MickyB

Think you were reading the level 2 section of the Orange Book - any responses are legal. Not my area of expertise, but most seem to go down the route of playing 1H as natural or GF relay, which seems sensible. What's your complete opening structure? What will you do when eg 2nd in vul, open 12-15 balanced 1♦?

Partner would rebid 2♦ with a minimum 6-4 in our style.

[hv=d=n&s=skj9xxhqdacakjxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 1♥:2♣ 2♦ 2♣ is GF, 2♠ now would be 4SF. Hidden:

How does partner's x being the ten increase our stopper power? Is LHO going to underlead the KQ twice? The suit might not be led, but be switched to by RHO.

Everything is a trade off - maybe there isn't room for a bid to show that in their methods. Agree with (an in-tempo) 3NT, this is an auction where you just have to make your decision quickly. I can certainly sympathise with not wanting to pull a slow 3NT.

Depends on the auction. What chances has partner had to bid? What have oppo indicated? After 1N:2D, 2H:3N, a doubleton club looks a very nice lead - sounds like both oppo are pretty flat, and partner could have bid 2S or (if you play it that way) doubled 2D if he had either of those suits, but showing clubs would have been trickier. More generally, I'd tend to prefer to lead from three so as to need to find partner with less in the suit to beat the contract.

Auto pass for me. The hand is crap and defensive. Yes, there are downsides to passing, but there are downsides to passing any random 9-count with a reasonable five-card suit - and that's not too far away from what I have.

Axxxxxx Qx xx xx 2nd in?

With regard to specifically playing 2/1 with a weak NT (as opposed to weak NT 5cM and potentially lighter 2/1 responses) -It exacerbates a common problem - 1M:1N, 2X:2M, ??? when opener has 15-17. Not being able to open those 1NT is a definite loss. As has been said before, 1D:2C has to be biddable on decent 9-counts (assuming you aren't opening 1C on all 15-17 balanced hands).

Hmm? Take it you don't think 3♦ is 4th suit there then :lol: Sorry, guess I should have stated that in my original post.

[hv=d=n&v=b&n=skq9xxxhqtdkqj9xc&s=sjxhakjxxxdckjxxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP 1S:2H GF 2S:3C 3D (X) AP[/hv]

It feels pretty desirable to be able to pass on a weakish 2-6 rather than push a level higher in search of an 8th trump. I'd much sooner play opener's 2NT rebid as forcing, on the basis that responder can either rebid his suit or have a shot at game. And I've learned that 2H non-forcing is not universal.

Depends on methods - it's not exactly hard to come up with a method that doesn't disclose holdings in suits that responder isn't interested in. Wow. Strongly disagree on the "better partials" score - missing the occasional 4-4 spade fit to play in 1NT when both hands are balanced is hardly the end of the world. In contrast, showing the general nature of your hand (balanced or not) allows you to judge much better whether to play in opener's suit, responder's suit or no-trumps. Take a hand like xx QJxxx Qx Axxx - if opener rebids 1♠, you'd much rather play in a red suit rather than 1NT (which may well also wrong-side) - but how are you to work out which one? If opener is balanced, you probably want responder to be the one showing shape.

2♥ for me, 1♠ shows unbalanced hand etc, don't want to bid NT with xx in an unbid suit. Rebidding 1NT just seems to make everything simpler. You know immediately which hand is in charge (unbalanced hands tell, balanced hands listen), responder can give preference on a doubleton when he so desires, and opener's third bid (especially over 4SF) is much better defined. Of course, responder should have a way to show 5H4S NF over the 1NT rebid (but *not* over the 1m opener, where there is a case for a 2H bid to show 5-4 majors with five *spades*).

It can also be bad to show the queen when you don't have it when hearts are the agreed suit - partner may have one keycard and the trump queen.

[hv=n=saxhakt9xdxxcktxx&s=sxxxhqjxdacaqxxxx]133|200|Perhaps opener should have bid keycard...might get awkward if there's a spade void opposite?[/hv]

Close? Or not? Ok, if you bid 4♠ it continues 5♣ from p 5♥ from you 6♦ from p Your go.

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=saxhakt9xdxxckt8x]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♣-(1♠)-2♥-(3♠) 4♥-(P)-??[/hv]

Not so much a technique, but a mindset - that bad actions sometimes work, you will have bad boards due to bad luck or mistakes on your part, and that all you can do is keep doing what you know is right and keep taking percentage actions. I play a fair few tables of online poker at once, so I can see a lot of hands in a short space of time, and I can tell you that I'd rather get my money in good and lose than get it in bad and suck out. The amount of money from one hand is less relevant than the indication that I'm playing well and hope to do well in future. This may be in part due to it being fairly early days for me in terms of playing NLHE cashgames (I've played 165k hands or so) and I'm still working out just how good I am at it.

What routes are you each taking with the two handtypes?

Hmm...are there any hands where you would decline to bid 3♣ in order that your partner lead one? :) I didn't think it at all close at the table, and I still don't, but some pretty good players have told me that they think it is. *shrug*

Then play 2♦ as a good overcall in any suit...or X as ART including a good overcall in any suit :)

One of the winning pairs of the recent Seniors Bowl play Lionel, but I certainly haven't noticed many other good pairs using it.

This was on vugraph (England trials) btw...RHO was 6052 and there was Kx club and AKxxx heart in the dummy...of course the commentators had some things to say about my heart lead, including "a club will win the post-mortem" and "not leading a club is depriving partner of his good result for his 3♣ bid" :rolleyes:

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=s8hqjt54dt975c982]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♣-1♠-P-2♣ 3♣-4♠-AP Agree with both of your passes? What's your lead and is it close?[/hv]