[RedSpawn]

 PhilG007, on 2017-April-10, 01:44, said:

I wouldn't pre-empt on any of these hands.In each case,the heart suit is too moth eaten...
It should be remembered that when you bid a suit,you are not only proposing it as trumps;
you are also suggesting it as a lead if your side become defenders. On each of these hands,do you
REALLY want a heart lead (?)

Amen! Can you imagine the puzzled look on your partner's face if he gets the chance to lead hearts but the opposition holds the A,K, & Q ♥ and are sluffing losers over your bid suit?

The optics of that situation are not good and partner may be justified in giving you a menacing "side-eye". And reminding your partner that you said WEAK 3 will not adequately address his utter disappointment and shock.

[aawk]

Hand 1 :

100% pass in seat 1, 2 and 4.
In seat 3 3♥ is ok (I would pass because of the 8 LTC).
A good agreement is that after first passing a jump overcall (or response on partners 1♣/♦ openings bid) shows at least 6-4 in the majors.

Hand 2 :

If you agree that no aces are allowed outside the 7 card than pass or 1♥ (not a fan) is your only option.
I would open 3♥ in seat 1-3 (0-10 HCP 6-7 LTC) and on agreement 2♥ in seat 4.

Hand 3 :

I would open 3♥ in seat 1-3 (0-10 HCP 6-7 LTC) and on agreement 2♥ in seat 4.

[Jinksy]

 RedSpawn, on 2017-April-10, 04:48, said:

Amen! Can you imagine the puzzled look on your partner's face if he gets the chance to lead hearts but the opposition holds the A,K, & Q ♥ and are sluffing losers over your bid suit?

The optics of that situation are not good and partner may be justified in giving you a menacing "side-eye". And reminding your partner that you said WEAK 3 will not adequately address his utter disappointment and shock.

You know you're allowed to discuss these things beforehand, right? Agreeing 'aggressive preempts' is no more untoward than agreeing '4-card majors', and partner should defend accordingly. That doesn't mean it's winning bridge to preempt on all or any of these hands (or to play 4-card majors), but 'partner won't expect it' is a poor argument.

[RedSpawn]

 Jinksy, on 2017-April-10, 09:01, said:

You know you're allowed to discuss these things beforehand, right? Agreeing 'aggressive preempts' is no more untoward than agreeing '4-card majors', and partner should defend accordingly. That doesn't mean it's winning bridge to preempt on all or any of these hands (or to play 4-card majors), but 'partner won't expect it' is a poor argument.

I respectfully disagree. Bridge is war and it behooves me to adequately equip my partner for battle where possible. We may attack (declare) or we may defend. I don't know how the auction will end from 1st seat.

Since the question says I am dealer and in 1st seat and nonvulnerable, I want to make a bid that represents our assets well and also prepares my partner for a sound opening lead should we have to defend.

I may say my preference is aggressive preempts and if my partner agrees to that upfront, cool. ... then my partner is equipped at the point of style agreement. But these "undisciplined" preempts cut both ways....you get 1st strike in the auction and get to make your statement crisply and quickly. However, your partner has to unpack your bid and figure out is it plain vanilla or is it the aggressive preempt. Navigating that question means he has another decision point where he could make a bidding/interpretation error.

Also, I believe there are times that the element of surprise in the auction may benefit the partnership but I personally don't think it should be predicated on knowingly writing a personal check drawn on insufficient funds.

[msjennifer]

 Jinksy, on 2017-April-10, 09:01, said:

You know you're allowed to discuss these things beforehand, right? Agreeing 'aggressive preempts' is no more untoward than agreeing '4-card majors', and partner should defend accordingly. That doesn't mean it's winning bridge to preempt on all or any of these hands (or to play 4-card majors), but 'partner won't expect it' is a poor argument.

Sir,You presume that the hand is from a team event,a fact nowhere mentioned.The type of event the vulnerability etc nothing is mentioned.I take it as first seat problem.It is becoming,as I have noticed in these columns recently,a fashion to make so called Ill judged preemptive bids of 3/4 level with 7pawns in the suit.I will not be surprised at all that an opening of 6H/S be suggested on VOID,QJxxxxxxx,xx,xx on the basis of some unacceptable secret agreements made before the start of the event.I fully agree the sentiment expressed by Redspawn.The so called peremptory may be deviliously enjoying the game this way.Certainly it is not the authentic bridge at all.The game is no more the gentlemens game.None of the text books written by genuine experts will have or will advise arrogant (not aggressive,mind you) openings of 3Hearts on any of these hands in any seat.Felicity,I say,you must have had all the amusement reading all these NEW UNDEFINED definitions of preemptive bids.Should partner holding Kx of the preemption suit on lead never lead it as partners preemption is based on a holding of xxxxxxx and nothing more ? The experimental bidding at perhaps its best!

