m1cha

The suit is one card short but with 3/5 top honors it is not that bad and we are not vulnerable. Yes, I can afford a little lie. Why I really want to preempt here: I have a void in spades, that is 13 cards out, an average of 4.3 going to my partner, that is, the opponents probably have a 9-card fit in spades. I have three cards in heards, 10 cards out, an average of 3.3 going to my partner, that is, the opponents more likely have a good fit in hearts than we. -> Definitely preepmpt here, this is what preempts are for. And I don't share the view that a preempt is making life difficult for my partner. The opposite is true. A preempt shows a very narrow choice of distributions. Partner usually can make not only a good guess of what we can play but also a good guess of what the opponents can play. A better guess than the opponents can make themselves, at least initially. So partner is often in a position to try to make sure opps don't get where they want to be. Okay, so partner is strong and may want to check out a 5-3 fit in hearts? 3♣ - 3♥(forcing) - 4♥. Done. I would probably bid 3♣ over 2♣ but anyway. If the bidding started 2♣ - 2♦ - 2NT for some reason, I would jump to 6♣ with most partners right away due to a lack of more scientific means. We have a total of 30 - 32 HCPs and a long suit and a void, this is probably the right spot. With one partner, if the bidding started as above, we have defined a special sequence using voidwood, it would go 2♣ - 2♦ - 2NT - 3♠* - 4♦** - 4♠# - 5♣## - 5♥& - 5♠&& - 6♣ - - - * one or two minor suits ** preference # Voidwood for both minors ## 1 or 4 keycards, that is, ♥A, ♦AK, ♣A. & asking for the ♦♣Qs && none Actually we have never used this but here it would help us to reach more scientifically a place where a good guess would have led us also, if you see the point. :)

This is an obvious misunderstanding. Beginners of natural systems learn that the sequence 1♥ - 3♥ shows an invitational hand with trump support and typically 11 - 12 points. Beginners also use this bid when opponents intervene but later they learn that those hands are shown by overcalling opponent's suit. So 1♥ (1♠) 2♠ promises trump support in ♥ and ~ 11+ points. If you play this, 1♥ (1♠) 3♥ must show something else, often a weak hand with additional trump support according the Law of Total Tricks. North bids 3♥ here with a weak hand because of 4 cards in ♥, not only 3 cards. South should usually not bid more unless the South hand is very strong. Sometimes South should bid more with a suitable hand if opponents bid over 3♥. So what should South do with this hand? 1♥ (p) 3♥ (p): 4♥ is perfect, accepting the invitation. 1♥ (1♠) 2♠ (p): 4♥ also, same thing. 1♥ (1♠) 3♥ (p): PASS because North is weak. 1♥ (p) 2♥ (p): 3♥ or a new suit in order to invite to game. A little bit risky but the hand is strong enough for an invitation. 1♥ (1♠) 2♥ (p): pass now because the ♠K looks worthless, the strong spades are behind you. 3 points sounds too much to me if you also count points for short suits, but 1 or 2 points can be justified.

A nice borderline hand. 3♥ for me with 18 HCP and an ugly ♣Q singleton. If partner has points, we will get where we should be. If not, 3♥ may be just where we belong. 4♥ I find acceptable but it's kind of a gamble anticipating the contract where we will probably end up anyway. 3♦ if you give me ♦A109 ♣x which has much more potential than the original hand. 2♦ is great if your partnership agreements permit, but I don't usually play that. I'm afraid I might pass with an 8-HCP 4243 hand.

Sometimes very happy because N1♣-4 undoubled beats W4♥=. ;)

This one is easy: If you have a fit, your hand is strong and you should bid. If you don't have a fit, your hand is weak and you should pass. ;) On a more serious note, just think of what will happen if you bid or if you pass. Certainly you don't want to miss a ♠ fit. But if you bid now, partner's most likely rebids are ♥s, ♣s and NT. You don't like any of these and you may not be able to make another bid because that would probably be forcing or misdescibe your hand even more. If you pass with this hand, it is unlikely to be passed around. So you can bid in the next round and partner will understand your hand. For example, if opponents bid ♥, you may be able to bid 2NT (Unusual NT, what else?). If this ends up with the opponents bidding 5♥, opener will know what is good for your axis. If the ♦s and the ♠s were reversed, it would be a very different matter. I would bid ♠ in the first round rebidding if necessary to show a 6-card suit with few HCPs. The ♦s suit would probably be lost, but who cares?

