Flame

Cant check it right now, but if i remember correctly, it doesnt denay 4M, you can bid 2C with 4M if you are strong and dont like to hear pass over 1M. 2C is almost forcing(more forcing then 1M) and therefore you wont bid 3C without good 6 cards, 2C is the normal bid with strong club hands, no need to jump. Ill check it tomorrow.

Its possible but less likely first because u give maximum to partenr and second because this leaves declarer with KQJ 6 time club, which he might have not open 1nt, and maybe play on club. Anyway on QH, declarer will assume u have QJ and his right play is to duck and hope hearts are either 4-4 or 5 hearts are with the A of spade.

Agree, this one is cool.

I dont agree that there is no point in t.o now, there are 2 hand type that would want to t.o 1. a hand with right shape for initial double but a bit too weak. 2. a hand with no 4 spades if u play double to show 4 spades. (not recommanded but most still play this) something like 3235 with 9 hcp. OFcourse looking at my hand and the bidding it sounds like partner ment it as penalty.

A problem I've observed: A lot of times new players play with other new players. I definitely wouldn't want my students learning from many of these people who play in 99er, etc. games. :rolleyes: (I'm not saying that people with less points can't be good, just saying that they don't usually elect to play in 99er, etc. games) Its not all about learning from opponents. its learning from opponents actions, this include opponenets mistakes too. Basically students need excersize and the more the better, when they play the same system as thier opponents they have heard twice the ammount of bidding sequences based on thier own system.

Totally disagree with the idea of finding a second fit when you already found one, it wont pay off. Second i think the 4-4 fit is not as good as people like to think, and not always better then the 5-3 fit. Third If you have 5-4 dont look for 4-4, because 5-4 is usually better then 4-4. Bridge is a game where its usually wrong to try for perfect, you better look for good enough. exceptions are slam bidding especially grand slam bidding.

New players learn alot from their opponents, by teaching them a different system you take this from them.

We play invertend over 1m, but i htink it make less sense to play it when passed hand, do u have a passed hand different resposes ?

I had almost same ideas going to bed a week ago, didnt sleep for hours. Also thought about some kind of positive 1D respose to polish 1c.

i'm sorry. i read description for this Forum among others, 'Conventions'. i'm just asking about a convention, thus i thought it would be better here for asking. Its not a problem, this forum is ok for everything, just that begginer's forum would be a bit better.

Well i call it checkback stayman and not just checkback. And i use 3D to deny having a major bid, just like normal staymay, not to say its supriour to your version. Its a good convention, but today i prefer transfers over 2nt. nb. This kind of posts will be best if posts on begginers forum, so other beginers will know to read them.

Convincing argument. Would you please explain where I went wrong? I bid according to WJ2005 (I hope). As Jlall said my mistake. cant delele messages on BBO forum.

mistake

JXXXX QJX QJX QJ To the question, my 2M is 12-14 balance. With unbalanced and nice 6 losers i would normally bid 3M. If the support could be 3 cards, u need to bid more contervatively with only 4 majors, i bid natural invite 2nt with no less then 11 so with most bal 10 and 4 trumps i will have to pass.

thx all good advices. im convinced

This sounds good but this means you will sometime bypass a normal cue because u dont have the suit lengh needed, this will effect the all cue bidding process which normally the all idea is to find suits with lack of control by passing them. example 1S-2H-3H-4D I have good hand with no club control, normally i would bid 4h, but now im not sure, maybe partner has club cntrl but not club nat.

I was tought that when we have major fit and we are GF, new suits are cue bids. I heard from ppl like Jlall (and the relayers) that many times its more important to show ur hand naturally, and i agree, the problem is how can i define a simple rule or rules that will say when bid is nat and when its cue ? or must i go over each sequence possible with partner , which I think wont end well.

YOu contradict yourself, you say its close to 2c and on the other hand you say its close to 3h, there is huge gap between 2c and 3h like 2 tricks gap. you cant be close to both. this is 2c : Ax KQJXXX AX AKJ this is 3H : xx KQJXXX xx AKJ

3H isnt a strong bid, some play it 14-16 some 15-17 but never heard anyone play this as forcing, this is the lie in 2/1 system, there isnt a bid in the system that show this hand, but we prefer to ignore it cause strong hands are rare(this is why ppl think 2/1 is easier then strong clubs, because they ignore the grey areas), and when they come we lie with some reverse bid and hope for good. Two other alternatives are instead of calling it a lie make an aggrement that solve this hand, this could be just knowing reverse dosnt have to be real , or better play as most italians, save a bid to those hands either gazilli or first reverse, is either nat or any strong hand without other bidding which is usually either too strong for 3M or too strong for 3 level support. The other way to solve it is more simple and more natural bid 4 to show 18+ hcp.

Are you really serious asking what wrong with 3H ?

If possible id show my club singlton either vs short trial or splinter whicever avaliable, if not id bid a natural 3D, bid 4H over partner 3H or continue cue bid on anything else.

Yes, had wrong first instint too.

It suppose to get you to 3nt not 4 level with somwthing like xx xx AQxxxx xxx oposite Ax Ax Kxx Axxxx not saying this is the best use for 3X but its not unplayable.

What you said about the ability to adjust is wrong, you are giving your opponents exact information, they know that you have "law X leve"l and thats exactly what they need to make their right call. About other points, i dont say you should never give your partner information, but you should know that not all situations are the same. Its well known that when we open the bidding we are in contructive mode, we are looking for games and slams and trying to send as accurate information as possible about our strengh and shape to partner, therefore 1nt is the ultimate bid. But in other situations we lose that need for accurenly , for example when they open 1D i bid 1S with 7-18 hcp, and when they open a strong 1C it can even be weaker and bad 4 cards. Now lets say partner open weak 2S, and i have level 3 by the law, what benefit will come from givving my partner the information about it ? he has prempt he isnt suppose to bid again. Im not saying bidding 3S doenst have a point, many time its the bid that will help preventing the opponents from reaching their 4H, but there is no need to bid it for givving partner the information, he doesnt need it.

Let assume the law of total trick is accurate, lets also simplify thev law by one rule "bid to your number of trumps level" I believe (this isnt my idea, i think Richard believe it too) that always bidding to the right level suggested by the law demage more then help. Lets assume partner opened 2S weak usually 6 cards. i have 4 cards support and cheking the law say i should compete to the 4 level. Imo doing this is totally wrong, I was in a great position, i knew the exact number of trumps we had, i was in control, i knew till where we sould compete and with one bid i gave all this information to my opponents which now know everything i do and also see their hands. Premptive fit my thory easy, partner bid and put me in chanrge, no resson to give him back information, he isnt suppose to make more decisions.But i believe not only prempts fit here. Lets assume partner opened or overcalled 1S , and i have 4/5 card fit, my math is poor but i bet the chances of partner having more then 5 card suit are not bigger then 10%, so again i know in about 90% where we belong, opponents dont, i can always bid to the level which might help partner to keep compete if he got better then just 5 cards but that just 10%, on the other 90% i just helped my opponents. Now offcourse this is too simplified, but thats the idea. and no i dont suggest never bidding to the right level, i suggest (like Richard) to sometime do and sometime dont, so opponents cant relay on my bid. What do you think.