The_Badger

Watched The Ox (Oxen) 1991 directed by Sven Nyquist a few days ago. Nyquist is considered one of the top cinematographers ever. He worked in his early days with Ingmar Bergman. A disquieting, but uplifting film about a man who illegally kills an ox to save his family from starvation...(but I won't spoil the plot any further.) Unfortunately the film is very rare. But the cinematography is amazing. No CGI or any of that nonsense!

It is more than generally accepted as takeout: it is takeout. Except on the very, very rare occasion where you have a good holding in opener's suit and little else (and that happens once in a blue moon).

It seems, Kaitlyn, that you've invented a new way of leading to certain contracts: either high/low (or odd/even) attitude, one showing an ace or king; and the other showing the Q or lower :)

I recognise that many people create health problems for themselves - obesity, drug use, alcoholism, etc. - and some are just unfortunate, but has anyone factored in how much side effects from some pharmaceutical drugs costs any health service? I now use a clean diet, nutriceutical, Ayurvedic and herbal routine to keep by severe arthritis in check, buying online (less than $100) every 3 months from an American company (iHerb) for the most part. I just have one rheumatology appointment (check-up) per year, rarely see doctors and thus keep this country's (United Kingdom's) National Health Service's bills down. I'm not saying everyone can follow my protocol, but the number of side effects I had from pharma drugs (steroids, NSAIDs, DMARDS) in the years from 2000 until 2010 that required health professional attention, added to the cost of the drugs themselves - some are very expensive - must have come to tens of thousands of dollars/pounds. And whilst I believe that people who create problems for themselves should be treated initially as any addiction should be recognised as a health problem, there should be no unending supply of cash to those that don't want to help themselves. My friend, who is a senior nurse in a City hospital, sees the same druggies, alcoholics, etc. come into Accident and Emergency time and time again. We might have a National Health Service in this country, but it is frightening how it is abused, and it is frightening how inefficient it can be.

Better late than never I say, given that I used to play against Sandra at the Avenue Bridge Club in Hove. (I have only just learnt of her death in January of this year) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandra_Landy Not just a nice person, but a real ambassador for the game, and a double world champion. RIP.

Jinksy! Where are you? Please show us the whole hand. I believe we have discussed this enough, and need a definitive answer.

There are more topics on the GIB Robot Discussion than the Natural Bidding Discussion. It's about time the GIB Robot Discussion was renamed the Unnatural Bidding Discussion :rolleyes:

Yes, Kaitlyn, it also went through my mind that West could have ♥Qx only, but he might have bid an offshape 1NT with your hand instead of 2♣ knowing that if the bidding went as in the diagram, he'd would have to lie about his ♥ stopper. The other thing is if West keeps his cool (reads the situation right) the defence may never come to 4♦ tricks, but it seems the only way the contract is off if West has ♥A

If you're new to the game, polarmatt - and I assume you are - there's quite a bit to learn and get your head around. I'm not going into the complicated stuff after 2NT like transfers, etc. but the basics. Most players (whatever system they play) generally open 2NT with a balanced 20-22 count. You generally need 25-26 points for a 3NT or 4 of a major suit ♥/♠ game, though these days the more experienced players work on 25 being the minimum. So even though 2NT is a strong bid it isn't a forcing bid. If you have nothing in your hand you just have to let the 2NT bidder do his best to try to make 8 tricks himself. If you are trying to learn the game solely online, I would suggest that you invest in a bridge book that covers bidding and/or take some bridge lessons. These will greatly help you understand the mechanics of the game. And good luck!

A few years ago, I played against a Precision pair who used the J2NT bid as a low level Blackwood bid. But it obviously makes more sense with Precision as the opening hand is limited to 11-15. But it then left more space to highlight other features before committing to game or slam. To me, they did seem to bid a few more thin slams that other partnerships missed, but whether it was an effective tool long term I honestly cannot say.

My interpretation is that opener is trying to sneak a ninth trick through (♠J) with a 5-4-2-2 holding. I also have a sneaky suspicion that he might even be 4♦/5♣ too. Take the trick and switch to ♦Q hoping that he guesses wrong and partner has enough ♦ spots to beat the contract.

[hv=pc=n&e=sa532hakqjd743ct7&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=3np]133|200[/hv] What action would you take opposite a gambling 3NT opener. Pass or bid on? Partner will have one of the minors with a suit of no less than AKQxxxx

Without any specific agreement, double seems a good (but awkward) starting place. Your strength compensates for that pathetic ♠ doubleton. There's no guarantee that partner has a minor suit fit. Where the auction heads from there is anyone's guess, but you'd be damn unlucky to end up in a 4-2♠ fit, although that is a possibility.

Rule of 19 says open at one level, he says jokingly. Whether that is eminently sensible is another matter. PASS and hope to throw in a Michael's-style bid at the earliest opportunity. Whether you will get another opportunity, well it all depends on the auction.

Deleted.