This is correct. They are just humans doing their job. But your teachers are also just humans doing their job. And the people who wrote the books from which your teachers have learnt, are also just humans doing their job. And they are actually the same kind of people who play in the Bermuda Bowl. They are doing their job and they are doing it very well, otherwise they wouldn't play in the Bermuda Bowl. So what more can we want? We should listen. There are no gods on earth playing or teaching bridge. Well, let's assume a certain hand has 50 % of making game in 4♠. That means when you have two boards, the game should make in one of them and go down (by one trick) in the other. Let's assume we have two players, player A always bids game with this hand and another player always stays in 3♠ with it. Who is more successful? Player A will win a game and lose another scoring 620 - 100 = 520. Player B will win two part scores for 140 + 140 = 280. Obviously player A will play bridge more successfully. What we are trying to tell you is: There are situations where successfull bridge means, you have to play a full game even if the chance of making the contract is less than 50 %. The rate for IMPs vulnerable was placed by others here at ~ 37 %. This is not gambling. It is mathematics of probability. Yes. Hand evaluation does not stop at counting HCPs. In the official German bidding system, for example, this hand counts 8 HCP + 1 point for a good 5-card suit + 2 points for two doubletons playing in a suit contract (in a different suit) ____ 11 points in total. Opposite a 1NT opening of 15 - 17 points (which we have been assuming), this is a total of 26 - 28 points in both hands, certainly enough for jumping to game with ~ 50+ % success rate. Even there, hand evaluation does not have to stop. You might add + 1 for an ace and two tens with no queen (according to Marty Bergen) - ½ for a king in a doubleton - ½ for suggesting a 4-4 fit without HCPs in the trump suit + 1 for playing IMPs vulnerable (so you have to play more risky games) So now the South hand has 12 points. You would jump to game with 12 points, wouldn't you? Again, this is not gambling. It is bidding bridge supported by mathematics. I would not accept an invitation with the North hand if playing 15 - 17 NT. The North hand looks like pretty normal 15 points to me. There is nothing like constantly being lucky in bridge or elsewhere in this world. It's mathematics, statistics. First, this is not a normal 8 HCP hand. It is a very good 8 HCP hand worth at least two more points in a suit contract. Second, even if there is 58 % probability that you lose, you should be in game because you are playing IMPs vulnerable where, according to mathematics, you are more successful if you play risky games.

I wouldn't mind if my partner passed with this, but I would double to show the points and the 4-card ♠. It would feel much better with ♦7 instead of ♥7, or course, but I believe it should turn out right more often than wrong. Give me at least ♥J instead of ♥7, and I will think about 1NT. 1♠ never, promises 5 cards. Would I want a ♠ lead that desperately with this hand?

In GIB, 1NT - 2♠ is Minor Stayman. If you need 2♠ as a transfer, you might consider the sequence 1NT - 2♦ - 2♥ - 2♠ as Minor Stayman. My own preference is 1NT - 2♦ - 2♥ - 2♠: 5-5 in Majors, invitational 1NT - 2♠: transfer to ♣ (with option to superaccept) 1NT - 2NT: transfer to ♦ (with option to superaccept) 1NT - 2♣: both minors, pass or correct 1NT - 2♠ - 2NT/3♣ - 3♦: both minors and some singleton/void), GF 1NT - 3♦: 5-5 in Majors, GF (option to stay in 3NT with opener 2-2 in Majors) In this case, 1NT - 2♠ - 2NT/3♣ - 3♦ - 3♥ (good 4-card suit) can lead you to 4♥ in a Moysian (right-sided) or to 5♦.

After 1m - 2m, I also hate the idea that 2M shows extras and 2NT must be bid with a minimum hand (not bothering about stoppers). It's a waste of space! My problem with this is that very often you will start bidding stoppers at the 3 level and then, if stoppers are missing, you end up where? I am now using with several partners a fairly simple system along the following few Rules: - A non-jump bid in a new suit (2nd or 3rd) shows a stopper in this suit and does not promise extras. - A bid in NT (both 2NT and 3NT) promises stoppers in all unbid suits. - 2NT and 3m by either side show a minimum hand and may be passed by partner. As a corollary: Any bid beyond 3m is forcing to game. - 4m is always Minorwood (except if the player is limited by previously bidding 2NT or 3m). A few more details about bidding suits: - A non-jump bid of the 4th suit shows and asks for a half-stopper in this suit (because with a stopper you would bid NT). - A jump to a new suit in the second round of bidding (!) is Splinter. - Any other bid in a suit is a control bid (A or K) with slam interest. Some advantages: = If partner bids 2NT and you have extras, raising to 3NT is straightforward. = By the time partner bids 3m you usually have all the information necessary to decide if 3NT makes sense or not. = You don't have to play 4m unnecessarily because you usually know when to stop in 3m. = Simple and natural.

