jschafer

[hv=pc=n&s=sjhat8752dt63ct73&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=1n2s(5+%21s%204+m)p]133|200[/hv] 2♠ was Multi Landy, what do you bid now?

I haven't played the 1M-3x with suit quality requirements before, so the short answer to your question is that I'm guessing as much as you are here :) However, I think part of your question depends on your what your quality requirements are. If you just want to sort out the ones with no honours whatsoever in the 6+ suit invitational hands then I doubt it will make a difference to your rebids over 1NT because they will account for a very small fraction of all 1NT responses. The 1M-3x bids are rare as it is and when they do come up you will almost always have an honour in them. I did a quick check on the BBO deal source generator thing and the first 30 hands it came up with all had suits headed by the Q or better. The low frequency of the hands means you won't be losing much by putting them in 1NT and not rebidding differently, but it also means you won't be gaining much frequency-wise because they wouldn't have been in most of the original 1M-3x bids anyway. If you send these hands via 1NT to 3♣ it also means you have to give up on extremely weak hands with really long minor suits (eg. over 1♠-1NT-2♥-?), which you can no longer bid nicely (they are rare too though). I would suspect that in order to make your invitational long suit bids worth splitting up, you want to divide them into quality criteria that actually make them worth splitting in terms of hand evaluation for partner for bidding 3NT and with regards to frequency (eg. 5+ hcps in suit vs less than 5 in suit). The more strong hands you put into 1NT though, the lighter you may have to end up rebidding over 1NT because you might be worried about missing game if your side suit is AKx in a minor. I have no idea whether your suit quality criteria would be a gain or not over the standard treatment, but it seems like it would be nice to try out :D

As I understand it, a forcing 1NT contains hands that can be subdivided into: - Very weak raise of 1M, unsuitable for a preempt or direct raise. - Invitational 9-11 hands with a 6+ suit (unless you play 1M-3X as showing this). - Balanced invitational hands 10-11(12) hcps without fit (no 4♠ over 1♥). - Invitational raises with fit (but no 4♠ over 1♥). - (5)6-9 hands without fit or 4♠ over 1♥ (can have long side suit). Pretty much the same hands as a non-forcing 1NT bid. Bearing that in mind you most should be bidding on most (12)13-14 hcp balanced hands regardless of shape because: a) Game still has good chances opposite several of responder's possible hands. eg. Hand 1 partner could have a nice invitational hand with a strong 6+♦ or ♣ suit, making 3NT decent. b ) Still a fair few hands that can have support for major, which may play better than 1NT (and make game). eg. Limit raise opposite your Hand 1 has good chances of making 4♠ c) Partner can still have weak hand with a long side suit that may play much better than 1NT. eg. Hand 2 partner could have a really good hand with long ♦s which rates to be better than 1NT, the opponents can probably make/sac 2♠ anyway and have better chances of bidding it if you pass 1NT. d) You could be preempting the opps from getting in if it is their hand. eg. Hand 1 partner could have a really weak raise in ♥s and you are preempting them out of their ♦ fit. e) Partner can have a fit for your minor suit on 5422 hands, so it pays off when you bid them. eg. on Hand 2 if partner doesn't have major support he will not have 4♠, you could easily be better off in ♣ or ♥. f) Even if partner doesn't have one of the nice hands above, it doesn't mean you will get a bad score. At IMPs there usually isn't a big difference between a suit partscore or 1NT on most hands anyway. A lot of the time you will just end up in a 5-2M fit in 2M when partner doesn't have a great hand for you and they really aren't such a bad thing anyway (even at MPs). Sometimes the opps still decide to get into the auction at their own peril. You are eating up a lot of bidding space with still relatively undefined hands, making life pretty tough on the opponents. Anyway, that is why I would bid on on most hands as opposed to Pass. In the worst case scenario you might end up in a 5-2 Major fit or the occasional dodgy contract but imho there are many ways to gain by bidding whenever you are unbalanced. Obviously if you open some 11hcp balanced hands NV or a really nasty 4333 12-count then is safer to Pass over 1NT. EDIT: bidding 3c minor suits is better than rebidding 5M suits because it lets you play there when partner hates your major but has a weak hand with that suit (or ♦ if you rebid ♣s). Partner will usually correct to 2M anyway when he has 2card support and no other good strain to play in. It leaves more room to get to the best contract.

I would play the same way. 3-3♦s is less than 36% after the preempt. The lack of K♣ lead makes the ♣T hook more appealing, LHO might lead it with KQ. Running the ♣9 is the % play anyway I think and these additional clues make it even better. The only thing I would do differently is to run the ♣7, making it more likely for LHO to cover if he has KQ♣.

Partner probably has exactly 4♥ and probably 6+♣s for his bidding. It doesn't look like we need to play him for much more than an Ace to make slam a decent contract. He should have some values for responding to 1♣ as opposed to preempting and there isn't much left if he is short in the pointed suits. We have shown an 18/19 BAL hand so partner will not be making slam tries on every hand where he has shape (which he needs for 5♣ anyway) and an Ace (he has already shown some hcps). If he does start splintering on any hand with an Ace you will be raising to slam on hands less ideal than this one by playing him for having his slam interest bid opposite your limited hand. His range is anywhere from a minimum response to 8/9 points and it doesn't seem unreasonable to play him for values in the suits he showed 10+ cards in. RHO overcalled 1♠ unfavourable so the Ace of ♥s is probably onside if partner doesn't have it. Fwiw, I don't see this as overruling partner's decision at all just reevaluating after acquiring more information. EDIT: Presumably 1NT instead of 2NT should show the same hand and the OP auction was like the 1♠ never happened, so I assume their regular 2NT structure would be on and 3♥ is still possible. If they did play Sup X, it would (should?) have been mentioned in the OP imo.

