The_Badger

[duplicated]

hi helene_t Seeing both hands (and that helps) there is a totally crazy solution to this problem, The Badger says firmly tongue in cheek. ***Warning***Must not be tried at home (on the kitchen table) or at a bridge club West opens 1♦, East bids 1♠, West bids 2♥! If players still bid up the line at the one level, if East raises ♥ then West can assume his partner has 5+ ♠. Other than this bonkers suggestion, I personally cannot see anything wrong with 3♥ after 3♣. 5♣ looks the best percentage contract given the 2 hands. Just as a reference point that West hand is a stonking 23.65 on the Kaplan and Rubens hand evaluator!

hi ahydra Both need some hard labour, breaking rocks as opposed to playing bridge :) East's hand comes out at a juicy 17.05 on the Kaplan & Rubens hand evaluator. Personally I don't like rebidding 3♦ with a void in my partner's suit and a long, broken suit myself, but does 2♦ do this hand justice? As for West, what was he/she thinking of passing 4♦? He/she must have been on his/her cellphone to his/her martial partner discussing options on the hire purchase agreement on the car and forgot to bid! Send them down!

hi dickiegera, How lucky you are to have a X to contend with as opposed to an intervening bid. Dbl. gives you that extra bid Redbl. to show good hands, and Dbl. doesn't raise the level of the bidding either! So a 2♣ bid to me here would show exactly what you have: an 8-11 HCPs or thereabouts hand that is predominantly one-suited, in essence a free bid. Non forcing if needs be. With ♣AKQ986 in the same hand, I feel it's just about worth a XX. That hand is close to opening bid territory, and Kaplan and Rubens hand evaluator confirms that at 12.90.

hi Fluffy, Both examples give the impression of a game or bust mentality that I have noticed more and more in the modern game. There seems to me a loathing to play any major suit at the three level, and 'sub-prime' 3NT hands are common nowadays too. If I were playing at this level, against seasoned, experienced and expert partnerships, I wouldn't dream of disrespecting their knowledge, integrity and card play. The second example you give, board 9, is a classic example. Good X though :) A skinny 22HCPs with one good 5 card suit, one bad 5 card suit and virtually non-existent intermediates is translated into a 3NT game. (ok, it might have been a state of the match bid.) But how many times these sort of hands actually make 9 tricks? 1 in 5, I guess? 1 in 6? To me, that's a bad percentage. 3NT is always an edgy bid with a combined 25. You have a slight advantage normally as the strong hand is usually concealed, and with the lead coming up to you that sometimes guarantees an extra trick. Just in simple math. 13 (total tricks) x 25/40 (combined points over total points) = 8.125 potential tricks.

hi manudude03, I'm a coward and not going to vote as not quite sure, except by agreement, what 4♦ signifies. If North is strong why not X and then remove/act upon partner's next bid instead of 4♦? The more I try to visualise a 4♦ hand, the less confident I feel of finding the right bid with the South cards. Never overcall a pre-empt with a pre-empt is a hard and fast rule as far as I am concerned. 4NT looks the sensible bid without agreements. Thankfully you're holding the ♦K so can still bale out in 5♦ if partner turns up with just one ace. Cowardly I know.

hi MrAce, 10♣ lead and trumps eliminated suggest that West is 3-2-2-6, 3-1-3-6 or 3-3-1-6 shape. Might have overcalled slightly light non-vulnerable with a six carder as lead directional. Have to get rid of West's primary entry first ♦A first: after that it is plain sailing. Also, small possibly that East has lead from ♣10 9 and the ♣8 becomes an important card with ♥A as an entry.

hi MrAce, After 30 minutes, I've tried various full and partial eliminations, throwing West in to cash his ♥s and hopefully lead away, this that and the other, but due to the awkward entry situation between the two hands, I cannot see anything that quite works on best defence. It is 4.30am in the morning so maybe my brain cells haven't quite woken up <_< Essentially, in my view, the hand is about a finesse, or leading to ♦K and hope it holds. 50/50 either way. Damage limitation says finesse the ♠J into the West hand. Ok, it's rubbish. I'm playing for -1 instead of trying to make the contract. Be good to see the whole hand at some point and see what declarer actually did.

