ochinko

Did you see that the scoring was MP? Even if ♦ isn't the setting lead, which I agree is quite possible given that you have no outside entries, it is still the safest lead. If a diamond is not right, yet you lead it, you'll still get around 50% as that is what I expect most defenders will lead. If you lead another suit, and it's not right, you'll be closer to 0%, as you'll be a lonely swimmer against the current. I would give some thought to my highest heart at IMPs, but here I prefer to be lazy/cautious.

The strength of the opener in both cases is unlimited, which makes them forcing. The clubs are longer than the hearts, and the two suits are at least 5:4. You could, of course, invent a system in which they would be non-forcing, but I don't see what you'd gain by such treatment.

I don't have anything to bid, so I pass. Shouldn't be a criminal offense to pass this hand.

Ok, put yourself in ArcLight's shoes. He likes to read, and he likes to comment on it. Who would be interested to read his comments if they knew beforehand that the comment would always be positive? It became clear that he's not an expert. I, for one, think that's great, because he doesn't have to constrain himself. If he was a well known expert then a bad review could bury a book or an author. I am not less interested to hear your opinion than his as long as it has some substance. Tell me why ArcLight isn't right, what did he miss, don't tell me he should say only good things about a book. Nothing is more precious than an honest opinion by a peer of yours. No one expects those opinions to always be right, that would be silly. If you say that he's biased, don't expect to surprise me, everyone is biased. Let those biased opinions clash, and let the readers decide for themselves.

1. You seem to forget the fact that the advancer is forced to bid on the first round, so 1♠ could be bid with only three spades when there is no better bid. This makes it impossible for the doubler to distinguish between 3 and 4 cards support if you want 2♠ to show 5. So 2♠ from the doubler don't actually agree any fit. 2. Preempt is when you bid without high cards strength. 2♠ is no preempt if it promises 8 points. You, on the other hand preempt yourself with your example bidding: 1♥-X-P-1♠- ???-2♠-P-??? You would do that as a doubler with what, 16-17 points? And what would you say when you see the poor dummy has xxx xxxx xxx xxx? Will you curse your bad luck or try to improve your methods? That case is far more dangerous than to be "preempted" with 8 points. Not only you would have more trumps, as partner guarantees 4, not only you have more points (lets say 11 from you, and 8 from partner) but these points would be split between the hands, and provide you with vital entries. There's no comparison for your chances of making 2♠. As for the case that doubler could have only 3 spades, his hand should be good enough to play with a Moisian fit. It's not like partner wouldn't know what is expected from a double, right? As for the NT just how on earth are you going to explore whether you belong there and at what level if you play it that 1♠ could show absolutely everything short of an opening hand? I can assure you I am not less worried than you to describe my hand properly. Jamming the opposition is but a side effect, although a welcomed one.

Ok, everyone will agree that the higher the bid, the more precise it should be. From 0 to 11 we have 12 possible states for the variable "hcp". If we compress the meanings 0-7 in 1♠, and 8-11 in 2♠, our 2♠ bid has twice the precision of 1♠ (8:4 states). This looks beautiful to me, and makes the principle easy to remember. If we make it 10:2 (0-9 vs. 10-11) our 2♠ bid doubles its precision, but 1♠ becomes sort of a useless bid by trying to encompass most of the hands that we'll get. A ratio of 5 between the two bids is unproportional and ugly. And I know it's not all in the points, but these are good points, people. The fact that I have an Ace and a King is more important than the fact that I have two Jacks. And these are both good, working Jacks, the one is in the trumps, and the other one sits by a King instead of all alone in a suit.

In my book the normal bid with 8-11 points and 4 spades is 2♠, 3♠ with the same points and a five cards suit. Yes, I would prefer to have a better shape, who wouldn't? 2♠ is still the proper bid even at MP unless you want 1♠ to mean "from zero to infinity". When do you think the time will come to show signs of life, when LHO bids 2/3/4♥, and two passes follow to you? It is completely possible that both sides have a game, and being MP, LHO decides there's not much point in announcing his minor suit that would provide the tricks. Both sides have two fits, who is more likely to win, how could it be the one that is playing dead?

