FelicityR

I personally dislike the balance of 3♠ on the second round. If you're going to bid Dbl after 2♥ is light but acceptable I feel even at adverse vulnerability, the extra card in each suit compensating for the lack of strength. There's no way you that would balance if the opponents had raised to 4♥ so you have to factor that in. The awkward scenario is if partner now bids notrumps after your double. Letting the opponents muscle you out at their favourable vulnerability is not an option. Better to take a slight risk with Dbl on the first round than missing a vulnerable game by keeping quiet.

Before the UK left the European Union (EU), the EU was considering allowing Turkey to become a member of the EU. That probably won't happen now, I feel. Turkey is a beautiful country - I have holidayed there on a few occasions - and its citizens are very pleasant, but it borders one of the most troubled areas of the world. If democracy is whittled away from its people after the recent election, it's just going to end up, I personally feel, like many of the countries in the Middle East and Africa, with more bloodshed and dissatisfaction generally. And that will be sad.

The basic rule with misfits is to stop bidding as soon as possible but if you reached 3NT with the East/West cards you'll likely to be in the same contract as other players I feel. Without knowing the bidding, if West decides to open (rule of 19 maybe) with his shapely but ultimately poor hand, East will be thinking slam slam slam. Stopping him will be extremely difficult. It's awkward to decide upon the exact bidding on the hands as it's likely North/South will intervene in ♥ too. If it is at all possible can you provide the auction on the above deal and then the forum members can comment on the bids made? That may be more productive in the long run, and then we can gently suggest alternatives.

Very kind words, Phil. Thank you. But I know my level, and I'd rather watch some young guns give the JEC team a run for their money than get involved myself. However I will keep on posting on the forums as it helps me learn, and helps others too, and it's good looking at all the replies to a specific question. It's stimulating.

I recognise I am way out of my depth even to contemplate taking part in a JEC game, that I enjoy watching from time to time. But, and I can only speak for myself, playing against some of the world's top players who have honed every bid and card to virtual perfection with a pick-up partner is, in my view, a car crash waiting to happen. I would not be nervous having people watch me - I have sung and acted in front of hundreds - but partnering someone who isn't a regular partner just makes the game doubly difficult, I feel. Given that JEC's team beats established partnerships regularly, I assume the 'lack of interest' for want of a better phrase is a combination of factors including what I have written above. Let's be honest, on a Saturday night, at 8pm European time, I would be getting ready for a night out at the theatre, or the cinema, or meeting friends for drinks, and I am sure there are many other European players who would be doing the same.

I play Solitaire regularly on here - to improve my 2/1 bidding and for enjoyment. And sometimes I am left wondering what is exactly going on as the robots make some, in my opinion, very strange bids. This seems one of them. In a normal auction I would say 4♥ was some sort of advanced cue bid agreeing ♠. Other than that I haven't got the foggiest idea what 4♥ means on the above hand. Obviously, the robot pulled out the wrong bidding card from the box. Director!

I find, sadly, that many TV programme makers, and even some fictional authors, do not give intellectual pursuits like bridge and chess justice. There's invariably something where I am watching or reading and thinking 'That's rubbish'. Or 'That's wrong'. Without naming names, long ago one bestselling British author wrote a short story about chess. It seemed farcical, too far-fetched. I gave it to my son who was, at the time, an avid chess player to read. His words: 'Totally ludicrous!' What happened next was even more extraordinary. My son was so annoyed he penned a letter to the publishers pointing out all the inaccuracies to which he eventually received a sheepish reply.

In my humble opinion, partner wouldn't be bidding 4♦ without ♠ support. He could have doubled the 3♥ bid instead and removed any ♣ preference to ♦ with a long ♦ suit. So bidding 4♥ over 4♦ seems ok. If he has a singleton or void in ♥ he will hopefully assume it is the ace as East hasn't raised. Bidding 4NT (natural) is also a possibility. And yes, the preferred bid is problematic in my opinion, but bidding 4NT says ♥ stopper not control.

My way of looking at it - rightly or wrongly - is that the 2♥ opener is promising few defensive tricks, and you have just three certain defensive tricks, possibly four. The last thing you want to do at MPs is double them into game for an absolute top. Just pass again. Bidding 3♥ is dubious as the ♥ distribution around the table could be 6, 5, 1, 1 with West holding a stack over declarer.

Personally I find bidding 3♦ with the West cards bizarre. I realise the post is about using cue bids after a multi 2♦, but surely the sensible bid is 4♥. With a balanced hand, doubleton ♠ and 4 card ♥ support there's only bid I would consider. Yes, we may miss a slam, but hoping that partner will interpret 3♦ as cue bid (without prior agreement) is asking for trouble, I feel.

It is misinformation but using an artificial club bid, and a complex system, there may be no way of relating a hand that has trick-taking potential (by way of length) except by tweaking the system. And how many of us have done that in the past? And if they had posted a poor result by tweaking the system, would you still have thought about calling the director? The only way to get a sensible overview probably is to ask other partnerships who play Polish Club what they would have bid with the same cards. Then, and only then, will you know whether there is something untoward going on.

Thank you again for all your replies. They made interesting reading.

It's a strange (to say the least) flexible arrangement. I'm no expert here but I've named it The Multi-Coloured (Hesitation) Takeout/Penalty Double. In my eyes, double and pass in a competitive auction (especially at the five level) should have a definite meaning, not some woolly interpretation.

