All News

Pre-empts Work!

We know that, often to our cost, when it is one of our opponents who open at the 2 or 3 level or even higher. Ruefully, we all admit they are just part of the game and gleefully look forward to the next time we can put pressure on our opponents with such a bid.

Today’s tale is one of a pre-empt which did work. I thought it might be interesting to see how our Panel might have coped with this opposition 3 opening. So, they were given both hands of the pairs who faced this opening and asked them where they thought a fairly simple auction went wrong.

 

 

The best place to be for North- South was 4 though this suit never got a mention as the auction petered out a level lower.

Let’s hear it then from the Panel. There are those who thought North had enough to go higher:

Nigel Kearney “I think North has enough to bid 4 over the double. A five card suit opposite a takeout double is quite powerful and any needed finesses will be a favourite to succeed. A typical South hand might be Axxx KQxx Axx xx.

South has an awkward hand that is on the border between double, 3, and 3NT. Having chosen to double with this shape, you would normally be committed to bid again over 3 (either 4 or 4 according to style). But because it is a strong doubleton and the hand is barely good enough to double in the first place, passing 3 is ok.”

Steph Jacob “ Oh sorry, I’m holding North to blame for this one. Their response should have been 4 asking partner to bid their better major. They had some values which were all very well placed being in the majors  ( the suits partner is systemically showing at this stage) . We cannot assume the take-out doubler will always be a perfect shape over a pre-empt so we need to ensure we get to the right spot and 4 enables this.

Bruce Anderson “ I think the fault is with North who should bid 4.I think he/she is too good to make a minimum bid over a 3 level take out double.

 

South would now bid 4 and the excellent game is reached. Despite their 19 count, South has been fixed by North’s minimum bid, with no sensible move possible. 

Michael Cornell “ Pretty simple. North should have responded 4 and it would have been no trouble to reach 4.

North is guaranteed a fit when South doubles so it’s important to find it. I do not really think it’s even a slight overbid.”

Might South anticipate going higher than 4 after such a 4 bid? It will only be that South’s club holding that would be a worry this time and that they will bid a conservative 4 either after 4 or should they bid 4 and North 4 on the way up the line.

Showing sympathy to both North and South and referring to today’s title is:

Lysandra Zheng “ I think this is a bit of a "pre-empts work" kind of hand for me.  My first instinct was to have the given auction of X and pass 3 (raising another response to 4, of course). The issue is that I don't think 5 will be a good spot when partner can only find a 3 bid to the take-out double, but we don't have a good way of investigating 3NT.

3 might well be a 4-2 fit but it might also be our best chance to take back a positive score. I also believe that North's 3 bid is reasonable. So, there's not much blame to go around. This is just a hand where both sides took actions that did not look terrible, but worked out badly.”

There is also some criticism of South’s imperfect double:

Leon Meier “ Now the question of "who should have done more?".  I don't think that is quite right, because sometimes there is not an answer and I think that it is important for people to recognize that a bad contract can be reached with no bad bids.

That being said, I would have bid 3NT in balancing instead of double. 3 with 19 is too much and double just misdescribes the hand. Partner should be allowed to jump to 4 with  a 4 card suit and having 2 we are not happy with that. We do not really have a club stop but they may underlead AK thinking we must have Qxx, or not lead it and hope to get the lead through, or our partner can have Jxx, Txxx, or even A/Kxx and we are super happy in 3NT.”

All the above could indeed happen. We would be much less happy if West held a 7-card suit headed by AJ and decided a low club might be a good start, their partner holding Kx. However, it is true that West may well not lead their suit and that South could slither home with 9 quick tricks.

Also alluding to the no-trump game, but not as the final contract, is:

Stephen Blackstock “ Both players could and should have done more. North's response of 3 was feeble, with fair values and good fits for both majors. 4 would have been preferable. Yes, South could have been merely balancing, but many mid-range (i.e. opening hand strength) doubles will make game a fair venture. The play will be helped by the auction, as a lot will be known about the E/W shapes. Overbidding a little to find the best fit is a normal action in these situations.

South owed North another bid: he is a lot stronger than he might have been. I would try 3NT, which shows extra values, no great fit for hearts, and implies a spade suit. True, if 3NT is passed out, it could be a silly contract, but 3 in a 4-2 fit would be pretty silly too. 3NT would play well opposite A, Q, and Jxx. With diamond length, the Q may not even be necessary. I can also imagine West with AKxxxxx leading low, in the hope that East has a doubleton and an entry. Here, North would not sit for 3NT and 4 would be reached.

This answers another question, that of whether South could/should try 3 over 3. Stephen says “no” as that would be a 5-card + suit. Thus, by doubling and then bidding 3NT over 3, South is showing 4 cards in the unbid major.

Stephen also refers to the fact that South could be a lot weaker in the pass-out (of 3) seat. When we double initially and partner bids a major at the 3-level, it is normal to play them to hold just a few high card points which does indicate South should bid on here over 3.

As we have seen above, 3 was an OK contract though 4 was an even better one, though not a straightforward make:

 

 

Stephen suggested one route to 4. Above is another. After taking their club tricks, a diamond switch from West would give South losing options, like playing A and a second spade. A second diamond now beats 4. If, at trick 4 South plays a second high diamond which is ruffed, they can exit a heart. A third diamond is ruffed in the North hand and trumps can be drawn in 2 rounds via the finesse. 3 hearts, 2 high diamonds and 5 trump tricks will see South home.

If at trick 3, West exits J, South should survive by playing A and a second spade though again they must be careful not to play their high hearts first or else West can score a heart ruff with their remaining trump.

Meanwhile, Leon’s 3NT will need both a successful spade and diamond finesse if West did, say, lead J. Declarer will need to enter dummy by sacrificing one heart trick by overtaking and can score 4 spade, 2 heart and 3 diamond tricks.

If that did happen, or West led J, the post-mortem would be interesting. As Lysandra said “Pre-empts  work” but not always for the pre-emptor’s side!

Richard Solomon

Go Back View All News Items