ochinko

West is marked with SpKQ so I duck the SpK, clear trumps, and hope for the CJ to drop. If it does, I discard a spade on the last club, and throw West in hand with a spade for a diamond trick or a ruff and discard. If the CJ doesn't drop, and it's in East, I'll play East for DQ assuming West had the HA. With HA in East I'm doomed anyway. With 16 points missing East has either 3 or 4 so if East doesn't have CJ he must have the DA. Petko

Even if you use splinters (which is a good idea) I don't think a splinter in the second major is clear or welcomed. For me 3H would mean 5 spades, 4 hearts, 18-19 pts, and 4 hearts would mean 6-6 in the majors, few points - pick a major game partner. If you were stronger you could bid 5H as exclusion Blackwood. Here I would bid 2Sp because it's MP, and I have 6 spades. If partner jumps to 3NT I'll surprise him with 6D :huh: 4Sp from him will trigger 6Sp from me. Petko

1. Don't see any other use for 4C except as a splinter. I would understand it as 5+ hearts, since normally you splinter with 4+ over a 5 card opening suit; no other singletons, because you'd prefer to splinter in them; up to a 7 loser hand. With 7 losers and a diamond Ace, I'd bid 4D. With 6 losers and no diamond Ace, I'd bid 4Sp with an Ace there. 2. Just as we thought GIB was the perfect bidding machine... Could it be a misclick? :) Petko

This makes no sense to me. You choose to bid the same thing in two different ways, thereby getting rid both of WJS and SJS. Petko

I vote for this one too. Unless you get lucky enough to hear that opps repeat your mistake, and overbid their hand, it often costs much. Some players believe that being strong gives them the right to bid again. This is wrong, though, if you've already shown your strength. We had this argument after a disaster: me: "Partner, 1NT is the most limited bid. How can you bid again in a free position after my pass?" partner: "But it is 15-17 points. I had to show I had 17." :) Petko

Agree completely with you and Helene. Picking between WJS and SJS is a matter of style, I don't believe it can be proved mathematically that one is better than the other. My preference is for the weak jump not because I believe it comes more often, but because of its preemptive value. This I play differently, though. After 1♦ - 1♥ all heart rebids by the opener show exactly four hearts, but we bid upon our LTC here: 2♥ - 7 losers 3♥ - 6 4♥ - 5 No invitations. We just bid what we have, and give partner the opportunity to make an informed decision. Petko

I find it very strange when kibitzers are allowed at a tourney, then all of a sudden, they get thrown out. Is there any reason to change the kibitzers' status in a middle of a tourney? I find this a bit frustrating, so please don't do it, or at least explain the reason before closing it. Thank you :) Petko

That's my style too. Undisciplined count on the lead is no different than falsecarding, which is fairly common. If you assume that the declarer is better at counting than your partner, why give a proper count? If you suspect that your partner may read the 7 from K9873 as a high card why lead the 7? That's why I almost always lead my lowest card beneath an honor. Partner rarely complains when you make one trick more than expected in the suit. It depends very much on the style. Many (most?) good players insist on giving count on every suit, so that they can reconstruct the declarer's hand. I prefer giving and receiving attitude everywhere, and Lavinthal when it's obvious that attitude is useless. But then again, I'm not very good at counting :) Petko

I see no merit in a non-forcing 4C. There is the principle of not preempting a preempt from partner. It should be equally valid when opps intervene. Note that you don't steal any bidding space when bidding 4C over 3Sp from opps. With the hands that you gave as an example all choices are between pass and a game in partner's suit. You are not strong enough for a slam try to bid 4C. Note that: 1. It's easier to make 4M than 5m. 2. When both you and your partner have long suits it's better when the trumps are in the weaker hand, because it could have no outside entries whereas the tricks from high cards in the stronger hand will always be available. That's why I play that a preempt (especially in a major) sets firmly the trump suit. Whether a new suit from the responder should be natural or a cue-bid is a matter of partnership agreement. Petko

I instead would say it is standard and automatic hehe, its the price for knowing 2♠ is 4 card support I guess. It seems we are alone to support with 4 cards ! :D Alain No, you're not alone. I too support only with 4 cards. That's why it was easy for me to imagine what North might have thought. With the hand in question I bid 1NT though trying not to be scared by the singleton club. I want to show that i'm in the 12-14 range, especially when I'm at the top of it. 2D would show something like 11 points and a 6-cards diamond suit. The original poster wanted scenarios when the bidding goes horribly bad. Most of the posters didn't take that into account. Well, it's a free world. At least until Ron takes the power :) Petko

I sympathize with NS bidding. It's not unreasonable from any of them to expect his partner to be 4:2 or 2:4 in the black suits. In that case the Law would've proven correct, and they'd be -2 for 100% instead of -3 for 0%. I find it strange that noone else defended here. I had a simillar experience recently (NV vs. V): J T7 AJ98654 942 Partner deals, and opens 1D. RHO intervenes with 2C. I smell some major fit(s), so I jump to 5D. LHO bids 5H, doubled from partner, corrected to 5Sp from RHO. I pass, LHO passes, a pass from my partner would get us 96% now. Partner instead fights with 6D, doubled from RHO, LHO shifts to 6Sp, two passes, my turn again. I bid 7D. Opps decide to take what's certain, and double. We go down 5 for -1100. Turns out, they had 7Sp. We still scored 87%. Petko

If you have long spades, they have short spades. Assuming they know your 3NT shows a balanced hand, you are most likely to get a lead in your short suits rather than your long suits. I could still have the hand from the example that you gave in your previous post. Besides, if the opp on the lead is short in spades, he could lead them precisely because he would expect his partner to have a length there. It's not that unreasonable. The Argentinian star Luis Argerich has made a simulation which shows that with 6-8 points after the bidding goes (1NT) - (3NT) it's better to lead your shorter major. (Unfortunately, I am not able to find his web page at the moment.) It was indeed unlucky that he had those solid hearts. Petko

