[Vampyr]

RedSpawn, on 2017-May-27, 08:12, said:

I will co-sign ggwhiz with backup from the ACBL.

......

See link below where the ACBL shows 1♥-2♣-3♥ to be a weak or intermediate raise:

http://www.acbl.org/...or-suit-raises/

This link is not a bridge lesson. It is a portion of ACBL alert regulations.

[GrahamJson]

It's all very well playing weak raises but I suspect most partners will expect something a little better than this for a raise, even to the 2 level let alone higher. It seems to me that bidding on this mess has far too big a risk that partner will go 800 to more in 4Sx or higher if he is weak or going one or two levels too high if strong.

[MrAce]

GrahamJson, on 2017-May-27, 17:54, said:

It's all very well playing weak raises but I suspect most partners will expect something a little better than this for a raise, even to the 2 level let alone higher. It seems to me that bidding on this mess has far too big a risk that partner will go 800 to more in 4Sx or higher if he is weak or going one or two levels too high if strong.

It depends on the level of your partners. If you are playing mostly with intermediate minus partners then you are absolutely right that this is not what they will expect. Because it takes time for people to understand the tiny line between hcp and shape and number of trumps held combined.

By bidding 3♠ you are not only preempting but also telling your pd that his values in spades are not worth much, if any, in defense. Which can be a vital info for his decisions over their actions.

And no, you are absolutely wrong about the likelihood of going down -800 when your side has 10 trumps. But even if you do let's do the raw math about it. Assume they do not have a great fit and their fit is only 8 cards.

10+8 = 18 trumps=18 tricks.

If your side is going -800 this means you collect only 6 tricks in 3♠

18-6= 12 tricks for them if they chose to play their fit. 12 tricks for them which is worth -1430 or -1370 for us. I would take -800 on any day that ends with Y.

Oh I know, LOTT is not precise. So let's assume for the sake of argument that LOTT was inaccurate for 1 trick or 2 tricks on this particular deal so what happens? What happens is you lose -800 instead of -650 or -620, losing 3-4 imps. And ask yourself whether it is worth of losing 3-4 imps once in a while and gain much more frequently and help pd to make more accurate decisions (i am not even mentioning the space you stole from them)

And do not forget an important note, I gave them only an 8 card fit. Which is not usually the case when your side has 10+ cards fit in spades (also your pd is allowed to hold more than 5 spades for opening 1♠)

Edited to fix typos

[nige1]

el mister, on 2017-May-26, 06:35, said:

MPs, all vuln, playing 2/1, you pick up this fine collection of intermediates:
What is your call?
[Your opps are good, but the room is a whole is a bit of an ordinary standard,
if that makes a difference].

---

I rank ...

• 4♠ = PRE. A reasonable gamble, Hope 4♠ makes or is a good sacrifice. At worst, 4♠X is a bottom. Reduce bidding space for opponents to reach the right level/strain. e.g. At MPs, for opponents, the difference between playing in ♥s/♦s might be top/bottom.
• 3♠ = PRE. Pusillanimous at match-pointed pairs (Enough at imps).
• 2♠ = PRE. But might be a red rag to a bull.
• Pass = PSYCH. Worth consideration against poor opponents, who might not appreciate that they're playing with a 30-34 HCP deck.

[aguahombre]

deleted.

[el mister]

nige1, on 2017-May-27, 22:34, said:

I rank ...

• 4♠ = PRE. A reasonable gamble, Hope 4♠ makes or is a good sacrifice. At worst, 4♠X is a bottom. Reduce bidding space for opponents to reach the right level/strain. e.g. At MPs, for opponents, the difference between playing in ♥s/♦s might be top/bottom.
• 3♠ = PRE. Pusillanimous at match-pointed pairs (Enough at imps).
• 2♠ = PRE. But might be a red rag to a bull.
• Pass = PSYCH. Worth consideration against poor opponents, who might not appreciate that they're playing with a 30-34 HCP deck.

Indeed Nige, one should eschew pusillanimity at match-pointed pairs.

That being said, 4♠ with no singleton sounds excessive down the club - maybe in tournament play. On the actual deal both red slams were lay down due to the marked finesses in the N hand, but no one's getting there in this particular room, making 4♠X a bottom, at best.

[dave_beer]

Pass.

I play that 3♠ would be preemptive here but I like to have a singleton (or void) to do it. A doubleton ♠ is the worst holding in the opponents' suit: shortness is clearly good and additional length makes it more likely that partner will be short.

Partner will expect some HCP for 2♠ and despite the LOTT my hand is not nearly good enough for 4♠.

[rbhalla]

el mister, on 2017-May-26, 06:35, said:

MPs, all vuln, playing 2/1, you pick up this fine collection of intermediates:

---

What is your call? [Your opps are good, but the room is a whole is a bit of an ordinary standard, if that makes a difference].

3S