Conventions

Home

M J Bridge

♦

♠

♥

♣

Bidding

Hands

Theory

Context  -  Opening unbalanced hands in first or second seat - opening three of a suit

Expert style

The thoughts on this page are directly equivalent to those when considering ‘expert style’ regarding opening a weak two on a single-suited hand, and the conclusions are pretty much the same.

One of the major differences in the expert game, other than that they’re a lot better than me, is that they break the rules.

Not the rules of bridge, I hope, nor the rules of decorum, etiquette and good manners, but the rules taught to so many of us regarding what to do and when.

The clever thing is that they seem to know when they can get away with it, and their partners seem to ‘get it’.

Nowhere does this happen more than in the bidding, and particularly in the bidding of weak hands.

On the previous page I defined a ‘pure’ style of three-level preemptive opening bid.

Such a bid suggests a seven-card suit of some quality (perhaps two of the top three or three of the top five honours) - a hand somewhere in the range of five to nine (for the sake of argument) - no outside four-card major and no outside ace.

You can extend or stretch these requirements if you wish but the idea is clear enough.

The question which arises is ‘In what circumstances can you deviate from these requirements, and by how much?’.

These deviations might be respect of range, suit quality, holdings in other suits, and particularly in regard to length.

Much of the time the deciding factors will be to do with vulnerability and position at the table.

In particular, remember that two down vulnerable is always a bad score on a part-score hand, particularly at pairs scoring.

The two extreme situations are:-

vulnerable against not in second seat, and

not vulnerable against vulnerable in third seat.

Leaving aside the matter of length for a moment

First seat

In first seat you have only one partner to preempt but two opponents.  The odds are slightly in your favour.

With this in mind, vulnerable you might allow just a little leeway (perhaps in suit quality) but not much.

Not vulnerable you will certainly allow one flaw - just possibly two (see opening a weak two - expert style) but no more.

Second seat

With responder and partner still to bid you are as likely to preempt partner as you are responder.

You should therefore proceed with a modicum of caution - partner still has a bid and he doesn’t want to base his bid on a pack of lies from you.

Certainly, when not vulnerable, you might stretch things ever so slightly - perhaps a slightly substandard suit -

but if vulnerable in second seat your preempt should be pure as the driven snow.

With anything less you should either pass or restrict yourself to a preemptive offering at the two-level.

Third seat

This time you have only the opponents to annoy, and this gives you considerable leeway.

Vulnerable in third is much the same as non-vulnerable in first - you might allow one flaw,

but non-vulnerable in third, and particularly against vulnerable opponents, you can let your imagination have almost free rein.

Fourth seat

Either play a completely different system when opening in fourth seat because there is no longer any preemptive effect, or use the bid to show the same style of hand, but definitely a good quality seven-card suit on a slightly higher range (say ten to fourteen) and with no danger of your opponents stealing the contract in spades.  With such a holding in mind partner should be expected to raise your fourth-seat major suit preempt to game with just a couple of trumps and a likely trick outside.

Length (and other factors)

The standard guidelines for preemptive bidding are an extension of ‘bidding to the level of the fit’ although they existed well before that bit of theory.

If you have a six-card suit then there will be seven cards outstanding - partner will have two-card support most of the time - you have an eight-card fit.  Bid to the two-level.

If you have a seven-card suit then there will be six cards outstanding.  On average partner will hold two of these - you have a nine-card fit.  Bid to the three-level.

If you have an eight-card fit then there will be five cards outstanding - partner will have two of these more often than not - you have a ten-card fit.  Bid to the four-level.

Taking liberties when vulnerable can be expensive, and, as indicated above, you might bid one less when vulnerable against not, or even just when vulnerable.

But when not vulnerable it’s a different story.

Certainly, all else being equal, you should bid to the level of the fit.

If not vulnerable against vulnerable there is a strong argument for bidding one more.  Remember, three down doubled when not vulnerable scores better than allowing your opponents to make a vulnerable game.

So, in this situation, I will suggest that you open a weak two on a five-card suit, a weak three on a six-card suit, and four of a major on a seven card suit.

Note that this approach brings the club suit into play as you open 3♣ on a six-card suit at favourable vulnerability.

Note also that an opening 4♠ in particular gives your opponents a real dilemma, and four of either major can be effective as it takes 3NT away from the opponents.

Consider also pushing the limits with five of a minor given that four of a minor suit will hardly ever keep good opponents out of a major suit game.

You may wish to extend this approach to ‘neither side vulnerable’ - just make sure that partner is on the same wavelength.

To be honest, the expert may well not have the rules for when to bid like this quite so tightly defined, but such bids will certainly be in his repertoire.  Many will rely much more on feel and judgement - but I’m giving you a good starting point to be getting on with.

Did I mention ‘other factors’ above?

For those of you who (like me) have not yet developed the very highest degree of bridge judgement you should still allow your bidding decisions to be based on more than just a set of rules.

I shall do no more than suggest two or three particular considerations - you may choose to extend this list:-

if your long suit is of questionable quality you may well choose to bid one less;

even a hand with a seven-card suit can be defensive in nature.  If the shape is 7-2-2-2 with points in the short suits consider bidding one less;

and some hands are particularly offensive (as opposed to defensive) in nature.  A 7-4-1-1 shape for example has tremendous declaring potential but potentially next to no defence.  This might be the time to bid one more.

Responder’s continuations

This page last revised 19th May 2021