gartinmale

Does GIB read suit preference when you give it a ruff, or does it just try to count out the hand and simulate what to do? If you had led the spade J at trick five, would that have done it? I'm not criticizing, just genuinely curious what's going through the robot's 'head'.

I bid 1♠ and 4♠. Then I passed, which I thought was cowardly. Part of the reason I passed was because I feared I was going to get a spade lead whether I doubled or not. As it turns out: [hv=pc=n&s=sak3h72da963cj752&w=sqt9764ha4dcakq84&n=s5hkjt9863dkt54c9&e=sj82hq5dqj872ct63]399|300[/hv] No, I don't know why S opened 1♣, not 1♦. But if most Wests were facing 1♦ (or Pass - I'd open it but not everyone will), that should make going slow with the possibility of finding a slam even more appealing, right? Partner led a spade. Declarer then misguessed the hearts and went down one. +50 for E/W was worth 2/12 matchpoints for us. +100 and +300 would have been worth the same 2/12 matchpoints. -450 would have been a 0. At other tables, N/S played 2♥ once, 5♦x once, and 6♦x once. Every other E/W pair got to play some number of spades (from 3 to 5), usually doubled. Every E/W declarer made except for one, so there were a lot of +450, +590, +650, etc. I asked around and found out most Wests had started by calling either 2♠ or 4♠ with my hand. I thought this was pretty bad and decided I'd ask a larger pool. I also asked some regular partners and teammates how they'd bid the hand. Most of them start with 1♠ and then bid 4♠. One starts with a double. One plays Leaping Michaels over 1-level openings too. Do you think partner should have led a minor?

Matchpoints. North America. A club game with widely varying (two Grand Life Masters, all the way down to players who revoke once or twice per session) levels of play. Your opponents are on neither end of the spectrum. [hv=pc=n&w=sqt9764ha4dcakq84&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1c(3+)1s4h(immediately)pp4s5h(immediately)pp]133|200[/hv] 1. Would you have bid 1♠ at your first chance to call, or something else? Partner needs so very little for slam to be on, even with South opening. 2. Would you have bid 4♠ at your second chance to call, or something else? 3. Now what?

Hmmph. As usual Fred's points are excellent. I don't claim to be anywhere near an expert, so I don't really have a leg to stand on here. I've seen GIB rebid 1NT in this auction (or in the auction starting 1C-1H) with singletons many times before and haven't had any issue with it; I never posted such a hand until this one because this one seemed particularly egregious to me (no honors in the majors, concentration in the club suit). But I could certainly see why someone following (3) might bid 1NT here, and why one might program GIB that way. I'll spend some more time thinking about why I reacted so poorly to this 1NT. I apologize if my opening salvo seemed presumptuous.

[handviewer='http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=pn|bubels,~~M15562,~~M15560,~~M15561|st%7C%7Cmd%7C2S267TJKHJQKAD5QC6%2CS3H578D2468C2378A%2CS9H469D7JKAC49JQK%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%208%7Csv%7Co%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1C%7Can%7CMinor%20suit%20opening%20--%203%2B%20C%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1S%7Can%7COne%20over%20one%20--%204%2B%20S%3B%206%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1N%7Can%7C3-5%20C%3B%202-5%20D%3B%202-4%20H%3B%202-3%20S%3B%2012-14%20HCP%20%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C3N%7Can%7C4%2B%20S%3B%2017-%20HCP%3B%2013%2B%20total%20points%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CD4%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CSQ%7C]400|300[/handviewer] 1NT, eh?

The GIB convention card linked at http://bridgebase.com/doc/gib_system_notes.php shows honor leads to be standard. In particular, against NT, the systemic lead from KQT9 is the queen, asking for count or unblock. GIB led the king. [handviewer='http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=pn|gartinmale,~~M59619,~~M59617,~~M59618|st%7C%7Cmd%7C2S35JH357D2JAC6TQK%2CS6TAH46JAD67C247J%2CS47KH9TQKD345TC59%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%204%7Csv%7Cb%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1C%7Can%7CMinor%20suit%20opening%20--%203%2B%20C%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%201%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C1H%7Can%7COne%20over%20one%20--%204%2B%20H%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%206-12%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cd%7Can%7CTwo%20suit%20takeout%20--%205-%20C%3B%204%2B%20D%3B%205-%20H%3B%204%2B%20S%3B%2011-%20HCP%3B%2012%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cr%7Can%7CSupport%20redouble%20-%203%20H%20--%203%2B%20C%3B%203%20H%3B%2011-%7Cmb%7C1N%7Can%7COne%20NT%20to%20double%20--%202-5%20C%3B%202-5%20D%3B%202-4%20H%3B%202-4%20S%3B%208-11%20HCP%3B%2012-%20total%20points%20%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CH2%7Cpc%7CH7%7Cpc%7CHA%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CH5%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cpc%7CH9%7Cpc%7CH8%7Cpc%7CC9%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CH6%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CDT%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CS9%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CS7%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CD4%7C]400|300[/handviewer]

