gszes

You are hereby promoted to expert:)))))))))))))))))))

assuming a 15-17 1N I echo helene_t how else do you show this type of hand?

ok there are TWO volunteers remember that first come first served is going to be the order of the day if no one steps up before wed so keep that in mind

I have a hand which can reasonably expect to make something at the 5 level in 3 suits and slam is hardly out of the picture. 4s just seems to take all of the offensive wind out of our sails. x fits this hand almost perfectly surely we would have no trouble with x with 1 less spade and 1 more of either minor. There would be no concerns about p passing our x and us defending with a void. Does the 5th spade really change the scope of this hand so much?? Preempts work but they work much better when we make purely arbitrary decisions on hands where several options are available.

heart Q Unless the heart K is trick 9 the downsides of leading the Q are few-- We do not lose out when p has the club A or KQ since the opps can't run 9 tricks without clubs or spades. Leading the A can really be damaging to the defense in many distributional cases u give up the heart K anyway (except for those rare stiff K scenarios). Opps may be able to navigate their way to 9 tricks via clubs/dia/heart K spade A. OUCH I do not pin much hope the dia Q will win a trick but leading the heart A will virtually guarantee it wont take one (JLOGIC).

hmmm there is much interest in "stronger" so what do we think about a mini tournament each week IF we have more than 4 players (or 3 teams) that have a desire to play a round robin of maybe 16 boards the top 2 pairs/team get priority. W/o a direct competition I see little completely fair way to determine STRONG. We now have 1 WEEk left and I see ZERO volunteers (well thats not true since I pretty much always volunteer). As for the assertion a STRONG pair should have priority over a pair the WON last is completely ridiculous. WINNING is showing strong period sheesh. We can work on the idea of a "playoff" if we ever have too many to play. for now we are still struggling with getting ANY TEAM whatsoever. I am also in agreement that any new poster should not have priority over an established poster but we need to decide on a reasonable number of posts to qualify and ideas???? I will throw out 100 and see what others think. CALL TO ARMS

I am not one of those who prefers to go -1100 then -110 letting the opps play 2 of a major:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) PASS Sometimes its their hand.

If my HCP were more along the lines of quacks QJ KJxx AQJxxx x I would consider this an easy 2d rebid. The control oriented nature of the given hand lends itself nicely to games in nt and even 5d much more easily and needs to be bid with more enthusiasm. 2h Nicely shows the potential of this hand, does not bury the heart suit and leaves us nicely placed for partners rebids even if they suddenly were to bid slam I doubt they would be disappointed. It just seems unreasonable to bid 2d when all we need from p is Axxx xx xxxx QJx to make 3n or Axxx Kx xxxx xxx to bid 5d probably making 6 (if you can bid 6 with confidence include your lesson email address here)

Majors NT Minors the bidding has eliminated a major suit fit so the next question is NT and how high. 3c is not forcing but it definitely is strongly competitive. The 2 aces in the S hand means they must continue the bidding but what is the best way?? 3N is not out of hand with Axx since we can most likely use a hold up in spades to cut communications in that suit and I would not be upset with p for bidding that way. Maybe a better way is to bid 3h instead of the weak 3d bid (4c would have been a better choice) showing some concern about spades for NT purposes N can then bid 3s showing a partial stop and 3n can now easily be bid. When there are 2 "worry" suits we show what we have when there is one we ask for help or show a partial stop when we have space. Your bidding was not that far off so don't get discouraged.

Using splinter when your hand is so strong is normally an exercise in futility simce p will rarely be able to do anything but try and sign off. there is a better way. Using the principle of majors NT minors we can try to discover below game level if p has wasted club values for ex using the given hand- 1n 2h 2s 3d We make a forcing bid and while the bidding may go many different ways here the bidding shows opener has stuff in hearts and fears clubs for 3n. This bidding sequence alone gives us enough information to bid 6s and the only fine tuning left is how to get to 7s if p has no wasted values in clubs (that's another topic). This is using splinter theory w/o taking up all the space a splinter bid normally uses. Very simple and this same thinking can be applied to many different hands. Note that we can use this same thinking anytime our long suit is a major and the other suits can be swapped around any way you like A976 QJT9653 KQ void 1n 2d 2h 3d if p now bids 3s KQx Kx AJxxx Qxx we have enough to bid 6h and can explore for 7. directly using exclusion is fine if you dont mind occasionally getting overboard when p has lots of wasted club values. Using the above thinking it is rarely necessary to risk a negative score under such circumstances. This thinking can be applied to an incredibly large array of hands. It is not a cure all but it can have huge success under the right set of circumstances with no risk.