hi Liversidge, And how about the trump king, queen, and occasionally the jack, I ask? Or missing an ace, king, queen in a sidesuit? All these might matter in the grand scheme of things. Stephen Tu's reply sums up the general rules for cuebidding. All I would add to that is that when you have found a fit and slam is likely - and that's usually beyond 2NT if using an unlimited Jacoby 2NT force (4+ major suit trump support) - you have to try to decide the likely sequence of cue bids you would use. Obviously it is more awkward if the fit is found at the 3 or 4 level as bidding space is limited. The trump ace is a good card, but it's not a necessity to bid a good slam.

hi Vampyr, This is an interesting post because how some players bid is completely different to others. As MrAce demonstrated in a recent post, his interpretation of a suit rebid at the three level (as opposed to a new suit) went against what many other people were suggesting, including myself. As he succinctly put it, "He makes the bid because of shape, not shape and beans". I do feel there is some general difference between British and American bidding sequences, and interpretation of bids, especially where the opponents have intervened. To me, if opener bids a new minor at the three level, it is forcing for one round at the very least, whatever system you are playing. Opener is unlimited, except where a partnership are using a strong club system.

It's up to the schools, colleges and universities to promote bridge. However, as it is probably one of the games in the world where seniors can compete at the same level as juniors, it is probably not looked upon as trendy enough for today's younger generation. There's too many distractions elsewhere for today's younger people too, be it physical or mental. And fewer parents playing bridge around the kitchen table will mean fewer children learning the game at home.

hi lycier, Whilst I agree with nullve's 1NT overcall, that's a big hand knowing the ♠ and opening bidder are under you. Just as a hand it comes out at 18.05 on Kaplan & Rubens hand evaluator. 2♥ could well be passed out I feel, when partner doesn't need much to make game a possibility. On this occasion, I'll go for X. It's not ideal as it could present rebid problems. 2♥ looks the sensible overcall but I feel it is an underbid, in my opinion.

Thanks for posting the whole hand. I'll put that down as the luck of the Irish (against weak opposition) lol! :)

hi Stefan_O Well, that's how us Brits (GrahamJson and I) have interpreted a cue-bid in an opponent's suit in the effort to find a secure, or sometimes dodgy 3NT contract :) And as GrahamJson says quite rightly, the half-stopper/stopper (call it what you will) need not be Qxx but something resembling a stop; and yes I agree too, sometimes you will wrongside the contract using this bid. Most slim 3NT contracts will need a double stopper of sorts to succeed as declarer will usually need time to establish a second suit to make the contract. Rarely declarer will be able to run 9 tricks off the top. An interesting point that hasn't been discussed is how to interpret the cue bid if one opponent has bid a suit only, or if that suit has been supported by his partner. It could subtly change the meaning of the bid perhaps - by agreement.

hi sakuragi, I was kibitzing this match last night and it was sad to watch. Both Jimmy and Benito had some misunderstandings, missed bids, wrong cards played, undos, etc. and Jimmy announced publicly that he'd recently been to see an eye doctor. Sadly, some idiot kibitzers, who should have known better, made things worse by criticising what was happening and Susy had to turn off kibitzer chat mid game as things got out-of-hand. A number of boards had to be adjusted by Susy, and Diana_eva and gwnn deserve credit for being patient and dignified while all this was going on. People forget that they are watching for free two of the world's best bridge players, with a combined age of 170 or so, and given their senior octogenarian status - Benito will be 89 tomorrow - should make some allowances for their age and health.

hi dickiegera, To me, ideal hand to bid 3♠. With only one suit bid by the opponents, 3♠ is asking for a half-stopper in ♠s, something like Qxx. This rightsides the contract. He will know that you have a stopper in ♥s from your bid. By bidding 3♠, in my personal opinion, you are showing some form of stopper of sorts, but it is a stopper that needs help given that the opponents have bid and supported the suit.