Here's the link: http://tinyurl.com/7dwnvbr You might like X at South's first turn better than 1♠, but c'est la vie. 3♠ is described as 4-8 total points, consistent with a preemptive jump. North's hand is a bit better than that... (and yes, I know that 4♠ can be set if lefty underleads his club honors).

Hi guys, My regular partner and I and a friend are looking for a fourth, or failing that a partnership, for the Truscott Open BAM in New York City at the Edgar Kaplan Winter Regional. It's December 27th (and 28th, should we qualify for the second day). My partner and I are young (mid-20s) Life Masters with sustained reasonable success in flight A/B at local sectionals and regionals. We play a reasonably middle-of-the-road 2/1, balance aggressively, and play EHAA-style weak 2 bids at favorable. We don't sacrifice as often as our peers. We have very little experience with BAM. We have the seven of diamonds marked under "Special Carding". Another friend of ours, also a mid-20s Life Master, is interested in playing the BAM as well. He has essentially the same (non)-credentials as us, but has won the flight C GNTs and has made it reasonably far in the flight B GNTs with his regular teammates. He also has very little experience with BAM. He plays 2/1. We'd ideally like a fourth person to play the BAM. If we make it to the second day, great, because this is annually a really tough field; if not, oh well. If we have a good time, we'll be around for the Thursday teams as well. It'd be great if you knew something about BAM, or were the best player on the team, because then we'd be better than we are now. But really the only attributes we're looking for are friendliness, competitiveness, willingness to play with us, ability to play 2/1, and desire to go look at the hands over a beer afterwards without murdering one's partner or one's teammates. If no one is interested individually, but you're part of a partnership that is interested in teaming up for the BAM, we'd be willing to talk about that too. Send me a private message on BBO with your email if you're interested and I'll email you. If you want, we (or we and our third) can play a bit online to see if our styles work together. -gartinmale

Heh, I didn't even notice I had 3. Then I would duck and stop worrying that there are 14 spades and two aces of hearts in the deck.

I will duck. If I lose three tricks on the hand I am behind the field, regardless of whether they are in 3NT or 4S. I will hope that lefty led the 5 from KT753 and that righty has AJ tight. Edit: I suppose it is possible spades are 5-0 with righty, so I might not have 11 tops. In this case 4S makes 4 and 3NT makes whatever it makes when everyone faces the same problem I have after they give up a spade and righty plays A then J of hearts. Nevertheless, I would still duck.

If it matters (maybe it does based on likely general preempt strength?) I played this hand and E/W were vulnerable.

Quick side question (matchpoints, North America). I was in 3NT once when my right hand opponent led a spade out of turn. As I had a spade tenace in my hand and was worried about the suit, it seemed like the best option to exercise was to require lefty to lead a spade, so I asked for this option. Lefty was void in spades. The director ruled that I had already selected an option, so that lefty was on lead with no penalty (and could lead anything), and that the information that lefty was void in spades was authorized to everyone. I made the hand and got a good score, but have wondered since if this was correct.

Last round of a 7x7 Swiss teams. Your team is doing pretty well but is not in contention for first (you are currently 5-1, but with only 75 VPs). Your opponents are strong and play Precision. On the second to last board you have the following auction. Many spots (but not the relevant trump spots) approximate. [hv=pc=n&s=skjhakt94dakqjct5&n=s8652hq76d94cqj74&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=p1s(11-15)dp2cp2hp3hp4hppp]266|200[/hv] Trick 1: ♠T, ♠2, ♠A, ♠J Trick 2: ♠3, ♠K, ♠7, ♠5 Trick 3: ♥K, ♥5, ♥6, ♥2 1. How do you play the heart suit? [spoiler below, with second question] . . . . . . . . . . . 2. I thought for quite some time (well, for me, anyway) and eventually decided I would run the ♥T. I had two reasons, both of which are probably not very good. First, I was missing 14 HCP. Lefty and righty were both in and neither cashed a high club, so there's a mild inference that the club honors are split. If they are, righty is pretty close to a minimum opener, and he only has AQ fifth of spades. I doubt the heart J would have made much of a difference when he evaluated his hand and opened it, but a stiff heart might have. Second, it somehow felt right, because there was tension at the table even though both opponents knew I was looking at a ton of tricks. In any case: lefty covered with the ♥J, so I didn't have to follow through, but the hearts were indeed 4-1. I drew trump and conceded two clubs, making 4. I thought we might pick up some IMPs on the board, but we did not, which brings me to my second question: At the other table, my counterpart sitting S reached the same contract after a different auction (starting with 2NT - our teammates did not bid). He got a diamond lead around to his A, cashed the heart king, and ran the ten correctly without appearing to pause for thought. He is a much better declarer than I am, so this makes me think that there is some reason to play the suit that way, but I haven't been able to figure out what it is, even though I had more information available to me. What's going on? Or maybe our teammates gave something away?

