daveharty

I was kibitzing this hand and I was surprised that you thought there was a significant BIT. From the peanut gallery it appeared that partner's 5C bid was made in a reasonable tempo, given that he was bidding over a skip bid. But obviously perception varies, especially online.

One thing that I found very interesting was that on the "Top Partnership" list, five of the top ten partnerships (and all of the top three) are mixed pairs. If this sort of list were generated in ACBL-land, I suspect this would not be the case. I know nothing about the EBU, could anyone explain why this is? Are there just a lot more mixed pairs events?

3NT for me, sixth diamond with two sure entries tips it. I've been down before.

Okay, LHO continues the ♣5 to the 6, 9, A. You cash the ♦A and ruff a diamond, LHO following 5,7 and RHO following 3,4. Now what?

In a team match, some exuberant bidding lands you in a reasonable spot: LHO leads the ♣K: 2, 4...? What's your plan? Opps are playing UDCA. [hv=pc=n&w=sk5haqt76da982ca7&e=sjt82hj843dqct862&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=p2d(weak%202)2h3d3hp4hdppp]266|200[/hv] EDIT: Sorry something was missing. Diagram now correct.

Okay, thanks for the reality check. I was East and was just making sure I wasn't too close to the problem to see it clearly; my partner asked how we could bid the slam, and I tried to be as diplomatic as possible when I told her I thought she had an obvious accept. I loved my controls but the horrible spots convinced me to just invite, I wondered if people would think I should have been more bullish on the hand.

I don't get 4S with this hand, especially at matchpoints. With a doubleton in the opponents' suit it's not at all unlikely that you have mirrored distribution, and how many cover cards do you expect partner to provide for the overcall? Agree 100% with quiddity, I would show a limit raise and abide by partner's decision.

You hold: [hv=pc=n&e=skq54h2dj74cqt985]133|100[/hv] LHO opens 1S, RHO responds 2D, and the opponents conduct a tortured auction wherein LHO shows long spades, minimum values, and possibly a club control (ambiguous), RHO shows a secondary heart suit and eventually blasts to 6NT without asking for aces/keycards. (I'm not including the actual auction because A. I don't fully remember it, and B. the opps freely admitted afterwards that they had no idea what they were doing, they lost their way after about the third round.) So: do you lead a high spade in the hopes that partner has an ace, or do you think that's more likely to blow a tempo and set up declarer's road suit? FWIW these are good opponents, this was just not their finest bidding hour.

[hv=pc=n&s=skqht873dqj7cakq2&n=saj9653haq9d94c54&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1np2hp2sp4sppp]266|200[/hv] West leads the ♣J; low, low, Q. When you cash a high trump, both opps follow low. What's the best matchpoint plan?

This one is an ATB: [hv=pc=n&w=skqha2dkqj84cj765&e=saj532hk54da96ca4&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=p1np2hp2sp4nppp]266|200[/hv] +720 is sort of a silly score, especially when it's there on any lead. Who dunnit? EDIT: 1NT=15-17.

9 (HCP) + 5 (# of spades) + 2 (1 for each doubleton) + 1 (five card suit) + .25 (2 nines) = 17.25 WTP? Nah, I would pass.

The whole hand: [hv=pc=n&s=saq9853hdj984ca54&w=skjt72hkqt3dack87&n=sha976542dkqt752c&e=s64hj8d63cqjt9632&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1s1n]399|300[/hv] Results on this one were all over the map. At our table NS had a bit of an accident and played in 3D, but they weren't alone. Only one pair bid the diamond slam. (The West at their table also overcalled 1NT.) A couple of 4H-1, some 5D, one NS pair got brutalized in spades, etc.

I passed. Not a success: [hv=pc=n&s=sathqdakt832cqjt4&w=s842hkj97652d75c6&n=sj953hdq94ca98752&e=skq76hat843dj6ck3&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=3hp4hppp]399|300[/hv] As an aside, if you were North and your partner bid 5D, would you give him a bump?

[hv=pc=n&s=sathqdakt832cqjt4&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=3hp4h]133|200[/hv] Imps. Is your answer different at matchpoints?

What he said. Surely you would rather try taking three tricks than eleven.

I wouldn't even call it a convention, as it is both natural and nonforcing. But that's just semantics. Whether or not a treatment/convention is "good" depends on several things: Does it come up fairly frequently? Does its use preclude another, more useful meaning of the bid in question? Does the bid fill a gap in your bidding system? Is it easy to remember? Some of those questions can only be answered within the context of your partnership. Obviously 1NT-3m as natural and invitational is easy to remember, and it would be useful (particularly if you have strict requirements for the bid like 2 of the top 3 honors) when it allows partner to bid 3NT with an otherwise minimum 1NT opener if she has the missing honor. But it really depends on the rest of your system; if you have other hand-types that are difficult to bid then you need to prioritize and allocate the available bids accordingly. I usually play something very similar to what rogerclee describes and haven't had any problems, but with one partner I play exactly what you describe. I think the bid has worked well about one time in several years (in the sense that it allowed us to confidently bid a game that we wouldn't have bid if partner hadn't had the bid available). The few other times the bid has come up, it had no effect on the outcome of the hand.

