[Yu18772]

Hi all

Playing IMP with a good partner

1.

---

a. do you think 3S is going down?
b. do you double?
c. what do you lead?

2.

---

2♥ is preemptive, although may deviate in third seat. At favorable vulnerability please rate pass, 3♥, and 4♥ (or something else if any other bid comes to mind).

Thanks!

[menggq]

1.a 3♠ is going down
b.Dbl
c.lead trump ♠

2.Pass by South no other choices.

[dboxley]

Yu18772, on 2011-November-01, 01:12, said:

Hi all

Playing IMP with a good partner

1.

---

a. do you think 3S is going down? Maybe
b. do you double? No, I won't punish partner
c. what do you lead? trump

2.

---

2♥ is preemptive, although may deviate in third seat. At favorable vulnerability please rate pass, 3♥, and 4♥ (or something else if any other bid comes to mind). pass 100%

Thanks!

[rhm]

Yu18772, on 2011-November-01, 01:12, said:

a. do you think 3S is going down?

Why? I can not tell. I am happy to have pushed them to the 3 level.

Quote

b. do you double?

Why? Should they go down we should get an above average score, having pushed them to the 3 level.
If they make it DBL will turn an average into a bottom.

Quote

c. what do you lead?

A trump.

Quote

2♥ is preemptive, although may deviate in third seat. At favorable vulnerability please rate pass, 3♥, and 4♥ (or something else if any other bid comes to mind).

Wrong forum!

Rainer Herrmann

[gwnn]

I think -1 is most likely on board 1 but it will make quite some times. I think = is more likely than -2. Pass stands out.

Board 2 I think 3♥ would be understandable/interesting with ♥Qx but I'm not sure now. Against bad opponents 3♥ is likely to cause chaos (they will rarely choose to defend 3♥x), but against bad opponents I like to think (not entirely based on reality) that I don't need chaos, even if +EV.

[Flameous]

1. a) I'm holding two defensive tricks and partner holds likely a worse hand than me. So no, I don't think we are beating this at least very often.
b) Based on my answer a) it would be quite silly to do it.
c) I'm not sure what trump accomplishes here apart from being totally passive. I'm quite tempted to play declarer for singleton club or at least not holding CK and I lead CA to see the dummy.

2. I'd like to know if my opps are playing lebensohl of some sort. Cause if not, I'm very happy to leave them guessing right here.
3H is tempting as it really causes chaos like gwnn said. I'm not sure it's so easy even for good opps to hit 3H and if partner has his typical weak pre, they are making a slam. I wouldn't do it cause I'm trying to tighten my game a bit, but I wouldn't blame for trying.

[rhm]

gwnn, on 2011-November-01, 03:27, said:

I think -1 is most likely on board 1 but it will make quite some times. I think = is more likely than -2. Pass stands out.

Board 2 I think 3♥ would be understandable/interesting with ♥Qx but I'm not sure now. Against bad opponents 3♥ is likely to cause chaos (they will rarely choose to defend 3♥x), but against bad opponents I like to think (not entirely based on reality) that I don't need chaos, even if +EV.

Being super aggressive against bad opponents is a frequent way good players score a bottom against them.
Sometimes a penalty double will stand out even to poor players.
The best strategy to preserve your advantage against weaker opponents is to reduce your risks not to increase them.
Most, however, overbid. Fine when it works and weak opponents defend poorly, but in my experience far too often the better pair pays the price for their recklessness.

Rainer Herrmann

[gwnn]

I think we agree rhm, maybe I wasn't clear, I would pass too. However, 3♥ could easily work out well.

I don't know why you felt the need to rephrase what I said (that I try to avoid chaos against weak opponents).

[Fluffy]

do you think this is going donw? NO.

[Hanoi5]

It might go down, it doesn't really matter. It's imp's, you don't wanna double them into game when in doubt (sometimes not even without a doubt).

Pass on the second one is the best. 3♥ is a little bit crazy. 4♥ is absolutely out. 2♠ could steal from them.

[whereagles]

1. I don't know if it's going down, but we did do our duty of pushing opps. Now lead the obvious trump or an optimistic ♦A.

2. Even a 3D psyche wouldn't cross my mind......... Bidding hearts is a death wish.

[Yu18772]

Thank you all for the replies.

On hand 1, since we were vulnerable and my partner was bidding before the unlimited-potentially strong opening hand, I expected him to have an excellent hand with 10-11 in the form of aces/kings, and 3 spades to go down. I led the optimistic A♦, and 3♠ was made. -730

On the second hand - since partner is a preempt at favorable vulnerability, holding 2 points I was thinking that slam with EW is a very real probability, and making some noise cant be too bad, so I raised ♥. This didnt work out too badly, but still led to a small minus.

[Cyberyeti]

Yu18772, on 2011-November-01, 12:01, said:

On the second hand - since partner is a preempt at favorable vulnerability, holding 2 points I was thinking that slam with EW is a very real probability, and making some noise cant be too bad, so I raised ♥. This didnt work out too badly, but still led to a small minus.

On something worse than the second hand I earned a swing by raising 3 to 4 (should have been 1100 v a grand, but the worst defence in the known universe caused opps to crash Kx/Ax in trumps, one of 3 times they crashed AK in 8 boards in a first team county match, so pard got out for -800). It's dodgier opposite 2♥.

[ahydra]

I don't double 3S, expecting it to either make or go 1 off. Lead... well a spade is probably best, but a heart looking for partner's presumed suit is another option.

4H on the second one - opps have slam. Expecting to go for 1100. Any other vul* and I think you have to pass.

ahydra

* Or when playing with a partner who likes to open on almost nothing...

[han]

I think doing anything other than passing on the first hand is ridiculous. Doing anything other than passing on the second hand is just very bad.

[gordontd]

ahydra, on 2011-November-01, 14:57, said:

4H on the second one - opps have slam.

I see no reason why that should be so - especially opposite a third-in-hand opener.

[gnasher]

Gordon snipped the scariest part of ahydra's post. Voluntarily going for 1100 seems a rather extreme response to the situation.

[pooltuna]

gnasher, on 2011-November-02, 08:08, said:

Gordon snipped the scariest part of ahydra's post. Voluntarily going for 1100 seems a rather extreme response to the situation.

I suspect there is a big difference between raising to 3♥ and raising to 4♥ but opposite a cold vul slam -1100 is peanuts.

[Yu18772]

gordontd, on 2011-November-02, 07:46, said:

I see no reason why that should be so - especially opposite a third-in-hand opener.

I think its just a matter of how you define the flexibility in 3rd seat openings. With my regular partner (and whats common among experts in Israel) is that flexibility of the 3rd seat is mainly opening weaker than usual hands, given right distribution and suit and vulnerability. This flexibility extends to both 1 level and preempt openings, which may be "feather light", but not stronger or more defensive than the usual preempts. So, this is what I usually mean or keep in mind when agreeing that 3rd seat preempts are flexible - from this prospective - I would expect my partner holding between v,QJxxxx,xxxx,xxx and xx, KQxxxx, Kxx, Jxx. With these hands in mind, its very likely that your opponents have slam when you hold 2HCP, and partner 3-9, without much defense......
I do see that here many people extend the preempt in third seat to stronger and less distributional hands, which means that i should have passed. This all comes down to partnership agreements and expectations - so next time I will at least have a deeper discussion about how flexible the flexible preempts are......
Personally I think you can extend it to either stronger or weaker hands, but not both: 3-13, with or without defensive tricks, and with or without good suit imo is too wide of a range