EarlPurple

12% of the time all the players were in that range. For only LHO to the 1♣ bidder to be in that range will be quite frequent then. (Simulate that?) Besides, we can probably invent one bid (1NT maybe?) as an overcall to 1♣ that can be used to show a very weak but shapely hand? That will therefore allow you to use certain other bids as constructive in case your side does own the hand. So you still might not lose out on all the overcalls of the weak 1♣.

In the menu I see some very nice diamond-shaped diamonds, but when I post hands or see other people's posts, I see this funny square ♦ Why can't [ di ] simply print a diamond?

What you say about coming in over 1♣ bids is true, but: - you will rarely hold the hand you showed. More often than not when 1♣ is strong, each of the other players will have around 7-8 points. - When the interference occurs it is more damaging over a variable club. For example if the auction goes: 1♣ 2♠ can you freely show your hearts at the 3 level with these hands: (a) ♠ xx ♥ QJTxxx ♦ Axx ♣ Jx (b) ♠ xx ♥ AQJxx ♦ Kxx ♣ xxx © ♠ xx ♥ KJTxx ♦ Kxx ♣ xxx Ok you can play "good-bad" 2NT and use it to show hands like (a) though if the next player bids 3♠ you are now shut-out. After a strong club you are probably better placed because you know partner has a good hand and so it is much less of a gamble to bid on with any of those hands. Here I might even go straight to 4♥ with (a) (4♦ if we've agreed transfers) because it will probably make and partner will know we have them if they bid 4♠. With hand (b) I'd bid 3♥ which is forcing (3♦ if agreed transfers). I guess over Swedish-style club you'd probably play some form of transfers, possibly even transfer into suit 2 above. Then partner completes it with a weak hand or bids the suit in between with a strong hand. You might find you are often short of bids though.

A basic difference when balancing with 1NT and in fact after any one-level bid has been passed out, and balancing over a weak 2 bid, is that in the first instance, our RHO has shown a very weak hand which means the opponent's strength is condensed very much in one hand. This is usually bad for them and good for us. When you might overcall 2NT in the balancing position (after a weak 2 opening) with a weaker hand is when you have a decent minor suit. Here the chances of running off some tricks in the minor compensate for a lack of high card strength. In fact with a very good minor you might gamble 3NT for example you have AKQxxx solid in clubs or diamonds and AQx in their suit. That's only 14 points but 3NT is probably your best bid and hope your partner has 1 trick and adequate stoppers (and that your minor really does run).

The way I play it a direct raise does not deny a holding but shows more cards in the suit. The Rosenkranz Dbl I play shows Hx after partner has overcalled (thus partner promises at least 5). The bidding might go: LHO Pard [space]RHO [space] You 1[di] [space] 1[he] [space] 1[sp] [space] [space]Dbl I'm showing some values to compete and Hx in partner's suit where H is Q or higher. If partner has 6 he can compete further, and it's also useful if he ends up on lead. The Rosenkranz redouble is the same except RHO made a negative double. So the bidding might have gone: LHO Pard [space]RHO [space] You 1[di] [space] 1[sp] [space] Dbl [space] Rdbl In this auction I also promise that 2♠ promises one of the top 3 honours but 3 card support. I discuss this in depth in my article "Lead Directional Bidding".

talking of penalties over pre-empts. I would rather hold this: KJTx xx QJxx xxx and hear the auction go 2♠ (weak) on my right, passed round to partner who doubles and I pass. than have this: KJTx Ax KJxx AQx where now I will have to overcall 2NT instead of making a penalty double. If I pass, partner probably will too if he has the 8 points or so I need for 3NT. But on the first one I look forward to a decent penalty. I can lead through dummy's values into partner's values, and he can lead through declarer into my trumps. With the second one if partner has nothing I have to lead away from all my honours and I'm probably doing better going off in 2NT than I would be defending 2S which may well make. (Maybe I get no more than my 3 trumps and 2 aces).

I've read Mark Lawrence's book but it seems to be almost totally dedicated to an opening bid of 1 of a suit being passed round to you. That auction occurs far less than the others and while it needs discussion, I don't know if it requires as much space as others. There is a concept of "pre-balancing", thus 1♥ pass 2♥ Dbl is a "pre-balance". You are saying you have some values to compete should the next hand pass, but they may be less than the normal expected values for doubling an opening bid of 1♥. It should probably promise 4 spades and at least one 4 card minor and at least 3 cards in the other, thus 4-1-4-4, 4-1-5-3, 4-1-3-5 or 4-2-4-3 or 4-2-3-4. Partner can now bid 2NT to ask for your better minor. Of course, if partner was "trap-passing" we might get a good penalty here. I have taken 1100 against such an auction. Beware of habitually reopening. Especially if a vulnerable opening bid of 1♣ is passed round to you. Clubs might not be their best suit, in fact it might not be a suit at all for them and defending you could beat what you get if you re-open. If you double they may find a better fit. Also sometimes the opener can bid a second suit and they can find a big fit. Also if you gain a reputation as someone who ALWAYS reopens in some auctions, the opponents may take liberties and then catch you for a big penalty.

