rmnka447

Opener is probably looking at ♥ AKQx and thinks responder won't make a move toward slam lacking the honors. Even so, opener should let responder control the hand. There's no way for opener to know just what responder holds, so the 4 NT bid is insane. I think inquiry's response makes perfect sense. I agree that any move by the big hand over 4 ♦ other than 4 ♥ is a gross breach of partnership trust.

5 ♥ -- the hand is too distributional not to bid. If I take a number, it's only one board at MP. Would be more tempted to bid 4 NT if I didn't have a 7 card suit.

I certainly would rather have 4 ♠s for the limit raise, but sometimes it's more important to show the value of your hand even though there are only 3 cards in support. I could bid 2 ♠ with as little as a K, a Q, and 3 trump, so the hand just looks like too much for a 2 ♠ call. ♠ QJx are certainly good cards opposite partner's overcall. The hand would be an easy 3 card jump raise in a forcing NT auction after a 1 ♠ opener by pard.

I don't have any problem with the initial pass. Altough it's not perfect, you have about the value of a limit raise. After the 2 ♣ raise, how about bidding 3 ♣ to show that value. Partner will hardly go overboard because you've already passed and denied an opener. But partner with a 6 loser hand should make a move toward game with a 3 ♦ bid. With all your cards working except the ♣ Q, you certainly might accept.

Learning to become an excellent bridge player is a process that requires both study and experience. So whatever reading and study you do needs to be paired with playing the game. It's not unreasonable to expect it to take at least a couple years to become a good bridge player. As a relative beginner, your first objective should be to get well schooled in the fundamentals of the game. So your query about books on basics is most apropriate. The suggestions made by respondents so far have been excellent. As a basic text on card play, I would add "The Classic Book on the Play of the Hand at Bridge" by Louis Watson. Although written in 1934, many still regard it as a definitive fundamental book on all aspects of card play (along with the Gardener and Mollo book). Kantar's two books on defense are destined to be classics, but as a beginner, the first book "Modern Bridge Defense" is more important for you to master. The books by Reese and Kelsey are more intermediate/advanced in nature and probably best left for somewhat later. Whichever books you choose to read, I would suggest playing for several months following reading them. Then go back and reread them. You will be surprised at how much more you will get out of them. I still go back after 30 years, reread some of these books, and still find them useful. As far as bidding is concerned, it's OK to learn either 2/1 or SAYC. However, I would suggest keeping whichever approach you use fairly basic and not try to add a lot of extras to it now. It's more important as a beginner to learn the basics of good bidding and develop good bidding judgement. If you add a lot of extra stuff, there is a tendency to get so absorbed in the details of those gadgets that you never really learn the bidding skills required for you to progress to the next level. If all this emphasis on fundamentals seems a bit much, then please understand that learning to be a good bidder and a player who rarely makes a fundamental card play error will make you a quite formidable bridge player.

A splinter shows shows approximately 11-15 points, 4+ card trump fit, and singleton or void in suit bid. You've got 9 HCP plus 5 distributional points, so this is a clear 4 ♦ splinter.

Some further comments -- I don't think anything you bid in this auction was wrong. The quibble I might have is your bid of 6 ♠. If your agreement over the queen ask is that any bid other than a simple return to 5 ♠ guarantees the Q, then you might have considered bidding 5 ♥ and let partner bid the slam, probe further, or sign off in 5 ♠. If your agreement is you should jump to 6 with the Q, then you have done everything right. The problem on this hand was that your partner took control and drove toward slam with a hand that didn't warrant that kind of action. Despite the 13 HCP, partner's hand is an 8 loser hand which makes it equivalent to about a limit raise. Your hand has to be almost the equivalent of a strong and artificial 2 ♣ opener for slam to be right opposite partner's hand. Since partner took control of the hand and asked the questions, you must as part of partnership trust answer them as fully and correctly as possible. Is your hand originally worth the extras response? I think so. You have 15 really good points that translate into a 5 loser hand. Given something similar held by partner, slam is a definite possibility. So you have to alert partner to that possibility. Say partner held for instance ♠ Axxx ♥ AKx ♦ xx ♣ Kxxx. If you bid your as a normal minimum opener, partner is very unlikely to make a move toward slam. But once you show extras, partner will very much cooperate in exploring and finding slam. Indeed, this very example hand would be the type of hand hand where partner should take control of the auction like he/her did. Finally, if your hand captains the auction, you need to find out about partner's specific controls, especially those in the ♥ suit, to bid slam. That should push toward control bidding rather than rolling out RKCB.