Most 'strong expert' players in any sport or game, I suppose, will automatically know where they have gone wrong. As a moderately-advanced player myself with over 30 years of playing this game, I always know when I have made a right mess of things. As for stupidity, that normally occurs after the 2nd large glass of wine :)

I trust that partner's already worked out that as you didn't open a weak two bid vulnerable (in 2nd position) that you have a goodish ♥ suit but only 5 of them and a hand approaching but not quite an opening bid, and he then only bids 2NT. Whilst borderline bidding vulnerable games is recommended, these hands might suffer entry problems due to their distribution so 'Pass' it is for me too.

You wouldn't reverse on this hand as an opener so why should you even contemplate as an overcaller showing ♦s especially at red/white with a passed partner? That ♦AK is already part of your overcall, and whilst the ♣ suit is long, it is also tatty. You might have good play for a vulnerable sacrifice if partner turns up with the right cards and shape, but the 3♣ bidder could be unlimited. Better to keep quiet I feel.

When I learnt bridge many years ago I was told "Never pre-empt with a 4 card side suit major." But rules change and I have noticed that pre-emptive bids have become weaker and weaker in recent years but where do advanced/expert players now draw the line? Obviously vulnerability and position come into the equation too, but I'd be interested on your views and comments on the three following hands, assuming all non-vulnerable and dealer. Would you open, pre-empt or pass on the following hands? The main pre-emptive suit I have kept the same in all three, and I have made the suit semi-weak without the top three honours as they were pre-requisites for any pre-empt in yesteryear. [hv=pc=n&n=skt96hjt97654dqcj]133|100[/hv] [hv=pc=n&n=sa54hjt97654da8c2]133|100[/hv] [hv=pc=n&n=s98hjt97654dkqck2]133|100[/hv] Thank you for your replies in advance.

There used to be two younger men who played Precision at our club and I had a similar auction against them once with a genuine pre-emptive hand. They doubled my bid. When asked what this meant it was explained thus: Negative double forcing to game, any shape. "If you bid 4♣, partner bids 5♣, now 6♣ ? 6N ? 5N ? 5♠ ? do you fear the potential diamond ruff or insufficient heart stop more ?" (Cyberyeti) What I do fear is that the suits are unlikely to break, but I'm bidding 5 ♠ after a 4 ♣ - 5♣ raise, as it is the most descriptive (and lowest) bid: first round control of ♠; no first round control of ♥ or ♦. See what partner says to that bid first. And yes, it might just wrongside the contract, but it could rightside the contract too. You just don't know.

Having a degree of flexibility what constitutes a positive response to 2!C opening bid works well on this hand, but if opener had a different type of hand he might be embarrassed to find that your only control is the ♣ ace. Breaking the Kokish puppet 2♠ bid with a 2NT transfer to clubs is mentioned on Bridgeguys (as I have indicated in my earlier post.) Personally I am not keen on bidding 3♣ over 2♣: a 2♣ opener together with a positive response usually results in slam being reached. Many 2♣ openers are just 8 1/2 or 9 tricks, and only when opener turns up with ♣ KQx does the ♣ suit run without a hitch except on one 4-0 break. And it also depends if you are using 0314 or 1430 RKCB too as game as opposed to slam may be your only makeable contract.

Thank you Nigel for your advice. I will certainly take that on board in the future.

Fortunately I am familiar with the Kokish relay 2♣ - 2♦ - 2♥, etc. - in principle (though I had a further look online - Bridgeguys) Maybe if West declined the puppet 2♠ bid and bid 2NT instead as a transfer to ♣ the slam could be reached. What 2NT specifically means could be open to discussion, but at least a 6 card suit with 4-6 HCPs seems feasible. A quick check if playing 0314 Roman Key Card Blackwood by East would establish the ♣ ace and 12 tricks are there for the taking.

I have posted this in the intermediate and advanced forum - my level - although it is from an expert teams game I kibitzed recently. I would be grateful on players' comments on West's 4NT bid. I can understand it up to a point, but going 6 down doubled after South led ♣AKQJ stripping declarer and dummy of trumps and conceding a 1400 penalty when North/South have stopped in game and do not have a slam was disastrous. I certainly wouldn't have been brave enough to bid beyond 3♥, especially as partner had shown no interest, and given that South's 2NT relay bid usually indicates a good hand - but I recognise that it could also be psychic - was West bidding 4NT a bid too far and just very unlucky. [hv=pc=n&w=shakqt93dkj8c6543&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=2sp2n3hpp4s4nd5cdppp]133|200[/hv] Even though other kibitzers were watching this game, I feel it is perhaps prudent and discreet not to disclose who West was but even I was puzzled when he made this bid.

It all depends how weak the weak 2 level bid is, and whether a 2NT relay is unconditionally forcing to game. Even if 4♠ is not the right contract, 3NT by East might be. East passing with such a good hand just seems wrong to me. If East was the opening bidder and had opened 1NT, and West had bid 2♥ transfer, East would have super-accepted with 3♠.

Oh my God! I'm reasonably new to this forum and I didn't realise that things can get as feisty as this on here! I voted 'pass'. I gave my reason why, and I have been proved wrong. At the time of writing 12 votes for pass, and 32 votes for 4♥. I accept that there are far more better players on here than me, and the majority are in favour of a pre-empt. I graciously accept their decision. Thank you for enlightening me. Bridge is a game where you will learn something new until the day you meet your maker. If you cannot accept that, then you will get nowhere in this game, or in life for that matter...

When I do play on BBO - rarely these days as I prefer playing in the club - I take the compatibility 'star' factor with a pinch of salt. It would be interesting to know how BBO assess bridge compatibility. It seems a bit like online dating with cards, and many of us know (including myself) how inaccurate supposed compatibility is on dating sites!