Swedish style 1♣ openers are probably great with no interference, but I actually think they are more susceptible to interference than a 1♣ opening bid which is always strong.

Trap-passing over a pre-empt on a hand like that is overrated. How often will partner reopen with a double? The best chance for a good penalty comes when you have trump length but little outside. Now you can hope that partner will reopen with a double and you will pass. Not only that but partner's values will lie over pre-empter's partner (the one more likely to hold the side suits), and your partner will be on lead more often to lead through declarer's hand. With 18 points your best bet is probably to bid 2NT and hope partner can raise you. If the opps are vulnerable you might settle for an undoubled penalty.

Then you have the problems of 4-card majors. Not as easy for responder to raise after competition, and especially hard to handle when responder has invitational values and 3 card support. By the way I do not like "making up a suit" for a 2/1 response. I prefer it to show a real suit, so when I'm deciding whether to accept the invite I know whether my side suits are fitting well with partner's. Thus: 1♠=2♣=2NT-3♠. Do I accept the invite? If I can't base this on my club holding because partner's 2♣ could be "fake" then I'm guessing. Maybe partner has no more than ♠Kxx ♥xx ♦xxx ♣AQJxx Of course, with precision this will only come up if you open them on hands too weak for 1NT.

I think it is clear that the only psycher here can be North. If West psyched his 1♣ bid (i.e. he doesn't have an opening bid) then why did he bid 2NT over 2♦ when he had been doubled. Obviously with a bad hand he would pass. East would have no reason to go to 3NT if his earlier bidding had been psychic. So the psych is exposed. I do feel though that if players regularly overcall 1NT holding a weak-2 in an unspecified suit, it should become part of the system and be put on the convention card. If the call is not licensed then you simply shouldn't do it. You cannot use psyching as a legitimate way to bring an unlicensed method into your system. As you are a regular partnership I may be tempted to classify the psych as "amber" rather than "green".

Thanks for the replies. A square (box) in the middle indication where the table is would make it easier for a start. I'd be interested to know how easily the PBN and lin files can be used with Jack, by the way. I often find during vugraph I am having to type the hands into Jack, but it would be wonderful if it could somehow be integrated in like DeepFinesse is.

I don't think any of the British players are quite top 10 in the world... (Let's see us win something first).

I agree that you do not want to play a wide-range NT after an opening bid of 1♣ and probably not 1♦ (though what are you supposed to bid with a 4-4-4-1 hand in your NT range if you open 1♦ and partner responds 2♣?) But if you do not want to open balanced hands with a 5 card major with 1NT when it falls in your NT range, you have to be able to rebid NT on such hands. I used to play 5 card majors and a weak NT years ago, and there's nothing terribly wrong with: 1H-1S-1NT is wide-range. 2C asks. 1H-2/1 in minor-2NT is weak 1H-2/1 in minor-3NT with medium (15-17) hands. 3NT is usually where you want to play and partner can still repeat his minor with a good hand looking for slam. Playing 4-card majors and a weak NT (i.e. Acol, which is what Crowhurst played), the 1H-1S-1NT sequence can also be wide-range. If it's weak it will usually promise 5 hearts but may be 1-4-4-4. 2♣ is then artificial and partner's bid should be: 2♦: weak 2♥: 5 hearts, strong 2♠: 3 spades, strong 2NT: 4 hearts, 2 spades, strong. Acol players prefer to open the 4 card major rather than the 4 card minor on 15+ 4-4-3-2 hands. (I'm not sure I like that method. A weak hand now has to bid 1NT which is non-forcing and will be passed a lot of the time. Now the weak hand never gets to show his suit).

If we made this a defensive problem from the other side of the table, you might have to consider whether playing the queen of diamonds could cost matchpoints. I think it cannot. Unless declarer is now going to run of all 13 tricks, thus turn up with KQx AJxx Kxxx AJ in which case he'd win ♦K, run off 5 rounds of clubs (throwing all his remaining diamonds) and 3 spades then correctly guess hearts for the rest. But then you may score well for the opps missing a slam (albeit that it required a heart guess and ♦A onside).

surprising here that some have selected for declarer to always be North. I'm not sure they read the question properly - did they mean dummy should always be North (thus declarer always South). In the templates, I think the intention is that your own hand is South and that dummy is either East or West. It confuses me because give me 2 hands diagonally and no "table" and my assumption will be that the one closer to the top of the screen is the dummy and North, AND that: - a hand below it to the left is West and playing before dummy - a hand below it to the right is East and playing after dummy.