(1) If you have agreed to play 15 - 17 1NT with 5-card majors and have puppet available, you should open 1NT with the East hand - or change your system. (2) 2♥ with the South hand is dangerous, as shown below in (4). (3) Bergen makes good use of the otherwise almost useless jumps to 3♣ and 3♦ in the uncontested auction. After overcalls, these bids may not be jumps any more and needed for more urgent uses, as we can see here. Further, Bergen is not really necessary after an overcall because you can jump-raise partner's suit for pre-emption and overcall overcaller's suit with an invitational hand. Even if you play Bergen with a passed hand and after a double, you'd better not after an overcall. (4) Yes, 2♠ promises 3 cards in ♠. And while it is sometimes necessary to invent a bid, in this case I'd prefer to "invent a pass" and give opener another chance to do his job. Taking the first round of bidding as is, as well as Bergen, I believe it should be continued like this: p - p - 1♠ - 2♥ p - p - X* - p p** - p * take-out, showing points; ** with points; some length and values in opponents' suit. 2♥X should give you a shared top when down 3 (or more). If down only 1 or 2, you can still expect a good score only behind those who both bid and make 3NT. (5) With Bergen off, the bidding might go p - p - 1♠ - 2♥ 3♣ - p - 3♥ - p 3NT - p - p - p which is down 1, theoretically, after ♥ lead and perfect defense. Worth trying anyway. (6)Interestingly, the situation is similar after a 1NT opener. Some may reach 3NT as EW, some not, and sometimes S may decide to intervene with 2♥ Cappelletti or Landy, which W should double for penalty.

Over inverted minors, to me 2NT and 3 of the suit (bid at any time) can be passed. Anything beyond is forcing to game, 4 of the suit is Minorwood (unless the hand has been limited previously). So if 3♣ is not yet forcing to game, 3♥ is. Then if someone wastes all the space up to 5♣ and has nothing interesting to tell, it must deny slam interest (unless it is a special agreement), might hold ♠xx opposite my apparently missing ♠ stop. If I knew partner had a habit of opening 1♦ with 4-5 in ♦-♣, I would assume this is the hand, otherwise 5-5. With a random partner I would always correct 5♣ to 5♦ just in case the 5♣ bid is something different. Something else strikes me here: Isn't it better to bid 2♣ with the S hand rather than 2♦? Because opener's rebids after 2♣ are more informative. I will probably hear the ♦ length immediately or the strength of the hand. I can still end up in 3NT or a reasonable level of ♦.

I admit being endplayed is a nasty thing ;) yet I believe GIB should stop rebidding 4-card suits. Just a few days ago I encountered a similar problem which I posted here: http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/72126-how-to-deal-with-this/ In that case robot rebid a suit with a bid labed "5+ cards" but it had only Txxx. This ended up with the majority of players playing that suit in a 4-2 fit going down 4 or 5. Alternatively GIB could have bid the 4th suit or passed.

I'm afraid I would not have understood your 4♠ bid though I like it. So how can you cue bid with a slam-going hand? 3♠ also, and if partner bids 3NT and you continue beyond, you were showing the ace (or king) of ♠? @apollo1201: Yes, I also prefer to play the 3♦ rebid weaker, but that's what the label said.

