Chamaco

I just turned into a Tiramisu!! :)

Sorry I missed this, Happy Bday Todd ! :)

1. yes, although after reading hrothgar's post I might consider a direct 2H = constructive raise, stealing one card in hearts. the one thing I will never bid is 2H after 1NT forcing. If I have to land in 2H I do not want to do it via an ambiguous sequence reached after 1NT forcing, when opener might not kknow whether I have 3 card support and a bust, or a constructive hand with a doubleton. There was a similar argument in one of Marshall Miles books I think (or was it Danny Kleinman? I forgot) about raising immediately 2M with 10 hcp and Hx support rather than using 1NT forcing. 2. 2NT

1D-2M = I just turned to the use of "weakish" jump, a 6+ card suit with about 9 losers, say about 4/5-8/9 hcp 1D-3M = splinter, slam try if no wasted values in opener's hand

Hi david :-) I thought of inverting 2NT and 3D but I was worried exactly of this wrongsiding effect you mentioned. My own feeling is that it is indeed a significant issue for hands that do not foresee a major suit contract. Moreover, I felt that bidding 2NT with hands that might still explore slam in a major, would leave more room for investigation. Yes, this is possible. One way is to use the cheapest reverse as multi-meaning, another is to use your suggestion. For now, I try not to overburden my pard's memory, but I do acknowledge the merits of this bid. Right now we include 1=4=4=4 hands in the "catchall". We can then use a xyz scheme to checkback the distribution. It is interesting to note that the 1NT catchall convention is very useful when using the Bourke relay (as we have adopted): in fact, in the sequence 1D-1S-2D- now responder can use the 2H Bourke Relay without having to worry that pard will have 4 hearts (if he had, he wd have bid 1NT) and bid a spacewasting 3H. The way we play is that, after 1D-1M- 1NT we use xyz. That means that 2C is always artificial, puppet to 2D, either a weak signoff or an invitational hand (if followed by a rebid). As a consequence, partscores in clubs can be played only at the 3-level. However, when responder would like to signoff in clubs, he has the option of passing out 1NT or to preference to diamond or to a major (usually finding a 43 or 52 fit). Not optimal, I know, but not a disaster either.

Hi all. I am trying to work out better the details of our Precision 1D opener. I'll list below the status of the framework before dealing with the specific question. Thanks to anyone will contribute with constructive suggestions! :) - We play (12)13-15 NT, so our 1D opener guarantees 4+ diamonds and usually an unbalanced hand. - We play that 1D-1M-1NT rebid is a catchall, either for canapè in the minors (4D5C hands) or for hands with 5D and 4H in the sequence 1D-1S-1NT. EDIT: we also include 1=4=4=4 hands if responder bids spades. Opener's 1NT rebid is NONFORCING - We chose to use 1D-1M-2NT and 1D-1M-3D to discriminate distributional reverses with and without 3 card support in the major (distrib. reverses with 4 card support will just bid 1D-1M-3M). a. 1D-1M-2NT = distributional reverse (5-5.5 losers) with exactly 3 card support in the major and a good diamond suit. Example 1 of opener's hand: 1D-1H-2NT x-QTx-AKJxxxx-Kx b. 1D-1M-3D= distributional reverse (5-5.5 losers) with at most 2 card support in the major and a good diamond suit Example 2 of opener's hand: 1D-1H-3D x-xx-AKQxxxx-KTx c. 1D-1M-3M= distributional reverse (5-5.5 losers) with 4+ card support in the major, usually good diamonds. Example 3 of opener's hand: 1D-1H-3H x-QTxx-AKJxxx-Kx THE QUESTION A. Let's assume that 1D-1M-3D is a 5 losers hand (usually good 1 suiter without major fit). 1. Now how does responder checkback for club stopper and or spades stoppers ? 2. How does he investigate for slam in his own major ? B. If you did not agree on the meaning of 1D-1M-3D rebid (distributional reverse in misfit), please suggest *simple* alternatives to discriminate reverse hands with 4+ fit, 3 card fit , and no fit (if I wanted a complicated I'd use 1D-1M-2oM as "Multi-meaning distributional reverse) that - still allow to checkback for NT stoppers in sequences where we do not have a 4-4 fit. - do not force me to play in a moysian major fit if I do not want to - 1D-1M-2C/2D must be nonforcing (e.g. I won't use 2C rebid as 1RF)

