[jillybean]

---

Partner opens in 3rd seat, opps are silent. Is a raise to 2 enough?

[mike777]

No

[gszes]

Your hand is worthless on defense. The extra heart length has probably devalued some of partners heart assets on defense. That sort of eliminates power showing bids (like drury) because p will expect a lot more from you if the opps do chime in. You have a weak hand and a big trump fit at imps it seems to be an easy 4h bid. At MP it might very well be correct to bid 3h. This will make it much more difficult for the opps to bid and also warn p to have plenty of extras to continue.

[Cyberyeti]

3♥ seems right playing what I play, but I'd have multid this already. Opposite a 5 card heart 3 or 4 both OK.

[akwoo]

Against the beginners at my club, 2♥ is enough. They'll let you play it. On the off chance they don't, they'll push you to 3♥ and let you play it there even if they've found a good fit of their own.

Otherwise, 3♥.

[jillybean]

I bid 4, thought afterwards that perhaps 3 was enough. My BBO partner said 2 was absolutely the correct bid!
Perhaps he was from Alex's club. Do you find there are many players who learn "bridge" and never deviate from what they were taught.

Partner here had a 2533 17 count, 5 hearts to the 10 I would have opened 1nt and so we are going to be in 3 or 4 hearts anyway.

This seems a little light for a multi, only 5 cards , KJ, J. Perhaps I need more experience playing it.
What would happen if we all just started playing Multi at the club?

[DavidKok]

The multi is a distraction. Whether or not this is a suitable preempt for your partnership is only mildly dependent on the gadgets available - if it's fine for a multi it's likely fine for a weak 2 and vice versa (just make sure to disclose properly).

I think 4♥ is fine but some people abhor that raise without a short suit and will settle for 3♥, which I think is slightly worse.

[mw64ahw]

I had one like this last night with a partner and passed knowing almost certainly partner had a strong hand and the ops. would pass. I expected 3 to make as it did. With another partner all direct raises are preempts so the bid would be 2M with 3 and 3/4 with 5+ depending on vulnerability.

[jillybean]

DavidKok, on 2025-December-16, 10:06, said:

The multi is a distraction. Whether or not this is a suitable preempt for your partnership is only mildly dependent on the gadgets available - if it's fine for a multi it's likely fine for a weak 2 and vice versa (just make sure to disclose properly).

I think 4♥ is fine but some people abhor that raise without a short suit and will settle for 3♥, which I think is slightly worse.

Multi allows your partnership to distinguish between a 5 card , 5hcp preempt and a decent 6 card preempt so not completely a distraction

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I think 4H is normal, ... 3H as a preemptive bid is ok,
and if you start arguing with 3rd seat position openings,
the only feedback I would make is: stop the 3rd seat
openings.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[pescetom]

I agree with DavidKok, 3♥ is slightly worse (and for me is a different hand).
But I also concede that akwoo has a point, if you are willing to tone things down to succeed in a weak field then 2♥ is where the MP lie.
I will always bid 4♥ if partner is on the same wavelength, but FWIW the strongest partner I ever had refused point blank to agree this (the rest of my card was fine, in about 30 seconds).

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2025-December-16, 10:06, said:

The multi is a distraction. Whether or not this is a suitable preempt for your partnership is only mildly dependent on the gadgets available - if it's fine for a multi it's likely fine for a weak 2 and vice versa (just make sure to disclose properly).

I think 4♥ is fine but some people abhor that raise without a short suit and will settle for 3♥, which I think is slightly worse.

It's not a distraction, it has a massive effect on what 3♥ looks like. Since in most cases by a passed hand we can fit jump with 4♥/5m, could multi or preempt any hand with 5+♥ and could have Ekrened with 4+♠/♥, we are getting pretty specific.

[DavidKok]

Cyberyeti, on 2025-December-16, 13:29, said:

It's not a distraction, it has a massive effect on what 3♥ looks like. Since in most cases by a passed hand we can fit jump with 4♥/5m, could multi or preempt any hand with 5+♥ and could have Ekrened with 4+♠/♥, we are getting pretty specific.

I'm saying that having the ability to preempt with these hands isn't strongly related to playing a multi verus playing other preemptive tools. You're saying that your Ekren alone shifts the odds by a lot, compared to pairs playing a 5(+) card weak 2♥ opening? I think that's a bold claim, that the presence of Ekren has a significant impact on your fifth seat 3♥ weak raise. It matters a little, but not a lot, I think. Everything else is the same whether or not it's a 2♦ multi or a 2♥ opening that partner eschewed.