Last night I took part in a robot tournament (as a human player). In one board I ended up playing 4♥ in a 4-2 fit againts a 6-1 trumps break going down 4 (IMPs, vulnerable, undoubled) :( . This turned out to get a decent result because most other players also played 4♥ in a 4-2 fit against a 6-1 trumps break, and two of them went down 5. How could this happen? Here's the board: [hv=pc=n&s=sa4hk2daqt9852cq2&w=sqt3haj9875d63c54&n=skj87ht643dk74c76&e=s9652hqdjcakjt983&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1dp1h3c3dp3hp4hppp]399|300[/hv] 3♦ from S shows 17 - 20 total points and twice rebiddable ♦s iirc. 3♥ from N was labeled 5+ ♥s, 8+ total points and is perhaps an attempt to keep the road to 3NT open. 4♥ from S should bring 3 cards in ♥. Bud 3♥ is obviously forcing and may be very strong, something must be done and the players decided to raise to 4♥ with doubleton support to play in a 5-2 or 6-2 fit since there's no other full game in view. This is what happened, now: How should this be bid correctly? I'd argue that 3♦ from S is the best available description of the hand, but the 3♥ bid from N looks plain crazy to me. What should N do instead? This situation has a number of side-questions: - May 3♦ from S be passed? - Should 3♠ from N be natural or artificial? - Should 4♦ from N be invitational or Minorwood? - And was S at fault by raising to 4♥? By the way, the top score in this board went to a player who passed in the first round (as S with a 7-card suit and 15 HCP, oh yes!). W opened 2♥, Weak2, N and E passed, and S now bid 3♦ to be played and made. No comment on this. However, this brings up another interesing aspect because there is another, more sensible way of getting there. If S opens 1NT(!), N will pass but the opponents will do something; S then rebids 3♦ probably to be played. Opening 1NT with a 7-card minor in 7222 is perfectly legal and not even alertable, I believe, but it is not common. Has anyone tried this on a regular basis, and what is your experience?

I used to play 9 - 14 1NT for quite a while. It was fun to play. I don't recommend this because it has some obvious problems though not as many as one may think. What I can recommend from that time are our escape sequences after opponents' double: - XX shows any 5+ card suit (weak) and puppets to 2♣ for pass or correct; - Any direct bid on the 2 level shows 4 cards in the suit bid plus 4 cards in spades. Except 2♣ can also be any 4333 distribution. Opener will bid a known fit or otherwise suggest a long suit of his/her own; - Pass puppets to XX which responder may pass with any strong hand. If responder bids a minor suit now, this shows 4 cards in the suit bid plus 4 cards in a higher red suit. If responder bids a major suit now, this is natural and invitational (and probably distributional because otherwise pass may score higher). 54xx hands can be bid as 5xxx or 44xx depending on suits and values. The sequences were tested and optimized to guarantee a 97+ % chance of a 7-card fit and some 60 % chance of an 8-card fit, iirc, not counting responder hands with 6+ card lengths (which always guarantee an 8-card fit). Opps never know how good your fit is, so this is difficult to double. You never play 1NTX but you can play 1NTXX (which is a full game) if you go for it and unless opps run (which is, unfortunately, what they usually do in that situation).

When I ask people why they want to play this with me (2NT over Stayman showing both majors), I hear: 'It helps responder to evaluate the hand.' And while this is true, I wonder how often this is needed. I guess you are right that it helps opponents more often than responder. About escaping to 2M: When opener opens 1NT with 4432, the chances of having both majors is 16.7 %. If responder has 4-4 in the majors, the chances of opener also having 4-4 in the majors are less than this. If opener opens 1NT with any other distribution, the chances of 4-4 in majors is zero (ignoring 4441). So we end up with a total chance of perhaps 4 - 6 % depending on system. What I want to say is: If you as responder have a hand where you think getting out in 2 of a suit is a good idea, then it is probably still a good idea even if there is a small possibility that opener may respond to Stayman with 2NT. Sh** happens. As a side note: Yes, there are solutions for almost everything. In one case partner wanted to play the 2NT rebid while we also wanted to play 1NT - 2NT as transfer and decided Stayman should not promise a 4-card major. Here the problem is that if opener rebids 2NT for both majors, there is no way to invite to 3NT! So what we did was: 2NT showing both majors with minimum (which could be passed), 3♣ showing both majors with maximum, over which we played 3-level Jacoby transfers to right-side the desired suit-contract. I'm not recommending this. Just saying: If your preferences create problems, there are usually solutions. And obviously information leakage to opponents was not a concern that time ;) .

Well, I'm really not a friend of this 1NT-2♣-2NT showing both majors; yet I don't see what is so bad about it that it deserves being called 'crazy' within a system of a 15 - 17 point 1NT. Could you please help me a little with this? Of course, if you want to play Crawing Stayman, perhaps in a Weak NT system, I fully agree.

I can't find my 3-level preferences. 3♣ = both minors, weak, to pass or correct. 3♦ = both Majors, game force. Opener may rebid 3NT if opened 1NT with 2245 or such.