Hi andy, if Jack can read pbn files, I can send you a pbn files with, say, 500 or 1000 files that satisfy the constraints I mentioned (e.g. including 5332 with 5cM for opener and 4333 hands with 4c major for responder). This way you could rerun the test including those hand-types. In the real world, 5332 major 1NT opening and 4333 with responder's hand are frequent enough to shift by some amount the outcomes of the simulations. If you are interested, send mail at m_casadei67*REMOVETHIS*@tin*REMOVETHIS*.it

Hi Andy, thanks for your efforts! All I want to point out is that quantifying cost-benefits in terms of TOTAL POINTS, makes this analysis more suitable for IMPS than pairs. Needless to say, the difference in analysis IMPS/MP can be substantial. I did argue that I would lead a diamond at PAIRS, but would lead a major at IMPS: and also the small subset of simulations I ran, suggested (to me) that diamond would be equal or less likely to waste a trick than other leads, but that indeed, it was less likely to defeat the contract. The result of your simulations are quite compatible with these observations in my view. It would be interesting to see if Jack can analyze the outcomes in terms of board % at pairs, rather than total points. Finally, one question: did you include 5332 with a 5 card major in the 1NT opener ? I think this should be accounted for in the analysis. Also, it would be fair to include for the 3NT bidder hands with 4333 with a 4 card major. ====================== A side note to people who do not like simulations for chosing leads: I do agree that it's hard to set criteria that will be followed in the real world by all opps. However, it is reasonable to use some criteria that ill be hpefully followed by the majority of people, and even if the simulations are not perfect, a large number of runs should compensate for the occasional deviations (e.g. offshape 1NT, upgrade/downgrade, etc).

In Italy it is illegal to open a Multi 2D with less than 6 hcp, not even as a Psyche. see: http://www.federbridge.it/Regolamenti/doc/...einterventi.pdf (page 9). Strictly ONLY the meanings listed in this document can be used (weak 2 in either major, strong balanced, Acol 2 in a minor or strong 3 suiter) for a multi-meaning 2D opener, and one cannot deviate, not even as a psyche. Instead, one can indeed open a NATURAL weak 2 even with zero hcp. Had you called TD and notified that opps opened a Multi 2D with less than 6 hcp, your opps would have been penalized. (BTW, not claiming the rules are right or wrong, just telling which rules are aplied in Italy)

I think it depends from the bidding and alternative leads available. if you post (or email me) some example auctions and a specific hand you hold, I can run simulations and post them or send them to you :-)

I think that after 1S - 2D (GF) 2H - 2NT 3C should be checkback, to cater for finding the H fit.

It depends from the field. If the field is strong, many players will have bid the slam. As a result we are playing against the slam bidders. We have to hope that the heart finesse fails, so that the slam goes down (on a diamond K lead), so I bang down AK of hearts. If the field is weak, not so many players will have bid the slam, hence, it should be odds on to finesse through the 2s bidder (west in this case, I assume declarer is north).

I post here 20 simulated hand taken from a 50 hand subset (I have / can make more, but I do not want to clutter the thread too much). The simulation constraints were: South = 15-17 hcp, any 5332, 4432, 4333, and 5422 with minors. I did not include 6m322 in this set, I might in the future North = 9-15 hcp, any hand without 4 card major OR any 4333. I am sure in the real world there are deviations from such constraints, but I considered it to be more or less representative of the "field" :) As I am not an expert, you can try your own analyses. -------------------------------- From a quick glance, I could estimate that in a a fair number of hands the lead would be irrelevant. In some cases a major suit lead would be appropriate, but in almost the same number of cases it could waste a trick. (Basically, often opener had one or both major with a tenace waiting to trap East honors that would otherwise hard to guess, especially when dummy had a singleton in the suit) I could estimate more or less the same of a diamond lead: sometimes it did waste a trick when dummy had H8x(x) in diamonds, but it did not waste a trick, even given that holding, in all hands where NS held AKQJ in diamonds. Perhaps the biggest downside of the diamond lead was that, in some cases, even if not wasting a trick directly, it did not attack declarer's weak spot, although in some cases the diamond Ten would be the only lead defeating the contract. As a whole, the major suit lead (even spades) tended to be riskier than the diamond lead, but there were more casew where it would defeat the contract (although in a few cass, the diamond lead would be the only good one even at IMPS) In a few cases the best lead would be a club. ----------------------- Hand 1 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 2 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 3 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 4 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 5 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 6 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 7 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 8 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 9 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 10 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 11 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 12 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 13 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 14 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 15 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 16 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 17 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 18 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 19 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - - Hand 20 [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sat4hj97dq532ca62&w=s9752hq86dt974cj3&e=sq863haktdj6c8754&s=skjh5432dak8ckqt9]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] West North East South - - -