I can understand 1NT, and if you swap clubs and hearts, I'd bid 1NT too. But I can never understand the masterminding of bidding 1♠ if you don't have some magic bid other than 1♠ that would describe a hand with nine points less and only three spades when you would be forced to bid 1♠. (Boy, what a sentence, should show how appalled I am that people don't bid their hand with 2♠ here. ;) ) Edit: 1♠ bidders basically say that regarding a possible game(slam) in spades, having xxx xxx xxxx xxx is the same as having Hxxx HHx xxx HHx

If I am going to lead a spade instead of a heart for reasons of not enough tempo, the King should be better than the Jack. Justin, did you catch a lonely ♠Q, you cheater? :rolleyes:

How about this for rebidding the same values over and over again? [hv=d=s&v=n&n=shqj74d1042ca86542&s=skq42ha1063da86c97]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] The bidding goes 1♦ - (Pass) - 1♥ - (1♠) 2♥ - (2♠) - 3♦ - (Pass) 3♥ - (3♠) - 4♥ - (Dbl) Pass - (4♠) - 5♦ - (Pass) Pass - (Dbl) - All Pass North found his hand good enough to bid it four times instead of once. Wouldn't mention it if it didn't say "expert" in his profile. -5; -14.6 IMPs

Bidding: 1. Not considering the position at the table, the vulnerabilities, the type of scoring (IMP, MP). 2. Not considering the correction to the points that the shape requires. 3. Jumping to game/slam too fast not knowing which bids are forcing, and fearing partner would pass them. 4. Passing partner's forcing bids fearing that the level is already too high, and they'll get the blame for any misunderstanding. 5. Bidding their hand more than once. Declaring: 1. Not counting their tricks and making a plan immediately after the lead. 2. Not thinking about unblocking, preserving or creating an entry until it's too late. 2. Always drawing trumps first no matter whether it's necessary or not. 3. Making unnecessary finesses, or finessing without taking into account who is the dangerous opponent. 5. Considering finesses and 3:3 suit breaks as the only ways of developing tricks. Defending: 1. Not counting declarer's points, tricks. 2. Not thinking about declarer's shape. 3. Underleading an ace in suit contracts. 4. When getting a trick always returning the suit that partner has attacked instead of considering switching to another one that partner couldn't profitably attack. 5. Always leading in their shortest suit in suit contracts and their longest in NT without regards for partner's values that were unannounced yet were implied from the bidding.

2NT from partner means a strong hand, and requires from you to announce your strength and your suit. The idea is that at the end of the bidding your hand will be the one that is pretty much known, not to mention weaker, so it would make a better dummy than a declarer's hand. With that in mind here are your answers: 3♣ - weak (7-8) with hearts 3♦ - weak with spades 3♥ - strong (9-10) with spades 3♠ - strong with hearts Note how the last two bids reverse their meanings in order for your hand to be put at the table.

I don't get this. Don't you trust you partner will raise 4♦ to 5 with three Aces in hand? What I would like to avoid in the unlikely case when partner has three Aces is to be raised from 5♦ to 6.

My thoughts exactly. I'd be hesitant to open 4♦ as this would shut off partner's spades, but now that partner has shown me a green card, I feel free as a bird. 3♠ is a gamble with very few chances to be right. I expect to be shortened fast, and as my hand is too weak and without outside entries those 6 diamond tricks that I expect could well turn into 0 tricks when spades are trumps. Edit: I've never had a partner who would appreciate a joke so cruel as the bidding of 4♣ from me would be.

At MP it rarely pays off to play in a minor. Minor preempts OTOH tend to work well for the bidders most of the time. And while I pass here like the majority, I do it only because of the vulnerabilities. LHO could well have a side entry for his clubs. At equal vulns I double, and at reverse, I bid 3NT. Knowing my style of preempting, at favorable I could bid 3♣ with 10xxxxxx or Kxxxxx and nothing aside. Edit: At IMP I pass at all vulns, but I could still bid 3NT at unfavorable.

"It's a bidder's game." I would prefer to have xxx KQxx or AJxx void AJ10xxx which would satisfy the rule of 22 as well, but nothing is perfect. Since I have a rebid on all possible partner's bids, and a club lead is what i'd like from partner when defending, looks ok to open it. I don't feel too strong about it though, and I wouldn't mind if you pass that hand as my partner.

I wouldn't pass initially, but you don't have a rebid if partner bids 1NT (NF), and 2♠ from you would show a 6 cards suit. Having passed the opening I don't see anything wrong in 4♥ because I couldn't have a stronger hand that would not open. The only other bid you have is 4♠, but it puts opps in a better place to consider competing, as you obviously have 5 spades and not much aside.

