Chamaco

Ben, one more question. Assume 1S is NOT a balancing bid. Try this example: Now NORTH (not south) opens 1D. You hold Wests cards. N......E......S......W 1D....1S....p.......? In this situation, East has overcalled in the DIRECT seat, he is not balancing. What is the right bid for West according to R-S? NOT 2NT NOT a cue NOT a jumpcue. Do you suggest using a 2/1 as forcing (e.g. 2C artificial as suggested by whereagles)? Would u use 1NT forcing (and what could be the best followup, e.g. what wd be overcaller's obligations to show/deny opening hand strength as well as showing shape)?

Option already taken: we use 1NT as "Raptor" = 4M+longer minor, opening hand strength :-)

The jump-cue is a 4 card mixed raise; jump shifts are FitShowing raises. I am using the system proposed by Robson-Segal: can it be so bad ? :D

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=sj87hqt83d63c7643&w=sq2hak6dj954ckj52&e=sat953h972dkt7ca8&s=sk64hj54daq82cqt9]399|300|Scoring: MP S....W....N....E 1D...p....p....1S p....1NT all pass[/hv] S opened a better minor 1D. West did not feel like her hcp content would justify an offshape t/o double. East (me), felt that his 11 hcp hand would not justify a double followed by new suit (had I held an extra K, I might have doubled). So I bid 1S. West could not bid 2NT: that would be a conventional strong 4 card raise. Also, a cuebid would have shown a balanced limit+ raise in spades. So, she did not know what to bid: bidding 3NT would have been an overbid if my 1S balancing bid had come from, say, a 9 hcp hand. But, there was no forcing bid available (2NT and the cue being artificial raise). I thought of employing 1NT forcing opposite pard's 1M overcall, but it is not clear how the overcall should respond to clarify his strength/shape. I'd appreciate comments on the specific hand AND on the specific systemic issue. Ty all ! :D

Happy B-day Jimmy ! :D

Che ha fatto, esitato col singolo in mano?

Omero, ho postato la tua mano sul forum internazionale, e gli esperti concordano con te. La linea preferita dagli esperti è stare bassi in atout e sul probabile ritorno a quadri battere asso di picche e 2 giri di cuori tagliando in mano la 3a cuori.

Yes, but the line has the additional advantage of working when trumps are split worse than 3-2.

[hv=n=sat6haq876djcaq53&s=sj9743hk3dqt543c4]133|200|Scoring: IMP Uncontested bidding to 4♠. ♦Ace lead, then switch to small trump [/hv] What are the best chances to make this tight game ? I suggested a dummy reversal/crossruff, trying to score A of clubs and 3 club ruffs in hand, 3H + A of spades and 2 diamond ruffs, but not sure about this. This should work with clubs 44 or 53 with 3 clubs in east (if he ruffs the 4th club high, either J or 9 of trumps is promoted). This also depends on hearts splitting. I think this is better than playing low to the trump return, when the diamond return will force dummy, guaranteeing 2 trump tricks to the defense and communication problems for declarer. I'd like to hear more from all you about the alternative lines vs this one, TY Mauro

La modalità di combinare le percentuali dipende dall'ordine della giocata. In altre parole, se una linea di gioco esclude l'uso di altre risorse, le due % non possono essere sommate. Il numero di prese a quadri dipende da come e quando muovere le atout. O, se preferisci, il numero di prese in atout dipende dalla giocata a quadri: supponiamo tu giochi una quadri dalla mano al 2o giro, coperta da W; se ora tagli, ti sei tolto la possibilità del doppio impasse in atout, e le tue chances di 4 prese in atout precipitano dal 75% a meno del 50%. Nel caso specifico, è ancora piu' semplice per i difensori: supponiamo tu stia basso al morto sul ritorno in atout ed Est prenda: sicuramente ritnrnerà quadri per il taglio, accorciandoti, e garantendosi una seconda presa difensiva in atout. Ora la linea del dichiarante è difficile: deve sbloccare Asso di picche, rientrare in manoa cuori e battere un'atout (sperando che siano divise); Il ritorno di quadri puo' facilmente mettere in crisi (ovest puo' fare 2 prese immediate, senza piu' controllo in atout al morto); la cosa è molto probabile poichè se ovest è ritornato in atout al 2o giro per non far tagliare le quadri, deve avere delle buone quadri. Anche in caso contrario, comunque, il dichiarante ha sempre problemi da risolvere sul ritorno di ovest a fiori (e il dichiarante deve indovinare senza poter combinare le chances) o a quadri per il taglio. ------------------ Non solo: la linea NON a tagli incrociati, assume che le atout siano divise 3-2. Se le atout sono 4-1 o peggio (il 32% delle volte) , la percntuale si riduce ulteriormente. ------------------- PS- Mi sono accorto che la linea che ho dato di morto rovesciato ha % superiore a quella che avevo calcolato : infatti non funziona solo con fiori divise 4-4 ma anche quando gli avversari hanno 5-3 a fiori con la 3a di fiori in Est (se Est taglia alto, affranca una presa di J9 in atout).