Most doubles below and including 2♠ in these types of auction for me personally are essentially takeout, depending on the vulnerability, etc. It would also be useful to know if 1NT after the major suit auctions is forcing or not? (Not every player plays it as such.) The question that probably needs to be asked is why didn't the doubler double on the previous round of bidding? Essentially that the doubler didn't want to overstate his hand by making an immediate double, but now wants to compete with shape at a low level. (And sorry if it seems I am stating the obvious but I am bit bemused why anyone would want a penalty double when opener has shown in some of the auctions a six card suit or better.) As for the two auctions where the opponents overcall the opener's (usually short) minor suit belatedly at the two level, they are a good suit with at least light opening bid values. Full stop.

I am curious about this too. xavierf's thread got me thinking that the 3NT rebid in competition has to have a specific point range. As wank said on the thread "Partner has shown 18-19 balanced or something off shape with somewhat less." How much 'somewhat less' is what you are driving at in this post, I feel, and it's an awkward area of bidding that's for sure. With a 2NT rebid assigned to a minimum opener, that leaves potentially a 3NT rebid as anything in the range (14)15-19 that fits and looks like 3NT will be the best contract. Not exactly accurate if responder has a good hand and wants to progress. +1 for the post as i'll be interested how players more-experienced-than-me vote on the specific hands, or if there are any hard and fast rules (that I don't know of) for dealing with such hands.

Although I like the 4♠ bid, I personally prefer 4♦. It's 99% certain that it's going to end in a ♥ contract at some level, and whilst you have a fair idea what partner's hand is, he has no idea that you have a semi solid suit and two singletons. You're the one that wants to know what controls he has, and whether he has anything in ♦ to fill the gaps, or a ♣ suit in his own hand to get rid of the ♦ losers. You can always bid 4♠ next but I prefer 4NT after he has given preference to ♥, as is the most likely scenario (not guaranteed but likely). Whilst 4♠ is a scientific bid, partner is then posed the two conundrums 1) have you a void, singleton or ace as the control, and, 2) whether RKCB or a cuebidding continuation is best? The first thing you want to know is whether he has those two aces and the ♥K. A 4♦ bid, in my view lets you take control of the bidding.

My apologies. I should have clarified. When I said "The majority of players also insist, though sometimes it is not always practically possible, that if you overcall 1NT you should have a stopper in the opener's suit." I was speaking generally about overcalling 1NT. J9xx is a stop on this hand, as ahydra kindly points out. Though, it is all the more important to potentially have a stopper if the opponents open 1♥ or 1♠ as most players now open with at least a 5 card major suit these days.

Welcome to the forum, polarmatt Stephen Tu's analysis is spot on. I see from your profile that you come from New Zealand where the weak NT (12-14) may be played as an opening bid (with Acol), but that's a completely different scenario to overcalling an opening bid with 1NT. As Stephen says, as one hand has already shown some values, it is easier for his partner to take punitive action when you overcall, especially when you overcall 1NT. I won't go into great detail at novice/beginner level with this auction: I presume the double was strictly for penalties; the redouble may have been "I think we can make it partner" not knowing that you have overcalled 'light' (less points than you are supposed to have). The redouble can also mean (at different bridge levels) "Help! I don't like 1NT doubled, can we find a fit at the 2 level?". The majority of players also insist, though sometimes it is not always practically possible, that if you overcall 1NT you should have a stopper in the opener's suit.

I have just noticed something that happened on the 9th June: there were 859 online on the forums at the same time - a record! And, if I remember correctly, I believe the previous record was definitely quite a few years ago, maybe four or six, even longer perhaps. So all this input that many players put in for free - well done everyone that contributes - is being recognised and it's encouraging players of all standards to read the comments, and hopefully contribute themselves. Don't be shy!

My thinking goes is that partner definitely needs the ♣A for the grand to be cold, and there's a 1 in 3 chance he has it. Add into the mix that there are other keycards, ♠A, ♥K and ♦K that might be needed - all depending on the distribution - I would definitely pass. Surely he could have invented a forcing bid like 3♥ instead of jumping straight to 6♣ if his hand fitted that well. And if partner then bids 3NT, surely 4♣ would be forcing now instead of merely preference.

Yes, well done Nafiz Zorlu and Nezih Kubac. And thanks for the link. Now had time to read it - some very interesting hands. But the one I found unusual was Zia's 2♣ opening bid: I assume he was playing a normal system with Jeff Meckstroth.

Admittedly I am no 2/1 technical bidding specialist, but usually the principle of "minimum values, fast arrival" should hold true with most bridge systems that are played. So A) would indicate to me, long ♥s, nothing extra outside whatsoever, probably 7-2-2-2 or similar. and B) again, long ♥s, let's see where you are going, oh no! no support for your suits, nothing extra whatsoever. and C) again long ♥s but 4♥ is a better contract than 3NT, but as the bidding was slower, I might have slight extra values but nothing extraordinary to warrant slam. No doubt someone who has the latest 2/1 book will tell me that I am completely wrong

+1 for analysis. -1 for disclosing (partially) who the 'anonymous' expert poster is. (I already knew anyway.) Respect to both of you as you are both far, far better players than me, but I come from an era when bridge was a more genteel pastime as opposed the cut and thrust of today's game :)