[Joe_Old]

 aawk, on 2017-April-10, 08:30, said:

Hand 1 :

100% pass in seat 1, 2 and 4.
In seat 3 3♥ is ok (I would pass because of the 8 LTC).
A good agreement is that after first passing a jump overcall (or response on partners 1♣/♦ openings bid) shows at least 6-4 in the majors.

Hand 2 :

If you agree that no aces are allowed outside the 7 card than pass or 1♥ (not a fan) is your only option.
I would open 3♥ in seat 1-3 (0-10 HCP 6-7 LTC) and on agreement 2♥ in seat 4.

Hand 3 :

I would open 3♥ in seat 1-3 (0-10 HCP 6-7 LTC) and on agreement 2♥ in seat 4.

Aawk makes a good point: after three passes, you don't pre-empt. Ever. Why take a bid where you expect to go minus when you can just pass out the hand?

However, there is a standard meaning for a fourth seat, two level call in 2/1, SAYC and Standard American: six cards and the minimum HCP's your partnership requires for a one level opener. GIB plays 10-12 HCP; the original concept was more like 12-14 HCP. The original idea was to make a picture bid, attempting to find skinny, distributional games opposite a passed partner. Now the trend seems to lean toward part scores.

So pass hand #1 in fourth seat. Hands #2 and #3 barely qualify for a 2♥ bid (if partner has agreed to fight part score battles like this), particularly since it's a near guarantee that partner has 10-12 HCP. The downside would be that the opps have most of the HCP, and probably the spade suit.

[Jinksy]

 RedSpawn, on 2017-April-10, 09:26, said:

I respectfully disagree... your partner has to unpack your bid and figure out is it plain vanilla or is it the aggressive preempt. Navigating that question means he has another decision point where he could make a bidding/interpretation error.

Lewis Carroll already settled this:
'"When I use a bid," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone. "It means just what I choose it to mean - neither more or less."
'"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make bids mean so many different things."
'"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's all."'

[Jinksy]

 msjennifer, on 2017-April-10, 10:25, said:

Sir,You presume that the hand is from a team event,a fact nowhere mentioned.

No I don't.

Quote

The type of event the vulnerability etc nothing is mentioned.

Yes it is. The OP specifies non-vulnerable, first in.

Quote

I will not be surprised at all that an opening of 6H/S be suggested on VOID,QJxxxxxxx,xx,xx on the basis of some unacceptable secret agreements made before the start of the event.I fully agree the sentiment expressed by Redspawn.The so called peremptory may be deviliously enjoying the game this way. Certainly it is not the authentic bridge at all.The game is no more the gentlemens game.None of the text books written by genuine experts will have or will advise arrogant (not aggressive,mind you) openings of 3Hearts on any of these hands in any seat.

Since you've forsworn reason for mudslinging, your mother is a hamster and your father smells of elderberries.

[miamijd]

First seat, I think all are easy passes playing a standard bidding system. If you play a strong club system, then 1h on #2 is a possibility.

Cheers,
mike

[RedSpawn]

 Jinksy, on 2017-April-10, 13:19, said:

Lewis Carroll already settled this:
'"When I use a bid," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone. "It means just what I choose it to mean - neither more or less."
'"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make bids mean so many different things."
'"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's all."'

Dear Humpty Dumpty,

That must be a beautiful partnership where you can never be mistaken since you are the sole arbiter of the meaning of all the bids you make.

LEGAL DISCLAIMER: All bids are void where prohibited and good for a limited time only. Certain bids can only be used in participating auctions. Some restrictions may apply. All bid's meanings are subject to change without notice. And the opener makes no express or implied warranties about the accuracy, reliability, or applicability of said bids. Use at your own risk.

That level of freedom and ambiguity in a bridge auction can be both a blessing and a curse.

Best wishes to you and your underpaid, hardworking partner!

-Alice

[FelicityR]

Thank you again for all your replies. They made interesting reading.

[calabres]

For me the main rule of all preempts is where I am placed:

In 1st seat:
- My preempt can eventually cause trouble to my partner, but at the same time I am puting pressure over my opps.

In 2nd seat:
- My preempt should be construtive, because I have a Pass before, so the majority of the points will be in the hands of my next opp or in my partner.

In 3th seat:
- I can preempt in favour vulnerability with any trash, even with a 5 cards suit.

In 4th seat:

- I will preempt only with o good opening hand.

[johnu]

Against some members of this forum, I would open all 3 hands just to see their heads explode