Balrog49

Sounds right to me. I remember playing in George's game at the Newton, Mass. YMCA about 40 years ago. He was the only director I've ever known who insisted on positioning the tables so that North on the table cards pointed to geographic North.:D

[hv=pc=n&s=shtd86ckt&w=shdqtcj86&n=shdca9432&e=sk75hdcq7]399|300[/hv] The ten of hearts squeezes West. If he discards a diamond, South can play a diamond to establish the critical trick in the suit. Is this just a simple squeeze or something else?

A friend told me that every bridge player has a few hands that haunt them forever. In my case, it's the hand where I should have made 5♥ redoubled by executing a one-suit squeeze. It was a huge regional Swiss at a nationals and we probably would have won the event.

If there is no interference, 3♣ Gamma will tell you that partner has six to one honor (the ace). Unfortunately, it doesn't include a way to show seven or more. Then 4♣ Beta will tell you that partner has four controls and that your total is ten but you don't know whether he has the ace of diamonds or two red kings. Then 5♦ or 5♥ Epsilon will tell you which. But if there is interference, you may not get the chance to make three asking bids, even playing D1P2 and R1P2. That's why I can't find fault with 4NT. Partner will show the trump queen with extra length and thus 4NT potentially gets you more information than three asking bids. In all my years of playing Precision, I can't remember another instance of Blackwood occurring in a 1♣ auction.

Partner's actual hand was: [hv=pc=n&n=sakqt3haq9d4ckq76&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=p1c(Precision%2016+%20HCP)p2c(8+%20HCP%2C%205+%20Clubs%2C%20GF)2d4n5d]133|200[/hv] Knowing that responder had extra length helped him place the contract. He can count three spades, one heart, one diamond, and six clubs = 11 tricks off the top. If seven clubs, then 12 off the top. In either case, if spades run, 7NT is cold. If not, there's the heart finesse and there may be a squeeze. And responder could have the jack of spades and/or one or two red kings. Opener would have bid 5NT to check. We didn't actually play this hand. The opponents did. They got all the way to 5♣. Playing Precision guarantees that the opponents get these hands.

Good idea but irrelevant. In theory, we could play that 4C is Minorwood but we have a different agreement (see below). Minorwood is fine for natural systems but doesn't make much sense opposite a strong club. Here's what opener's rebids would have been: 2♥, 2♠ - Alpha asking for fit and controls 2NT - Balanced 19-21 3♣ - Gamma asking for suit quality 3♦ - Cancels asking sequence and starts cue bidding 3♥, 3♠ - Zeta asking for precise holding 3NT - Signoff 4♣ - Beta asking for total controls 4♦ - Splinter asking for cue bidding 4♥, 4♠ - Signoff 4NT - RKCB 5 any - Signoff

This hand was easy but what if responder has only six clubs? [hv=pc=n&n=sj8h64da2cat95432&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=p1c(Precision%2016+%20HCP)p2c(8+%20HCP%2C%205+Clubs%2C%20GF)2d4n5d5sp7nppp]133|200[/hv]

Many people play that you bid five spades when holding two aces and extra length in the trump suit. What exactly constitutes extra length?

Actually, opener had to guess a queen with AJT opposite K9x with nothing to go on other than the bidding. The ruff-sluff removed the guess.

My actual hand was xxx xx QTxx Jxxx. A long time ago, I was taught that you encourage when you have nothing safe for partner to shift to. Which is the lesser of evils here?

The opponents, a pickup partnership, had the following disaster: [hv=pc=n&w=s7hakt9862dat7ct4&e=sjt982h3d2cakq765&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=pp1hp1sp2hp3cp3hppp]266|200[/hv] Opener won the diamond lead, drew two rounds of trumps, and ran the clubs until someone ruffed with the queen. Making five for a zero. If I remember correctly, a new minor on the three level is forcing for one round without prior agreement. Is that correct? Does anyone play it as forcing to game?

