gszes

east 100% East has 2 opportunities to get this right. The first is in the bidding. The east hand is glaringly far from weak (replace the club K and heart Q with x's). To give you an idea how poor 3h is IMHO 2d = 10 systemic constructive raise mainly because I can bid 3c to show a concentration of values and a max if p tries to sign off in 2h. 2n = 8 assuming this is a limit raise 2h = 6 the 4333 distribution is a negative but hardly a deal breaker so this is an underbid 4h = 3 not the worst bid on the planet but is just plain too optimistic 3h = 2 just a gross underbid but at least has some preemptive value (mainly against partner in this hand) The second came after 4d p p. East should realize that even with an eye on the vulnerability partner is short in diamonds and the club KJ are well placed behind the original x. Partner may not have been able to act over the "weak" 3h bid but most minimum openers short in diamonds will probably be close to making 4h and if I had to decide between defending 4d or 5d I much prefer 5d. While it would have been too optimistic to bid 4h over 1h the fact that opener seems short in diamonds makes our hand much better than before and game is worth a shot now.

Do not get overly concerned with missing too many :miracle: making hands. For ex" move the heart Q to the club Q and 6n suddenly looks pretty poor while 6c is a bit over 75%. 1c 1d 2c 2h stuff in hearts for nt purposes (length not overly important since opener already denied 4 hearts) at least invitational and "some kind of problem with bidding nt" 3n willing to accept invite and double spade stop a bonus 4c mild slam try makes clear the reason why 2h was bid vs some number of nt too strong 4s the heart and dia Q's suddenly spring back to life and even the iffy spade q is protected against the opening lead. Though somewhat min for previous actions the club j may be worth a lot more than normal with at least a 9 card club fit. 4s is a cue bid (at the same time denying heart or diamond a or k) 6c since our total hcp are around 31 32 it is best not to hope for too much in the way of miracles and settle for a small slam. There are many reasons for this and number 1 on the list is that opener (sometimes) has to rebid clubs with only 5 of them so pushing too hard for 7 or the perfecto 6n makes little sense on a hand with no plausible side suit to set up for extra tricks. Oh it makes 7n ah well cant win them all:) i'm happy with my 6c shot but that's just me.

The heart J has a tremendous advantage any time the opps have Ax in hearts (with or w/o the Q) because we will be setting up either 3 or 4 heart tricks right from the start. DD play will not be able to overcome that disadvantage. P may easily be looking at close to an opening hand yet they did not take any action. Could it be due to their holding something like xxx of hearts? A club led ignores the fact that p did no bid so they are very unlikely to have the club length we need to make that an effective lead. A club lead runs the risk of setting up clubs for the opps that a heart lead does not do.

Opps are probably ahead due to sound bidding so there is strong reason to believe they can make 6h. While we can bid 7d and probably go for less than their slam an even better plan is to start with 6s Impossible to get wrong since we are a passed hand it is an obvious lead director just in case the opps bid more. Not only that there is a slim chance we actually belong in 6s. If the opps x we will go to safer pasture in 7d but if they pass 6s?? (ah who am i kidding). SOTM means defending is hopelesly unlikely to gain us (either x or no x) much but bidding on just might make up some ground.

Entirely too easy to begin with 2c and bid spades later with 5+ clubs and 4 spades and gf. This sequence is much more likely some kind of game force with a problem in clubs for NT purposes. Something like KQxx Axx KQxx xx. Even if one hates the idea of bypassing spades stating with 1s and rebidding 3c over 1n will also work well to show a GF (though in this case there should be some slam interest).

Assuming you mean 730 pm (est) sat 8/29 I will show up around 715 if a team has not been filled here by that time

I will volunteer to get hammered on I will show up around 1445 new York time and hang around to see if I am needed

While we will most likely end up in 4s there is little/no reason why we cannot emphasize our really long heart suit on the way to showing spade support. Splinter sequences work best when there is no secondary long suit present and here we have a REALLY long secondary suit. 2h Follow up with 3h (hopefully) and then convert to 4s (whatever p does next). This will give opener a pretty darn accurate idea of your hand type and they will hopefully drive to slam with aces and quietly pass with lesser honors. If your system will not allow a "natural" 4s bid over 4h by opener you may have to use J2n and settle for 4s. It is too scary to contemplate a direct 4h natural to play when we have a known 9+ card spade fit vs a known 7+ card heart fit.

