gabika73

3nt. Even if I didn't play 4♦ as Leaping Michaels. I recall Bob Hamman saying something about 3nt.... Choose it when it was one of the alternatives. I boldly extend his wisdom to apply to situations in which it is the only alternative.

2nt(Leb) then 3nt showing 4card spade, game-going values, and heart stopper. Bypassing 2nt denies 4card spades, while cue instead of 3nt denies stopper. Anyone else using this Leb structure?

1. Max 13(-14) HCP. It cannot be of great playing strength. 2. I raise M with weak 6card minor and strong major holding. I rebid minor with the opposite (since this can be as strong as 17, partner is expected to keep the auction alive, if not bare minimum...). If in between, I will raise if partner is better player - as Kantar put it...;-) 3. Same as Ben. Though, for me, all 3level bids (below 3M) are NF INV (i.e. new minor shows INV hand 5+ minor, 4 major.). 4. F1 INV with these responses 5. 3S shows 5cards, and generally wants good trumps for game. 6. Hands with good 6carder, 14+ HCP in 3154, etc. I make up some bid (mostly 2m or 2om), and show support next round. We jump(-shift) with real strong hands, so responder is expected to continue after 2om.

Thank you, Arend... You saved some minutes for me. Was just going to write something similar, but you were faster. And I could not put it that nicely..;-) Only one thing, where I think Ben went wrong, and that has nothing to do with hand-evaluation or bidding strategy. (Classic) Drury uses the bid 2♦ to show subminimal hand, and 2M shows full opening strength. Reverse Drury uses the bid 2M to show subminimal hand, and 2♦ shows full opening strength. With reverse Drury, it is of course a partnership agreement whether bids above 2M show only INV hands, or are gameforcing, and therefore, looking for slam. I like it when all INV hands (i.e. those that can accept a game-try) go thru 2♦, and bids above 2M show some extras towards slam. (Reversing this as Ben means you are playing a reverse continuation of Reverse Drury...;-)) And yes, this is why you must have an agreement about continuations before playing any conventions. When both are aware that a bid is really forward-going, one is much more prepared to evaluate holdings, and tell partner what she needs to know.

I play it the same way. NF, INV. I even play all 3level bids as NF (INV, of course). 2nt, however, is a forcing INV+ hand. Opener now describes his holding: 3m: 3card major, 5card minor, minimum. new suit below 3M: splinter (or fragment, your choice...) with 3card M 3M: minimum, 3-4card major. 3nt: maximum, 3card major. 4m: good side suit, maximum, 4card major. new suit above 3M: splinter with 4card major. 4M: BAL, 4card major, maximum.

I agree with Ben. However, just to note how well Kickback would do the job here: After 4N, responder was reluctant to show Q of trumps: 5♠ would push partnership to slam even though they might not belong there. After 4♠, Kickback, however, 5♥ is just available to show 2+Q.

It all depends on the system and arsenal we use for such auctions. (One usually cannot assign the blame unless knows the meanings of the bids, and the available alternatives...) If 2♥ was GF, West must bid 3♥, no matter what. Especially if there is no Last Train after her splinter: slam is probably good without a ♦ control from partner. The same applies if 3♥ commits partnership to game. However, if 3♥ is invitational only, West does a good job with splintering. With the jump, however, things become too difficult. If playing LTTC (which is hard to imagine for a pair that can pass 3♥ here... ), East can show her interest here. If not, all she can do is (in order of my preference): - try 4nt (or 4♠), blackwood, assuming that partner must have the diam A, KQ for the splinter (or K will be behind A, or we'll guess right...) - try 5♣, slam interest, denying diam + spade control. - try 5♥, Lackwood So, if 3♥ was available as a forcing raise, it is West to blame: even though her bid showed what she had, she failed to forsee her partner's problems. If it was not, West, having a lot more than she could, signed off after partner's encouragement.

Fred, I am totally mislead, then...;-) But I still think that - cuebidding below level 4 (With either serious or frivolous 3nt/3♠) - appropriate version of RKBlackwood (Kickback, Voidwood, Lackwood) - some defined continuation (specific kings, or spiral scan) can place you where you belong most of the time. Furthermore, as you said, it is difficult to reach such a partnership understanding as to be able to bid those hands with 5th level cuebids. For an 'advancing' partnership, the more orthodox line described above leads to much less misunderstandings or wrong contracts. I am ready to accept that for players at your level, cues can work better, though...

Wow... Is it only me to be surprised that declarer had only 8 minor cards?