If I did bid 3♥ here it is clearly a competitive bid and not an invitation for partner to go on and bid more. If I am not allowed to compete part-score because my partner will punish me by raising, then it is me who is playing with the wrong partner. I obviously do not have an opening bid because I didn't open the first time. By the way, I would expect for that sequence a hand with 7 hearts and most of the values outside the suit, thus not a good pre-empt in front of partner. This hand may justify passing then balancing into 3♥: ♠A9 ♥J976532 ♦KJx ♣x Ok, you might decide sometimes to open 2♥ or 3♥ with that hand. I'd probably open 2♥ on it, but passing them coming in later is not unreasonable.

I have encountered this before and have normally prescribed the following: - 2♠ by North is no more than competitive. - 2NT is "good/bad" showing extra shape but not extra values. I think it may be the right bid here, followed by 3♠. Over 2NT South may well bid 3♣ and North can now bid 3♠. South should raise this to 4♠. - Dbl here would show a strong hand. It would probably deny 4 spades, though you might bid it on a 4-3-3-3 18-count. - 3♣ would be a good hand (better than opening) with nothing but clubs. - 3♠ would be a good hand with 4 spades. Should be stronger than 2NT followed by 3♠. Perhaps you are not strong enough to do that here. - 3♦ would be a second suit, extra values. - 3♥ should be an enquiry for 3NT if partner has heart stops? By the way, hands like this illustrate the strength of playing a weak NT. On a hand like that one North can simply bid 2♠ competitively and South knows that his partner does not have a balanced 12-14 hand.

A 1♦ opening bid will always be unbalanced though. With a balanced hand you would open 1NT (weak) or 1♣ (strong). If you have 3 card support for the major you will surely have a singleton somewhere. That is if you treat 2-3-6-2 and 3-2-6-2 hands as balanced. By the way, your 2♦ opening is no longer needed as any kind of normal opening and can be used for some pre-emptive type, for example a weak 2 in either major while a 2♥ and 2♠ opening would be 5-5. What would 1♦-1M-1NT show? If it can't be a balanced hand, you could conventionally use this to show 3-card support while a direct raise would be 4 card support. Note that you might have longer clubs. With 1-3-4-5 or 3-1-4-5 you would open 1♦.

I'm bidding 3♥ over 2NT because I have good support for partner, and even if partner is going to pass I think we'll score better in hearts. It depends on how you play a direct raise to 2♥ with 1NT forcing. Do you play that you use this method for constructive raises and 2♥ direct for pre-emptive raises, or vice-versa, or do you always deny 3-card support when you bid 1NT?

For an Advanced/Expert player... fair comment, :) For a Beginner/Intermediate? I would maintain that Weak Twos should be disciplined! The exact limits of a Weak Two are open to partnership agreement, but if I am playing with a Beginner/Intermediate player; my partner can trust that I have: 6-10hcp, mostly in the named suit. 6 cards in the named suit. Less than 4 cards in the other major. Yes, I will relax the discipline with a more advanced player, but I think Beginners/Intermediates appreciate a partner that they can trust. I think I have to disagree: Beginners and Intermediates should be taught to pre-empt more aggressively. They should learn the principle of "in quick out quick". If you'd opened 2♥ on this hand you wouldn't have a problem now because you've "shown your hand". JT8xxx is actually quite offensive. I'll take a likely 3 tricks with it while I'll take nothing with it defending. That is different from AQxxxx where I will usually take 1 and sometimes 2 tricks in defence with it if partner has no fit.

You can play that 1♦ promises 4 if you pass on balanced 11-12-point hands. Then you are no longer using 1♦ for weak balanced hands. 1NT covers 13-15 Traditional precision used 2♦ to show 4-4-1-4 hands. I prefer 2♣ freeing 2♦ for other uses. If partner has a 4-card major after your 2♣ opener you will find your fit, otherwise he will usually have at least 3 clubs and you're no worse off there than anywhere else. If partner is 3-3-5-2 maybe he will bid 2♦ and pass your 2♥ response. (Some players prefer 1♥ with this hand but I'd rather lie about my minor than my major). You can modify 1NT to be 12-15 instead of 13-15 if you don't like passing with 12 points. Certainly a good 12 can be opened 1NT thus: ♠K 10 x ♥ Q 10 x ♦ x x ♣ A Q J x x

I would be happy to mentor a pair of players. I am European based and cannot be online usually in the "early hours". For some reason that seems to be a problem with 5th chair.

I think that defensive hand posting looks a lot clearer when dummy is North, and your hand (defending) is either East or West. While it's true you can "cheat" with those templates, it would be much simpler it were displayed without a "South" over one of the hands, but instead with a North and either the East or West.

and talking of those templates. LEFTDUMMY and RIGHTDUMMY annoy me because they place dummy East or West with you South. Hand diagrams always look clearer with dummy as North and you as either West or East. But you can get around that by "cheating".