Roland, one question here. Don't you think that 2D may be more helpful to pard, considering it is a passed hand ? It does tell pard we have a fair 5 card suit and 10 hcp (with 11 hcp and a 5 bagger we tend to open in Precision). Now, in reality North held: ♠ KJ9xx ♥ AQJxx ♦ xx ♣ Q and 1NT works well. But if pard had held instead the diamond Q, say a ♠ KJ9xx ♥ AQJxx ♦ Qx ♣ x then perhaps a 2D bid instead of 1NT would help North to evaluate the fitting honor ? It seems to me that 2D is right on values (10 hcp with 2 Aces, a hand close to opening hand values) and it does tell where South's strength is. South may suspect that N will rebid hearts, but still 2D by a passed hand should, IMO promise a hand similar to this one, considering that almost any 11 count with a 5 bagger is opened.

1. Qual'è il contratto? 2. Qual'è la licita ? Chi ha dato carte ? Sia l'interferenza che la NON interferenza avversaria sono fondamentali nella decisione di piazzare gli onori mancanti. ------------------------------- Se si gioca 4 picche, credo che la chance migliore sia rovesciare il morto. - Prendo subito di Asso di Picche e gioco A di Fiori e fiori taglio - quadri taglio al morto e fiori taglio - quadri taglio e fiori taglio - R di cuori, A di cuori e D di cuori, eventualmente surtagliata in mano. Questa linea ha successo se: - le quadri sono divise 4-3 (62%) - le fiori sono 4-4 (32.7%) 62 x 32.7 = circa il 20% di probabilità di successo. Basse probabilità (ma si vedeva ad occhio), ma non mi sembra che le alternative siano migliori. Se si esclude il rovesciamento del morto, è necessario trovare le pree mancanti in atout e nei colori laterali. Le atout forniranno 4 prese al 75% Le cuori 4 prese al 36% Le fiori 2 prese al 50% Le quadri possono fornire 1 o 2 prese, ma a costo di non ripetere l'impasse in atout e quindi giocando le atout per 3 prese. Risulta evidente che el chances di fare 10 prese con una linea alternativa si avvicinano a 75% x 36% x 50% = circa 13.5 %, ancora meno che la linea del rovesciamento del morto.

[hv=d=e&v=b&n=skj9xxhaqjxxdxxcq&s=sxxhtxdaqtxxcaxxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Hi all, I would appreciate comments on this bidding. Both sides were vulnerable, in a close team match. The problem is how to choose between: a. game or partscore; b. if game, game in 3NT or 4M. East was dealer, and North opened in 4th seat. E.......S.......W.......N p.......p.......p.......1S (Precision, 5+♠, max 15) p.......2D.....p.......2H p.......2NT...p.......3H p.......3NT all pass All bids after the limited openings are natural, no special gadgets available. 3NT was a hopeless contract after a club lead (H K was onside but H did not break) . After the hand: - North stated that 3NT by South was a "shutout bid"; - S said that, since in their system, 2NT denies any singleton, N should have pulled to 4S because his spade suit would be close to worthless in 3NT. - South added that the choice of game should have been made by the one that held the 55, because he only could know the quality of these suits. - North replied that South should have preferred anyways the suit contract because the Axx(x) stopper is usually better in a suit contract; holding QJ9x (slow tricks, useless vs shortness), South should have preferred instead 3NT. Basically North said that the choice of game should not be made by the one who knows the quality of the 2-suiter, but by the one who knows the quality of the stoppers in the critical suit. I'd appreciate comments :) Thanks ! Mauro

Nooooo. If you bid 3S,then dont run from 3N if pd bids it and gets doubled. What about SOS XX ?

