Gerben47

You can play 3NT as a 4♣/♦ preempt. With a gambling 3NT hand you want to play 3NT from dummy's side anyway. If BSC openings are allowed then you can play 3♥ = natural or gambling in ♣ 3♠ = natural or gambling in ♦

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sqj7hakdkq8753c64&s=sak9643hjt9d2caq5]133|200|Scoring: MP Lead: 8 of Spades[/hv] After a straightforward 2/1 auction we land in 6♠ and receive the lead of ♠8. What is your plan. Please look at the different hidden texts after you made your plan. After you decided where to win the first trick look here: If you decide to play a second round of trumps at some point look here: If you play diamonds at some point look here: All follow if you plan to ruff a second diamond. For the third diamond: If you play a club finesse at some point look here:

Forbidden to bid or forbidden to agree? If the latter I explain that I normally do not hold an 8-card suit and we do not have agreements about 1-bids and 8-card suits.

Partner cannot have just 1 HCP in this auction at the point you bid 1NT because EW cannot have 28 HCP when they bid 1♣ pass pass. That this was the case after all was not NS's fault. If East didn't double 2♦ I would have ruled "asleep". Now... I dunno.

Why do you see European style as emphasis on destructive bidding? It's just that in Europe there is more variation in the 2-level opening bids. These are no more or less agressive than weak two bids. Besides, weak two bids can be extremele agressive. Ask Marty Bergen for details. These kinds of ideas are btw rarely played. The only thing that I have seen from more than one pair are the Lorenzo two-bids that force you to bid on the 2-level 1st 2nd seat NV with any 0-7 HCP hand.

Double now. If they pass I'd like a forcing NT but lacking that I will bid 2♣. As others have said, what's the hurry? 3NT on my next turn.

Not more or less sensible than with your regular partner. If you psyche you have to assume partner will be fooled as well, regular or not. Depends. If you have psyched an 1NT opening once that does not mean that next time you psyche an 1NT opening bid partner will be counting on that. It is simply not true that if you have ever psyched an 1NT opening bid with this partner that he should alert it every time after that because it might be a psyche because you psyched it once. Been playing for 14 years or so (but with ups and down in seriousness). I don't psyche with regular partners unless it is "obvious" but this is very rare. Some bids are simply agreed upon, for example: 1NT weak (dbl) 2♣ = natural, or without clubs and plans to run when doubled. This is not a psyche because it is agreed upon and explained as such. With not-so-regular or pickup partners maybe 2 to 4 times a year. But every time it seems to be memorable. And always for a reason. Now tactical bidding, that's a completely different question... See above, really. Lack of system tools will result in "punting" not psyching, i.e. at one point my partner opened 1♥ and RHO doubled. Now I did not know which bids partner would take as forcing so I decided to wait it out and pass. 1♠ 2♣ pass to me. I still didn't know what would help me and punted 7♥. This is an extreme example and one might think to pass 1♥x with a huge hand is psyching but I simply didn't know what would help me find out what was best. Psyching is specifically for a swing and to feel better afterwards if it worked. I think beginners should made aware of the possibility so that they later will not turn into those kind of people who yell at you when you psyche and were successful but simply say "Well done, you got us there". I would not teach anyone psyches. If the player is good enough to think of good ones themselves, either by being hit by a successful one or otherwise, that's the only way. Regardless of the ethical situation I doubt it is a good tactic to psyche against opponents that would give you 70% expected value if you would just bid normally. You'd have to be sure that the actual psyche would give you more than that in expectation, and that's pretty hard! I make a difference here between beginners and bad players. Don't psyche and have your bid exactly against beginners. If people played for a long time but play badly nevertheless, no more pity from me. The big difference between poker and bridge is in the ethics. In poker it is perfectly okay to mislead your opponents by change of tempo and mannerisms, in bridge it is not. Bluffing however, is allowed in both games. It is just that poker is more well known for this.

I agree with game preempts being disciplined if disciplined means: not a wide range from minimum to maximum. If you open 4♠ on QJ(8) xx x xx then you cannot open 4♠ on AQJ(8) QTx void xx. If you bid it on both partner cannot judge when to bid on... If 4♠ can be on junk you should pass with the actual responding hand and if 4♠ is not on junk you should make another move. Regular partnerships talk so much about convention this and convention that, but not about these kinds of things. It is so important to DISCUSS a preempting style and stick to it. This is the problem with the initial question. Do I open 4♠ on this hand? Well, I don't know, it depends on your partnership style. DISCUSS what a weak two looks like. And a weak three. And a game level preempt. What about Namyats? If you play that what do you do with a 4minor preempt? The short version of my style is this: Vulnerable: You can take it to the bank. 3-level preempts should be on 7 cards with 2 of the top 3. 4-level preempts have 8 tricks. No one vulnerable: 3 tricks short Favorable: 4 tricks short