I also support pass. Partner did not double when the hand was passed back to him/her. So partner either has a minimum opener with just 5 ♣s or possibly just more long clubs than anything else. You've pushed the opponents up a level and you have 2 QTs, so defending isn't the end of the world. Like someone said, you don't want to find pard with the long ♣ hand and push the opponents into a makable game.

If I have a problem with this auction, it's because your partner is asking the questions and you are answering even though you have the big hand. Where you have a big hand that raises slam as a possibility, partner needs to be telling what he/she holds rather than vice versa. This is because most of the time you can not describe the big hand well enough for the lesser hand to make an intelligent decision about the slam. OTOH, the weaker hand can usually give the stronger hand enough information for the big hand to make an informed decision. But more importantly, the big hand usually knows the exact key information to be sought and can captain in a direction to get that information. After you show extras, responder needs to have some sort of mechanism to limit his/her hand. This needs to be done as cheaply as possible because the hand with "extras" may have enough to even want to explore for slam opposite an invitational hand. In this regard, you need to differentiate between invitational raises, game force raises, and slam positive raises. (By slam positive, I mean a raise with "extras" or possibly a game force raise rich in controls.) If your agreement is that partner's 3 ♠ [relay?] asks about shortness, then I think your partner should not ask about shortness. Partner cannot see or know from his/her hand if slam exists no matter what you answer. Instead, partner should either simply bid 4 ♠ or show his/her cheapest control on the way to 4 ♠. In this case, the control bid would be 4 ♥ denying controls in ♣s or ♦s. (This is in line with my 1st paragraph comments -- partner should be thinking "I can't tell if slam is there from my hand, so I should look to tell what might be useful to partner in deciding if slam exists.") By bidding the cheapest control, partner gives you additional information by denying a club control. You are now looking at potentially 1 1/2 losers in ♣, 2 potential losers in ♥s, and a possible loser in ♠s. Slam might still be possible if partner has both missing As, the ♥ K and a favorable ♣ holding. But that's a pretty tall order, so just bidding 4 ♠ looks right at this point. More comments later.

Interestingly, it's hard to know if you can get to slam over any other bid by South. The opponents have the 20 HCPs in the minors and a big ♣ fit. They might open/compete if South makes a different original bid. 6 ♥ is a complete shot in the dark. It figures to make some percentage of the time, so might not be a bad ploy if you are looking a swing at IMPs or want to go for it at MPs. Everytime I make a bid like that, I seem to find pard with ♦ xx and end up trying to explain my bid.

West has 16 HCP, a 6 loser hand, and the ♦ K behind the ♦ bidder. The only negative is the dangling ♥ J. So this looks like a pretty clear DBL and bid ♠s hand to me. Taking that approach would pretty much guarantee getting to game. After the 1 ♠ overcall, East has a pretty clear cut 2 ♥ bid no matter how you play a new suit bid -- NF, NF const. or F. If East bids 2 ♥, West has a raise. East has enough to bid game. So basically both players underbid.

4 ♥ is an extremely aggressive preempt Red vs. White with a 6 loser hand. So I give South the lion's share of any blame that might accrue. 3 ♥ would seem more reasonable at this vulnerability. That makes it possible for North to bid 3 ♠ to find out more about preempter's hand. Preempter could then show the ♦ control with a 4 ♦ bid. Then you might find your way to 6 ♥, if the opponent's don't interevene in ♣s. But there would probably be a sizable number of people who would simply bid 4 ♥ with the North hand. This is not an easy slam to bid unless you have some very good undertandings over preempts. So missing it isn't the end of the world.

2 ♠ even playing disciplined weak 2s in 1st and 2nd seat.

Pass If the agreement is 2 ♦ shows about 9-12, then I see no reason to violate it with this 9 loser hand.

With both hands, a take out double is right. It gives your side a chance to find a fit in either major. Both ♠ suit you give are not very attractive five card suits -- single honor, virtually no intermediates. They may not play well opposite 2 or 3 small in pard's hand. If the 5 card suit is much stronger -- say ♠ AKJ75 ♥ J863 ♦ 5 ♣ K85, overcalling would seem more reasonable with hope you might find a ♥ fit later if need be.

You have a 2 loser hand. So one way or another you probably want to end up in 5 ♦ if pard can't show much. However, with ♥ KQxx, it's just possible that pard could show up with ♥s and 6 ♥ comes into view. Keep all options open by bidding 1 ♦. You can always bid 5 ♦ later.

The key is that pard made the negative double, so can't be completely bereft of values. I'm bidding 4 ♠.

1 NT is nonforcing, so pard must have extra ♠. The hand is clearly a misfit, so your best chance for a positive is to get out of the auction as soon as possible. I'm passing.