Ben has touched on what I consider to be a very interesting question: Assume that partner opens 1♣ playing a "standard" system and the auction develops something like 1♣ - 1M - 2M. Does it make sense to treat partner's Clubs as a "real" suit? Earlier, a number of people were suggesting a splinter rebid in Clubs: 1♣ - 1H - 2H - 4♣ or some such. Currently, Ben is suggesting cue bidding shortage opposite partner's "suit". A number of people have criticized these bids, suggesting that its critical to be able to show support for partner's suit... In all these cases a shortage cue does not seem a good approach, whereas everytime opener has xxx(x), it is. Here's the rub: Given that the 1♣ opening could easily be based on a holding like Qxx or xxxx, does it make sense to consider this as a suit or not? I think the anwer should come from a simulation. How often does the 1C opener have values (even with only 3 cards) in the suit ? In these cases a shortage cue does not feel right, whereas in the cases where opener has xxx(x), it sounds effective.

Low heart at IMPS, diamond Ten at MP. I think/hope leading from T97x won't waste a trick often, and still might be a decently aggressive lead.

In this interview, you can find some thoughts declared by Eric Rodwell about NT ranges http://www.bridgematters.com/rodwell.htm

Ditto, I like all 3 suggestions, especially the second for entering max/min length of suits that are shown artificially but explicitly.

This "problem" is not so difficult to solve, e.g. 1. when one does accept the game try, he does not signoff, but bids the first cue above 3M; 2. when one refuses the GT, his pard can bypass 3M, either with the first 3-level cuebid or "serious" 3NT The idea can work, but I do prefer to be able to know if pard's values are fitting with mine BEFORE starting cuebids. Using the approach you suggest, I would have to start the cuebids without knowing more of pard's hand, and this I don't like. My basic idea is that I want to know pard's shape or fitting values before cues. I do like to be able to know more of pard's hand via short/long suit game tries, even when I have some slam prospects, and use the agreements I outlined above to tell pard that my hand was indeed a game force hand that was trying for slam.

1) Yes, I would. Hand is good in offense. 2) No. Neither shape nor values are worth competing in direct seat. 3) yes, I'd bid 2S both in direct and balancing seat.

Just a question on what is supposed to be "standard" hcp requirement for a neg double. I know it sems std to require only 6+ hcp for a negative double, *when partner can take it out at the 1 level*, e.g. 1m-(1D/1H)-dbl. But is seems to me some books require 6+ hcp *if opener has 1level rebid available*, 8+ hcp *if he has only a 2+ level rebid* available. In other words, according to such a criterion, 1m-(1S)- dbl would require 8+ because opener (except 1NT) is much more likly to have to bid at the 2 level. What is the "standard" ? ;)

Sure. Robson Segal argue for avoid as much as possible side-honors of any kind in FJS (using 2NT for these hands if wasted honors). As for the jumps denyng side controls, no matter if honors or shortness. I agree with you; nonetheless, some people do play these kind of picture jumps (e.g. Fred in his 2/1 structure advocates the use of picture jump denying any sort of sidesuit controls, no matter if shortness or honors). Sure enough, in competition, it pays off more to be flexible. ======================================= If FJS does not deny club shortness, I'll bid EKB (4NT if using 4S kickback, or 4S if using 4NT RKCB).

Two questions here: 1. does the FJS deny side honors ? (some people would not FJS with side wasted honors) 2. does it deny shortness in clubs ?

Just don't contend :-) Play what you like, the way you like, and when you get better scores than them, just joke "Sorry, I was lucky" :)

3NT

I like 2-way game tries (short suit and long suit). Here I'd start with a short suit GT in clubs; if pard accepts, we have very good slam prospects. I like this strategy much better than an immediate splinter 4C, since we have nothing in spades and it's difficult to checkback for a control there.