I voted for marginal opener, but I am more inclined to pass rather than open that hand. It is flattish, and the values are scattered. It doesn't satisfy the rule of 20. Here are some better hands with the same points and distribution: KJxx Kx A10xx xxx Kxxx Kx AJ10x xxx KQJx xx AJ10x xxx AQxx xx AJ10x xxx

I am not fully content (60%) but I am against opening that hand at IMPs. What am I, telling myself to lead a heart against opps' contract? But I know that already. If it's our hand, I don't want to preempt partner. Second position is the worst for such experiments. If it's opps' hand, I don't want partner to lead his ♥King from Kx.

Here I disagree. I think the original hand has adequate defense for a 1-level opener. Compare with, say KQJxx x xxx KQJx This hand, despite 12 hcp, is far worse for defense than the original one. In fact, I would open this one 2♠! I don't agree with you here. You can't say what the defense of the hand that you give is until you know whether or not you have fits in the black suits. It has good defense on misfit hands, and vice versa.

What wasn't mentioned was the Rule of 20 (pts + length of the two longest suits). Those that use it would open 1♠ just as those who are focused on the singleton. It isn't very precise though. I prefer the Rule of 22 (Rule of 20 + 2 defensive tricks). The hand satisfies the Rule of 20 but clearly not the Rule of 22 which again tips the scale towards Muiderberg.

Partner has 7 losers or less, I have only 6, we have a great trump fit, slam is definitely a possibility. If we play mini splinters - 3♥, else - 4♥.

Well, since for me passing here is out of the question, I bid 2♠ exactly because I find 1♠ to distort my holding and to be more dangerous. If I open 1♠ and partner bids his five hearts, we'll be in trouble. If opps bid their hearts, partner would double them too prematurely, expecting more defense from me. Where ever you place them hearts, they are going to bite. I want my partner to be informed of my limits, so he would be in a better position to know when to double, when to pass, when to bid more spades, or even try for a sacrifice in my minor. I have no fear partner would make a mistake, because I took the chance of informing him what I hold. And even if 2♠ go down, is it very likely that opps would prefer to play there and abandon their game? After all, they too are vulnerable. Opening 2♠ may be risky, but certainly not as risky as opening 1♠. And if I pass and hide my spades with my weakish hand, how can I hope I'll ever have the chance of bidding them?

Sorry for being harsh, but have you ever heard of offense-to-defense ratio (ODR)? On average, this hand should make something like 4-5 tricks when declaring and perhaps 2-3 defending. That's 2 extra tricks declaring. Compare this to a more typical muiderberg bid, say, KQJxx x xxx QJTx 5-6 tricks on offense, 0-1 on defense. That's FIVE extra tricks when declaring. Bottom line: preemptive bids show hands with high ODR. The original hand has VERY LOW ODR. This is not about points, it's about HAND TYPE. If you're gonna open a muiderberg on that, you'll be lying about the type of hand you have. One of the things that can happen with an expert pard is he'll take a "save" in 4♠ for -500 or -800 when 4♥ was already going 1 or 2 down. I sympathize with your position. We've all been drunk at one time or another. :) No, seriously. I have a weak, limited hand, and a perfect way to describe it. I want to get in and out of the bidding as quick as possible. Yes, second position is the worst for preempting, and I could go down for a number. This would probably concern me a little if we were playing IMPs. Yes, the hand that you show is even better for Muiderberg. But I won't waste space here to show many more 11 pts hands that would be more suitable for opening 1♠ than this one. And if you pass this hand in MPs, I don't see how you could get positive results.

This is precisely the hand when you should be glad you play Muiderberg, otherwise you'd have to pass or open 1♠. I don't understand why you would have any regrets to portray this hand as below opening, and take the chance to preempt LHO. Since you are vulnerable, partner will know you'd be closer to your maximum, and be in a great position to evaluate your combined strength. For these points you could have 2 Aces and a King, not to mention some Tens. What you now have is three Jacks. Even though all of them are working they are still Jacks. And it's not even certain they are working, given that RHO is a passed hand. I play multi with 7-10 points, but Muiderberg with 8-11, because with a 5 card major and a 4 card minor your chance of having a playable fit is smaller than with a 6 card major. So here, being vulnerable, you show 10-11 with soft, rather than hard, values. Why bid anything else when 2♠ give you the chance to describe perfectly both your strength and shape? Edit: And 2♠ also have the benefit of denying the possibility of a heart fit, so you don't have the problem of what to rebid on your partner's 2♥ bid if you open 1♠. Or LHO jumps to 4♥ and partner doubles. If you started with 2♠, you'd be glad to defend. But if you opened 1♠ don't you feel guilty you promised more defensive tricks than you got? And, of course, passing here is criminal.