[hv=pc=n&s=s4hajt872dat763c2&w=sakt863h65d8ca973&n=sj95hq94dkq5cjt64&e=sq72hk3dj942ckq85&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1sp2c3h3sp4sppp]399|300[/hv] This was the full hand. As South I bid 3♥ thinking that I would either have to show a 5-5 hand in the reds with 2NT or show a lot of ♥ length by preempting in ♥s, as it didn't seem likely I would get another bid to show my 6-5 shape at this vul. I went for 3♥ because it consumes a lot more space from their 2/1 auction and partner will almost always raise when he has some cards and ♥ support. An additional factor was that if we do have a double fit, I might have just drawn the opps a roadmap to slam. Thoughts on 3♥?

ATB = Assign the blame

Well you were playing with me, so I'm in not much of a position to comment on whether I am a lunatic :P For the purpose of answering this assume you were playing with a good player who has his bids :D

[hv=pc=n&s=sj95hq94dkq54cjt6&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1sp2c3h3s]133|200[/hv] IMP scoring, 2♣ is nat GF. Is this an obvious pass?

Do you have any structure for this or a link with more information? I'd be quite interested in seeing as this works as jump shift auctions are always messy :(

If you double partner's hand was:

[hv=pc=n&s=skqt2hkq9543d43c5&n=sa97hadkj95cakq83]133|200[/hv] Nobody vul, East deals and passes. IMPs team match.

Big balanced hand?

[hv=pc=n&s=sakhjdjt98652cakq&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=p1d1h1s4h]133|200[/hv] IMP scoring, 16-board team match.

6♠

[hv=pc=n&s=sakjt9haj92da92ck&n=s764hq85dkj64caj4]133|200|[/hv] ♣ is led. What is the best line to play this 6♠? My line that went down was:

I'm not stuck, 4♣!

[hv=pc=n&s=saq84hkd97cajt963&n=sk7haq8532dj632cq&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=p1cp1hp2cp3dp3nppp]266|200|IMP Scoring, Jack of spades lead.[/hv] You are North and your partner didn't rebid 1♠ but it seems to have saved you from a potentially dangerous ♦ lead. How would you have continued in partner's seat? You seem to have a couple of options: 1) Win in hand, cash the A♣ and unblock the K♥, hoping for 3-3 ♥s if the King of ♣s isn't singleton. 2) Win in dummy with the K♠ and overtake the ♣Queen, trying to establish ♣s. 3) Win in dummy with the ♠K and run the ♣Q, crossing to hand with the ♥K and try to set up ♣s.

Partner is a passed hand, I am doubling and expect this to be the winning action as this really looks like it will be a partscore hand.

Is it possible to have tables compare scores of tables with players of similar 'skill level'? If this sort of thing could be implemented into the software it would be quite nice to have. Currently simply getting high card points and bidding very normal game contracts will give you at least 3 IMPs on average, more for slams. It is a little annoying that you keep losing IMPs when you don't get hcps, despite bidding normally and playing good bridge on defence. It seems a little silly that when you are at a strong table and your opponents bid 3 "easy" slams, you're down 30 IMPs on simple boards. On the other hand if you are at a weaker table and you find a slam that may seem a little 'difficult' to find, it would be more satisfying to get IMPs for it. Besides making the scoring a bit easier on the nerves, it might also result in people displaying more accurate skill levels on their profiles. If you currently have "Expert" on your profile and keep getting negative IMPs, it might help you reconsider to "Advanced" so that your averages stay closer to 0.

[hv=pc=n&s=saq9865h5dkq5cj63&n=skj3haqt962dat9ck&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1sp2hp2sp3sp4sp4np5cp5dp6dp6sppp]266|200[/hv] Club lead to the Ace. Small ♦ switch. Edit: If you play a ♠ at some point:

It is a matter of style and most deny 4♠ with 1NT, I am not one of them. Even other seemingly obvious bids like 1♥-2♦ could have different meanings in 2/1. For some it shows 5+♦, for some only 4.

[hv=pc=n&s=sq953hq3dakq93caj&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1cp1hd2h3d4h]133|200[/hv] Edit: IMP Scoring without any special agreements.

Trumps were 3-2, LHO doubled on nothing pretty much. If you draw two rounds of trumps you would have had an overtrick, not that it matters much at MPs (though it was only a shared top now, making 10 tricks!). Was just curious if the potential overtrick was worth the slight risk of them not misdefending (not ducking ♣) AND the ♦ splitting badly.

[hv=pc=n&s=sak872hd943cakqj3&w=sjt4haq953dajc842&n=s953h8742dt652ct6&e=sq6hkjt6dkq87c975]399|300[/hv] West had underled his ♥Ace.