Interesting hand to discuss decisions at matchpoints. What is the likely contract elsewhere? -- I think all will agree 3 NT will probably be bid at most tables. So how do you best play the hand at MPs? Two major possibilities are being discussed -- combining chances by playing on ♦s or playing for the ♣ finesse immediately. Combining chances increases the overall probability of making 9 tricks to 68% while risking an additional undertrick. Taking the immediate ♣ finesse reduces the probability of making the contract to 50%, but also risks 1 less undertrick. It seems like a simple decision. But, is it? If ♦ do break 3-3, do you simply cash out for 9 tricks, or, do you now take the ♣ finesse for an additional trick(s)? Clearly, at IMPS, combining chances and cashing out is right. But at MPs, any time the ♣ finesse is right, you are making at least 11 tricks (and even 13 tricks when ♦s also break). So cashing out gets you a poor score versus those who find the winning finesse. Another issue is if there is a way to avoid a ♠ switch should you take the ♣ finesse. So I think I'm playing the hand as follows. Win the ♥ lead in dummy with the ♥ K. Cash the ♦ Q and ♦ K. Then I'm leading a low Club and finessing ♣ J from dummy. Hopefully, if the ♣ K is off side, this reveals the least about my other high card holdings and gives RHO more to think upon before switching.

Some things you might have thought about ... South made a 2 ♦ overcall, received no raise, yet the opponent's hold 10 ♦s between them. The missing honors are ♠ J ♥ Q ♦ AQJ ♣ K. If South holds just ♦ AQJ and length you might have gotten a weak jump overcall or preempt. With ♣ K10xxx and supportive ♦ length, you probably would have heard a ♦ raise from North. So, it's not altogether clear that a ruff is imminent. At the somewhat less than clear possibility of a ♣ ruff, playing low might gain an extra trick if the lead is from the ♣ K. At matchpoints, it's often proper to play for the extra trick if you judge everyone else will be in the same contract especially if the risk of taking a trick less than your competition isn't particularly large. That being said, overcaller gets some credit for putting to the guess with the opening lead.

I'd bid 1 ♠ with this hand.

Like just about everyone else, I'm bidding 4 ♣ and wondering why 2 ♦ wasn't an option. Even though you have 17 HCP, this looks like one of those hands where it's right to "underbid". The problem is with a good but not great 5 card suit doubling and rebidding your suit may get you too high if Pard doesn't have a fit. Sometime this may cost you if the auction dies following the overcall. But more often than not, you'll get a second bite in the auction and have the chance to show your full values then.

I'm bidding 2 ♠ to get the spade suit in play. There's no guarantee that partner will be able to balance if all the points are fairly evenly distributed and LHO passes. Although highly likely that opening bidder has ♣s and ♥s, you can't assume so.

1. This is one of the most misunderstood auctions in bridge. Everyone seems to focus on the fact that Dummy has a 4 card major. Most people just don't focus on what the NT opener is also telling you. Opener has no 4 card major. That means at least 7 (4-3-3-3) and more likely 8 cards in the minors (5-3-3-2 in either minor or 4-4-3-2 with both minors). 2. The objective for the defense at NT is essentially the same as the declarer to set up long suit tricks to defeat the contract or hold it to a minimum number of tricks made. This is especially important when the declaring side freely/strongly bids game. That involves two aspects - having a suit to set up and having the entries to be able to cash the suit later in the defense. 3. A third consideration is necessary in terms of matchpoints -- what are risks of giving something away with the opening lead. Applying those to this hand, here's how I see it. Declarer and dummy should hold at least 25 points between them and my hand has 9. That leaves at MOST 6 points for partner and often less. Applying #2, my hand has most of the points for our side, has entries, so if we are going to be setting up long suit tricks it should be my suit. Looking at a stiff ♣, I'd rate it highly likely declarer has 5 ♣s. If declarer has only 2 or 3 cards in either major, leading away from either K10 combination may well give a trick that declarer can't rightfully expect left ot his own devices when declarer holds honor doubleton or tripleton. So, in the end, it leads me to the 4th best ♦ as the best lead.

2 ♥ is definitely the right call over the 1 ♠ overcall. Based on the actual auction, I think ♦ K will be a fairly normal lead at IMPs. It's even more likely if partner rightly makes the initial 2 ♥ raise. The question is "Where can we get tricks to defeat to defeat the contract?". The opponent's have bid both black suits. ♥ are likely to yield no more than 2 tricks and more likely just one. The Q doubletons in your hand don't augur well for black suit tricks for the defense. It certainly can't be right to lead either of those. So you come to the ♦ K lead which works out if partner has the ♦ A or ♦ Q.