From the point of view of East: We are weak, the distribution is unbalanced, so we are playing Law of Total Tricks. This seems strange because partner hasn't promised anything yet. But with 6-5 in the minors, we have a good chance of an 8-card fit to play on the two-level. Plus 1 level for white against red plus 1 level on the partscore range while opponents probably have game, if we stretch it. This is certainly enough for 2NT (or 2♠, for that matter). 4NT I find over-optimistic but not psychic (which is certainly the word wank wanted to use ;) ). And I don't think it's a psych because after "1♠ p 2♥", when the opponents have shown 23+ points and are very likely to have 26+, everyone should realize we are not talking points here, we are talking distribution. And if South bids 3♥ over 2NT, I jump to 5♣ as West. Or dunno, perhaps I wait and bid 7♣ if they voluntarily reach 6♥.

Thank you all for contributing. Well then, the bid of the week is 4NT. I'm not claiming it is generally the best bid with the East hand. I'm just saying 4NT is (probably!) the successful bid on this particular board, and this is a particular board, otherwise I wouldn't post it in this forum. And 4NT is what may partner make bid and play 7♣X and get a good score even if (or especially if) on all other tables NS just play 4♥. Do I have your attention ;) ? This is the full hand: [hv=pc=n&s=sak7652haq875d3c6&w=sqt943h3dj75caqt5&n=sj8hkj942daqt2cj2&e=sht6dk9864ck98743&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1sp2hp3hp4hp4np5hp6hppp]399|300[/hv] The bidding is what I believe how the bidding should go in a system close to Standard American. 1♠ = 5 cards 2♥ = 5 cards, 11+ points 3♥ = support, slam interest (otherwise 2♠ or 4♥) 4♥ = close to minimum (perhaps some people cue bid 4♦ here?) 4NT = RKCB 5♥ = 2 KCs, no ♥Q 6♥ = one KC missing As South I have a 4-loser hand, so I have definite slam interest opposite a near-opening-strength partner. I'm interested in exactly 3 cards: ♣A, ♦A, ♥K, so I ask for KCs. Since partner has two of these cards, I think slam should have a probability near 80 %. Now there are two things I don't know how to handle with this board. Q1: If I am South and East bids 2NT, I probably bid 4NT right away. But what if East bids 4NT over 2♥, can I still ask for KCs? Is there an agreement that "double" is Blackwood if the opponents bid an artificial 4NT or anything like this? Q2: The slam is down when East leads a ♣, West takes the ♣A and switches to ♠. Let's assume East comes to the conclusion that this is the way to play (which is perhaps far from clear with these two kings, but anyway), then what should East lead to make Partner switch to ♠?

A friend asked me how to bid this hand on the NS axis, and while that question is interesting in itself, I find the even more interesting problems on the EW axis:[hv=pc=n&e=sht6dk9864ck98743&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1sp2h]133|200[/hv] 1♠ = 5 cards 2♥ = 5 cards, 11+ points Matchpoints, if it matters. Will you interfere here, and if you do, what's your bid? I will post the full hand and some follow-up questions later (probably tomorrow).

:) Yes but I guess most people are trying to beat high scores for their own personal satisfaction and not to get some document for impressing their grand children. In this sense there can be a difference between 900 or 1000 but of course it's nothing to worry about. I'm just having fun. And I was really curious why I got these 900.

I see. So with 10 participants the highest possible score is 1000, but there is no point at trying to reach it because it depends on what other players are doing. Yet in this 900 tournament I might as well have got 1000 - if some mean, malicious sock hadn't resigned early. Watch out, when I get at you ... ! ;) Thanks, Barry!

Thanks, diana_eva. Right. Where with other tournaments the total percentage or total IMPs are shown. Say, when I finish in the last minute with a low rank and the Bingo card half-full, I get a score of 100. If I am faster, I get 200, 300, or 400, with decreasing frequency. 2 or 3 weeks ago I finished with just 5 crosses on the card, all in one line, probably first in rank, and got a score of 500. So I thought that was the highest score one might get. Then yesterday I ended up with a score of 900! So I got curious how the score computes and what is the theoretical limit.

Can someone please tell me how the scoring works at Bingo Race? I realized that I get 100 points minus 20 for each cross missing in my best line if I don't finish a line, so far so good. But if I do finish a line, I get some multiple of 100 points. How does this multiple compute? I have got up to 400 points occasionally, 500 once, and very recently 900, so I started wondering about the possible high score. Does the score depend on the number of crosses? On time? On rank? In the last two cases I had only 5 crosses on the sheet.