There are also of course plenty of hands with the right strength and shape but failing on other criteria to be a worthy preempt, that might now consider a raise. In total I think the negative inferences are good, but the difference between '2♦ 5-card multi, 2♥ Ekren' and '2♥ 5-card weak two' is minor.

[Cyberyeti]

DavidKok, on 2025-December-16, 14:32, said:

I'm saying that having the ability to preempt with these hands isn't strongly related to playing a multi verus playing other preemptive tools. You're saying that your Ekren alone shifts the odds by a lot, compared to pairs playing a 5(+) card weak 2♥ opening? I think that's a bold claim, that the presence of Ekren has a significant impact on your fifth seat 3♥ weak raise. It matters a little, but not a lot, I think. Everything else is the same whether or not it's a 2♦ multi or a 2♥ opening that partner eschewed.

There are also of course plenty of hands with the right strength and shape but failing on other criteria to be a worthy preempt, that might now consider a raise. In total I think the negative inferences are good, but the difference between '2♦ 5-card multi, 2♥ Ekren' and '2♥ 5-card weak two' is minor.

If you don't weak 2 with 4 cards in the other major, or you don't play 3m fit, there are other hands which can fall into 3♥, for us it's pretty much 1444 or a 5 cards minor, 4♥ with a very weak minor. Just possible you had 5 crappy hearts and cards outside.

[mikeh]

A bit late. But, as is often the case, methods matter.

For example, most pairs use some form of drury…imo one of the most valuable conventions available. That removes the need for 3H as an invitational raise. However, it doesn’t dictate what a 3h bid looks like. I used to play weak. I also used to play that by a passed hand it shows a fit jump with clubs…so invitational. Nowadays I play it mixed. This isn’t a mixed raise so I’m not bidding 3H.

Even if my methods had 3H as weak, I’m not sure I’d use that here.

So it comes down to 2 or 4. I think it’s an easy 2H bid..I’ll go further and say that imo 4H a terrible bid.

Why?

Give me this hand in 3d seat and I’d bid 4H if not vulnerable.

And if we were red, I’d have a more difficult choice. I’d consider my opps, how the session is going, and the form of scoring

But we’re not in 3rd seat. We are a passed hand and BOTH opps have passed.

If 3H showed something like this, it’d be perfect. It’s 10-1 that they are passing it out if partner lets 3H go.

Ok, but I don’t have 3 H available. If you do, then bid it

I’m willing to bet firstly that LHO won’t bid over 2H. Secondly, that partner will bid over 2H if we can make game and thirdly that if partner passes 2H, we will often (but not always) survive. Either RHO won’t balance or my 3H bid will end matters.

To me, 4H should never be a robotic bid made simply because we have 5 card support and a weak hand. We have to consider the situation. Why are we preempting? Because, in large part, we think it likely that a lesser bid will allow the opps to compete successfully. The fact that they’ve both passed already suggests that this concern is not as relevant as it would be otherwise

We also hope, when blasting game on a weak hand, that partner may make by taking ruffs in our hand. Obviously it helps to have shortness. 5422 isn’t as bad as 5332 but it’s nothing like as good as 5431 or 5521, to say nothing of having a side void.

[Huibertus]

Assuming 5 card major openings, I'm following the law, 4♥. Now both of them already passes I do not want to see any balancing double on 3♥ leading to an unbeatable 4 ♠ so making that as hard as I can for them. ALSO in case partner has a strong hand 4♥ is the best description of mine, weak 10+ card fit. If KXXXX is all he needs this is what he wants to hear. If he needs more this is what stops him from overbidding.

[bluenikki]

Huibertus, on 2025-December-17, 10:35, said:

Assuming 5 card major openings, I'm following the law, 4♥. Now both of them already passes I do not want to see any balancing double on 3♥ leading to an unbeatable 4 ♠ so making that as hard as I can for them.

An opponent who will re-open 3♥ will need little extra shape to re-open 4.

[thepossum]

Always hard to answer this without sitting at a table. I think 3 hearts from me. I even considered a risky pass
Seriously. People saying our hand is useless in defence. Well wait and see if they bid

[AL78]

I would bid 2♥ on the basis that both opponents have had the chance to enter the auction and haven't, so why jump to 3 or 4♥ when there is a good chance there is no need to jam the auction given the opponent's lack of enthusiasm. I can see 3♥-1 or 4♥-1 being a bottom at the clubs I play at.