VM1973

I disagree. Holding what appears to be 7 solid tricks and thinking it is unlikely that partner will have any ruffs available, my thoughts turn naturally to 3NT especially at MPs. You have 2 Quick Tricks. In that I agree. It's not a question of science, it's a question of math. With a sufficiently powerful computer we could create every conceivable combination of opposing hands and run an analysis. But since we're talking math, let's make a generous assumption and think that the passer is the most die-hard Roth Stoner out there - a man who would not dream of opening 14 HCPs and 4-3-3-3 in 1st seat. Accordingly his pass shows 0-14 (average 7). Now anyone can count my hand and see that it contains 9 HCPs. For those who are math challenged, I'll let you know that we are up to 16. Considering that there are 40 points in the deck if those points are evenly divided between the two other players will give them each 12. Accordingly we can calculate that the hand should belong to our side some 52.5 percent of the time (21 hcp / 40). These odds are of the type that make casinos enormous fortunes. There are a large number of possible hands in bridge. This number is sufficiently large that I would not attempt to calculate it. Anyone who thinks that their life experience (even if it be 50+ years) is a statistically representative sample of all bridge hands available is rather foolish. People here may think, "I've seen some hands like this before and they worked out in the following manner...therefore the next hand like this I see will also work out in the same manner." This is a logical fallacy because the logic is circular. These people believe that the future will resemble the past but if you ask them why they think that, they will only quote the past as 'proof' that the future resembles the past. In short, they are assuming their conclusion as the premise of their argument. So a 1,000 hand simulation might be amusing but, as you have already mentioned, it would prove nothing at all. However, I do appreciate the courteous tone of your post.

You hold: ♠AKQJxxx ♥x ♦xxx ♣xx White vs. Red IMPs Your partner a BBO self-rated World Class Expert. No previous discussion. SAYC The auction goes: Pass-Pass-Pass... your call.

I don't agree that the hand is a 4-loser hand. I mean, if your hand were: ♠109872 ♥KQ10652 ♦(very few) ♣K10 then you would still bid it the same way figuring if partner has AKxxx of spades then you have no spade losers anyway. Accordingly the ♠Q is a wasted card. The key is diagnosing how much is wasted in diamonds. Splintering might work with this hand, but I think most people's agreements about splinters are just "yeah we play that" with no fine tuning to try to resolve exactly how a person should respond or why. If the only agreement is 10+ and a singleton then really you've only consumed a lot of space without getting the information you need.

In case you haven't noticed, my base assumption in life is that I'm always right and that those who disagree with me are wrong. However, assuming that you are defending this wide NT, why don't you answer the questions I've posed? Would you open the first hand 1♥ and then, presumably rebid 1NT? Would you open the 2nd hand 1♥ and then rebid 1NT (or are you in the 2NT camp?) At what point, under this system, should someone bid 4NT quantitative? IMPs I figure it doesn't matter since Vulnerable you bid game on almost any reasonable hope of being close, but at matchpoints this kind of 4-6 point NT spread makes reaching 3NT when it's right problematic.

No, I don't see what you mean because somehow I don't worry about my opponents bidding and making slam when their first contribution to the auction is "Pass." As for "missing the preempt class" why don't we revisit it now? Let's take that eager preempter Marty Bergen and get his opinion. It's right here at http://www.bridgehands.com/bergen/points_schmoints10.htm "...do not open at the three level with a suit headed by the AKQ. A solid seven-card suit is too good. Open 1 with: ♠6 ♥53 ♦J72 ♣AKQ10865" Firstly, if you preempt more aggressively than Marty Bergen, you are way out in left field, pal. So for all those people who said: If you got a bunch of experts together and asked them what to bid with this hand, none of them would agree with you, here's my response: Talk is cheap. When you come up with experts supporting your POV, let me know. Until then, I've got an expert right here on my side so that makes Villa Maria 1 - Blowhards 0. As I said, a 1♠ bid is much better than 2, 3, or 4 spades. The only problem with 1♠ is A) opening 1 banana with less than 10 HCPs is banned in most junior rooms and B) If you have agreed to open 1 with less than 11 HCPs you are supposed to pre-alert your opponents when they sit down. If I were in a superchart event, I might well open it 1♠ as it easily meets the rule of 20. Last I checked, however, this is Beginner and Intermediate Bridge Discussion. The reason why you don't open 4♠ on a hand like this is because partner, holding: ♠x ♥Axxx ♦Axxx ♣AJ10x is thinking, "I hope I've got enough for him to make it." not "Wow, we have a great shot at 6!" Now if partner opened 3 or even 4♠ 3rd seat, I'd say he made a fine call. If he did it in 1st seat, I'd accept it with good grace for the sake of the partnership. However, this kind of undisciplined BS in 2nd seat is a bad idea. As for those who argued: Well, maybe there are only 17 trumps, but there still often is 18 tricks under circumstances like this, I should like to point out that it is very possible for both sides to both get 9 tricks, for 18 total tricks on the deal. Considering that now it's confirmed that it's matchpoints, I think I'd rather try to double 4♥ for +200 than advance sacrifice in 4♠ for -50. Admittedly on this hand a 4♠ bid works out reasonably well, but hindsight is always 20/20. Both a 1♠ opener and a P-P-P-1♦-P-2♠ auction could easily result in reaching a 4♠ contract. Finally for those who said they'd open this hand 4♠ red against white... I hope they aren't playing for money.

