I put these guidelines up (written by me..so anyone is welcome to pick them to bits) for some friends of mine who have been going for traffic lights scores with bad preempts. I have seen a number of preempts that have gone for traffic lights recently...when no consideration of vulnerability or seat position or suit quality is taken into acount.

 

Here are some things to take into account.

 

 

 

For 2 level preempts of weak jump shifts / overcalls 6 trumps

For 3 level preempts of weak jump shifts / overcalls 7 trumps (occassionally a very good 6)

For 4 level preempts 8 trumps or a good 7

 

Comment : Stick to the law most of the time. Do not preempt at the 3 level with crap 6 card suits when the 2 level is available. On the other hand with a reasonable hand and a good 7 card minor and the right vulnerablity you might choose 4 minor to maximise the difficulty for the opps (in preempts taking these factors into account is everything...making undisciplined preempts just because you have 6 cards in a suit will often result in really big minuses and destroy partnership morale). And with 7 trumps go to the 3 level (not 2)... I don't know how many times I've thought my hand isnt fantastic and bid at the 2 level when the 3 level preempt will be raised by partner and makes game in a major. (The same length criteria apply to weak jump overcalls and weak jump shifts)

 

 

Read this line 100 times. If you want to preempt with crap suits...you'll go off in a lot of no trump contracts when your partner has a good hand...and you'll go for traffic light penalty scores.... .

 

So for weak 2's I prefer 2 of top 3 or KJ10 or QJ10.

For 3 level preempts in 1 2 seat I prefer KJ10 at worst...the reason is often you will have preempted your partner and holding HX in yr suit they will be expecting 7 tricks in NT.

 

 

These aren't used so much anymore but basically when vulnerable your hand should be able to make 2 less than the bid and when non-vulnerable 3 less.

 

 

Seat 2 has the greatest chance of preempting partner and carries the greatest risk of going for a big penalty.

Seat 1 carries less risk than seat

Seat 3 is preemptors heaven...

 

 

Vulnerable / nonvulnerable - be very disciplined

Same vulnerabilty - be disciplined

Nonvulnerable / vulnerable - can be less discplined

 

 

I tend to prefer preempts in MPs 

 

 

One advantage a regular partnership has is determining some firm guidelines. If one partner likes getting in with undiscplined preempts (one of my earliest partners loved them..so we came to an agreement that in MPs only when nonvul/vul they could have their head so to speak..)

 

So as an example of the sort of agreement you might have in terms of discipline...

 

	You vulnerable, opps not	Same vulnerability	You nonvul,  opps vul
1st seat	Very	Very	Some license to have less than expected
2nd seat	Very	Very	Mostly disciplined
3rd seat	Mostly disciplined	Anything goes	Anything goes

 

And finally...preempts are good...and very common in more competitive bridge...this is not an argument against preempting...but an argument for a little sanity in the choices.