MickyB

[hv=d=n&v=b&n=sk9hakjt976dcj952&s=saq4h2dq7632cakt3]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Pard and I managed to bid this to 6♥ which can make but won't (Qx of trumps offside). How would you bid these hands? We were playing Acol, so a reverse shows about 15 points. Which slam is better? How does 1♥:2♦, 3♥:3N, 4♣ differ from 1♥:2♦, 3♣:3N, 4♥? Not that either of these auctions occured, just wondering...

Standard count, if anything.

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=sqj85hj765d853caq&w=st9742h3da974ct54&e=sk6hakt8dq2cj9862&s=sa3hq942dkjt6ck73]399|300|Scoring: IMP 1N:2♣ 2♥:3♥ 4♥ 1N = 12-14 T1: S 9JKA T2: C 34Q2 T3: D 32JA T4: H 3... Deep Finesse said it was making at T4, and the trump lead made sure of that. Strong tens, so the 9 was probably from T9(x)(x)(x) Should we have beaten this? [/hv]

I think 2♥ is clearcut here (if the auction is what I think it is!)

I love WJS - I play them as constructive (4-7, 5-8 or so), now bidding and rebidding your major is invitational, and jump rebidding it is GF. It leaves you with nasty guesses on some hands (eg 4♠6♥ responding to 1m) but makes up for it when you play 2♠ tick on an invitational auction when the field is split between 3♠, 4♠ and 3N.

One of your jacks is abley supported by a nine :) and the fifth diamond is worth something. Although it may come down to a system difference - if you bid 2♦ or 3♦, opener will pass if he has a flat 15 or 16 playing Acol (which Gnome was).

Ok thanks for the replies so far. I gave this question to a player I respect, and his opinion was that 6-5s are often best off opening a weak 2 and making another move later. Obviously this diverges from conventional wisdom. Any comments? When people are saying two suiters, what counts? 6-4, 5-5, 5-6? Any suggestions as to how an agreement to cover this situation could be phrased? Something like, "A passed hand opposite a passing partner bidding a new suit at the 3 level without jumping"? Cheers!

Jilly's 6-5 topic got me wondering - what does an auction like P-1♥-P-3♥, 3♠ show - without discussion (expert p), or in your preferred methods?

I think Matt was suggesting that the 4♠ bid should show 5♠6♦. I can understand opening the major if the hand is too weak to reverse, but surely it's right to open 1♦ if you aren't a minimum? And yes, I have no idea what problem people have with 3♣ as a sound raise - it shows a limit raise or better, a direct 3♦ bid would be weaker...the only people who wouldn't bid 3♣ on this hand are the ones who still play 3♦ as limit. I do agree that there's no point worrying about a few MPs between 6♦ and 6♠, should they both make.

In that situation you expect pard to have the weak option, both on initial frequency and because RHO has values...better to do something like P = suggetion to play in 2D X, XX = bid your major, 2H and 2S nat

In addition to the points Arend makes - If you make a preempt showing hearts, opps can gear their bidding around finding a spade fit. If you have four spades, you'll often make a takeout double; If you have five, you'll usually bid them. If you make a preempt showing diamonds, opps need to look for fits in *either* major - what do they do with 5-4 majors, 4-2 majors? Of course, asking what 2♦ should be doesn't make too much sense without knowing what the rest of your structure is. Is this for your strong club sys? If so, knowing that you don't have the 2M openers available to be weak twos might sway people's opinions, after all weak twos in the majors may be less destructive but they are more likely to lead you to a making game. As I said in the other thread, I prefer a weak only multi - sometimes 2nd seat only gets one go at bidding when he expected two, and occasionally you can get away with them never finding out what your suit is at all! As Mark said, it is much easier to preempt opposite a weak only multi as well. Of course, Mark and I played it in a system with no problems with balanced ranges (strong club, 1C:1D, 1H = nat or big bal, if responder made a positive response then he was describing his hand for the rest of the auction).

A priori, a doubleton having A or K happens 2/13+(11/13)*2/12 = just under 0.30 So I'm surprised it is quite as large as 0.49 for 13-18 point hands. Instinctively it felt like it should be a fair bit less.

I want to be opening 1H and 1S on weak balanced hands to get the best frequency out of opening four card majors...could have 14-16 NT and put the other ranges up a point, or either 14-15 any bal or 12-13 no 4cM. There's still the club single suiter in the 1♦ opener otherwise it is severely underloaded, anyone know any useful preempts when you've only got 2♣ and 2♦ free? lol No problem with bal ranges after a 1♣ opener, I've always used Kokish...Plus being able to pass a multi 2♦ is *very* nice

That's a situation where, IMO, standard methods leave you to guess. If it is worth doing a sim, surely it is much more worth trying to solve the problem scientifically like in Keri?

Most would play 3♣ as a fit jump there Prior, sounds like a good start.

unless you open it 1♥ :blink: Lol Jimmy, possibly a fair chance of getting to hearts when it is wrong as well then :lol: Swans belong in their long suit...