hi lcsmw, My suggestion - love it or loathe it - is to try to get a local/regional newspaper to do an interview with you, have a photo taken, supply your e-mail address, and get it out there in the mainstream media. It might not be quite you, but it's worth a try, I feel. Local/regional papers are always searching for news stories that are little bit different, and to me yours is. My friend has this theory that it is easier to meet a social partner in a bar than on a dating website. And here you are on the biggest potential bridge 'dating' website in the world and are still searching... Good luck with getting those 3.5 gold points. If it's meant to be it will happen :)

hi kenberg, I accept that many good players prefer 1♣ in 2/1 to 2NT with this hand, even though it comes out on a K&R count at 22.30 as partner is supposed to drag a response up on as little as ♠xxx ♥A109xx ♦xx ♣xxx Opening 2NT probably (not too 2♣ - too many losers) doesn't give so much information out about the hand, even if partner initiates a Puppet/Stayman response, so I can understand others choosing this opening, even with 2-2 majors. In answer to your question, if partner uses 2♠ or a 2NT bid as a relay to 3♣, then I am assuming he is showing preference only, not 4 card ♣ support as in the diagram [North]. If that's the case, then ignore the relay and bid 3NT as that's where everyone else will probably be, I feel.

That's hilarious, lamford. I'm sure the late Victor Mollo would be laughing his socks off, just like me :) As for interpreting the technicalities, I'd leave that to the experienced tournament directors on here. p.s. What did the Hideous Hog say? Rules are rules...

Thanks for that MrAce. Your explanation makes perfect sense. It does make me wonder (and you too, no doubt) how GIB chooses leads, but I'll think we'll leave that topic until another day...

hi MrAce, I love the challenge of a difficult hand, and I'd wish I was as quick at analysing these problems as some players, but this is an interesting point in itself, having knowledge of GIB (for example, the ♦ finesse is losing, ♥s are probably 4-1, etc.) is probably making this into a double dummy hand where a player will make a 'contrived' (for want of a better word) play well below the standard odds of let's say a 50% finesse for example, to achieve success. It's great having knowledge of GIB, and knowing that it will make things as difficult as possible for you, but if the odds of success are dependent on a layout of the cards that occurs, let's say just 10% of the time as a random figure, surely you are playing against the odds only because it is GIB. If West had bid ♦s on this hand, then many declarers would make the assumption that the ♦ finesse will lose and find this alternative line. Fair enough. That is information provided in the bidding - that's different than knowing how a bridge robot works (without bidding). The point I'm making is because you are familiar with GIB, you are now probably playing the hand differently than if you were playing against humans. And that's probably a talking point in itself. And yes, it'll be great to see the whole hand soon. My brain is well and truly fried on this problem!

Oh my God, gordontd! EBU standards have certainly slipped since my day :( lol!

Your absolutely right! 15 hours later, let alone 15 minutes later, I still haven't come up with a winning line. It's such a hard hand to keep control of - so easy to lose four tricks. It's one of those hands a top world class player will fill in like a jigsaw puzzle, trick by trick.

hi portia2, A 4-0 split in ♦ is 10%, and even a 4-0 split with East you can make 3 tricks, so 95% chance of 5 or 6 tricks ♦A first. 4-1 split in ♥s is 28%, 5-0 is 4% so ♥ will roll in 68% of the time. Usually in these situations it's best to go for the longer combined suit with top honours. Postscript: ahydra says quite rightly Suspect however we may not get a good score for this as a number of people will be in 6H or 6D. If that is the case and you feel that everyone else is in a slam, you may have to play it differently on the assumption that there are bad breaks for the slam and the slam doesn't make, because 3NT needs to make then for a plus score.

hi jallerton, That's an interesting question, and I'd leave the technicalities to the tournament directors on here. However, given that it is less experienced players, I would have said that the deviation from the NT range is a far greater crime than opening 2♣ inappropriately. I won't mention the funny yet derogatory term that a very experienced international player calls 2♣ openings made by inexperienced players who let the rush of length and honours go to their head without counting correctly. Yes, we've all seen the Aunt Aggie 2♣ opener, something like ♠AJx ♥QJx ♦x ♣AKQJ10x :)