So holding: ♠K10x ♠KJ10xx ♦A10x ♣xx You'll open 1♥ and rebid 1NT and also holding: ♠Kxx ♥KJxxx ♦Axx ♣AQ Is that right? 1NT rebid 11-17? Out of curiosity... how many points should responder have to bid: (opponents pass throughout) 1♥-1♠ 1NT-4NT (quantitative) ?

My opponent has already passed accordingly I see no reason for me to take Herculean measures to shut him out of the bidding. Unless LHO is gripping his cards so tightly that I can see how white his knuckles are, I see no point in preempting with a hand that contains 2 defensive tricks. It's just as likely that the person I am shutting out of the bidding is my partner rather than my opponent. Assuming my partner's shape is: ♠xx ♥xxxx ♦xxxx ♣xxx and a smattering of points, you're still looking at barely 17 trumps on the deal. You're going to feel really stupid when you're in 4♠ doubled -1 and the one lonely pair that managed to play hearts was in 3♥ -100 That doesn't even count the possibility that partner has ♥KJ10x or some other very unattractive holding. If you bid 3♠ and partner has 3-card support, isn't he going to raise you to 4 anyway? Why are you trying to bid your partner's hand for him? If your partner holds: ♠xx ♥AKxx ♦Axxx ♣Axx then you have an excellent chance of 3NT+5 = 460 which would be a definite top. Neither a 3♠ nor a 4♠ opening is likely to get you to any strain of NT. Your best matchpoint chance of reaching 3NT is either passing and having your partner open (or overcall 1NT) or to bid 2♠ and respond to Ogust 2NT with 3NT.

My opinion, for what it's worth is as follows: 1. At IMPs you should go all out to defeat the contract. 2. On the auction a Lightner Double would appear to call for a diamond lead. 3. On your hand a club lead would be indicated after a Lightner double. 4. Yes. 5. I'm not sure.

Your analysis is probably pretty good... as long as the 5cm is the spade suit. Holding: ♠Kxx ♥KJxxx ♦Axx ♣Ax You open 1♥-Pass-1♠-Pass-?? Do you: A) Rebid 1NT showing 12-14 HCP B) Bid 2♠ C) Bid 3♠ D) Bid 2♦ E) Bid 2♥ OR F) Fake a heart attack and be rushed to the hospital?

You didn't mention the scoring. I think you should pass. As you have the master suit, it's hard to imagine how you could get shut out of the bidding. Additionally with solid spades like that, 3NT could be a possibility - rating to outscore 4♠ which is important at MPs. In 3rd seat a preempt would be almost automatic but even then I see no reason to go beyond 3♠. Pass - 10 2♠ - 8 (Especially if playing Ogust) 1♠ - 6 3♠ - 6 4♠ - 2

Partner can't want a club ruff or he would have doubled. A diamond is unlikely to help as partner won't have a trump entry nor will he have the ♦A. I suppose the only chance to set up a trick in partner's hand while he has the ♦K as an entry. I guess the spades are a slightly better chance... maybe the ♠10 with a diamond lead = 0

I'm all for penalty doubles, but not when I have a fit for my partner. I'll try 3NT. You should be able to take 6 diamonds, a spade, and a club for 8... then we'll cast around for more. Maybe you have to try the club hook. If you're down, you'll have company even if it's only 5♦ down.

Holding more quick tricks than losers, I tend to open 2♣ and assuming partner bids either 2♥ (positive, natural) or 2NT (shows hearts since 2♥ = negative) it's hard to imagine not finding slam.

Actually if you had bothered to open the link, I think you'll find that it leads to a book copyright 2004 entitled, "Standard American 21 (Rubber Bridge Player's Guide for the Twenty-first Century)." So now I don't want to be rude... but unless you can come up with some clear guidelines for knowing when a double is or isn't for penalty at the table then I'll have to stick with resources like: http://www.paloaltobridge.com/education/lectureseries/Winter%202011/penaltydoubleHO.pdf which says: "A double of an opponent's bid is for penalty if: Partner has bid or doubled (excluding agreed upon negative etc. double situations)...." As far as I can tell this isn't a negative double, support double, responsive double or Rosencranz double. As such, as far as I'm aware, standard practice is to play this double as penalty.

This is a strange location to ask for expert opinion seeing as its the beginner/intermediate area. I believe the advantage of opening 1NT with a 5-card major is it saves rebid problems. A hand like: ♠Kx ♥AQJxx ♦Kxx ♣Kxx Has rebid problems with: 1♥-P-1♠-P ??? I remember Fred Hamilton was once asked what he thought and he said you should never do it holding 5 spades as you never have rebid problems with that hand. I know Marty Bergen recommends it and I believe he recommends using 3♣ as Puppet Stayman to get "back with the field" and find the 5-3 major fit. I also believe Kit Woolsey said in his book, "Matchpoints" that one shouldn't have hard and fast rules on it. Instead he suggested that it was good to do with a strong suit (like ♥AKQxx) or a bad suit (like ♥J9xxx) but that you shouldn't do it with a suit like ♥KJxxx because the suit isn't solid enough to run at No Trump and you may need the extra control the trump suit gives you in order to establish it.