At matchpoints, I opened 1♠ and LHO doubled. Partner bid 2♠ with this hand: AJ62 JT KJ83 T86 2♠ was a weak raise. We play inverted Bergen raises but not in comp. 2NT would have promised a four-card limit raise or better and 3♠ would have been preemptive. We were the only pair in the room to miss game in spades. I would have bid 2NT with his hand. Is there a way to distinguish three-card from four-card support and weak, constructive, limit, and forcing raises? And are there Bergen-like methods that apply to an overcall sequence, e.g., 1♠-(2♣)-2♠?

Defending against a game, partner led the king of his AKxxx suit and cashed the ace, me following with the 10 and 2 from QTxx. Partner thought I had a doubleton and played a third round of diamonds, giving declarer a ruff-sluff that lost the only chance to beat the contract. Is there a way to distinguish between situations where you have two or four of the opening leader's suit? In case you're wondering, I couldn't support partner's suit on this hand. I had a flat three-count. We would have gone for -1100.

My experience in this area is primarily the New England Regional Individual, in which you get some really awful partners. Here's what's worked for me: Keep a smile on your face no matter what happens.Don't discuss poor results at the table unless partner asks you to teach while playing.Don't expect partner to understand anything sophisticated. Use only the most straightforward bidding sequences and defensive strategies.Mastermind like crazy. It's better to play the hand in the wrong strain than to watch partner throw away tricks in the right strain.

Again, thanks to everyone who responded. It's very much appreciated. One comment in particular hit home: "You really need to be able to hold a whole layout in your head and solve it before you can become a good defender." I can do that when I'm declarer or solving a double-dummy problem, so there's no reason why I can't learn to do it on defense. When I get a look at dummy and feel helpless, I just have to choose a starting point and work from there, even when the bidding doesn't reveal anything and it seems like there are an infinite number of possibilities. Whenever I make a mistake on defense, I'm going to copy the hand and post it here. Maybe someone can tell me what I should have been visualizing but wasn't.

Many thanks to all who have responded. It's much appreciated. I should have provided a better idea of my level of play. I have about 1250 points and have won two open regional events, four Flight Bs, and dozens of sectionals. I've never won a national event so I classify myself as "Advanced" even though I've been advised to change it to "Expert." Maybe if my defense were better. I stopped playing bridge for 20 years to raise a family but now I've been back for a few months and I'm finding that my bidding and declarer play are as good as they ever were but my defense is not. I played in a two-session sectional pairs last Saturday with a good partner (about 3000 points). I made about four or five costly defensive errors and one awful declarer play blunder, which brought us down to average. See: http://www.bridgebas...tract-now-what/ > The best way to improve is to have a regular partner and to discuss every hand with them. Right now, I have only one regular partner who plays about as well as I do. Playing on BBO is a great way to go back over the hands you play and I intend to do a lot more of that. Maybe I can provide some "what should I have been thinking?" example hands.

My bidding and declarer play are very good but my defense sucks. I get lost on hands where there's little or no information from the bidding. It seems like there are so many possible layouts of the unbid suits that I spend all my time and effort counting everything and trying to avoid mistakes, instead of using logic to visualize what's in the unseen hands. I don't understand why, but I'm infinitely better at visualization when I'm declarer. I've struggled with this for many years and it's very frustrating. No one can tell me what I should be doing differently. I've read Kelsey and many other books on defense. I do much better with their example hands than I do at the table. Maybe it's the pressure from fear of making an embarrassing mistake. Helpful suggestions would be most welcome.

Thanks. All that effort for nothing. It seems so easy if you just look at it the right way.