Now for the minority report: 3H My leading question is how many times will p hold a hand where 4h is exaclty the right place to be where they will not raise 3h to 4h??? Even opposite a partner that could not bid over 3d (thank goodness this problem is not rho opens 3d) the % of hands must be agonizingly small because let's face it we need some help from p to make 4h. 3H Allows p to bid 3s which in turn allows us to bid a 3n that strongly suggests spade shortness/weakness since we opened the festivities with 3h vs 3n. The biggest fear of a partner with long spades gets that suit out of their system at the 3 level and if they repeat spades at the 4 level we have good cause to let them play it. that means 3h brings 4s into the picture while 4h eliminates it. 3H Allows us the possibility of clubs if p is 5/6 in the blacks I mean seriously if p is holding something like xxxxx A x Axxxxx where 7c is a lay down do we have even the slightest prayer of bidding even 6c when we start with 4h?? its easy after we start with 3h. 3H Will enable us to stay out of a lot of poor slams where p gets overly excited when we bid 4h especially those where p has less than stellar heart support thinking we must surely have great hearts to bid 4h. I will gladly take a rare + 170 when p has say xxxxxx Jx x QJTx (are we sure they wont raise to 4h with that?) and greatly increase the probabilty of acheiving a much better score on the rest of the hands.

1d flawless and as such earns S 100% of the credit. 2n KQx Qxx xxx Qxxx is a 2n bid might i suggest the current hand is too strong for such a minimalist action and the complete lack of a heart stop (and doubleton) should keep N from bidding 3n IMO best here is 3c. 4h P would surely have neg x over 2s if they had 4 hearts so this call should promise at least 5 hearts and longer stronger diamonds. IMO the best bid here is X to show extra values netting somewhere btn 500 and 800 if p leaves it in. 5c showing this cruddy 6 card suit here into what should be a 56 misfit doens't compute. IMO 4n to play would now be a reasonable choice (can the 2n bidder really be slamming?) If you are too worried about 4n being taken as blackwood then how about 5d. 6c IMO this was just adrenaline or testoterone gone haywire. If p has anything remotely similar to a 2n bid what possible chance do we have for slam?? IMO PASS and discuss the bidding later.

These criteria are my idea of how to run this thing so that there are no surprises and everyone understands clearly how/why a team was chosen. Ummm anyone that has read my posts knows I am far from infallible and I am sure we can come up with a better structure that is fair to all. Give me some more ideas. Let's plan some sort of mini competition to win a spot shoot I don't know all the answers. I have seen some REALLY good teams get hammered and getting close hasn't even been in sight much. The overwhelming majority of the losses have been by over 35 imps (mgoetze figured we were losing at close to 1.75 imps per hand). I quit watching the last match with 8 boards left and we were down by 47 we picked up 16 imps over the last 6 boards is that a sign of better times or desperation paying off for a short period of time???? By now almost every poster that cares about playing has played and that option should be exercised rarely. Those that are interested are likely going to get a chance to play. Note that PhilKing and Cameron_1 played back to back sessions. If you do not like or care for my "criteria" choices come up with a system everyone can live with. I have no desire to act as a dictator. I have some spare time and think these matches are great. Not all posters care about playing -- they meet these guys in real life on a consistent basis. My idea is to essentially treat posters as equals even though some are much more prolific writers than others (for which we are grateful). Give all that want a chance to flex their bridge muscles against the big leagues a chance. Those that get slaughtered will probably wait a bit before trying again. I see some INTEREST now lets come up with ideas on how to pick a team that makes EVERYONE deliriously happy :))))))))))))))))))))))))))

poster and non poster partner was meant to be a reference to a poster playing with their regular non poster partner sorry if that was not clear

I assume you are referring to the 4/27 match---The 4 players scheduled Nige1-tylere philking-cameron_1 had not played before and had top priority over everyone except the pairs that actually won the previous match and of those 4 I was the only one showing interest in playing and I decided to sit out because I felt those that had not had a chance yet should get top priority. As it turns out tylere never responded or showed up so I ended up subbing for him that match. The 5/11 match the first 4 that volunteered where the ones that played since no one else stepped up before the deadline even though PhilKing-Cameron_1 lost the previous match. All one has to do is look at mgoetze historical archive or the one I started recently and you can see who has lost the most recently. The most recent loss places one at the bottom of the "seniority list". As time goes on and the losses pile up they move above all those that lost after them. A win (a rare mythical creature) places on at the top of the list until a loss is incurred (read the limits on same team representation).