IMHO since it would be OBVIOUS that this was not a "blunder" but a pure case of mistaken identity there should be zero problems with merely calling the director over and allowing the "mistaken" card to be returned to dummy for a more proper play. The rules allow discretion for "expert" players to recover from such mistakes since it was "obviously" unintentional so why not make allowance for the physically infirm? BTW anyone should be able to call the director in these cases. Do not "pressure" the opps into being good/bad guys.

not seeing the ew hands i must guess here may i assume west holds both the spade Q and T? If not then whenever east wins their spade honor will not a club switch allow doe 2s and 3C? but i digress? Ducking a heart does no good once I decide lho is hugely likely to hold heart/club length since I have to pitch before west. Trick 2 win the heart in hand and cross to the dia A and lead a spade toward the J hoping against hope lho has to win the trick. Assuming lho continues their assault on hearts win the A in dummy and play another spade to the ace followed by 4 dia tricks. this is the ending I am hoping for. xx x void void void void void QTx We now exit dummy with the heart throwing lho in and "confidently" await our 9th tick IF lho began with Hx QJT9 xxx AKJx. If lho started with only 3 hearts (QJT) we need to hope they started with 5 clubs. Is this a good plan? soso at best BUT it gives us our 8 tricks we began (assuming dia run) the hand with and gives us a real shot at 9 if lho started with a couple of very possilbe distributions given the play. Since this LOP is neither very pretty nor very imaginative I fear it will not work but that is how I would play the hand and I would get the heck out of this game asap if lho switched to the heart Q from something like Qxx or even QJsmall into our known 4 card suit since such a switch could all too easily lose an otherwise sure heart trick.

If our clubs were xxxx vs Kxxx would we see this hand differently? I am looking for the best route to consider SEVEN not overly concerned with 6. P has made a tox of 3c what kind of junk are we imagining this happening with? I rate p to have a club void else opps have been VERY clever in preempting to the 4 level on 8 card fit. Even so it is only the tiniest of targets where 6h will have little to no play. IMHO north even thinking about bidding only 4h is an automatic 2 point deduction since it shows little to no partnership trust for the TOX. I would start with 5c to show my slam interest and over the expected 5 d/h/s bid 6h and if p cannot find 7h with 3 aces 5 hearts and a club void THEY suffer a 2 point deduction for not trusting YOUR bidding. A more interesting scenario develops if p now bids 6c (over my 5c) and I jump to 7h. This entire idea exists because it is very difficult to imagine losers opposite even the weakest of TOX with our current hand. Switch even 1 club to a pointed suit and I will be inviting slam (via the same 5c) vs always bidding slam:)

PASS BUT if I was going to guess I prefer 3n to 3s. Sure the spades are great but spades will far too often NOT be the proper place to play even if it is our hand. x is horrific (mikeh) since it leaves us in a cold dark place with a 3/4 heart advance while we can happily accept a transfer to 4h if we begin with 3n. In case you think I am in love with 3n forgetaboutit. IMHO P = 9 3n=3 3s=2 4c = 1.5.

The first step in conducting a campaign is to figure out your objectives. In this particular hand we need to be able to pitch 3 clubs on the hearts so any hand where west holds 5 or more hearts to the Q is a loser and any hand where east holds 5 or more hearts to the Q9 is a loser. That means those distributions should be eliminated entirely from consideration before calculating how to proceed. Our target therefore is to aim for hands where hearts break 3/4 4/3 and a limited supply of 5/2 2/5 (6/0 0/6 forgetaboutit). Next is how to count distributions. I note that you counted Q xxxxxx as 1 (which it is) and also counted Qx xxxxx as one which it is not. Let's replace al those x's with 234569. Q2 34569 Q3 24569 Q4 23569 Q5 23469 Q6 23459 Q9 23456 Note that Qx is actually 6 different possible card combinations vs the 1 you attribute to it in your analysis. Qx occurs 6 times more often than Q solo. Now for Qxx Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q29 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q39 Q45 Q46 Q49 Q56 Q59 Q69 Note how there are 15 different Qxx combinations vs the 1 you attributed it in you original idea in fact you would have given Q or Qx a 2/1 advantage over Qxx yet with 15 combinations, vs only 7 total for Q or Qx, Qxx is more than a 2/1 favorite to occur. Now for xxx 234 235 236 239 245 246 249 256 259 269 345 346 349 356 359 369 456 459 469 569 Note there are 20 combinations of xxx opposite Qxxx By now I hope you get the idea that instead of simply counting the different suit lengths as equals you must try and envision all of the subtypes for each length to see which carries more weight before deciding how to proceed. This does not exhaust the analysis (you can take it from here) but the numbers get sort of large and we primarily look for shortcuts since we have only limited time available for calculation.