For what it's worth, in the partnership where I have this agreement we have agreed to reopen regardless of shape or strength at matchpoints, but have not agreed to always reopen with a double. I actually think this is a bad agreement, because we penalty-pass trap our opponents less often than we ourselves get into trouble, but nevertheless we play it, and we would reopen with 3532 shape and a minimum.

I'm not really sure what the right forum for this question is, but I'll give it a shot here. My teammates and I were discussing this over beers after a Swiss and wondered what other people thought. Suppose you play something like 48 hands a week with a competent partner against competent opponents. There are 35 different possible contracts that one could play redoubled. Let's assume that you and your partner only redouble/play redoubled contracts when you think it is correct, and do not just redouble randomly. Since the form of scoring matters, we'll say it is something like IMP pairs or teams. What contracts do you expect to play redoubled most often? Least often? (We thought 1NT and either 1C or 5NT respectively). What's the over/under on the number of different redoubled contracts (out of 35) you will make in a year? Ten years? Fifty years? We sort of thought if you played long enough, and redoubled at IMPs whenever you thought turning the cube had positive expected value, you would probably make many of the 4 and 5-level suited contracts redoubled, maybe rarely a slam. You would likely make 1NT and 3NT redoubled as well. You might occasionally make a 2-level contract when they double you, you make an SOS redouble, and partner, with a pleasant surprise in hand or dummy, leaves it in. But it seems likely that you will never make 1C redoubled, on the basis that no one will ever let you play 1C redoubled unless they very much want to defend, nor 5NT redoubled, on the basis that it's a hard contract to reach even undoubled. (I can think of only one time each 1C and 5NT were played at my table in the last year. Neither was doubled).

Okay. Thanks for the replies. This sort of hijacked the thread, which was not my intention. I am interested in knowing whether this forcing pass treatment should be alertable (the way I see it, it's somewhat akin to the forcing 1NT, which is announceable in ACBL-land).

I meant your pass to be the so-called baby psyche. If the systemically correct call with your hand (due to the 1NT being forcing) is one of 2C, 2D, 2H, etc., and you pass, then you are misrepresenting your hand according to your system, albeit in a silly and possibly minor way, aren't you? [Edited: never mind, I think we're on the same page - when I call it a baby psych(e?), I'm talking about case (e)]. In the case I brought up, the director ruled that our opponents had been damaged by my misinformation "you said the bid was forcing, but then you didn't bid" and so reopened the auction prior to my pass and allowed righty to bid. [Edited: righty had some strongish two-suiter with spades and clubs and was hoping I would bid 2C so she could double it, and if I did not bid 2C intended to bid 2S.]

Actually (sorry for the double post, maybe I should edit), where do you draw the line on these things? Let's just look at the forcing notrump. Suppose you've agreed that it's always, 100% forcing, because it could include some very big hands (I don't have this agreement). You open 1H on a balanced 12 count, partner, an unpassed hand, bids 1NT, and before your next chance to call... (a) righty shows you her hand, which has 25 points and seven spades, and then passes. (b) righty tanks for 30 seconds, fingers the 4S card (yes, I know this is an irregularity), and then passes. © righty asks "Is it 100% forcing? Am I guaranteed another chance to call?" and then passes. (d) righty passes in tempo, and you look at your cards again and see that you actually have a 2 count, not a 12 count. (e) righty passes in tempo. It's a breach of partnership agreement to pass the forcing notrump. It also might be winning matchpoints, and as you've quoted, you're allowed to draw inferences at your own risk. If you ever pass in case (e), it's sort of a baby psyche, right? I mean, if, in the perfect, undisturbed-by-tempo world of bridge, the bid is 100% forcing, then it's 100% forcing. You're passing a forcing bid without any reason to believe that it's the right action, and if you do it often enough you'll have to stop describing the bid as forcing, because you'll have an concealed understanding that sometimes you pass for no legitimate reason. I guess case (d) doesn't really matter, because you've already psyched and you and partner are not allowed to have agreements about what is and is not forcing after a psyche (this is not the original Roth-Stone). But where's the line drawn in (a) through ©? At what point does it stop being "inferences...drawn only by an opponent, and at his own risk" and start being a, well, baby psyche? And when are or are not (maybe the answer is never?) your opponents entitled to redress if you pass the bid?