I do not think you can gather enough info about declarer's distribution. You can play declarer for AJ x KJ9xx AKJxx or A xx KJ9xx AKJxx If declarer is 6-5 in minors, he will not have a void in spades (partner would have lead a spade honor with that holding). So our second major suit trick will come only if declarer has a stiff K. Should declarer have a stiff heart, there is no chance to set this contract without both a spade trick and a club trick: but a club trick will not go away: we will switch to a spade as soon as in with the trump ace. As Hongjun said, we cannot afford the luxury of holding up the ace of trumps to get some signal from partner: we are dealt 3 clubs... Also, our spade shift will get an attitude signal, not count. We're not going to be much smarter when in with the trump ace. So we are left to guess whether partner passed the 1m opening with K[J/9]xxx KQxxx x xx or with KJ9xxx KQxx x xx Well, neither is too likely, unless we play really sound overcalls and sound 2suited overcalls (Michaels cue). I guess I'd pass with the 1st hand much more often, so I will play partner for that hand. Overtake king, lead a small spade, showing count (it cannot show attitude, seeing dummy's Qx). Partner might take the message and help me: he would signal encouragement only if thinks declarer has a loosing spade...

I agree with 5♠ being a Lackwood with 2 diamond loosers. I like it pretty much, and it has worked in my partnerships to play a voluntary 5M as Lackwood if: - opponents have bid a suit, and we have not shown control in that suit, or - there is exactly one unbid suit in our side. There are so many ways to ask for missing honor in trump suit (KeyCard ask, with voidwood, if appropriate), that you should not need another bid. On the other hand, it can be of great use with these types of hand. So, clear 5♠, and partner will raise to 6 with his singleton.

In my partnership, when hearts are agreed as trump, all NT and spade bids reverse their meanings. 3♠ will be serious, 3nt shows spade stopper. 4♠ will be (Kickback)RKCB, 4nt is voidwood with spade void. And yes, cuebidding stops at 4level, all 5level bids are voidwoods (J or NJ), and we bid specific kings up the line when asked to.

Cross-imp means averaging the IMP you achieve against all pairs playing the same side. So making a vulnerable slam that no one else bids gives you the expected 13 IMP. It is like playing a team match versus all other tables, and averaging the IMP's on each hand. I would be pretty much surprised if BBO used a different method. btw, it is a better form of IMP-scoring than a butler (average of IMP's vs IMP against an average)

When an offense from one side causes damage, the score should be ammended such, that the non-offending side gets the best score possible had the offense not taken place. Since with reasonable play, 3nt -2 is a reasonable result that fulfills this requirement, I would give a score based on this result.

Just to add a few lines on Stefans's notes on how to stop below game: 1/ in my view, responder cannot pass a reverse. a reverse is 100% forcing. 2/ 3-of-openers any suit sets trump, and is forward-going. This opens up safe bidding when exploring possible slams. To play 3 of openers suit, according to Ingberman, you have to slow the auction by: a / bidding 2 of your own suit, promising 5+ b / bidding the 4th suit if that is at level 2: denying stopper, and denying 5 in your suit. c / bidding 2nt: promising stopper only if you did not have option b/ Opener must respond to all these bids keeping in mind that his 3-of-first-suit or lower response can be passed. All the other sequences are game-forcing. I have been playing this for several years with no problems. But, I guess, this is another difference between regions, countries, schools...

By opener: I like to stick with Ingberman's way here: if responder's second bid is 2nt or lower, he can pass opener's 3-of-1st-suit. (2nt promises stopper iff the 4th suit cannot be bid at the 2-level; the Dallas Aces played it this way) By responder: It is not that hard-coded. Partnership has to agree. I am now playing it as one-round force, invitational only, with my regular partner. I expect to be in a minority with this agreement. An advancing from Hungary.

In our partnership, no Bergen from a passed hand. We use Drury, or just raise to 2 with a balanced hand. After Drury, of course, game is reached. After a normal raise to 2, relay asks for shortness. Upon hearing the doubleton spades (2nt), game can be reached (either via 3m, or straigth).

C'mon, it is not "after-empting" we are talking about... It is PRE-empting... That is, 1st seat, NV vs Vul, when nothing is known about 3 other hands. This is what Gabor called poker. It is rather luck that decides scores in this case: - you can miss a game or a slam; - opps can miss a game or a slam; - you will play too high in a part-score; - opps will play in an otherwise unreachable game or slam; - you'll concede hundreds for nothing; - etc, etc You just have no way of knowing. And the low scores for 1-2-3 NV undertricks do encourage this in-quick pre-empts. This way, luck will decide the results, more or less... Of course, it does have something to do with skills, especially opponent's skills and knowledge about competitive bidding, but more often than not, they are in some disadvantage as they mostly do not expect the kind of hand you happen to have. They (especially if unknown, or at a Pairs event, or online) do not know your style, and rarely will they be alerted to your super-agressive style od pre-empting. As for the other issue: "let us read the rules (i.e. scoring), and let us adjust our style and methods to maximize the scores". This is true. However, rules are to serve us. In an effort to make this game as enjoyable, as creative, as entertaining, as challenging, as put-here-anything-you-want, as it can or should be. Therefore rules are not sciben into stone. They can be modified if that serves our common goal. /// off-topic Football (soccer, if you happen to live overseas...) some decades ago gave 2 points to the winner. So everybody was defending, because it was not worth to take some risk for an extra point. This meant 0-0 draws after boring matches. What happened? They have changed the rules: winner gets 3 points: risking 1 to get 2 points is better... Well, now again defending have come to top again opposed to attacking, as at Euro2004. Curious, if this keeps happening, whether they will modify some rules again...