My normal take is: 5h nothing special pass surprisingly good distribution no dia fit xx surprisingly good distribution and a dia fit I feel it is entirely too rare for a 4h bid to have much defense (void xxxxxxxxx Ax Ax) so using xx for that purpose seems like too tiny a target Using xx to show extra potential and a dia fit (since we really dont know just how good the promised heart support is) might find us in a superb spot and the fate of even 5h might also be heavily dependent on how the dia suit fares. We may not care much on this particular hand since we only have 4 dia but there are a ton of others where we have more dia length and such information can be crucial. void AKxxxxxx Jxxxx void (xx) or void AKxxxxxx void Jxxxx (pass) gives you an idea how distribution can make a monstrous difference. Question 2 is much more diffcult to answer w/o some decent agreement on 5h/p/xx. I would imagine the 5h bid is "run-of-the-mill" 4h bid so it seems 6h is out of reach and there is no guarantee we can set 6/7c so pass 5s and good luck.

This is IMPS and we really need to take our best shot at GAME. 5D while playing an obviously vastly monstrously stronger trump suit just looks like too small a probability to have any play. 4S is vastly inferior overall but may easily have a much higher chance at making GAME than 5d. Another huge advantage to 4s (not to be overlooked) is that if someone X 4s we can always run/flee/scurry to the "safety" of 5d (which will probably also get x but go down far less). I would hazard a guess that 5d is probably slated to fail over 80% of the time so bidding one more for the road since we will not get x'd would appear to be a long term losing strategy. 4S along with being far less likely to get x (4 lvl vs 5 lvl) might easily make 50+ % of the time making it a very viable game strategy vul at imps. 5D does indeed have more preemptive attributes than 4s but the overall reward position for 4s is just plain vastly superior to 5d and should not be ignored. To be completely honest i actually prefer pass vs 5d (ouch) 4s= 7 pass = 5 5d = 3 (nothing is perfect)

Open both too good a tactical position both hands to consider passing especially at MP. IMPS could consider passing since not much to gain overall and some small risk of large loss but that is not a real problem at MP where a bunch of small wins slaughters the occasional large loss. BTW opening both at 1 lvl can survive virtually any bidding sequence unscathed.

Many players hate inverted minors but the example hand shows how tough it can be to sensibly bid when play 1m3m as invitational (vs 1m2m as invitational +). I would definitely bid 3h with the south hand since clubs looks like a glaring weakness and the 3h bid at least gets the ball rolling toward a possible 3n and warns responder that you have a problem with nt (and it is not hearts). responder follows with 3s which should mean a club problem identical to yours. This is bad for nt but how to proceed sensibly from here is sketchy. You have a lot of extras but the combined potential of the partnership could still easily be the 4 level (depending on responders club length). IMHO it is not a bad idea to try 4s asking responder to POC since slam looks highly unlikely opposite a limit raise. Responder should be more than happy to pass 4s with their Kxx and singleton club since they are near the bottom of their limit raise and their cards are not slam conducive.

Trouble was brewing early when xx was discarded for insufficient reason. There are many reasons xx can be used there and a later penalty is only one of those options. The main point of xx is to suggest to partner this is probably our hand (especially in the case of a passed hand) and then let the partnership comfortably keep the bidding low if both are minimum or game force if opener (or responder on other hands) is strong enough to force to game. Whi8le I probably would have passed Axx Kx Axx xxxxx the current hand with the AK concentrated in the 5 card dia suit makes not only for a great lead director but has the (imho) 2+ defensive tricks making life much easier for partner in any competitive bidding situation situation (just a side thought). Since it is clearly impossible for partner to have long hearts and partner did p is almost assuredly not short in hearts your side should either try 3n or settle for 4d. The final result will be skewed somewhat sihnce responder spent the entire hand trying to make up for having passed and then no xx. I would probalby just bid 4d with my less than desirable minimum and speculative heart J and dia QJ since we strongly suspect dia length from p. If those speculative cards were converted to morte useful cards I would gamble 3n and if we were vul 3n is much more appetizing.

hand 1 3d If p is near min for neg x 3d may easily be our last safe spot so I choose that with game still a long way off if p cannot move further. What is opener to do with 4s 3h 4d 2c and a min over the x? It would seem 3d is the only reasonable choice if nothing else fits (ie no heart stop etc). Game is a long way off even with our current hand so the 3d rebid covers an unfortunately large amount of hands. If someone wanted to argue for 4d with the problem hand I would have little heartache with it though it lacks flexibility. hand 2 Bridge bidding is a constant struggle with reevaluation. My hand was insufficient for -me- to open but i am close to the top of my original pass and have pretty darn good distribution and armed with the knowledge the opps have a fit thus dramatically increasing the odds we have one as well that is why i x over 2s.

