but you could go for a number with a preempt too, yet preempts work most of the time.

If I have a balanced 18-19, opps can go ahead and overcall most of the time; I don't need to open 3NT to preempt myself.

When you are sitting with 15+ in 4th after 3 passes, the last thing you should be worried about is opposing interference. You should think about constructively bidding to the best contract for your side.

Maybe you haven't been burnt badly yet, but that isn't the point. How often have these high level notrump openers kept the opps out of a making part score?

Peter.
New York, NY.

[cherdano]

On RGB, there was once a thread where a few posters argued for 3NT in 4th seat as natural, 15-18 (when playing IMPs). Their experience was that it often makes when it shouldn't, because the defense has no clue about declarer's hand. Add to that the fact that it often will be the right contract, and that it will never get doubled when it is wrong.

Arend

[pigpenz]

I play two bids as sort of ACOL like and three bids are gearted to getting to THRUMP

[mila85]

cherdano, on Sep 8 2005, 03:20 PM, said:

On RGB, there was once a thread where a few posters argued for 3NT in 4th seat as natural, 15-18 (when playing IMPs). Their experience was that it often makes when it shouldn't, because the defense has no clue about declarer's hand. Add to that the fact that it often will be the right contract, and that it will never get doubled when it is wrong.

Arend

Seems interesting.
Did anybodody played it so?

[cherdano]

mila85, on Sep 9 2005, 03:04 PM, said:

cherdano, on Sep 8 2005, 03:20 PM, said:

On RGB, there was once a thread where a few posters argued for 3NT in 4th seat as natural, 15-18 (when playing IMPs). Their experience was that it often makes when it shouldn't, because the defense has no clue about declarer's hand. Add to that the fact that it often will be the right contract, and that it will never get doubled when it is wrong.

Arend

Seems interesting.
Did anybody played it so?

Yes, they were talking from experience. Btw, light openings and frequent preempts favor this approach not only in that it makes it more likely that you have the balance of hcp, but also in that everyone is probably balanced, so it must be really rare that 3NT is absolutely the wrong game.
I haven't tried it out myself.

Arend