SteveMoe

w/w + 9 trumps = 3♣. Not encouraging at all. Hoping they walk into a Major...

1) ♥8. All I need from partner is ♥KJ10xx. No overcall might simply mean insufficient strength. 3=5=2=3 with 4 HCP is not an overcall, yet could set this puppy. I will venture a ♥ because neither opponent showed 4 when they had the chance. With luck, the ♥Qxx will be to my left. ♣ could easily be 3=4=3 around the table... 2) ♥ King - to take a peek. To much to guess at trick 2...

Zel, Useful insight. Thanks! Yes - the 1/2 trick adjustment is just that. MLTC is my third back up. I indulge when too tired to use SST a la Wirgren and Lawrence. Really like Working Points valuation. Couldn't find a path in these approaches to explain why Aces and Spaces is erroneous (imho). Agree w/above posters that players without planning and creativity probably perpetuate this concern.

xfer to ♥, rebid 3♣ over 3♦/3♠/3N rebid 4♣. I have no mechanism to transfer to ♣ then show hearts. Interestingly, a Stayman call can strike paydirt if partner responds 2♥.

With my partners, 1N tends to deny 4 ♥s. I will bid 2♥. Too many slow values in their suit for more now.

Check out the adjustments published in Klinger's book. The context is that Axx Axx Axx Axxx is an apparent 8 loser hand, one more than the minimum "requirement" for a 1 level opening bid, and that is certainly not right. Yes - MLTC is for suit play, not NT. I assumed folks wouldn't question that. ;) Yes, trick taking potential is really about BOTH hands with a good trump suit (5-3 neutral; 6-2 negative; 6-3/5-4 positive. 7-card trump suits in a 9+ card fit reduce loser count by 1. etc....). We can agree suit contracts are frequently played after a 1N or 1m opening. The simpler point is 4 Aces and spaces is quite valuable opposite as little as KQxxxxx and out. I agree with prvious posters that downgrading these hands likely traes to weaker players who do not plan their declarer play. M. Bergen referenced a A=4.5 / K=3 / Q=2.5 / J=0.75 / 10=0.25 scale (also discuees in Bridge World). That upvalues the hand to 18 and not down to 14. Add in 4 10's and we're at the equivalent of 19 HCP...

I think calling attention to the UI immediately is best. Here I would have called the Director anyway. I am looking for some helpful "behavior modification" to ensure the rest of the field is not mistreated in some similar fashion in a later round by this pair. The Spade play smacks of UI abuse IMHO. The irony of the result is palpable, but doing nothing after the hand is done is not an option.

You're probably aware that MLTC promotes loser count by one for every 2 Aces held more than queens. So Axxx Ax Axx Axxx appears to count to an 8 loser but is considered a 6 loser (8-(4Aces/2) = 6). If 4333 shape, reducing winners by 1 makes sense. Clearly if we open 15-16 INT with only 4 Aces, then partner's invitations will fill in a few holes. Ax Axx Axx Axxxx > Axxx Axx Ax Axxx > Axx Axx Axx Axxx. Perhaps the Aces and Spaces argument came when partner was broke and we had to play with no cover cards opposite. I'll take my chances. There's always garbage stayman or the redouble runout to the rescue!

If 2-3-4 is a guide, opener has a rule 3 preempt. Responder needs 3 sure cover cards and does not have them. Would not argue against passing in 1st seat here. If opener held x xxx x KQ108xxxx there would be no question.

Your hand, should you choose to accept it is: [hv=pc=n&s=st8hk873dcakqjt73&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=3n(Gambling%20no%20outside%20A/K%201st%20and%202nd%20seat)p]133|200[/hv] Partner is a reliable advanced player. You have discussed for weeks the foolishness of the 3N gambling opening. It wrong sides the contract and reveals too much about the opener's hand in 1st and 2nd seat. Now that you have one yourself you can scarcely believe your eyes/ears when partner puts 3N on the table... Your methods are simple - minor is pass/correct. You are not sure we have ever discussed what a Major suit bid would be. You assume it is control showing (is it?). 4N Is completely undiscussed. Partner must have AKQ10xxx at a bare minimum. The recent post by Quartic Replacement for Gambling 3N is still whispering in your ear. So, do you pass, hoping pard has something useful in [spades}? Do you bid 4♣, knowing partner would correct to ♦ on this hand? Do you Bid 4♦ perhaps expecting we have 3-losers in the majors? Do you bid 4♣ expecting to rebid 5♣ over partner's correction to 4♦? One consideration you have is that partner probably has a better chance of reahing your hand in ♣ that you have of reaching partner's in ♦. When there is a major transportation issue it's often right to let partner's suit be trumps. Have you ever had partner reempt your Gambling 3N opening bid with their own? Here's the full hand... [hv=pc=n&s=st9hk873dcakqjt73&w=saj76532ht94d965c&n=s4h652dakqj8742c4&e=skq8haqjdt3c98652&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=3n(Gambling%20no%20A/K%20Outside)p]399|300[/hv] Opponents can make 4♠. Results where all over the place!

Let's await the peer review of the recent experiments - not sure they are of the quality and scale necessary for firm decision. Uncertainy in the face of political force shoud be met with fact not emotion.

Knowing ♥K, ♠A, ♣A, and 4 ♦ cards means there are 13 tricks 89% of the time (78% 2-1 ♦ break, plus 50% of the time partner guesses the 3-0 ♦ break right IFF we are missing the ♦Q).

5♥ is where this hand seems to live. However 4N 2-places-to-play might pay dividends. Over partner's bid, perhaps a correction to 5♥ would show a 6=4 shape (the direct 5♥ a one suiter).