3S = stop ask. Clubs are not so good but if I don't get doubled I give this a shot. If they double, I run.

I do not know other country's regulations for mid-low flight events. But in Italy, in NON-TOPFLIGHTS, any non strong opening (where "nonstrong" is defined as <13 hcp) ranging between 2C->3S (inclusive) MUST guarantee 4 cards in a SPECIFIC suit. So, some example of NOT ALLOWED treatments in non topflight events: - 2NT = unspecified 3 level preempt - 3S Gambling in an unspecified minor. You might use 3NT as Gambling if you announce a specific minor, but this seems to lose the point (and reduces by half the frequency of occurrence). Note that I am not discussing the efficiency of the use of such treatments (I'd also love to use 3S Gambling), nor do I agree with such restrictions. Yet, knowing the regulations in Italy, I prefer not to waste energies in selecting (good) treatments applicable in the minority of tournaments here. So I suggest it would be wise to check which of these are allowed in your country, and select those which are allowed also in low-midflights.

Roland, I agree with you, and I am sure Fred and Uday are busy into other more important stuff. All I am saying is that such a feature can be used RIGHT NOW with no further efforts ! :) Specs and commentator can use the available tools from Yahoo Messenger or MSN Messenger.B) No further effort from the BBO developers. :D

Exactly. The main plus of such a feedback tool is that he commentators can decide if/when they want to look at the specs questions, according to the moment. When they are busy concentrating on the hand, analyzing, they will not watch the fedback window; but maybe, in other moments, when they are less busy, they might as well decide to have a look at it. All this would happen without private messages to the commentators AND without cluttering the main Vugraph chat windows, reserved to the commentaries. All in all, if not an improvement, it sounds at least a "no lose" option :-) (and bridge players like to "combine chances" B) )

At IMPS, plain Ace ask. It makes sense to be able to stop in 4NT *at pairs*, where 5D would score less than NT games. But at teams, it is better to orient the system towards not missing slams and content ourselves of bid a few more games in the minors rather than in NT. Here, the strong balanced opener almost surely has 3 card support for one of responder's red suits (this sequence guarantees at least 55, if not 65). So, if slam is not there, opener could simply have signed off in 4H or 5D. Takeout, very strong hand. Shape and hcp can vary: the more offshape, the more hcp opener needs. Sample hands: AKJxx-AQx-Jxx-AJ--->offshape hand but extra hcp AKxxx-x-Axx-KQJx---> minimum hcp but perfect shape [EDIT: I had not seen responder's double. In that case, my view is that opener is strongly suggesting a penalty]

I agree.Being able to read somewhere (either on a Yahoo messenger chat window or anywhere else) the questions raise by specs could be of help to both commentators and specs. Specs could be free to write their questions without cluttering the Vugraph chat window. Commentators would see in real time what intelligent or dumb questions are going through the mind of specs, and tune accordingly their comments: a great feedback tools.

Everything! I am not saying yours is bad, but I prefer to insert a 2NT relay after 1x-1♠; 2♠, and a 2♠ relay after 1mi-1♥; 2♥, asking for number of trumps, min or max, and shortage or not. If the members are interested, I will be happy to give you the subsequent responses. Roland I am interested. Actually, I'd like a structure that: - allows opener to raise with 3 cards - allows responder to stop in 2NT if he has an invitational hand with a 4 bagger (opposite a possible 3 card raise). The current I am using is given below. It does not make use of relays. I would be happy to improve it , provided the 2 conditions above are respected (can stop in 2NT and can raise with 3 cards). All suggestions welcome ! :-) 1D*:1S *= Nebulous D, Precision 2S:? 2NT= natural invitationa, 4cM 3C = help suit Game Try (HSGT) in clubs, guarantee a 5cM 3D = artificial, generic GF, wants to know if opener has 3 or 4cd support. Opener will cue with 4cd support, bid 3NT with 3 cd suport. 3H = HSGT in H 3S = HSGT in D 3NT= pass/correct (if opener has 4 card support) 4m = splinter 1D*:1H *= Nebulous D, Precision 2H:? 2S = HSGT in spades, guarantees a 5cM 2NT= natural invitational, 4cM 3C = HSGT in clubs, guarantees a 5cM 3D = artificial, generic GF, wants to know if opener has 3 or 4cd support. Opener will cue with 4cd support, bid 3NT with 3 cd suport. 3H = HSGT in D, guarantees a 5cM 3S = splinter 3NT= pass/correct (if opener has 4 card support) 4m/4H = splinter

