sasioc

Thanks, have edited :) Sorry if I've misunderstood but 3♥ doesn't gf opposite any response. It's not forcing, just shows a decentish 6 card suit and somewhere around 16-18 points if the bidder has no additional distributional features.

This hand came up at a duplicate I played in last night and I still have no idea how I'm supposed to bid it. As I'm not sure I like that many of my choices I'm going to give both hands and simply ask how you think the auction should proceed. I was playing with my partner for the first time and had agreed 2/1 with some gadgets but had no detailed understandings about, well, anything, and would appreciate it if people tried to give auctions that don't involve lots of complex agreements! [hv=pc=n&s=skhakqt974dqtc963&n=saqt76hdkj732caq8]133|200[/hv] Edited to make South dealer.

I also find card combinations difficult to think about but when I'm faced with one that I don't know the answer to I try to think of possible layouts in the suit that I can pick up and choose the line that gets as many of those as possible. So for Q764 A843 I'd start by considering 5-0 breaks, then 4-1, then 3-2. I'd think something like "if the suit is breaking 5-0 or 4-1 I cannot escape for one loser, even if the singleton is the K and I drop it. There are, however, some 3-2 breaks that I can pick up for one loser." They are 1) Kxx xx (location of J, T, 9 unimportant) 2) Kx xxx 3) xxx Kx In 1) and 2) you can escape for one loser by playing low towards the Q (in these cases it does not matter in isolation if you cash the ace first or not). The K will win a trick but the Q and A will take care of the other two rounds of the suit. If the layout is 3) you need to cash the A and then duck a round of the suit. A good start would be to count how many of each of these there are and do whichever line is implied (trivially, 2 and 3 cancel each other out so, in isolation, the single line that picks up 1 and 2 is better). It's important to realise that these considerations only apply to the suit in isolation - in an actual hand you could have many other considerations, such as entries, trump control and the potential for opponents to ruff (if this was the trump suit it might be that you'd want to cash the ace first to cut down on that chance if you did not fear losing trump control). Edit: I wrote this before the previous two posts were up and took forever over it :P

♠xx ♥Qx ♦QJ10x ♣AKQJx is not a nice 15 on this auction. I'd expect partner to have a 6 card suit a lot of the time for 2♣ - that or a little bit of extra strength. From this point of view you don't really have extras. The diamonds could be useful but Qx in opponents' suit is likely to be wasted and the fact that you don't have a singleton sucks. In short, you are not at the top end of a 2♣ bid imo and don't have anything like the shape required to wander back in at the 4 level. There are also a couple of problems with the hand you are trying to pick with partner. He is not massively likely to have a heart singleton - opponents' auction doesn't sound like they have a 10 card fit so you should probably expect to find partner with some length in hearts (and, for that matter, spades). The other problem is that at white he is not going to be too scared to bid 3♣ over 2♥ and when he does not you can probably assume that you don't have a massive fit and/or that his hand is pretty rubbish.

In essence they show the same thing in that they say "I like xyz suit", but there are differences. Most int+ partnerships will play both signals in different circumstances. Attitude can be given on partner's lead to say that you want him to keep playing that suit. No one plays suit preference on partner's lead (unless the cards in dummy make it clear that partner is not going to continue that suit and thus that your attitude is irrelevant). One reason that no one plays suit preference on partner's lead without special reason is that you cannot call for the suit that partner has led and might not want him to switch. From your initial post I am not sure that you have understood why this is because you said that throwing the ♠10 and the ♦10 both called for a spade, playing suit preference. This is not the case. When thinking about which is the "high" suit and which is the "low" suit you ignore the trump suit and the suit that you have thrown away. So if (for example) clubs were trumps and you discarded the ♠10 as a suit preference signal, this would call for a heart. The ♦10 would indeed call for a spade. If you were following to a spade lead and played the ♠10 as a suit preference signal, this would call for a heart in exactly the same way - you cannot call for a spade, telling partner to continue. In terms of your first discard, attitude and suit preference do basically convey the same information and, at beginner level, I would just pick whichever one you find easier to remember and play that. There are some differences but these aren't big enough to worry about as a novice. These differences include that it might be easier to give a suit preference signal than an attitude signal if you can't afford to discard a card from the suit you want partner to lead and that it is a bit more fiddly to give a neutral signal playing suit preference (you might have to call for a suit that you "obviously don't actually want" but at novice level, partner might find it harder to realise that that's what's going on). Essentially, suit preference is slightly better at allowing you to always give the information that you want to but comes at the cost of being a bit more fiddly to play than attitude. Note that, whatever you play, it's usually only your first discard that carries a strong meaning. It is also possible to play suit preference when following suit to declarer's lead, for example when declarer is drawing trumps. You say you don't play count yet. If I were you I would try to learn to play count rather than worry about suit preference - it is far more useful imo. Playing count also helps to train you to count hands out, which is an important skill to learn.

Penalty. I play that when pass is forcing, double is for blood.

I have a major. I bid my major.

In the UK the 'standard system' is acol - obviously not a five card major system. My experience is that casual social players will learn this system when they are taught to play bridge and, while they might add a few gadgets in their partnerships, are generally able to play it with other casual social players. Frequently the differences between two such players' style or system will go largely un-noticed by them over the course of a duplicate (eg what to open with 4M4m basically never seems to get discussed) and if it costs them they don't particularly mind - they're not there to win, they're there to share a fun evening of bridge. Obviously this is a bit different to your examples because the fact that acol is a 4cM system makes the jump to something like 2/1 quite big, so very few people will learn to play 2/1 in the UK who don't want to play at a fairly high level. I'm not an expert on the matter but I believe the French standard system is kept very uniform between partnerships - not a lot of this adding of gadgets and bits.

