Chamaco

Hey JB, happy bday, sorry for noticing this too late !!!! :)

Ditto.

In the Nightmare system, Buratti Lanzarotti use: 1♥:1♠(Kaplan Inv) and they furter reverse 1NT and 2♣, so now 1NT = Gazzilli (Strong hand or minimum with 3+ ♣, as responding to 1NT forcing) 2♣ = 4 spades, "normal" hand

Happy B-day Helene, save a piece of cake ! :)

At first I thought AK of clubs, if Q does not drop, then finesse diamonds, to combine chances, as many similar situations are quited in cardplay handbooks on % plays. Then I did the math. The chances are: Dropping Qx of clubs = 2/5 of the 3-2 splits = 0.4*68 = 26.6 Dropping Q stiff = 1/5 of 4-1 splits (28%) = 5.6 Total chances of dropping club Q = 32.2 Finessing diamonds works with: Qxx onside = 50% of 3-3 splits = 18% Qx onside = 1/3 of the FAVOURABLE 4-2 splits (which is 24%, the half of all 4-2 splits) = 8% Q stiff onside = 1/5 of the FAVOURABLE 5-1 split (7.27 %) = 1.4 % The overall probability of picking the diam Q by a 1st round fimesse is then = 27.4 only if Qxx of diamonds onside = (chances of Q onside) * (chances of 3-3 split ) = (50%)* (36%) = 18%. The chances that both chances fail is the product of the % = [(100-32.2)/100] * [(100-26.8)/100] = 0.678 * 0.726 = 49.22 % chances of failure. ---------------------------------------------- EDITED by Chamaco My previous calculation contained errors. Hope these are better. It seems after all trying dropping the club Q is slightly superior to a first round finesse. ---------------------------------------------- 3rd solution is trying AK of diamonds first and then finessing clubs. Chances for DQ dropping: Qx of diamonds = 16% Q stiff of diamonds = 2.8 % (this time we do not care which 51 beak we get) Chances of dropping DQ = 18.8 Chances of club finesse picking up the suit = 1/2 of overall 3-2 splits = 34 % Chances of both failing = 0.812 * 0.66 = 53.592 % of failure

I think you should bid as if behind a screen, e.g. ignoring your pard alert, following the system agreements (or at least the agrements you *think* you had). So IMO it boils down to the meaning of your pard's pass after LHO's double of a Michaels qbid: a. if your p's pass means = "I have nothing to say, cannot make a free bid, pick your suit", then 2S is fine and ethical b. if your p's pass means = "I don't mind playing 2H doubled", then you should be passing and not correcting to spades.

Usually when you have a stopper such as Ax(xx) without decent interiors in the dangerous suit , and a side minor fit, the hand plays 2+ tricks better in the contract in the minor (e.g. no need to duck, there is often time to discard or ruff other losers in the suit etc etc).

I open 3 hearts (at unfavourable vuln, I bid one level less than I would normally). No defensive tricks promised if opps stick in and p doubles for business; on the other hand, no risk of missing game: pard can still bid game if he sees chances.

No, IMO a 5 card *good* suit is a suit that either 1. needs AT MOST one entry to dummy to finesse, in case pard is weak, or 2. has realistic chances of playing for 0-1 losers even if pard contributes little. So it should be close to semisolid. This is not the case here. True, the suit does not suck completely, but still it's a big gamble to bid such a 5 bagger. If LHO has values, we are likely to find any spade honors offside, and go for a number. To make up for the quality of the suit, I would like that my hand has either extra overall hcp strength OR extra length in the suit I prefer pass or double. (I would have passed).

When in competition, it is IMO best practice to have only one type of splinter bid: the splinter in opps suit. when you do have a splinter with shortness in another suit, you just use a fitbid that does not disclose if/where you have shortness. Sometimes you lose but on balance, you free other bids for more useful meaning. So basically, my view is: in this sequence, if I could choose, I'd use 4D for ANYTHING except a natural splinter. I prefer fitshowing jump, but if you do not play it, then I'll vote for wjs.

I have come up with a slightly different scheme for my strong club responses. If you have constructive improvement (e.g. not "channge your system altogether" :) ), any suggestion will be valuable ! This scheme, immediately discriminating hands with 5 controls major based and minor based, is intended to simplify the relay by the 1C opener, because otherwise the sopectrum of possible responder hands in the 1C:2C would have been too wide. =================== 1C: 1D = 0-7 any 1H = unbalanced, 0-2 controls OR 6+ controls 1S = unbal, 3 ctrls 1NT = unbal, 4 ctrls 2C = unbal with at least a 4 card major, exactly 5 ctrls 2D = MULTI = either weak 3-6/7 with a major OR exactly 5 ctrls , unbalanced without 4 card majors 2H/S/NT = 11-13/8-10/14+ bal 3C/D/H/S = various 4441 shapes and ranges ===================

If using the 2S as mixed raise, I lose the low-ODR invitaional raise, don't I ? B)

Hi all, I have a question about Robson-Segal structure of major suit raises in competition. The 4-card mixed raise is usually a JUMP-CUEBID. But how do you show a mixed raise when PARD opens 1H and LHO overcalls 1S ? The jumpcue (3S) exceeds the safety-level (3H), and the simple raise is a sort of underbid. Do you folks who do use RS have any specific gadgets for this ?

West is a weak player, her bidding not reliable upon. No inference available from her bidding (east instead is a real expert, and extremely disciplined in bidding; he is trying hard to teach bridge to his wife ;) ). No. jumpshifts would be strong and no fancy agreements.

