[Flame]

How much do you need at each vulnerability ?

[Rebound]

A very light style at any time seems to be the rule on BBO, but personally, I favor fairly disciplined preempts except in 3rd seat where it's totally down to personal taste.

So, I would say, vul, at least 2 of the top 3 honors and non-vul 2 of the top 4, not incl QJ. At least with this agreement your partner can count on a certain minimum strength in the bid suit. I hate it when I have no idea whether to lead my partner's suit against 3NT.

[hrothgar]

Flame, on Sep 26 2004, 06:41 PM, said:

How much do you need at each vulnerability ?

Enough that your partner won't quite in disgust...

In all seriousness, this is completely subjective and depends more on system than consensus

[inquiry]

Depends a little on partner.

With a random partner, 4-3-2-1. Read this as follows.

When they are vulnerable and we are not.. within 4 tricks of my preempt
when neither side is vulnerable, within 3 tricks of my preempt
when both sides are vulnerable, within 2 tricks of my preempt
When we are vulnerable and they are not, within 1 trick of my preempt

With a parnter who I trust not to go crazy opposite a non-vul preempt, I might extend 5-3-2-1 in first and second seat, and 5-4-2-1 in third seat.

This doesn't mean I will never go do say 3 vulnerable. The estimates (like 2 when both vul) are with more or less normal breaks.

Ben

[Flame]

Thx, Ben's response was what i was looking for, now does this 4321 or whatever number is use only when opening or for example after a squence like , (1H) p- (3D)* where 3D is bergen and you consider a 4sp with your long spade suit, do you still use this 4321 or this is something totally different .

[Free]

If you ask me, it also depends on what type of scoring you're playing. In imps I don't treat V-V the same as NV-NV. In MP's however, you might do that anyway.

Basicly, for me, NV vs V everything goes. NV vs NV also, but just a little (nothing much) more solid. V I try to be very solid, especially when V vs NV.

[inquiry]

Flame, on Sep 26 2004, 02:29 PM, said:

Thx, Ben's response was what i was looking for, now does this 4321 or whatever number is use only when opening or for example after a squence like , (1H) p- (3D)* where 3D is bergen and you consider a 4sp with your long spade suit, do you still use this 4321 or this is something totally different .

No.. once tey have limited their hand and found their fit (with bergen, say), I will no longer stick my neck out for 5421 or 4321... They have shared too much information. Now you are giving them two shots... they KNOW what to do and you don't. It is almost silly to preempt after a bergen raise... they have described their holds so well. So in this case, my preempts are in this are aimed at taking GOOD sacrafices... not distrubing their auctions...

Ben

[pclayton]

Weak 2's:

Somewhat dependent on vulnerabilty; see Rule of 2/3/4 below:

1st seat - loose - KJTxxx, xx, xxx, xx
2nd seat - disciplined - AQJxxx, x, xxx, xxx
3rd seat - silly to sound (wide range) - AJxxx, x, xxx, Qxxx to #2 above (even with an outside K)
4th seat - opening hand - AQxxxx, xx, KQx, xx

3 bids (and higher)

red on white - 2 short of my bid; KQJxxxx, x, x, xxxx
equal - 3 short; KQxxxxx, xx, x, xxx
white on red - 4 short; KQxxxx, x, xxx, xxx

I'm assuming MP's; at IMPs, tighten it up a little; but not too much.

[mikestar]

I like the rule of 2/3/4. Overbid by two tricks at unfavorable, 3 tricks at equal, and 4 tricks at favorable. If my trick count is dubious, I evalute agressively NV but conservatively vul--this is very similar to Ben's 4-3-2-1.

The theory is that if partner has one trick, your bid is a good save against their game. (If partner is trickless, they may well have a slam.)

With the right partnership agreements, more aggession with weak twos can work--they don't get doubled as often as higher preempts.

Position at the table is also important. Second hand should be a bit more conservative than the dealer, third hand can be a fair amount more aggressive.

Fourth hand preempts are another story--here I expect to make with one trick from partner and a little luck, regardless of vulnerability. A fourth seat opening leading to a minus score is a disaster--you could have done better passing it out.

[whereagles]

I don't believe in any rules whatsoever to preempt. Preemption is a matter of judgement, tactics and table presence. There are, of course, guidelines one should follow and matters of discipline. But other than that there is little technical merit in setting rules as to what a "max" or "min" is.

Suppose my LHO sees his hand and wiggles with excitment. I'm dealer and hold

xx
xxx
xxx
KQJTx

at favourable vuln, I would seriously consider a 3C opener. But if LHO looks overly bored, I'd probably pass holding

Jxx
KJxxxx
Qxx
x