What is your objection to opening 2♥ with a 7 card suit? I realise that people make plenty of awkward bids in attempts to describe their hands as best they can (off shape 1NT and especially 2NT openings, rebids of 3 card suits to establish a gf etc) but, although it's not perfect at all, I didn't really think that this was one of those uncomfortable stretches (although I can see that some other people bidding it do). If your objection is that 2♥ is not a good description of the hand, is pass really a better one?

2♥ and would not have seriously considered any other option. Probably not a great shock that I agree with Mickyb given the number of his bidding rants I've been subjected to. Fwiw I wouldn't open it if I didn't have those heart pips.

I've seen this sort of hand a couple of times before and experts have always told me that they think 4♠ is the only bid. I haven't gone wrong following this advice yet (although obviously haven't had many chances to put it into practice!)

I would open that 1♠. Edit: I started writing that when no one had replied. You guys move quickly!

My usual rule with my p is "if they double and you don't know what things mean, assume they are the same as they'd be without the double".

I asked Mickyb about this, saying I'd probably bid 2♦ at the table and think I was supposed to double. He said, "That's strange, I'd probably double and think I was supposed to bid 2♦.".

I am informed that he only inverts the responses like that over 2NT, not 4NT. Tough luck.

With a genuine penalty, East would just have to pass. On many of these hands you're not exactly doubling for 1100 anyway. It's far more important to be able to get back in on these big hands that don't want to defend 4♠ than it is to collect an extra 50 when they are known to have a massive fit. It's very, very standard for double there to be takeout unless you are a lol (and sometimes then too). As an aside, the auction on hand A at my table was: 1♣* 2♥ x* 4♥ x p 5♦ p 6♦ p p 6♥ x p p p 1♣ = nat or 17-19NT, 2+ cards x = takeout in principle but she's meant to do something with any hand that wants to play in game opposite the big NT hand so could be a bit off-shape quite easily. I probably should have bid 5♥ or 5NT (we have no agreements about what the difference is but it feels like one of those should deny 4♠) over 4♥, rather than giving partner the chance to pass it but fortunately she did not have the hand for that!

I can't see a way to improve on that and make it just north of 80% because I think you'll also have the chance of a 4 2 break with two of the QT9 in the doubleton.

There appear to be a number of reasonable lines in the suit, which I'll consider in turn. There are 2^4 = 16 possible layouts. 1) Cashing the ace wins on 10/16 layouts (all 2-2, stiff honour on your left or right) 2) Low to the jack (then cashing the A if it loses to an honour with LHO) wins on 10/16 layouts (all 2-2, stiff honour on right, KQx with RHO) 3) Running the 10 then playing low to the J (could cash A on 2nd round but this trades two 3-1 breaks for one 2-2 break so is not right) wins on 10/16 layouts (all 2-2 except KQ on right, 4-0 onside, KQx on right, Hxx on right) 4) Playing a low card off dummy and covering whatever LHO plays wins on 11/16 layouts (4-0 onside, KQ9 or Hxx onside, stiff H on your right, all 2-2 except HH on your left) So you should play a low one off the dunny and cover RHO's card, repeating this on the second round (for the same reason that it's right to play low to J rather than cash A on the 2nd round in line 2)

My regular p would have practically denied a 5cM by passing and won't have 5 clubs and a decent hand either. I think that she either has a really terrible hand and LHO is sitting on something or she has a reasonable hand with shortage in a major (with something like 4432 and some points she would have doubled) or diamond length. My hand, however, is completely massive - I am just too likely to have a game on to want to pass this out at unfav, even when I know that they are massively likely have 9 spades. I'll double and await further developments.

This occurred in a competition where it is safe to assume that everyone has some understanding of laws and ethics and a reasonable understanding of their rights. I posted this because when it happened I had no idea what the rules were at all and would like to know for future reference. As defender it did not occur to me that declarer might lead a different card when the first was withdrawn - as has been suggested, I assumed he was just trying to put it out of the way/ make the previous trick clear. The director was called when the second lead to trick 2 appeared. If I'd realised declarer might consider playing a different card I would certainly have called earlier but it did not occur to me that this might happen!

Defenders did not tell declarer that he could not lead and they did not say anything about what the rules were or weren't. All that was said was simply "my partner has not quit the previous trick". This could just as easily be interpreted as an explanation for why the defender is not playing to trick 2 yet as it could be interpreted as an instruction to declarer, who picked the card up of his own volition.

Mgoetze seems to have covered the original question pretty well. I would not consider opening this 1NT. I think opening 1♣ is fine and if p bids 1♠ (the only time I can't show my hearts) I will raise her and feel pretty good about that. I don't play that a raise there shows 4 cards (it being potentially 3 is standard in my neck of the woods, doubly so if unbal). If you do play that 1♣:1♠, 2♠ shows four cards, you need to have a chat with p about what to do with 3415 and no extras. I would have passed three ♣ as South because you are now known to have a club fit.

At trick one, the opening lead is won in declarer's hand. The defender who was third to play has not quit trick 1 when declarer leads to trick 2. When declarer leads to trick two, both defenders point out that the previous trick has not been quit and declarer picks his card back up. After a minute or so, the defender flips her card from trick 1 and declarer leads a different card to trick 2 than the card he first tried to lead - is this allowed? Does he have to play the same card as the one that he tried to play the first time?

+1

They are the same throughout the country