jogs

Pass. Guessing that partner has bid badly. He probably should have bid 4 or 5 hearts instead.

1♦ - 1♥, 1♠ Does that promise diamonds? Or can it still be 4=4=0=5?

If your opponents don't know you, it is faster to play on and not claim. Against strangers I only claim when one hand has all the remaining tricks.

I can't construct a board where the spade opening lead is critical AND partner knows it. If partner has AQ of spades behind dummy, how will declarer avoid those losers?

But what is partner's side on this board? What is he asking for?

You had? ♠ Jxx ♥ xxx ♦ Axx ♣ Qxxx I would have lead a passive heart with that hand. You already got a bad board when you lead away from the ♣Q.

Easy solution. Trust opponents to be rational. Trust partner to always be at the bottom of the range. STOP doubling on general principles.

I have a lifetime subscription from 1977. Cost $150. Think TBW spent more in postage than $150. How does TBW know when I have passed?

On these boards where there is a possibility of a strip end play, why don't players just lead a trump?

Agreeing with you.

Responder is showing a control poor hand. With average controls responder should be cueing on the three level rather than jumping to 4♠.

Maybe it is time partnerships start bidding slams based on controls rather than HCP.

Only if the other table is also in 6NTS, is it necessary to double. BAM: you don't get extra points by winning the board by more.

There's a chart on page 216, chap IX. I was disappointed that his followup book didn't focus on those concepts.

How can pard's hand be this strong? One opponent opened. The other opponent XX. They have more than 16 points with 12 trumps. They are a favorite to hold the balance of strength. Pard has probably only 6 or 7 points.

When those nasty opponents preempt, sometimes it is our only tool available for approximation. While we often don't know the total trumps, we rarely know the total of our short suits and know even less often about the total of their short suits.

This board is NS vul and EW non-vul. Only open 11 or less with long suits or two suiters. Those hands would have found a call over 2♥. When flat North would always have more than 12 points. Therefore there are no hands with this bidding sequence and vulnerability where NS does not hold the balance of power.

Not relevant. With or without BIT, South knows his side holds the balance of points.

Why should LA apply to this board? They are vul and opened. South holds 9 points(AKQ). He knows his side holds the balance of points. He is allowed to bid anyway he chooses.

Yes, you could have bid 3♠. Only -800. You would have won 7 imps.

Aren't those doubling planning to pass 3♥?

I think many players would open 3♦ with that hand. We need a poll.

If you want more people to vote 4♦, you need we(non-vul) and they(vul).

Lawrence is claiming his short suit totals of the side suits play a greater role than total trumps. In selected scenarios this is true. When there is a double fit and each partner has only four cards in the short suits, the distribution of the short suits determine our winners. 5=4=?=? facing 4=5=?=? For simplicity all our points will be in the majors. 1) AKxxx, QJxx, xxxx, - facing QJxx, AKxxx, - , xxxx 2) AKxxx, QJxx, xxx, x facing QJxx, AKxxx, x , xxx 3) AKxxx, QJxx, xx, xx facing QJxx, AKxxx, xx , xx There are no obvious losers in hand 1. Two losers in hand 2. Four losers in hand 3.

http://www.newbridgelaw.com/ This is Lawrence's website: Discussing the Law of Total Tricks Trumps is just one of many variables for estimating tricks.