Agree Fluffy. I would probably choose the ♠5 and hope partner can win, switch to ♥ and eventually return to the ♠ suit. The 5 should suggets 1 Honor not 2 in spades. Partner should read the switch to Hearts. We'll see.

We don't have ♠ they do. Let's make it hard for them to land there. I bid 3♠ forcing, and expect LHO to fumble, stutter and fluster for 20 seconds then pass. When partner rebids 4♦ or raises to 4♠, I will bid 5♦. If the opponents can unravel this one, I'll tip my hat.

We could duck the lead, then win the continuation with an eye toward leading twice toward the ♥KQ. The duck helps either when ♠s are 3-3 (not out of the question) or when Lefty is 4=2=4=3.

How did Captains Pike and Kirk do in the closed room?

Pass. Not close. Of the 8 HCP 6 are working, but the ♣A is singleton, a deduction. Double shows the other two suits with aobut 9 working HCP, but for some denies 5 ♠ cards. 2♠ would show a better suit in a better hand (KJTxx with 5 working HCP eslewhere).

A good approach Chris. I've been playing this one with some success (2♣ promises 6 (5 in 3rd seat)): 2♥/♠ 8-10 5+ cards. Partner may raise to 3 w/4-card raise maximum. 2N = 11-12 Balanced. Might have 4-card major. Opener passes, bid 3-clubs with distributional minimum or bids 4-card major (GF). 2♦ 11+ HCP query, but NOT 11-12 balanced. ......2♥/♠/3♦ = 4-cards suit ......2N = 2 side suits stopped ......3♣ = 1 suid suit stopped ......3♦ = max unbalnced (never open 2♣ with 5=6 in minors). ......3♥/♠ = min 5=6 ......3N = Max balanced ......4♥/♠ = max 5=6 3/4/5/6/7♣ to play 3♦ = 5♥s & 4+♠s invitational 3♥ = 6♥ GF 3♠ = 6♠ GF 3N plays 4♦ Redwood 4♥/♠ Plays Here's a more esoteric approach: 2♣ (11-15 HCP) 6+ ♣, denies 5 Card Side Suit. ........2♦r / Double / Redouble - 11+ Asking .............[11-13]: 2♠o no Major; 2No – 4 Hearts; 3♣- 4 Spades] .............[13-15]: 2♥o Bal or 4-Card Major; 2♠r Asks: ..................2No=4 Hearts; 3♣o=4 Spades; 3♦o=2236; 3♥o=2326; 3♠o=3226; 3 No=2227]] .............[13-15]: 3♦ 3/2=3/2=1=6/7; 3♥ 3/2=1=3/2=6/7; 3♠ 1=3/2=3/2=6/7; 3N 233=6 ........2♥r / 2♠r 8-10 5+ Cards Constructive Non Forcing ........2Nr 10-11 Constructive ........3/4/5♣r Plays ........3♦r / 3♥r /3♠r - Good Suit 11-12 Invitational Non-Forcing ........4♦r RKB Clubs ........4♥r /4♠r Plays ........4N Beta Ask (Top Controls A+2, K=1) w/implied preference for NT.

I like your build - I was more inclined to finish the 6=4 pattern first... Steve

Pass! Neither Double nor 5♥ transfers blame to partner!

I like the following after 1♣-1♦: 1 Major shows 5+ and 16+ HCP, Partner will have 4 cards if holding singleton or void (4441 54xy 64ab, etc. where 5+ card suit is a minor). Forcing one round. Then responder bids as follows: 1♠ = 0-5 HCP and 0-3 ♠s 1NT = 0-5 HCP (Promises 4+ ♠ over opener's ♥s. Intended as forcing. (Kaplan Inversion right sides majors. Switch back to natural if you like). 2♣ = 6-7 HCP 0-2 M cards, not 5+ cards in OM. 2♦ = 6-7 3 card raise. 2M = 2-3 HCP, 3+ card raise 2 OM = 5+ cards, 6-7 HCP denies 3+ card fit for M. 3♣/♦/OM = mini splinter: 0/1 with 4-5 HCP and 4 trumps. 3M = 4-5 HCP and 4+ card raise 2N = 6-7 HCP Balanced raise. Opener new suits are asking bids (epsilon or suit control ask) 4♣/♦/OM = mini splinter: 0/1 with 4-5 HCP and 4 trumps. 4M = Preempt raise 5+ Trumps and a 0/1 somewhere, with one outside . This hand is a clear 2N. Partner will take one more bid and you will insist on game (your 5th trump told you to do this). We avoid jumping to 4M as partner is unlimited. Aside - the older Italian Ask Jump rebid by opener (zeta) could be made on a 4-card suit. We avoid that. Too much space consumed. This means the 1M rebid is unlimited. Work relly well. Now we use Zeta only when we need to know partner's exact holding in our suit.

Showing ♦A looking for control bidding toward a ♣ slam.

I bid 2♥ first. My rebid deserves more consideration: I have 4-losers. Partner is inviting/stretching in ♥. Like it or not the stretch hand would be a 8 HCP hand with 5♥, whereas any 8 loser with 4 hearts would also bid 3♥. (Let's leave the discussion about responsive doubles with 4 cards in the other major aside for now). With my holding I simply think partner is more likely to have the 9-11 HCP 4-loser with 4 hearts. If so 6♥ seems right.

I prefer double to 1♠ but only slightly. I dislike 1N strongly - too hard to find a 5-3 fit in ♠. The reason I like double first is I prefer the overcall limit of 16 HCP and prefer an overcall than double to promise a 6-card trumps suit and imply 6331 shape. Playing a higher overcall range 1♠ is appealing.