[petterb]

Opening post says fav vul. Full hand post shows unfav. Quite a difference I'd say...

[42]

Oops, sorry, my mistake: EW vulnerable, NS white. I don't know how to edit properly the diagram

[sasioc]

I don't understand your partner's argument either. I'm not sure about the general style in different parts of the world (I'm aware that Americans tend to have far sounder pre empts than we do over here in the UK) but certainly for most players I know a weak two does not promise much in the way of defensive values - indeed, defensive holdings would strongly discourage me from opening a weak two. If my partner doubled a contract because I'd opened a weak two and hence must have some defensive trick(s) I'd kick him under the table!

I am keen to open a weak two on this hand because of the vulnerability and the fact that I have a seventh diamond, which makes up a bit for not having the suit quality I'd normally look for to bid like this. I won't open at the three level because I am in second and opening this will make it very difficult for partner to judge when it is right to bid 3NT over my second seat pre empts (or to take any other action for that matter).

[phil_20686]

Arguments that seem like nonsense to me:

(1) You do not have enough defence for a weak two.

I have an ace. That is my one defensive trick. It might also help get an early ruff in when partner is short. If Partner doubles needing more than one trick from a weak two to beat a contract he does not have a double. Sure it might be one off when he is expecting two off. Shame.

(2) You lack the playing strength to open a weak two.

I have a A-seventh. Sure, I could h ave a better intermedeates, but even opposite a stiff diamond I will have 5 tricks 67% of the time. That is more than most weak twos have opposite a stiff.

Arguments that do make sense to me:

(1) I like partner to bid 3N opposite a first and second seat 3m.

Thus, I only bid 3m with HHxxxx(x), so that partner, with Hx, can bid game confortable on minimalish hands knowing the minor is coming in.

(2) I have a weak hand with diamonds. I have a bid that shows a weak hand with diamonds. I do not like to pass when I have a bid available that shows my hand.

(3) Pre-empts work best when there is a certain amount of variation. Sure, your hand is hardly classical for a weak two in diamonds. But your opps dont know that, and will treat it like a weak two in the play defence. Better yet, if you open these hands declarers have to consider that you have these hands in the play defence. Both might cause them to err in the bidding or play.

[fromageGB]

mistake

This post has been edited by fromageGB: 2012-January-06, 06:44

[the hog]

phil_20686, on 2012-January-06, 06:24, said:

Arguments that seem like nonsense to me:

snipped

(2) I have a weak hand with diamonds. I have a bid that shows a weak hand with diamonds. I do not like to pass when I have a bid available that shows my hand.

Uh, which bid would that be? Surely you can't mean 2D as your hand does not resemble anything like a weak 2 in Ds.

[fromageGB]

the hog, on 2012-January-06, 23:52, said:

Uh, which bid would that be? Surely you can't mean 2D as your hand does not resemble anything like a weak 2 in Ds.

phil_20686, on 2012-January-06, 06:24, said:

(2) I have a weak hand with diamonds. I have a bid that shows a weak hand with diamonds. I do not like to pass when I have a bid available that shows my hand.

(3) Pre-empts work best when there is a certain amount of variation. Sure, your hand is hardly classical for a weak two in diamonds. But your opps dont know that, and will treat it like a weak two in the play defence. Better yet, if you open these hands declarers have to consider that you have these hands in the play defence. Both might cause them to err in the bidding or play.

The bid that describes - by partnership agreement one hopes - ANY weak hand with long diamonds that cannot be opened 1♦ or 3♦ is, by definition, 2♦. Remember 3♦ guarantees 2 of the top 3 honours.

Argument(3) is valid, if alerted, explained, and allowed by the governing authority.

[the hog]

Remember 3♦ guarantees 2 of the top 3 honours.

[/quote]

Eh??? What on earth are you smoking? Where is this written?
You would not open 3D in first, 2nd or third nv vs vul on AJTxxxx ?

[fromageGB]

the hog, on 2012-January-07, 06:15, said:

Remember 3♦ guarantees 2 of the top 3 honours.

Eh??? What on earth are you smoking? Where is this written?
You would not open 3D in first, 2nd or third nv vs vul on AJTxxxx ?

phil_20686, on 2012-January-06, 06:24, said:

<snip> Arguments that do make sense to me:
(1) I like partner to bid 3N opposite a first and second seat 3m.
Thus, I only bid 3m with HHxxxx(x), so that partner, with Hx, can bid game confortable on minimalish hands knowing the minor is coming in.

Darjeeling, actually, but drinking rather than smoking

Hey, they are not my methods, I'm an othodox 3♦ bidder. I am merely pointing out how Phil seems to guarantee 2 of the top 3 honours with his 3♦ open, therefore a 7 card suit headed by AJT does not qualify. (Hx with partner would not be enough for a comfortable 3NT.) So that hand has to open 2♦ it seems. Therefore 2♦ is extremely wide ranging in both strength and length, as he implies, and has the unsettling effect on opponents that he describes.

[whereagles]

the hog, on 2012-January-07, 06:15, said:

Quote

Remember 3♦ guarantees 2 of the top 3 honours.

Eh??? What on earth are you smoking? Where is this written?

In the bible.

[kenberg]

For some reason the software will not let me vote, but I chose a pass before seeing the comments or the full deal. I have a question about the success of 3♦. After 3♦-pass-pass, would not West reopen with a double?

It seems sort of touch and go as to whether EW will reach 3NT if N passes. 1♣-1♥-1NT and then? I guess some Wests would raise to 2NT, I probably would not.

[the_dude]

I voted 3D, because it applies maximum pressure to the opponents when it is their hand, while (somewhat) describing my hand to my partner if he has the big one.

Obviously you are going for a number if you play 3Dx, but honestly, that is not a likely result. I suppose partner might take a 5D sac that goes for 800, but again at equal colors he doesn't rate to be saving too often unless you are on a huge fit.

Most of the other results rate to be in your favor. If partner bids 3NT with Kx of Diamonds, you have a 50-50 shot (ditto for any doubleton if he can stop some suits). If he bids it with Kxx, you are in 3NT when you might otherwise not be. You have successfully warned him off of overbidding a big hand with no diamond fit.

And of course your opponents will have a much harder time when it is their hand.