Okay, suppose North is declarer in 4♥ and West has ♠KQxxxx ♥Kxx and four minor suit cards including the ♦A. Declarer wins the spade lead and takes the heart finesse, winning. If declarer plays a third round of hearts, West can cash a spade and a diamond to hold declarer to 10 tricks. If declarer tries to run the clubs instead of playing a third heart, what happens depends on West's distribution. If he has 6-3-3-1, he can ruff the second round of clubs, cash a spade, exit with a spade, and wait for his diamond tricks for down one. If he has 6-3-2-2, declarer gets a pitch on the third round of clubs. If he has 6-3-1-3 with the stiff ace of diamonds, declarer can play four rounds of clubs, pitching a spade and a diamond to make six.

Matchpoints, no one vul. [hv=pc=n&s=sa5h7dkt87cak6532&n=sj4haqjt863d43cq7&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=p1c1s2hp3cp3hp3nppp]266|200[/hv] The opening lead was the ♠K and as soon as I saw dummy, I knew the field would be in 4♥ so I had to make at least the same number of tricks in NT. Here's how I analyzed it and I'd really like to know if my logic was sound. 1. I expected most declarers to win the spade lead and play a heart to the queen, hoping for ♥K to be singleton or doubleton onside. I guesstimated that picking up the ♥K was something less than 50-50. The bidding made it likely to be onside but the a priori probability of K or Kx onside vs. all other combinations was definitely less than 50-50. 2. Obviously, something good had to happen in NT: either clubs run or the ♥K is in the slot or both. Otherwise, I'm dead meat - I'm getting a zero. 3. If the ♥K is in the slot, they would be making 10 to 13 tricks, depending on the club split and if clubs not 3-2, the location of the ♦A. Otherwise they would be making 8 to 12 tricks depending... 4. If the ♥K is in the slot, I'm making 11 or 13 tricks, depending on the club split, the location of the ♦A, and the possibility of an end position. This will probably be a good result. 5. What if the ♥K is not in the slot? If I lose the heart finesse before I run the clubs, I'm dead meat. But if I run the clubs first, I'll put some pressure on them and maybe find an end position. 6. If the heart finesse wins with Kxx onside, I'll have six clubs, two hearts, and a spade for +400. Maybe a good result. Maybe not. 7. If I win the spade lead and run the clubs, I'll have a six-card end position which is worthless. But if I duck the spade lead and win the second round, I'll have a five-card end position. LHO may have to come down to the ♥Kxx, the ♦A and one spade winner. If I put him in with the ♦A, he can cash his spade but then has to lead away from the ♥K and I'll have nine tricks making +400, which is a zero unless 4♥ is going down. (I can get the same result by simply taking the heart finesse.) So how does 4♥ go down? 8. In 4♥, if the heart finesse loses to the king, they may be able to take a spade and two diamonds to go along with their heart trick. In that case, +400 will be good. If the heart finesse wins but LHO has Kxx, declarer may or may not be able to pitch a diamond on the third round of clubs. So +400 may or may not be good. 9. So it seemed like the choices were to play for nine tricks or 13 tricks. At this point, I was unsure of what was best but was running out of time and had to do something. So I decided to play for nine tricks and ducked the first spade. LHO banged down the ♦A and I had a big, fat zero. He was looking at ♥Kx in the slot. Clubs were 3-2 and everyone in hearts made 13 tricks. My logic seems reasonable to me but did I miss anything?

So I've noticed. I watch a lot on my iPhone while waiting for kids, etc., and I've seen "Expert" and even "World Class" players make horrendous mistakes. My profile is set to "Advanced" because although I've won several regionals and dozens of sectionals, I've never won a national event. Some of the "Expert" players I've watched couldn't win a national event in the U.S. in a million years. I've had enough of sitting down with "intermediate" and "advanced" players who have no concept of the game and try to blame their bad results on me. They're not even smart enough to know how bad they are. If I have no regular partners online and want to play for 30-60 minutes, how do I get to a decent table? Barry

Sorry if this has been asked before. I've read the help in BBO and searched the forums, but can't find the answer to what seems like an obvious question: what bidding methods are in play when you sit down at a table with an unknown partner? BBO Standard? BBO 2/1? SAYC? Your profile? His/her profile? Barry