MickyB

The passer had been given the hand by someone else, I don't know if he selected pass before being given the full story. The 4S bidder was in the dark.

Ok, cool. A couple of decent players disagreed [one advocating pass, another advocating 4S] so I thought it was worth posting. Pard held J T8xx AKQJxxx J, is this a firing squad offence?

Both vul, imps, partner deals. 3N-P KQ98xx QJ xx AKx 3N shows seven solid without an outside ace or king.

Maybe more people would play in longer tournaments if they were advertised as being "officially variance-free".

1C:1H, 1S:2N and 1C:1H, 1S:3C give you some awkward guesses on 4315 min. Not that it's clearly worse than overbidding on the previous round, but you can solve some of them by bidding 1C:1H, 2H:3C, P if that's your method. If playing this style what would you rebid on 1345 after 1C:1H? My scheme of transfer responses to 1C solve all of these problems, I now play 1C:1D, 2C as 5+C,3=H 11-15 and 1C:1H, 2D as 5+C, 3=S 11+.

Yeah I'm not sure you'd want to double any less frequently playing Precision when partner can easily have a penalty pass of clubs. Still, 1D (2C) X (P); 2M is pretty horrific, any kit here? I'm sure it's worth giving up playing in 2D in order to split [balanced with 4cM] from [5+D4M].

Usually 5332, yes. Occasionally 5422 with honours in both doubletons. Otherwise we show our second suit. I think this style is pretty common on BBF and amongst experts in general. The point that I am trying to make is that if you still transfer on 5332s [to keep 3N in the picture] and you still transfer on 5431s [to allow you to reach 4M in a 5-2 or 4-3 fit, or 5m in a 4-4 fit, when partner has weakness opposite your shortage] then you are left with no 5-3 hands to go through Stayman. I was thinking recently about ways to bid 53(32) as responder in case opener is (52)33 that still allow you to play 3NT opposite (4333) - eg transfer then 3H to show 5332 in any order, now 3S from opener shows five cards in the other major - but I doubt the gains are worth it.

Most experts believe that 5332 opposite 4333 belongs in 3NT, not in the 5-3 major fit. Some believe this is true even if the major fit is 5-4. We would bid 1N:2D, 2H:3N, P when opener 4333 and responder is 5332. If you start 1N:2C, 2D:3S you'll play 4H with these hands.

I take it 1N:2C, 2D:3N is only bid with 4-4 majors? If so, it should be alerted IMO. I played that for a while, it definitely helps oppo on lead, but it is just one handtype so it's not a big flaw. I'm not keen on the methods for showing 5-3 majors. 1N:2C, 2H:3N. If this can be either 5341 or 5314, then how can opener judge with Ax KQxx KQJx xxx? 1N:2C, 2D:3S. If this can be either 3532 or 4531, you can't play 3NT with 33(43) opposite the balanced hand. I'd expect to do better by transferring and bidding 3m/3N on these hands.

4H is auto

"There is bridge and there is love all at matchpoints" - Franceshinden Unfortunately I couldn't find the "Expert-Class Love All at Matchpoints" forum, so it'll have to go here. Partner deals and you hold - A87x T KTxx K9xx P-1S-P-1N P-2S-P-P X-P-2N-P 3C-P-P-3S P-P-?? Partner opens most 11-counts. Opps are playing Acol. 2N showed two places to play. What's the worst hand partner should hold here? What inferences, if any, are there from partner's pass over 1NT? What's your call?

I agree with opening 1m on 4441s. 1D on 4441 min, 1C on 4414. Even if your minimum suit lengths were 5-5-4-2 this wouldn't make your system "standard five-card majors". I'm not a fan of the 15-19 NT rebid. If you want to respond very light to 1C then you are probably better off playing 1C:1R, 1M and 1C:1R, 1N to show two different balanced ranges - this is commonly played with a 14-16 NT, so completing the transfer shows an 11-13 NT and 1NT shows 17-19. Other potential solutions to this problem include opening 2D to show an 18-19 NT or splitting the two balanced ranges between your 1C and 1D openings, e.g. 1C = nat/17-19 NT, 1D = nat/11-13 NT.

It also allows you to bid 1D:1S, 2C on 1453 without missing heart fits, which will lead to better part-scores and allow 1D:1S, 2D to promise six cards.

Easy pass. I would rather like to defend 2C when partner has a weak NT.

I assume this is in jest, but for the record, N/S have been playing together for a decade or so, E/W were playing together for the third time.

Pass at any conditions

I would strongly prefer that posters here do not assume things which have not been said. While it is possible to read what I wrote in that fashion, and I could have chosen better wording, I would also be capable of making it much more clear if I wished to state that I felt opener had been deliberately unethical.

Care to elaborate? I think you may have misunderstood my use of "private match". This was in a national event where matches are arranged privately, to be held in a home or bridge club on a date of the players' choice.

You are called to give a ruling in a match played privately. [hv=pc=n&s=skt872h963dkqcjt7&w=s543hk85d9865cakq&n=saj96hjt4d743c863&e=sqhaq72dajt2c9542&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=p1d(4+%21D)p1s(4+%21S)p1n(12-14%20balanced)p3nppp&p=cjcqc8c2d5d3djdq]399|300[/hv] Table result was 7 tricks. East announced his intention to seek a ruling at the end of the hand. The N/S convention card stated that standard count was shown on partner's lead, declarer's lead and when discarding. Underneath this, in the box marked "exceptions to the above", it stated "1st high card revolving; suit preference". It became apparent in the post-mortem that the N/S agreement was to show attitude on partner's lead, with a secondary meaning of suit preference. East claimed that with this information he would have thought it likely that clubs were 3-3, given that the jack had been led without the 9 or 8 to back it up, and attempted to cash 9 top tricks. N/S claimed that attitude and count were both irrelevant with the AKQ in the dummy and thus the card was clearly suit preference - besides, the card stated that the secondary meaning was suit preference and this information was correct. East replied that it could be necessary for the defence to continue clubs if declarer held a doubleton, thus count was still relevant. How do you rule?

Presumably opener wasn't sure whether 2D was natural or a transfer. If he's not sure which it is, what is he supposed to do in terms of alerting/announcing? If he was supposed to alert, then hasn't he gained an advantage from ignoring the alerting regs? He's basically made sure the UI his partner has received permits him to correct back to 3D.

This strikes me as a particularly poor area for DD analysis. Most of the time, if an aggressive lead is needed, it can be made from either side of the table, while if a passive lead is sufficient then there is usually a suit that happens to not give away a trick. At the table, aggressive leads into opener are more likely to cost than aggressive leads into responder. It also doesn't take into account that trump leads into opener are more dangerous in practice - with Axx opposite KJTxx, you'd expect declarer to take the line that picks up Qxxx on one side, so leading from xx or xxx will blow a trick iff opener is declaring.

2N:3C, 3S with 4-4 majors 2N:3C, 3H:3S puppets 3NT with precisely four spades or a good 4H bid 2N:3C, 3H:3N shows five spades, looking for three-card support This is very similar to what I play in the context of 2N:3C showing 4+spades and 2N:3D showing 4+hearts.

Rainer, I'd be interested to see what results your DD analysis gives for a 2NT opening, so, say, 20 points opposite 5. My instinct is that 5332 opposite 3(433) is much closer here due to potential communications issues in 3NT.

Ah, I just assumed you'd missed the 'P' out of the title ;) I'd suggest Landy instead of DONT and Stayman instead of Puppet - the latter makes it hard to bid hands with both majors that aren't worth a game-force, especially hands that want to play in game only if they find a fit, e.g. (54)(31)s with 7 or 8 points.