We need volunteers to storm the walls of castle JEC sat 5/25. Players with no fear of boiling oil getting slammed or even worse drawn and doubled. Since I have sort of volunteered to fill a vacancy I thought this might be a great time to have a wide ranging discussion on how and why we choose a team. Let me start with what I consider the most obvious argument. We are 1-35 against some of the best of the best and it seems to matter little which team we field and it is for that reason I am not overly concerned about fielding the "best" team. I look at these sessions more as a reward for those trying to help others understand this great game of ours. Is there a method to choosing?? IMO I will try and turn in a team 4 days in advance up until that time the team that is chosen will go by the following "system" 1. Team or pair that won and sat out a session to play together 2. Posters that have never played 3. Posters that won the last time out (we have tons of those hehe) but still limited to every other session unless playing with a different partner. A team or pair that wins and wants to play together again have to sit out the next session but then move to the top of the seniority list (switching partners to keep the same team intact does not count as playing with a different partner). 4. Two posters playing together 5. Poster and non-poster partner 6. Poster and 3 non-poster team 7. Poster that lost less recently (a loss moves you to bottom priority) If we do not have a team by wed before the match we no longer worry about the above "system" and go to first come first served. If a chosen pair wishes to give up their seats for another pair that is fine but can do so every other week. OK that's my idea now let me have it big time--tell me of obvious flaws and how to fix them. BTW whatever happened to the bbo poster league? I have seen no new posts since the first season.

No need to play the hero here--P might have been shut out of the bidding over 3h (though maybe not since this partnership seems to require few if any values to bid). When rho is willing to stop in 4h and you are silent (for once) your p will know you have some values and if their hand warrants it they may choose to sacrifice. Let's say p held Kxx x xx Kxxxxxx. I would not bid 4c or 5c or whatever but after lho stops in 4h it becomes a lot easier for me to sac in 5c since p is highly likely to have at least some values and probably be relatively balanced since they gasp took no action at favorable.

PASS We have already seen that this partnership likes to bid on a whim and a prayer. That being said opposite a passed hand the 4h bid could have a suicide pact letter associated with it and all the opps had to do was x for a top board. They opted to bid 4s instead and since we haven't the faintest clue what to expect from p for their 4h bid we have no rational reason to bid further. Who knows what is going on the opps are just as likely to be cold for 6s (making 7 if they finese) as they are going down in 4s when p has ummm a lot of defense for their 4h bid. Pass quietly and allow p to bask in the glory or suffer the consequences of their unpredictable actions for once-- maybe just maybe something akin to discipline will accidentally creep into their bidding (not holding my breath).

AHHHHHHH MP where if you go for -2000 opposite a part score it is no worse than -200 opposite a part score. This pile of rubbish is almost never going to be worth anything but a sac so the question is do we go for the "disruptive" effects of a 2n 1/2/3/4 heart bid (we paid our enty fee and we can do whatever we want) or do we go silent and wait to see if bidding is a worthwhile endeavor. I am voting for pass mainly because our hand meets none of the criteria I use to preempt/bid vulnerable. 1. The heart suit isn't good enough though its close if the heart 2 were the T I would be a ton happier. 2. The hand can play well in either dia or hearts and a preemptive heart bid goes a long way to burying diamonds. 3. There is virtually zero danger the bidding will subside in 1c with us having so little power. 4. I personally don't think it would be a shame if i had a hand with some surprise value. Adopt these light actions at your partnerships peril. Most of us play this game to exercise our brains and while we want to win most of us aren't all that happy when we win mostly due to blind luck vs skill. It is not a crime to pass. Lets listen and see if p can do anything if p is silent we might still be able to stick our neck out on the next round of bidding and at the least not preempt p too much.

