new suit response to pre-empts
#1
Posted 2022-August-14, 04:45
#2
Posted 2022-August-14, 05:08
Some players after a 3 level pre-empt will use a new suit to show controls, but that is not the norm imo. A new suit below game level is forcing and shows a good suit 6+, usually with some fit with opener's pre-emptive suit. There are opportunities after a 2 level pre-empt to show various hands, either with a new suit, or by way of 2NT (Ogust) first then bidding a suit, all by partnership agreement.
#3
Posted 2022-August-14, 05:36
#4
Posted 2022-August-14, 06:27
Over 3m I play a new suit as NF if we are not vulnerable, and game forcing if we are vulnerable. Over 3M a new suit is GF regardless of vulnerability.
The 3-level agreement doesn't matter that much, it rarely comes up and when it does you don't stand to win or lose a lot. The NF new suits over weak two's are very helpful though, and I wouldn't go back to forcing unless a (pickup) partner strongly prefers them.
The most important question is which criteria you use for your preempts. If your 3-level preempts are dinosaur style 'I would be happy to table this dummy in 3NT, usually 7(+) cards' you've lost the race before the agreements even have a chance to come up. The more you weaken your preempts the less valuable game-forcing bids become, and the more valuable NF constructive bids become.
#5
Posted 2022-August-14, 06:39
I prefer a standard RONF approach, but I agree with DavidKok that this is correlated to a relatively conservative preempt style.
#6
Posted 2022-August-14, 08:11
#7
Posted 2022-August-14, 11:05
In fact, in my partnerships, even after 2suit-X, I play "new suits are lead-directing raises, XX is 'partner, I know where to play, and it's not here'" (others play 2NT as the get-out; our weak 2s are such that the hands that have an action redouble are so few as to not want to give up the opportunity of playing 2 of my suit). It just doesn't come up very often.
Yeah, 2♦= into 2M= (which only matters if you're playing a natural 2♦).
Transfers are a neat idea, but it puts the strong hand down when you have a fit, and trick 1 with the weak hand, the defence knows we're going for downtricks (and likely how).
An exception? I play EHAA occasionally. Median preempt suit is KQxxx/AJxxx (using lots of simplifications in my simulator, but it feels right. Note that one of the simplifications is that 8xxxxx > AKQJT), and could very easily be 85432 (of course it could be AKQxxxxx, which might just override the bailout). By agreement, new suits are NF, non-constructive, "I think my suit will play better than yours". But then again, nothing in EHAA 2-bid responses makes any sense playing normal - because it makes *opener* captain (don't ask).
#8
Posted 2022-August-14, 11:15
As I understand EBU requirements, a non-forcing change of suit must be alerted.
Added: EBU Blue Book para 4H2(d) says you must alert:
(d) A non-forcing new suit response, to a non-forcing suit opening at any level, below game,unless responder has previously passed, bids over a natural NT overcall, or makes a double jump
#9
Posted 2022-August-14, 13:21
Douglas43, on 2022-August-14, 11:15, said:
As I understand EBU requirements, a non-forcing change of suit must be alerted.
We play constructive and NF and alert. I would suggest the more random your weak 2s can be, the more you need to play NF.
#10
Posted 2022-August-14, 23:04
#11
Posted 2022-August-15, 12:03
Douglas43, on 2022-August-14, 23:04, said:
It is still the official EBU position to recommend 2 level responses as constructive, non-forcing and 3 level responses to be game forcing, as can be seen by the current (2014) system file, by the pre-completed Benji convention card, or Sandra Landy's 2009 English Bridge article, all to be found on he EBU website. The one exception listed there is Neil Rosen's 2012 English Bridge article where he recommends all new suit responses to be non-forcing, but that article is perhaps not aimed at the typical club player, also suggesting the use of a shortage ask rather than the more common Feature or Ogust conventions.
#12
Posted 2022-August-15, 14:48
Gilithin, on 2022-August-15, 12:03, said:
How exactly did the shortage ask work?
#13
Posted 2022-August-16, 02:15
pescetom, on 2022-August-15, 14:48, said:
Here's a link to Neil Rosen's article https://s3-eu-west-1...-12.pdf#page=26
Sandra Landy's is more mainstream, and is linked from my previous post.
The EBU has a lot of material linked from this page (in the "educational articles" box)
#14
Posted 2022-August-17, 09:17
Douglas43, on 2022-August-16, 02:15, said:
Thanks.
I guess if one is going to take a Feature Ask approach, it does make a lot of sense to probe for shortages over a majors preempt.
The article makes an unabashed claim that this method is superior to Ogust, but I think that is only true if you accept the straightjacket of a narrow range of suit quality (in this case either 1 or 2 top honours). Those willing to open 2♠ with JT9xxx x KJx xxx (or unhappy / not allowed to open 1♠ with AKQxxx xx xxx xx) are probably better off with Ogust.