[mike777]

If you open weak two bids with five or weak three bids with six cards what is your criteria in terms of suit quality, vulnerability, shape, shortness, seat position, Imps vs MP, Etc?

[bluenikki]

mike777, on 2025-December-28, 08:03, said:

If you open weak two bids with five or weak three bids with six cards what is your criteria in terms of suit quality, vulnerability, shape, shortness, seat position, Imps vs MP, Etc?

First seat?

I learned from original Kaplan-Sheinwold to strain to open 2M with 5431 in third seat, rather than an understrength 1M.

[Cyberyeti]

As somebody who used to open 4 card weak 2s until the EBU banned them:

2nd and 4th, don't think about it

1st: decide whether this is a gun preempt position for you. If it is, play weak 2s essentially destructive. Open weak 3s where the vul is right with some weak 2s.

3rd: go for it

Alternatively play your bad weak 2s in a multi, and keep the good ones.

[DavidKok]

I think this is a great question, and one I wrote about at length a few years ago. Some of that is now dated, but it was a very decent start.

The decision of whether or not to preempt is the most important, and likely final, bidding decision you will make with a weak hand. I think there is a lot of room for profits here that people are neglecting. Consequently, any simple advice that fits in a few lines is either missing the point or so simplified that you are not going to gain much from it.

It is currently fashionable, but shallow, to lean really strongly on seating and vulnerability for this decision.

[pescetom]

I rarely open weak twos with 5 cards and when I do it is almost always in third seat. To put that in perspective, I am (by forum standards, I suspect) middle of the field in terms of aggressivity in general, although my first seat preempts are retained very aggressive by local peers. One reason I am cautious about 5 cards is that our national bridge culture is very intolerant of weak openings with less than the traditional n+4 cards length and even a fully disclosed agreement of n+3 is regarded with suspicion: it is of course perfectly legal, but the unease of partners and the predictable friction with opponents make it less attractive.

DavidKok, on 2025-December-28, 09:18, said:

It is currently fashionable, but shallow, to lean really strongly on seating and vulnerability for this decision.

I respect your depth of thinking about such things, but FWIW I do think that seating makes fundamental difference. About the first two positions, I think cyberyeti got it right: be as aggressive as the partnership decides in first, be cautious (but still ready to show shape) in second. Fourth seat opening is about going positive, so that leaves third seat, where I think you do have a point (in another thread) that the pendulum may have swung too far. I have lost count of the times that (say) opening 3♣ in third on KJTxxx led to a poor MP score, particularly when the level of the tournament is modest. Nowadays I prefer a level of aggressivity close to that in first seat, although with different reasoning about what is optimal HCP.

[DavidKok]

In my opinion seating and vulnerability are some of the most important factors for deciding how high to preempt, or whether to preempt at all. However, they are also only some of the factors among many. I think people are currently creating too wide of a gap between their preempts at different seats and vulnerabilities.

It's good to learn that preempting works. It's even better to learn that the seating and vul. have a large impact on your expected returns. But don't stop there - look into what else matters.

Here it is fashionable to preempt on absolute garbage, e.g. J-fifth (no T or 9) with nothing outside, at favourable in first and third. But change it to everybody vulnerable and people demand KQ-sixth. To me that's taking a good thing too far - vulnerability matters but not that much.

P.S.: I think 5 card weak 2s are much better than their 6 card variant. If you can find a partner willing to play it, give it a try. Just keep in mind you need to be discerning which hands might be suitable - you'll need to be selective.

[Huibertus]

mike777, on 2025-December-28, 08:03, said:

If you open weak two bids with five or weak three bids with six cards what is your criteria in terms of suit quality, vulnerability, shape, shortness, seat position, Imps vs MP, Etc?

Always played weak two's as 5+. I don't feel you should bother to much about the requirements. As a general rule of thumb, the more favorable seating/vulnerability the wider the range you apply (downwards AND upwards) as the wider the range is, the more difficult life is for opponents should they own the hand.

The thing to care about more is how to find out what opener has should your side own the hand. A simple and effective scheme I use over 2 NT is: 3♣ Extra length; 3♦ extra strength; 3 Major NONE of these; 3 Other Major both extra length and extra strength; 3NT AKQXXX. There are other schemes that offer more information (to the defense as well).

We'd ALSO open 3 level preempts on 6 cards. These would invite a raise on secondary support with quick tricks that would pass on a standard 6 card weak two. Not sure how to describe this in specific requirements.