I agree with you. Of course my comment was referring to the situation where we DID NOT AGREE A FP here. My point here is: is pass is nonforcing, doubling just gives away our defensive asset. If instead pass is forcing, doubling seems obvious to me. :-)

That's what I meant, a sort of LOTT-based bid. "Preempt" was not the right term.

You are right eric. I do not remember quite exactly the hands, but there was no H discard. Assume something like DUMMY x- xxx- Q9xxx-K9xx DECLARER Kx- AQ- KJTx- AJTxx I edited the original post accordingly.

All white, matchpoints You are South and hold AKxx-void-KQTxxx-Txx LHO, east deals and opens 1D ! E...........S...........W...........N 1♦...........p...........1♥...........p 2♣.........DBL(1)....2♥..........3♠(2) p...........p(3).........4♥...........all pass (4) (1) Is this double takeout ? I assumed so. My pard also saw it at t/o. (2) Would you play this as invitational or (semi)preemptive ? I know some people would bid 3S as shutout and cue one of opps suits for inv+ hands. I strongly suspected it to be (semi)preemptive, given the busy bidding, but assumed anyway it was an invitational hand. (3) ANYWAYS, assuming pard is inviting, should I bid game ? I thought my hand was minimum, because of all the wasted values in diamonds (pard is likely to be void), so I passed. (4) should anyone double or balance? Pard's hand was Q9xxxx- Qxx- void - AJ9x

If you think of it, the only EXTRA asset for defeating 5C was the Qxx of trumps: doubling gave this info away and an extra chance to opps to make. By doubling, we are basically giving away our extra asset. It does not sound a good strategy, even at MP (5C -1 might still be a decent score, because the tight 4S game might go down and quite a few tables would be in that contract; 5C made thanks to guessing the trump Q, doubled or undoubled, is a sure zero) ;. Besides, if we pass in direct seat, pard can still make a penalty double, knowing we have something. The fact that we are passing with Qxx of trumps does not mean that the end contract will inevitably be 5C undoubled. I would make a penalty double if i had a SURE trick in clubs, not a "potential" trick that would vanish thanks to my double because declarer guesses the suit.

*Hehe*, alright :)

I quote the following examples from Eddie Kantar's booklet "Forcing pass": Example 1 1H-(1S)-2H-(2S) 4H-(4S)- pass = ?? Example 2 1S-(2H)-2S-(3H) 4S -(5H)-pass =??? Example 3 1H-(p)-2H-(2S) 4H-(p)-p- (4S) pass = ??? ============== In all 3 cases, Kantar suggests the agreement that the pass is forcing ONLY if we are vulnerable and they are not. I think the case of the mixed raise (the hand originally posted in this thread) is like the 1H:2H raise in example 3. In this case nobody is vuln, so according to Kantar's rule, pass shd not be forcing, even play std 5 card major and not precision.

I was kibbing a friend of mine (we often partner in real life), and we had a friendly discussion on the following hand he was playing with his wife(so this is a regular partnership, not a pickup mate). Please comment on the bidding and agreements :) ---------- Matchpoints pairs, none vuln You hold as east: JT9x-T9xx-Ax-Qxx West deals and opens a Precision 1S W.......N.....E......S 1S*....p.....3D*...4C 4S....5C...DBL... all pass 1S = 10-15 hcp, 5+ spades 3D = Rev Bergen mixed raise = 4 card support, 6/7-9 hcp (or, better, about 9 losers) On the A of spades lead, dummy came down with x- xxx- Q9xxx-K9xx Declarer held Kx- AQ- KJTx- AJTxx Declarer managed to misplay the hand and go down: on the spade continuation he won in hand with spade K, then tried to go to dummy in diamonds to finesse the trump queen but west won with the ace and led a heart, for 5CX-1; Of course, had declarer ruffed in dummy the second spades, she could have finessed trump Q and developed diamonds for a heart discard, making the contract.. ------------------------------------------ In the post mortem, I argued that in my opinion the DBL was not a great bid: 1- It bids east's hand twice: our pard already knows our 4 card support + 7-9 values 2- it gives a hint to declarer to pick up the trump Q My friend replied that the double was meant to: a. protect the matchpoint score if we have a 4S game b. stop partner rom the temptation of bidding 4S On Point b, I replied "you mean that pass would be forcing?", and he said "At the 4-level, no, of course, but I think that at the 5-level pass would be forcing; if so, I am forced to double" I responded: "But opener has a precision opening (10-15), a limited hand, often very light; you have 7-9 hcp; how can pass be forcing ? Besides, opener bid freely 4S over 4C, so she is likely to have extra length in spades, meaning that opps are short in spades and we might make no spade tricks at all" I responded: "IMO, it wd be forcing at the 5 level if oyu had mader a LIMIT+ raise proimising some defense, say 9/10 hcp or better, but not a mixed raise. "

Talilking about opening leads, Tony Sowter's book is a very good one. It explains rather clearly and concretely how to diagnose situations when you need an attacking lead or a passive leads.

I think the "delicarte" auctions are good for *slams* that would be unbiddable without knowing the high card location. For bidding games, I agree with you, no need of much detail.

Pard is supposed to have a spade void (weak 2 raise, they shd have a 6-3 fit). In order to be able to double at the 3 level, he is supposed to have serious values. Not only that, but, to double with a void, he must have primary honors that will take tricks if pard converts the double (when we make a takeout double with a void we must have compensating extra defensive values on the the side cos our pard leaves the dbl in more often and we can't lead trumps) So the doubler's hand should be rich in AKs, something like: void - AQxx- AKxxx- ATxx With this handtype, I think 5C is a better bet. Of course all these reasonings are based on 2S promising 6+ length; opps might have gambled a 5 suit weak 2, in which case leaving in the double should payoff