I like it. Always agressive preempting :unsure: It might not be allowed because it is a controlled psych. You might open 3♥ on KJxxxx x xxx xxx and partner is not allowed to bid. After you get doubled you bid 3♠ and partner is still not allowed to bid... And if they don't double they will surely not play hearts... I already play that a preempt in 3rd NV is 0-13, longest suit is the one bid. Do not raise unless you have one more card in support than you would have for the same situation in a different seat. Blakset's 2♠ looks a bit like the Lorenzo 2 bids as now in OltMaas (newer version of OltBrink): NV 1st 2nd seat: Pass: Not an opening bid but at least 8 HCP 2♣: 0 - 7 no 4-card major (forced) 2♦: multi 2M: 0-7 at least 4 cards (forced)

What would 2NT be after 1♣ (1♥)? Why should I have 1NT as an option with 11 HCP? For me the choice is between double (showing no good bid and less than 4 spades) and 2NT (showing invitational with heart stopper). I don't like a (non-forcing or forcing) 2♦ with such a bad suit, especially when partner does not rate to have many diamonds in support after opening 1♣. Probably with only Kx it is best to bid dbl. After (2♠) 3♣ (p) I will bid 3♥ showing a stopper. If partner stops spades we'll be in 3NT.

I agree with Fred that 3NT is not a psych. 3NT takes complete control so there is no agreement about what hands should bid 3NT. The agreement is: "If I bid 3NT you pass". Another example of a non-natural bid that is not a psyche: 1NT dbl rdbl and you have: xxxx xxxx xxxx x Opponents are about to double you in anything your bid. Great... The solution is to bid 2♣ and make an SOS redouble afterwards. The 2♣ shows willingness to play 2♣ undoubled (but not doubled) and is not alertable, or banned by any psych regulations. It is not a psych, it's a tactical bid (i.e. making a bid on a hand that would not be standard for the bid but will probably work best after all). The SOS redouble must be alerted as is it an agreement or at least "agreed Bridge logic". I would adopt a mixed strategy (here we go again!) on hrothgar's magic hand. Sometimes I would bid 4♣ or 5♣, sometimes I would bid 3NT. An example where a mixed strategy is the best strategy: [hv=n=sat983&w=s76&e=sqj&s=sk542]399|300|[/hv] Declarer cashes the king, small, small and you have several strategies: a) Always play the Queen B) Always play the Jack c) Sometimes play the Queen, sometimes play the Jack. One can calculate that the best strategy of this position is to play the Queen 50% of the time and the Jack 50% of the time. Now no one would disallow that, so a mixed strategy in the bidding is also allowed.

Micky: with an awful suit you can reevaluate your suit to a 5-card suit. Also with a side 4-card major you might want to treat the hand as a 5-4. Basically decide before you make a bid if you respond 1M or 2M. Edit: I checked some top pair's CC: Fantoni Nunes: SJS but can be 5 cards. Forced by system as 1-level bids are limited but no lower limit. Lauria-Versace: After 1♣: 2♦ WJS in either major, 2M show trouble hands. After 1♦ limited fit jumps (4♦ and 5+M) Bocchi Duboin: Invitational jump shifts, 1♣ - 2♦ = Flannery hand. After 1♦ CC does not say (the same?) Auken - v Arnim: Weak jump shifts (after 1♦, 1♣ = Precision) Hamman - Soloway: Strong jump shifts (after 1♦, 1♣ = Precision) Brink - vProoijen: Invitational jump shifts, 1♣ - 2♦ Multi (weak jump shift in major) So maybe we should play invitational jump shifts :rolleyes:

North should evaluate his hand in his range given by his pass of 1♣. In that respect his hand is HUGE, so raise to 3♠.

I would like to understand the advantages of this treatment. How do you use them and is it really so good? WJS (5 - 8 HCP or so) really solve some problems compared to SJS and WJS are usually motivated in this way. How would you motivate SJS to a WJS player? (Assume a WJS structure where for example 1D - 1M ; 2C - 2M is invitational and 3M is game forcing)

Simple question: WHY? What was wrong with the previous scheme (except SJS which I don't like but you probably already know this). What problems did you previously have with 5♠ + 4♥ hands? After 1NT rebid 2♥ shows that shape, NF. After 2♣ rebid forget about a fit (unbalanced hands should raise with 3 cards) After 2♦ rebid: forget about fit unless at least invitational, in that case bid 2♥. Can't they play it because of tradition? If you only use them to set the trump suit they are a real rare bird. IIRC they are also used on some other hands (GF fit + side 5+card for example).