This is a system I've been working on...Some background below, for anyone interested! 1♣ Any 16+ 1♦ Denies a 4+ card major; 11-15 unbal or 11-12 bal 1♥ and 1♠ 10-15 unbal, either 6+ suit or 4 cards with a longer minor; or 10-12 bal, 4 cards or 5332 1NT 13-15, a strong NT I guess :blink: 2♦ Multi (weak only) 2M Exactly 5 card suit, 4 or 5 cards in a minor, 11-15 I have two worries about this system, other than sorting the responses of course! Firstly, the 2M openers. They are fairly undefined given the level that they are being opened at, but I guess the preemption can work both ways - after all, natural systems will frequently land up playing in 2M on a false preference auction. I suspect the main loss would be playing in 2♠ when we can make 4♥ in a 5-3 fit, but again 2/1 has this problem. One alternative I considered was 1♦ as exactly 5 cards in a major, but that isn't terribly legal around here. Shame, 2♣ and 2♦ as either six cards or 5-4 minors could have been quite nice. Another is 2♣ as four or five ♣ and a five card major, so that the 2M openers promise that suit and diamonds, but that doesn't solve the 5-3 heart fit problem. A further option, the one I started with, is as follows: 1♦ nat single suited, minors, 4+♦5M 1N 13-15 or 11-12 with 4♣333 and 5♣332s, Blue Club style 2♣ nat 6 cards 5M4+♣ hands either opening 2M or being added to the 1M openers. 11-12 bal with 4♦ but no 4 card major could go into 1♦ or 1NT. The 1♦ opener could be interesting to respond to. 1♥ would need to be artificial, possibly a negative, possibly just an enquiry ambiguous in strength. Jimmy (Luke Warm) has suggested 1♥ as an artificial negative, 1N as artificial forcing, and 1♠ and 2♣ as natural non-forcing, as per Weiss Club. Another idea that I've had is to use 1♥ as a general relay, now continuations for unbalanced hands are split by whether three spades are held or not - after 1♦:1♥, 1♠ 3 cards (now 1N relay), 1N nat, 2♣/♦/♥ nat without 3♠. Secondly, what to do with a major two suiter. The three options I've thought of - Opening them with the shorter suit, opening them with the longer suit, or using the currently vacant 2♣ opener (possibly including a diamond option). I suspect that opening 5-4s in the five card suit could lose a lot of the benefits of the system. I've had little experience with Blue Club, should I be seeking out a book on it? Of course, any other comments are welcome! TIA, and thanks also for the replies to my previous posts on the subject. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Here goes with the background... Having played some MOSCITO (transfer openings), I'm quite keen on frequently opening four card majors. Finding the major fit quickly is often advantageous, and you can get some nice penalties when opps balance over 2M when you had been in a 4-3. However, I dislike the amount that MOSCITO gives up to obtain those penalties, and to compete to the 3 level when responder has four card support for opener's five card suit. 1♦:2♥ is defined as 6-9 points, exactly 3 card support IIRC; With four card support you often need to raise to the 3 level on what could be a 15 total trump deal, and weaker hands have to pass the transfer opening and hope that the opps have game on. The latter problem is exacerbated by the EBU's regulations - A strong club has to promise 16 HCP in all but a couple of events in this country. Indeed, transfer openings are permitted in less than half of our competitions. This leads me to prefer a system where a 1M opening bid is natural, showing either four or six cards in the bid suit. This leaves responder in no doubt about our total number of trumps after raising partner's major, as he can happily reraise with six. It also reduces the pressure on responder to make a raise on three cards on hands not suited to playing in a 4-3 fit. To increase the frequency of the 1M openings, they should include both balanced hands and hands with a longer minor suit. As you can see, the exception to the "4 or 6" rule is 5M332s in the 10-12 point range. I'm not too worried about these, their lack of shape will mean that they frequently behave similarly both on offence and defence to a 4M5m31. It is likely that some 6m-5Ms (and possibly some 5-5s) will also land up opening 1M, but they are happy to take another bid.

Sorry, I'm going to rant more because while I like pass and sympathise with 1♣, I really can't understand 3♣! 1) You give the opps a lot more space at a great time for pressure bidding, without giving yourself a reasonable chance of getting into ♥ when it is right 2) You'll play 3♣ or 3N when you should be in 5♣. Wouldn't most of you open 3♣ on KQJTxx and out at this position, and consider it a sound preempt? This is a couple of tricks stronger than that. 3) I put it into a hand evaluator, and it came out as being worth 0.01 tricks more on defence and 0.08 more on offence than xx Kx x AJT9xxxx. The honour structure isn't great, but the shape makes up for it IMO.

I presume this refers to the full version of Deep Finesse - I haven't used it myself, but it probably states the number of tricks available in each of the five strains by each of the four potential declarers. There may be licensing issues though?

You are 1st seat, NV against vul. This means that you have more to gain by creating a guess for both sides than if the vul was different or you were in 2nd seat, and less to lose if things go wrong. Your shape is very offensive, 7-4s belong in the 7 card suit most of the time, and the T9 of clubs offer some extra security. 4♣ seems absolutely clear to me. If we were vul or I was in 2nd seat then the KJ of spades would persuade me to pass. What do I vote for in the poll, Free? :blink:

Yes, an excellent book Fifee, along with his computer programme Counting at Bridge which is similar but IMO even better.

Hate 3NT, I'd bid 5♥ at the table but pass could be interesting.

No reason to make overcalls 1RF IMO - you can start strong hands off with a double. At one point I played P-(1X)-1Y as showing an opening hand and made a WJO on anything weaker, but 5 card WJOs are more dangerous than 5 card weak twos IMO - a reopening double is almost automatic.

A similar question - how strong is 1D-(P)-1N-(2H), 3C?

Single raise and 2N constructive NF New suits weak I think, but some play as constructive NF Jumps nat forcing Slightly simpler than Fantunes!