Double should show in this sequence a hand with defensive values. You have bid a suit, and partner has supproted that. So you do have a fit. If you want to compete, you can always bid your suit. Furthermore, you have 3 other bids for invitational hands (2nt, 3m). All the above sequences say: partner, we have to play this hand, I have an offensive hand. While double says: partner, I have something extra, but I have doubt about who should declare this hand. I have great defensive potential based upon the bidding so far, so 2s doubled can be the best contract for us. Director was kind of wrong. Declarer took a line based upon a surfacial (is that a word?) analysis of the auction. It could have worked out well for him, but it did not. I remember one of our doubles, when declarer, after a telling precision sequence was declaring 4S. Their distribution and strength was clear from the auction, so my partner with a stiff spade doubled them, knowing I should have an opening hand with 4 spades. With normal line, declarer would get home, but based her play on the double: 2 or 3 down....

Yes, this seems to be a correct way. With 5-5, however, you have some problems, unless you you can bid 3H, 4H, hoping that opener is not 22(45).

I was definitely wrong with the example hand... Anyways, I was just trying to make you show me that yes, after 2M, with shortness, you have to take all opportunities to enter the auction. While after a natural 1suit opening you will not bid with borderline hands, especially at the 2level as a non-exclusive bid. The main reason being the fact that after 2M, one of the opponents will know the strain and strength of their line: you've just got to give partner some info about your hand if you can. Shortness in their major is the key, twofold: With shortness it is more probable that responder will have some support for a 3/4M bid: and you will not know (with 11-14 points in each of your hands) whether it is bid to make or to sacrifice. On the other hand, if responder will not have spade, it is partner to havbe some. Therefore less likely to be able to balance (see the 13pointer balanced hand). I am not sure whether there is a hand that should enter the auction after 2M, and should pass after 1M (there should be, pls constuct one...;-) ). But definitely you need to be more aggressive and willing to enter. Opponents are in great advantage, and you must take risk to reduce that advantage.

To come to think of it again, yes, I agree. 3m can be passed. Though it might depend on the values and/or distribution needed for a 3♥ jump shift by opener.

2nt would be the bid with some good spots in the minors, say: Q986 and JT85. However, with this hand as it is, my minor suit honors are just too lonely. These 10 points are 9, while those with the good spots can be 11...

In another topic (the one wioth the balancing 2nt after a 2M opening), I stated that after a 2M opening, with unpassed partner, one should be more willing to enter the auction than after 1M opening. I am not fully sure about this, however, and I'd like to ask you to express your views... After 1M opening, one would never overcall with 2♣, when holding a 13count with poor suit quality and a spade shortness (say, x KJx KJTx AJ98x). However, it is a must to enter the auction after a 2♠ opening. Why? Because of the spade shortness, and because of the strength of the hand. After 1M, we do not take up bidding space from opps, and our ODR is too low to introduce such a suit. There is not too much to gain, and too much to loose. We do not know whose hand this is, and we will have another opportunity to buy this hand if it belongs to us. However, after 2M, opps are in a better position: responder will know what to do. So we must bid with a spade stiff, so that partner will have some information about the strength of our line, and will be able to bid. If we remain silent, opps may buy the hand with 3 or 4M undoubled, with us having 26+ points. There is a saying: when pre-empted, bid aggressively to game - however, be cautious about slams. This is because of the fact, that you want to enter the auction with more marginal hands. This is somewhat against the idea of having to have more for a 3level overcall than for a 2level overcall (or dbl). And yes, the risk is much higher. You can be doubled by LHO, and go for a phone number if you overcall with such a poor suit quality. However, if you dont, you will be giving up too much 600's and 620's for -140's and +100's.

This is partnership agreement. If we agreed to show 1st and 2nd round controls (Aces, Kings, voids, singletons) after serious, which we did, I am obliged to bid 4♣. After all, one of the main goals of playing serious is to determine whether opps can cash AK of a side suit. If I do not bid a club control, partner will sign off with Qx(x) in clubs immediately, and might not play with me again... at least, not when serious (some people would write: no pun intended.... I won't..).