The situation I had in mind was more along the lines of EricK's post, where partner has junk and righty is trying to decide how to bid a big hand based on our partnership agreements. I understand the "at your own risk" part of the rule, but have had a result adjusted against me previously when I passed partner's forcing notrump after righty made it clear that she had a big hand. The director rolled the auction back because I had informed righty that the forcing notrump was forcing, and then passed it (at my own risk - but it would have been a good board had it stood). This seems like it could be an analogous situation.

In North America there is a partner with whom I have this agreement at matchpoints only (if we open 1 of a suit and you overcall 1 of a suit, we must reopen). We were told we don't need to pre-alert it, nor alert the pass, but the agreement is clearly written in capital letters at the bottom of both of our convention cards. It wouldn't really surprise me if different directors said different things. We've found little consistency in the ACBL's local enforcement of what is alertable, what methods are permitted, etc. Here's a related question. Suppose you have this agreement and open 1C. Suppose lefty overcalls 1S, partner passes, and righty fidgets for a long time and then asks "The pass is forcing, so you have to bid again, right?" If righty passes and you decide that based on the fidgeting and the question that maybe you would do best defending 1S, do you think you will get any redress when righty calls the director?

Here's the link to the hand.

I definitely should have raised immediately. But they had let us buy the previous two hands for much lower than we deserved and I was greedy. Karma reared its ugly head, I suppose. The full deal, which makes me look rather worse than partner, I think: [hv=pc=n&s=sat8h76dj52ca8743&w=sj42hakqt942datc9&n=skq75h83dkq963c62&e=s963hj5d874ckqjt5&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1h2dpp2hpp3d3hp4hdppp]399|300[/hv] Partner led a low club to my ace. I cashed the A of spades looking for a signal; declarer played the J and partner the 5, which I couldn't read. Reasoning that if partner had an honor sequence in diamonds he might have led from it, I led a diamond back looking for the AQ in partner's hand and they wrapped up 11 tricks. I didn't give declarer enough credit, since he has to have something for his bidding, but I was picturing KJx ??QT9xx Kx 9 with a missing heart honor (since I was trying to give partner something close to an opening hand in my mind). Declarer did think for a bit before playing the J of spades, so maybe I should have decided he couldn't hold KJx, but he usually thinks for a bit before he plays any card. My partner will be gratified to see that an honor lead is not automatic on the auction. The misdefense is clearly my fault. What could I have done so that we had a better chance of getting it right? Should I just trust that declarer is not going to bid this way without some sort of diamond control?

Matchpoints, North America. Here is the auction. I was sitting South, but I'll give you North's hand. [hv=pc=n&n=skq75h83dkq963c62&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1h2dpp2hpp3d3hp4h(long%20thought)dppp]133|200[/hv] Club game, everyone is relatively inexperienced. I was unhappy with partner's 2D bid, as our agreement is that he should have an opening hand and (frequently) six diamonds at this vulnerability. Nevertheless, he made the bid and then eventually had to lead against 4Hx. What should his lead have been?

Thanks for the answer to question 1. I sort of figured it was illegal but didn't know the explicit rule. For the second, where is the line drawn in practice? For example, I'm not allowed to play 2/1 but switch my system to Precision against pairs that my partner and I know are weak; I can only vary the system based on vulnerability and seat. Isn't breaking our notrump agreements more often against weak pairs just an (admittedly much more minor) version of the same thing? I realize it's kind of a slippery slope ("I knew they weren't going to double me, partner.")

Matchpoints, North America. None vulnerable, in second seat after a pass, you open 1NT on a modest 15 count. Lefty, who has just finished counting her cards face down, passes without ever having looked at her hand. It's clear that righty notices this. 1. Do you call the director? If partner passes and righty comes in, do you call the director? 2. On the next hand, you are dealer. You have a bad balanced 15 count that by partnership agreement you would normally open 1D. You consider opening 1NT on the basis that lefty clearly doesn't like bidding over notrump. Is this ethical? What if you have a good 14 count with a five-card suit, but your partnership does not normally upgrade 14 counts? [edited to add country of origin]