This is way too close for me to call- If I held the heart x and *AQJTx dia I am absolutely bidding --depending on partnership methods-- 4c/4n/5c). The problem here is opener had to way underbid with 3c since responder could have been a min invite with or w/o hearts stopped. Once responder bid 3n over our non forcing 3c we know opener has close to opening values + and it is certainly reasonable to give an extra nudge with a hand that is close to a full ace stronger than I needed for the previous bidding. This worry wart attitude about losing in the post mortem is horribly anti partnership when it limits thinking in our fine game. Once in a while bidding beyond 3n will be wrong but there are many ways to win* by bidding on and only a few small ways to lose. This being MP makes the concept of bidding beyond 3n scarier. The fact that I would downgrade the heart Q enough and pass 3n this particular hand does not mean I think bidding beyond 3n is horrific in any way shape or form. Now when it comes to U/I we have a different story -- The long hesitation creates obvious problems for opener since passing at MP is so obvious the hesitation strongly suggests 3n is not the bid of choice but something else is. That mere fact (along with the singleton heart and above mentioned extra values strongly suggests that 3n is not really the best spot and bidding something more would be beneficial to the partnership. Opener did not treat the U/I aspect of the problem with proper respect and took a bid that seems to take advantage of the U/I BUT IT IS CLOSE. Do not ask me what i think of the 3n bid:) with extra time to think about it no less

With partner well versed in splinter theory they will not leave the x in with K6543 and out in hearts they will probably leave it in with KT9xx however and that should be enough to set 2h. We expect p to have 7-9 hcp and if they have reasonable length and spots in hearts the opps will most likely have at best a tiny chance of making. Sounds like the perfect time to x since our hand seems to indicate the opps have nowhere else to run. While 2hx will rarely be a disaster it can pay quite good rewards at times so the risk vs reward ratio for x seems to lean quite heavily in favor of x.

There is an oddity in the logic of those proposing a 4 card major be bypassed. The oddity is that those same players will never intentionally bypass a known 44 major suit fit to play 1 or 2 nt they will always raise the major. If it seems reasonable to take a chance on missing a major suit fit why not be just as willing to intentionally bypass a known major suit fit to play 1n?? Is the slam/competitive bidding so much more useful when one takes the risk of bypassing a 44 major suit fit? Is it really reasonable to have the "weaker" hand suddenly become a huge favorite to become declarer (client dummy privileges aside)?

Apples to apples the generic concept that a 31 split is more likely than a 22 split (and by how much) is a generic approximation based on little information about the opps cards. The "generic" approximation becomes less and less "useful" (though it may by coincidence remain highly accurate) as we gather more and more information. Your problem indicates you have a huge amount of information about 1 of your oppA (you also have a lot of specific information about oppB based on the information you gathered from oppA). Your decision should be based on the probabilities of only the remaining distributional chances and the generic approximation (at least in this case) is completely useless. There are only ten card combinations left (lets assume the cards are ABCD) for every card combination oppA can have oppB has the alternate. oppA / oppB can have the following holdings: A BCD B ACD C ABD D ABC AB CD AC BD AD BC BC AD BD AC CD AB Note that the odds are 6 to 4 in favor of a 22 break (very far from the original estimation of 31 outnumbering 22 but sort of close to the 5.6 vs 3.6 of overall hand pattern chances. NOW look closely and you will see that both original suit calculations are completely useless and misleading at this point IF you are missing 1 key card that is finesseable (is that even a word?). Let us assume A is a missing Q in the key suit. It makes perfect sense to try and drop the singleton A from oppA since it is impossible for oppB to have a singleton but when you play the next card of the suit and oppB follows low it appears you are on a 5050 guess. It is probably best to play for a more even suit distribution if the opps bidding has been relatively tame and take the finesse if the opps bidding has been spirited other than that its a coin flip. Note how 50% is a far cry from either original suit break or hand pattern probability. Nothing takes the place of good detective work:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) I hope this is what you were looking for because my fingers are tired.

3c Not much defense p is a passed hand and aiming for spades is a super small tiny window to worry about. It is all too easy for the opps to have game if not slam and at the very worst 3c is a decent lead director. Passing under these conditions is a head-in-the-sand philosophy:)

I hate the 2hx bid since it should be reserved for a 1 suited heart hand. Partnership agreement on the meaning of 2s is important since if it is michaels that would be a better choice than x. W/O michaels 2s can be a relay to 3c (intending to POC with a competitive minor suit hand or some kind of game forcing hand) and if not that it would seem vastly superior to pass since bidding 3c here is a massive overbid. This would seem to make it 100 % west but that is not what I mean at all since partnership understanding might prevent west from doing anything useful. East must realize there is a huge difference between an actual guess and pure masterminding. There is little to no rational reason to assume 7c is the right place to play (I would have a ton more sympathy for 7h). Eest can easily have 6/7 hearts 1/2 spades and 3+ diamonds and can certainly be void in clubs. On the other hand x of 6s seems clear cut so the decision to bid 7c on a whim is masterminding in the extreme and got the zero it deserved (and even worse east would probably be proud if 7c had made sigh). 100% east