I have seen players use these "negative" type doubles thru 7s. The theory is sound but frequency of use is so tiny that using them that high seems wrong somehow. I personally prefer to use them no higher than 5s. The main advantage of the "negative" double here is being able to differentiate between 4 and 5+ spades in advancers hand. Let's face it how often is advancer going to have a trump stack that is solid enough in front of opener to make a penalty x a worthwhile consideration. we all know p will not always have 4 spades for their bidding and being able to x here to show 4 spades has a huge benefit over those that have to guess. There is another route you can take (which you would do after 1s x 4s) and that is to bid 4n and convert 5c to 5d which should show long dia and 4 of the other major. The downside of this is you lose out on a possible last best game shot of 4s. It is IMPS and I do not want the opps to start xing me so on this hand I will try for what should be far less dangerous 5d but I am not happy with having to "guess"

Whatever reason p has for x of 4h I find it almost impossible to do anything other than bid 5d. If p suddenly has found 4 tricks on defense 5d should have decent play if p is making a 5440 takeout sac well we happen to have a wonderful 5 card dia suit to accomodate. If p had 6 decent spades they would almost assuredly bid 4s rather than x so bidding 4s looks like we do not trust p a whit espcially on a hand where distribution seems wicked at best and 4s could get slaughtered via a tapping defense and 5d could be ice cold with the same defense. AT MP i can see being willing to toss one board in the hopes we cannot make anything yet we can set the opps in 4h 1 for +200. At IMPs this same line of thinking can virtually ruin any partnership trust and lead to horrendous results that are merely an irritant at MP. 4N seems tempting but that should be a red herring since p might all too easily prefer clubs to dia with 3 clubs even and P failure to use Michaels virtually guarantees they do not have 5 in either minor.

discard a low heart (assuming that is doscouraging in your signalling system. These auctions are fraught with peril for the defense. The only way to allow the opps to make 4s might be a club continuation after we gleefully alarm with the A or encourage with the 9. With 2 entries to dummy we need to make sure declarer cant score more than 1 club even under worst case scenarios so tossing any club is out. With the singleton heart, in dummy, it would seem fairly obvious we would encourage a heart if we had the A and our discouraging heart play should be more than sufficient to get p to shift to a club (since we better have clubs covered if we hate hearts and are asking for the other suit). an alarm clock signal is normally done to awaken p to a line of defense they may not normally consider. In this hand that alarm might be to make sure p returns a 3rd dia so we can ruff with our stiff K of spades (imagine declarer with QJT9xxxxx AK xx void this defense would be the only way to hold declarer to making 4.

there are times one has to trade quality for flexibility and this hand is a great example. If p was a passed hand I would bid michales in a heartbeat at favorable since it quickly shows 2 ways we can make a save and I can subside thereafter. The downside of michaels here opposite an unpassed p is we will frequently get too high when p has "stuff". Those losses will generally be small and might even win against part scores. We will gain huge when p can find a useful sacrifice that would never be found if we are silent. When we are even vul the odds of a successful sac go down but might still be worthwhile if Nvul. Would never think about Michales at unfavorable since the only time we have a chance of being right is when p is very strong and we will most likely get a chance to hear that on their next turn to bid.

These hands are normally long trump suit or two suited hands. When the opps can pull trumps there is more of an urgency than when they can't (like this hand). Declarer is much more likely to have a 2 suited hand and looking at our distribution that 2nd suit is a ton more likely to be clubs than diamonds. Leading clubs now has 2 stikes against it ther is little reason to lead your shot suit when all a ruff will do is cut down on your natural trump trick(s) and it has the extra problem of granting a "weak" dummy extra entries in the for of free club finesses. A spade lead has the advantage of almost never leading rho long suit but there is still great danger in leading fom a K into the "strong" hand. While a spade lead requires only the spade queen form p to be effective the lead of a dia requires only a T8 to be non disastrous even if it is rho second suit. IMO low D = 7 low spade = 5 low club = 3 any heart = 1 nothing is perfect and different leads will work on different days even the suicidal low heart will find p with stiff K on occassion sigh.

This hand stinks but opposite the right cards can play very nicely in 2 suits. I see no reason to start the festivities with a cruddy suit which has a superb chance of supressing my 2nd suit. This isnt even taking the vulnerability into consideration where conceivably we could end up down 7x vul becasue our "suit" is so poor. Let's wait and see if p can bid anything that makes our hand better.