I learned bridge by reading Sheinwold's Five Weeks. I suppose it must be filled with silly rules to which I give far too much credence. He said silly little things like, a double is for takeout when your partner hasn't bid and you are below the game level. Now according to this "silly rule" an auction like: 1♦-P-1♥-P 2♣-2♠-P-P X The double is intended to be penalty, though I wouldn't fault partner for pulling it if he had a void. Now, just to make sure that I'm not misremembering I went to Google and found this link: http://books.google.com.pe/books?id=k7M9IG1KNcsC&pg=PA171&lpg=PA171&dq=%22when+is+a+double+for+takeout%22&source=bl&ots=5oQ887sgvB&sig=vDZX1VYV38wO6IXcrN2cQU--RvA&hl=es&ei=034wToO6H7S50AHR-fiFAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CE8Q6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=%22when%20is%20a%20double%20for%20takeout%22&f=false I quote: "There are several conditions that must be met for a double to be takeout rather than for penalty. First, your partner has not bid, but may have passed...." So now I don't want to be rude, but I think that you don't know what the fu...er...heck you're talking about. If you have some special agreement with your partner that you think is good for how to determine if a double is for takeout or penalty, I'm all ears. But as far as I'm aware Standard American and 2/1 has that double as penalty.

I pass both hands.

I'll bid 7♦

I don't relish playing 2♠ doubled if that's what you mean. Really from the auction I figured partner for 4 spades. It never occurred to me to find someone holding AJ10xxx not vulnerable and not willing to bid anything. As far as I can tell from my hand, I need to find partner with 10+ to make a move towards game. Something like: ♠Axxx ♥Axxxx ♦Qx ♣xx How do you expect partner is likely to bid if he holds: ♠xxxx ♥Axxxx ♦x ♣KJx Won't he pass 2 clubs?

And if the auction goes ... 2♣ 2♠ Pass Pass ?

Here's a very similar hand. [hv=lin=pn|diwine,elise4,VM1973,edmarken|st||md|1S368H2368AD3JQC2J,S9QKH49QD58TC678K,S7HTJKD247KAC34TA,|rh||ah|Board 27|sv|o|mb|p|mb|p|mb|1D|mb|p|mb|1H|mb|p|mb|2H|mb|p|mb|p|mb|p|pg||pc|SK|pc|S7|pc|S2|pc|S3|pg||pc|C8|pc|CA|pc|C5|pc|C2|pg||pc|HK|pc|H5|pc|H2|pc|H4|pg||pc|HJ|pc|H7|pc|H3|pc|HQ|pg||pc|CK|pc|C3|pc|C9|pc|CJ|pg||pc|C7|pc|CT|pc|CQ|pc|H6|pg||pc|HA|pc|H9|pc|HT|pc|S4|pg||pc|DQ|pc|D5|pc|D2|pc|D6|pg||pc|DJ|pc|D8|pc|D4|pc|D9|pg||pc|D3|pc|DT|pc|DA|pc|S5|pg||pc|DK|pc|ST|pc|S6|pc|C6|pg||pc|D7|pc|SJ|pc|S8|pc|S9|pg||pc|C4|pc|SA|pc|H8|pc|SQ|pg||]400|300[/hv]

What a shocker that the 3rd hand is more powerful when you can cherry pick the hand it's opposite. However it's just as likely that the diamond and club holdings of the responder could be reversed. That would effectively put your KQJx opposite x and your xxx opposite Ax.

I pass. I have a fistful of defensive tricks and no proven fit.

What lead? ♥J?

Generally speaking playing bridge does not result in an increase in skill. You must break bridge down into components and practice each skill set moving upwards in the ladder of skill. How many times can one see someone playing in a novice room and one of their good winners gets ruffed. "Sorry, partner," the person says. "I didn't realize he had a trump left." This person has not taken the time to master counting suit distributions and following the play of the cards (not that I'm saying that's your problem). Generally speaking I recommend people work on defense first. Odds are you will be defending twice as often as you are declaring and most of the skills you learn from defending are transferable to declaring. Try to find large numbers of similarly-themed problems (hold up or suit establishment or whatever) and work on that skill set until you have mastered it and then work on another one. You would be surprised how many people cannot finesse correctly. Example: AQ108 J973 Lots of people start with the Jack, and when the defender doesn't cover they drop the 8. Then they play the 3 and win the 10 with the right-hand opponent (RHO) showing out. Now they have to use another suit to get back to the other hand (or maybe, worse, they don't have another entry). If you do it right you start with the 9, which wins. Then you can play the J, which wins and you are still in the South hand to lead towards the AQ. Simple things like this should be practiced until they are automatic.