apollo1201

Oh yes. So if I even missed the truly N&B part of the problem that was, before the ❤️, telling dummy from declarer...

Was quite complex otherwise indeed. Anyway I still believe it is more of a I&A. We have to guess who had Ax or hope of a 33-split ❤️. The ❤️9 complexifies too as we can finesse for the 10. As we can’t play twice towards KQ due to lack of entries (unless’East ducks’with Axx and he would fool many good players), and I understand W is longer in the suit he led so shorter in ❤️, we can try small to J and’small both hands if J wins. That is specifically playing for this layout and no hanky-panky from E. The finesse is theoretically 50% while 3-3 break is 36%. A bit less due the already known assymetry in a side suit. Well...that is hard!

Thanks all esp Mikey for that analysis. I’ll remember the « post later the other hand » part, a nicely cunning plan! I’ve posted other table sequence on purpose as we have no direct interest neither partner nor myself for a « revenge I was right ». We never have this spirit as we always try to learn and discuss. Maybe ATB was a bad title! As for our table, she can’t indeed know I have everything covered but when I freely bid myself to 5C, I gotta have something (SK, some diamond goodies...). IMP favor risk taking anyway. She actually said tabling dummy I hope you don’t make 6, which I said probably not making 6 (LOL).

Am not even sure of the proper English terms tbh 🤣 Elimination & throw in? I posted it N&B but maybe it is better in I&A?

😉

[hv=pc=n&s=s92h873dkq4caj853&n=saq85hdat9852ckqt&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=pp2hd4hdppp]266|200[/hv] Strong NT, 5cM, 2H "standard" weak 2, second X = values and virtually denies 4-cd♠ Actually I bid 5♣ as S, and was un-understanably left to play there! As in that case the blame would be quite easy to assign, I've given the other table sequence who finally gained IMPs as 500 was better than 440 (should be 800 w/ a ♠ruff they didn't get).

Textbook hands also happen in real life! Now you have to guess the title of the lesson :P Lead is ♦Q [hv=pc=n&s=sak9652ha5d75cq63&n=sqt873hk62da8cj74&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1sp4sppp]266|200[/hv]

Not completely familiar w/ SAYC but considering it is a 5CM system, could be 15-17 (with 5H that couldn’t be opened 1NT therefore) with (double) stopper.

I play 15-17. These elements especially when several combined push me to open 1NT: - not 17 HCP (too strong, open 1M and rebid 2NT), rarely 15 (just give up hopes of tiny game) - scattered values and/or tenaces to protect - 3 cards in oM - weak (Kxxxx or worse) or strong (AKQ, AQJ, KQJT...) suit - doubleton C (rebidding 2D leaves less space especially if you opened 1H) But we don’t play some Puppet to find back 53 fits

With 44 fit, you usually play better in 4M. Any ruf in any hand will bring an extra trick. Only with 53 could you consider 3NT. For 3NT to be better you also need very balanced distributions with no profitable ruff (eg 5332 facing 4333), scattered honors in the short suits and obviously enough HCPs. Often, in that case, the trump suit will be not too good and could suffer the loss of trump trick in case they break 41 in defense. The decision has to be made knowingly by both players e.g.; - 1M-2M-2NT-3NT-pass: responder proposes NT (eg 9 HCPs 4333 with Q and Js) and opener accepts; with a small doubleton or concentrated values in 2 suits, opener would reject and bid 4M - 1M - limit raise w/ 3 trumps - 3NT - pass: opener proposes and responder accepts

There’s no really standard here but; - it is not uncommon to play a reverse Truscott where 3m is invitational and 2NT weak fit so that potential 3NT is played by opener and have doubler on lead - I’ve seen 2M played as fit jump approx 10 HCPs 5M4m, or 6 cards, weak in M (subminimal to bad weak 2, sth like 3-8 HCPs) - 2D over 1C or 3C over 1D same kind of fit jump or constructive but less than invitational m fit Any fit after XXing becomes GF in those cases obviously.

Unless the splinter says « miracle slam if we fit well », we have to cue. The hand is definitely not great but 2 aces and the SJ - it could be worse. If partner runs out of steam and bids 4S next, I’ll pass with the sense of having done my duties.