You might try something like the "Wrigley's Coup" which I believe was once used against Ely Culbertson. Lead low toward the QJxx; if the trick holds, return to your hand in a side suit and lead a gum wrapper. You might catch LHO napping.

I'm sorry, but none of this post makes any sense: Your concession that it might be bad if the deal was passed out amounts to a tacit admission that you want to be in the auction with this hand at some point. Why not simply get in quickly with an opening bid, especially when you have an easy, descriptive rebid? This seems far less risky than waiting until a subsequent round to make your first noise, after letting the opponents exchange information about their own hands and possibly elevating the bidding to an uncomfortable level. Unless you count the many plus scores your side could have earned by reaching a good partscore (or even game) if you had opened. If everyone else at the table has a balanced ten-count (the most likely scenario for a pass-out), don't you like your chances of making a partscore in one of the majors? If, after you open the bidding, your partner simply bids a slam with no further input from you, then one of two things is happening: either your partner has an ENORMOUS hand, in which case your two aces should not prove a disappointment; or you have a real problem, namely, a fundamental misapprehension of the purpose of dialogue bidding. Hopefully, your partner will allow you to more fully describe the nature of your hand (spades, hearts, minimum opening bid values but good controls, etc.) rather than deciding on a unilateral course of action. Your main objection to opening with this hand seems to be that partner will play you for more than you actually have. I think that is erroneous for several reasons, but the main one is that this hand is simply good enough to open. If it doesn't fall within your partnership parameters for opening the bidding, okay, that's fine. (I think it's wrong, and the unanimity of the good players who have posted responses here suggests you may want to reconsider, but that's your business.) But don't let it be because there aren't 13 HCP in the hand; that kind of bean-counting is not very effective on unbalanced hands. Of course there is a risk of getting too high if you open the bidding, but that is the case every time you open anything.

That's true, but I would expect to make game opposite a fair number of hands that would pass 1H. Of course many of those hands would pass 2NT, too. Todd and I were kibitzing this hand and talking after it came up and I was sort of on the fence between 1H and 2NT. In retrospect I think 1H is better, but I think there is a fair amount of risk. Seems like the main risk of opening 2NT is just what Phil and ArtK78 mentioned, missing a superior club contract.

I would open even with slightly less (change the sQ to the sJ for example), and I don't consider myself a wild man by any stretch when it comes to opening bids. This hand is substantially better than some random 4432 12-count that everyone would consider an obligatory opener.

This was the wildest hand from the local club game last night, and caused at least three people to comment to me about the "nature" of computer dealt hands. Whatever. [hv=pc=n&n=sha976542dkqt752c&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1s1n]133|200[/hv] What is your plan here? If you double: If you bid 2H: If you bid 2NT: EDIT: To accomodate ArtK78. If you bid 4H:

Good luck tonight folks!

Let's not confuse the issue here. My interpretation of jilly's post above is that she has been in the habit of doubling with garbage hands that have 44 majors. (If that's not the case, then ignore what follows.) It's easy to understand the motivation; finding a fit is important in a competitive auction. But it's also wrong. Jilly's example hand (ATxxx QTxx xx xx) may or may not rise to the level of a 1S overcall for your partnership; it's close enough that I would expect reasonable people to be on both sides of the argument. But it in no way resembles a double. If you have discussed with your partner the possibility of doubling with this hand (or with a 44xx equivalent), you may be in violation of the ACBL's prohibition on systemic psyches; if a psyche is a "gross misstatement of a player's honor strength or distribution", then I think this fits the bill. But even if you don't run afoul of "the Man" you face the erosion of partnership trust. How is partner supposed to make intelligent decisions after a double like this? If she holds moderate values, she may jump to an unplayable level. Or she may double the opponents in a partscore hand expecting you to have some defensive strength. Even if she is an understanding sort and doesn't get upset, she is almost certain to start making allowances for the possibility of subminimum doubles, and you are again on shaky legal ground. Minimum doubles by an unpassed hand, even at favorable, should be something like ATxx KJxx QTxx x in my view; obviously where you draw the line is a matter of partnership discussion. But the further you get away from "ideal" shape, the more honor strength you should have; and a hand like ATxx QTxx xxxx x isn't even close despite perfect shape.

You may want to check out Kit Woolsey's Matchpoints, which deals at length with such issues. It's a good read.