maartenxq

I play xx and all suit bids responder are transfer ie. xx = ♣. Pass forces xx opener then 2 ♣ RH looks for openers best suit. Maarten Baltussen

First reaction: They cannot play this so I bid. First question: what bid? 5 ♣? P cannot even double 3? 4 NT can be disastrous. lets read reactions then. Arguments for pass are convincing indeed, do I resign, which can be very wrong too. Maarten Baltussen

Agree, if in C had 12 hcp I would pass. this is btw why an identical shaped 10-11 hcp responder should prceed with care, especially in mps. Maarten

Difficult. 3nt may be better but shape and medium intermediate cards make me bid stayman. Plus i hate to be the wise guy who decides on some whims where to go without consulting partner. Maarten Baltussen

I pass, This will surely turn out to be disastrous, why else the problem. Lead a heart see what to do next. Maarten Baltussen

You bid like the unlucky expert. Agree alas with your choices. Maarten Baltussen

Agree. Another option would be of course to pass the dbl, opps are at least vulnerable. I know several opps in bbo tnrmts against which I would do this a tempo.

No opening values, 2 ♠too timid, 4 ♠too high, so per exclusion we bid 3. Maarten Baltussen

Think you must act here at any scoring. We may make something, we may have a save, they can bid (wrongly) higher. Some days we will go for a number but that's life. Reasoning like this bidding is 75% on. These are better odds than the 50% you get in any lottery: either you win or you loose. Maarten Baltussen

When I used to play big dutch mps tournaments, I was always asked to indicate our pairs playing strength. This could and can be controlled by yr nbb masterpoints or competition level you play. Based on this data it is quite easy to make a number of groups (like now in champions league) from which you draw the playing list. I do not know however how 'sophistacated' yr pub drive operates. These drives have of course a large luck factor. Years ago our rather mediocre team won the Amsterdam pub drive, among other factors because in our last match the weakest player of our oppposing team chose to sit west instead of east and make a mess of all the easy decisions he had to make. Greetings Maarten Baltussen

2♥indeed. 4-3 fit will not be horrible and maybe even the way to a winning 4 ♥. Downside is of course when partner thinks like us with AJ10. Agree with your initial pass. I hate partners who open hands like this and then bid 2 ♠, lying about strength and distribution. Maarten Baltussen

Problems. 1 and 3 are weak invitational because of 5 card ♥. 2 u can bid 1 nt in my opinion, certainly in mps. Your problem has already been solved by the xyx convention, an extension of checkback stayman. After 1 x - 1 y 1 z - ? you bid 2 ♣ with any invitational hand or a lot of diamonds. Parten MUST bid 2 ♦ whereupon you say what you have, in this case 2 ♥or nt. If you happen to have gf values you bid 2 ♦ gf relay after partners second bid and p bids naturally. Maarten Baltussen

I think the main lesson that should be learned is that it is time for the exit. As far as I know canapee bidding is not Acol but partners whim. Second he belongs to the big BBO family who refuse to support partner (no 3 [hearts). 'But I must bid my [diamonds, partner!' Well then start with them and you will not be in the mess you created yourself!

IMP pairs. 4♥ is cold, 4♠X is down 1 (and would have made had S had the A♥). Should we have found it? Our overcalls are relatively standard I think - very roughly 9-18 here. Much depends on opponents methods. Assuming their 4 ♥ is hands like these and stronger hands cue first 4 ♠ from west is relatively easy in my view. If opponents bid the same with balanced fits you take a considerable risk but at imps you cannot allow to be blown away.

Indeed, but it would also help to know who is vulnerable.

Years ago I used to play rubber bridge and team matches for money in mixed company. Not for tremendous stakes by the way. One of the more experienced players, who shall remain nameless, explained once to me: if I double slowly in competitive bidding my thinking prevents you ethically from taking out my double, so these doubles are for penalty. Come to think of it, I remember having read an interview of Hans Kreijns, dutch top player in the 60's and former world champ, telling of his matches against the Blue team, who were signaling odd even. 'This gives a problem when holding only odd cards and wanting to sign off. I cannot say they were very obvious about it, but I have witnessed several times an ever so slight pause and then partner duly switched.' In Kreijns' opinion this was legitimate partner understanding and he firmly denied all rumors of Italian cheating etc., apart from the famous tap dancers in Bermuda.

As already stated 2 nt is clearly for minors. As it went however, P bids 2 NT. This should indicate some values and I think u have enough for 3 NT.

You can play 2 ♣- anything 4♠promises hands like this. Unorthodox not without risk but p knows he can count on lots of tricks and point shortage.

If p can say 2 C or H problems are over. U bid 3 S fixing suit and ask p to start cueing. I wi

Bridge is difficult as it is and defence even more. Imps, so we must defeat the contract. Now there is a simple rule, if we do not know what to lead we lead longest and strongest. Can be wrong can be makestart can be overtricks, but at least partner knows what I am doing. In this case I thin k I can afford the jack.

Tell what you have, ie minors and slam interest. Then partner can make a decision how to proceed. So 2 S and after partners bid 3 D. If P does not move 3 nt it will be. After superaccept I will move forward myself to 6 or even 7 with enough key cards. Maarten Baltussen

3 S it is. Partner must have seen vulnerability too and if not this is a good way to teach him to do so in future. tx for simulation btw.