I think this is espcially true with standard bidding. But opposite a nebulous 1D, opener is limited. As I said, I believe that the main loss of not showing the minor is losing a potential slam, in std bidding, when opener can still have a reverse. There will admittedly be a few hands where, say, 3D/3C makes and 2NT goes down, but I wonder about the frequency of these hands. BTW, opener or responder has some chances to "describe himself" over a 2C/2D generic relay. Example: 1D-2C (relay, weak +D or invit w/o majors) -- 2D = normal relay (other bids are D "superaccepts") ----2H/2S = to be defined; these bids can be useful ----2NT = natural invit bal ----3C/D = natural invitational with the minor bid -- 2H/S= 6+D, 5M -- 3C = 5+D, 5C -- 3D = D single suiter 1D-2D (GF, without major OR with SJS-type in a major) -- 2M = 5+D, 4M; ----if responder bids other major, he has the SJS hand ---- otherwise, he has either -------a. bal hand = bids NT -------b. minor oriented hand: bids 3m -- 2NT = balanced hand -- 3C = 55 or better in minors -- 3D = diamond single suiter -- 3M = 6D, 5M In the latter cases (2NT->3M), responder's bid of the other major is always SJS hand. Anyway I like the idea of using 1D-2S as generic single suiter.

Sure, one cannot have it all. :-) The auction you suggest is based on weak/intermediate JS (so that a simple major rebid at the level of 2 would be invitational). But then again, you lose the ability of Flannery/Reverse Flannery/55M types of hands :-) So, again, there is a tradeoff. I think the discussion was raised to understand on which type of hands SJS gains, and by now it should be relatiley clear when/where it gains and loses: it does gain on those rare slammish hands where responder needs to take control. Yes, they are rare and probably a net loss at MP, but probably a net gain at IMPS. And yes, you may stick those hands into the 2nd round jump rebid of te major, but this conditions the rest of the structure and you'll find anyway some hands where you lose. So, I guess it's just a matter of tastes :-)

Yeah, as I said in another post, I believe both approaches have merits :-) Actualy in my post (2m responses over Precision 1D) I was trying to verify whether with a small price (giving up explicit invitational hands with 2 of a minor) one could have the best of both world :-)

SJS are good for hands where responder needs to take control. This is not so easy in natural bidding, whereas Relayers can take control with a relay without the need of a SJS. Therefore, if you have a strong relay to take over after your pard's 1m opener, and just haveing opener describe his hand, you might not need SJS. So, let's consider natural bidding [hv=d=n&n=sxhxxdakxxxcakxxx&s=skqjtxxxxhadxxxcx]133|200|[/hv] North opens 1D South, from the start, knows he will need cuebids: asking for aces won't help, because if opener has one ace only we may have 2 suits unguarded. Natural bidding without SJS, uncontested: 1D:1S 2C:2H*= 4sf, a wannabe attempt to be able to show a strong 1suiter 3C:3S ? And now ? From opener's viewpoint, responder can have a myriad of hand types. If opener bids 4C or 4D, it will debatable whether it is a cue or natural: responder will often have to guess, gambling on the fact that "opener must have some honors somewhere", but I do not think this is reliable bidding. I would not be happy to explain to my teammates that we overbid to 5/6S down 1 because I simply gambled that "pard must have something somewhere". :-) I much prefer a scheme where responder can gather explicit infomation on side suit controls. Let's see with SJS 1D:2S* 3C:3S** (sets trumps, asks cue) 4C:4H*** (either cue, or Last Train- I prefer LTTC) 5H****:6D***** 6S ****= Lackwood: asks to respond keycards if holding first round control in the Last Train suit, to bid directly small slam if holding 2nd round control *****= 2KC + trump queen. Now regardless of whether using or not tools such as Last Train and Lackwood, setting early the trump suit is useful when all responder needs is the knowledge of sidesuit controls.