Partner guarantees something close to a 4H opening X: take-out but probably setting opps facing a weakish flattish hand (although the latter is less sure...). The 4252 distrib and nice D suit convince me to bid, more trying to rather than being sure to make, though. Opener is probably weak and distributional. With some luck I push them to 5 or it is a good save...

That was the « only disclosed to me » twist I did when I played them. Quite easy since you can clarify at your 2nd bid. Probably a good use of that bid anyway and fairly frequent. But partner (old-school, I was 20-sth, she was 60-sth) didn’t want to bend, which is partially why I no longer play them as such LOL.

The poll on’preferred 1m-2H sequence (dunno how to post links sorry) showed that it has become a minority. True enough, the SJS requirements (16 or 17+, strong suit or support) are so rare (when I used to play them, I think I tricked to use them) that most frequent uses exist and are used (fits on a M-opening, jump fits, some kind of Flannery or reverse or weak-2 above 1m...). Nevertheless I am relieved to see that staring 1D-1H there are still ways to get to 6

At least it is 1 down less than had you played in your exclusion BW🤣 More seriously, I really like the suggested auctions by the former posters.

More North. When South promises inv+ values, some Hs and probably some back-up plan / tolerance for D/S, the good 6-bagger and the 2 Aces would suggest bidding on. Anyway 4C forces us to do sth as the bidding space is seriously lowered. That reminds me of a good player who opened green vs red 3m in front of me, I had 16 and tried (not too confidently) 3NT. Other room was pass, 1NT opening, Responder with 4 queens didn’t think he was worth an invite at red, but both déclarers made 9 tricks...

More North. When South promises inv+ values, some Hs and probably some back-up plan / tolerance for D/S, the good 6-bagger and the 2 Aces would suggest bidding on. Anyway 4C forces us to do sth as the bidding space is seriously lowered. That reminds me of a good player who opened green vs red 3m in front of me, I had 16 and tried (not too confidently) 3NT. Other room was pass, 1NT opening, Responder with 4 queens didn’t think he was worth an invite at red, but both déclarers made 9 tricks...

Great link Ahydra! And kinda proud to have discovered the theoretical play😎

Hi! When a 9-card fit is known (as here presumably), some play 3NT is start controls while 4m is a strong 2-suiter, 55 or more, not denying controls in the skipped suits (with H you can play 3S start of controls and 3NT 2-suiter 65 in that case). It helps partner evaluate if his hands fits well. It will not solve everything, though. But partner with QD will be extremely happy and will move forward and not bid 4H.

I am pretty bad at that but 4-1 (except stiff honor after K and you put up K on 1st trick) and 5-0 are lost. Only 3-2 splits can give you hope. If the A is 2nd after your K, you need to duck twice. If 3rd after, you’ve lost unless you manage opps to clash their honors. Unlikely even with weak players. If the A is before your K, you lose 2 tricks if you guess well on playing K. So it is probably better to play small from both hands (I guess AHHx H is less likely than HHx Ax). Then you play towards K98, and guess if it starts small, honor. If you could gather some info in between (vacant places, HCPs...) you might have some help. But I’m sure a better player will find it is the other way round 🤣

A bit light (to me) for a reverse, but make one of those major K an A or strengthen the D and it will probably be the best description of the hand (and will keep us at a low level to continue bidding). 3D is the textbook bid but is extremely space consuming (the famous « diamond problem »), even so more when we have 3-cd support. Other alternative bids decribe much weaker hands (2D/S) or a weaker D suit, or overstate my values / wrongside NTs (2NT). So 3D for me too, hoping that partner will bid again. It is IMPs after all.

Sorry to be confusing (and confused too!), but as regards those Lebensohl-type responses or 2NT 2 places, are they not supposed to be in place when we are « forced » to bid? Here it is a free bid and we genuinely could have some 10-11 HCPs with a stopper (eg HCP split 11–6-12 or sth like that between the other hands) where a penalty X or natural 2NT are useful having. If I have a suit or Hs, don’t I just bid it? Which shows some values (or a long suit) since I could leave opener with his 2S.

Damn, we made the same comment at the same time. When I logged in yours wasn’t published yet😮

North lacks at least an ace (and another goodie) to splinter. It commits to game opposite a partner who can have as low as 5-6 HCPs.