That was the hand in question:[hv=d=w&v=n&n=sa5h842da5cq98532&w=sj872hkqj93d94c76&e=s94ht65djt862cat4&s=skqt63ha7dkq73ckj]399|300|Scoring: IMP (P) - P - (P) - ?[/hv] Funny thing is that 6NT makes with everything but a heart lead. One pair made 6NT from N. When a heart is lead 3NT is down as well. 4Sp always makes. Yes, I was not exactly balanced, but figured I was likely to get a spade lead on my bidding. Petko

After 3 passes, I like to bid 3NT with 18-19 pts and a balanced hand even with an unknown partner, when their skill level is advanced or expert. I believe that this makes the defense much harder than if we reach the game slowly. However, I get frequently raised to 6NT by a partner that helds two Aces and a Queen. The last one was an expert, who told me afterwards that this isn't bridge. I reckon, he was talking about my bidding, not his :) What do you think about that? Petko

Sorry, but the pass of 2Sp is clear cut, automatic, WTP, etc. only if you can't ignore the fact that you've seen both hands. You are North, your partner has opened, you believe there's a 4:4 spade fit, you look at a 7 loser hand. How is passing 2Sp a clear cut? What would your answer be if you knew South had: QJ9x KJx AKxx xx 4Sp, WTP? And even with the cards as they are dealt, you still have a chance to make, 18% or so. I know, I've pushed some hands to a vulnerable game at IMPs that didn't have a chance at all. Haven't you ever? Petko

1D - 1Sp 2Sp - 4Sp :P Petko

Strange, I've never heard that from a partner. And I'd be pretty surprised to hear it, since my name is not Luis :) Seriously, Luis has a point. Not only we should try not to offend others, but also not to be too easily offended. Petko

Even if 4SF suggests a 5-card major, I hope partner won't push to 4H with only 2 hearts, so I'll correct 3H to 3NT, and either play there or 4H on a Moysian fit in Case 1. In case 2 if I bid diamonds enough times we'll either play 6D or 6NT. Yes, these hands are tough for camp a., and I'm not sure I bid them right but you could construct difficult hands for any given agreement :) Petko

Everything is a compromise. We base our preferences upon our priorities, and I prefer to be at the right game as often as possible, even when I have to pay the price of missing a minor slam once in a while. OTOH, I'm very much willing to drop minor suit transfers, so that I'd be able to use 2Sp as a minor suit Stayman (GF), and find minor slams when a big part of the field is playing 3NT for +1 or +2. Petko

I am from the camp a. Even with a 6-card minor I bid my 4-card major suit first because generally 4M and 3NT are easier to make than 5m. It is precisely because I want to escape the ambiguity of introducing a 4 card major as a 4th suit, that I do that. On the other hand, I may bid 3D over 1D with xxxx-xxxx-xxxxx-void just to steal some space from the opponents, and maybe send them into a 4M contract that can't be made. Not that a. is necessarily better but for me it's much simpler, and can be used easily with a pickup partner, whereas b. requires good agreements. Petko

It is the delay of the explanation that tells the tale. If it came a few bids later, it is almost obvious that the declarer didn't add the explanation on his own accord. Let's say that I have a strong hand with ♦KQTxx. LHO opens 1NT, partner passes, RHO bids 2D, unalerted. Even though it's important for me to know whether this is a transfer, or not, I believe I should not click at the bid. Why? Because most probably it is, and I'd be passing UI to my partner if I do it. The click over a bid plays the role of a cheap Leitner double. The declarer can play that game himself if he decides to be unethical. He could explain a bid that noone asked for an explanation in order to receive a lead there. You can make an experiment at a friendly table where you know all the players well enough. Do it, and ask them later what was their feeling about the unnecessarily explained bid. Petko

This, unfortunately, is not true. I've seen occasions when an opp clicks on a bid of yours, and you have to explain it. Sometimes it serves exactly as an unauthorized information, because the other opp gets the message that his partner is interested in that suit. Intentionally, or not, it happens. It could cost you the hand because opps find the only defense. In those cases it is even worse than a f2f tourney, because you don't know who was the interested party :) Petko

I am with hrothgar here. The need for alerting is to draw attention of opps that something is happening that they should know about, not that it's artificial. Everyone expects 2C after 1NT to be Stayman, so logically here you'd alert only the natural 2C if you happen to play it like that. At the local club the bidding from our side went 1H - 3H. We play Bergen raises. Opps complained afterwards that we didn't explain that 3H was a weak hand. I found that very strange at the time, since 3H is completely natural. So I went to the TD, who was also an expert player, and it was explained to me that we should have alerted it, because it's too modern for some people. He said he expected that in 10 years the opposite would be true, and 3H should be alerted only if strong. Since then I had to review what is alertable, and what isn't, and more importantly, why. Petko

1. I bid 3NT at these vulns. Let's show some respect and trust to our partner. She won't be appearing at the 3rd level vuln. vs. NV with some weak diamonds and nothing else. 2. I almost never shift a penalty dbl by my partner, but here I have too rich of a distribution, so it's a close call. If it turns out that we have fits in both red suits, and opps - in the black, 4Sp will probably make. It depends very much upon partner's style. For many players a double even at that level is not necessarily penalty, but more of a cooperative dbl. Partner could be saying: "I don't know what to do, so I propose a double." Petko

2D for me too, in case you play inverted minors, otherwise I could bid 2C first, but won't like it very much. 3H (splinter) could be considered too. I would jump immediately to 5D if you replace the club Ace with a small, because opponents will be likely to have a major game or even a slam. BTW, have you noticed that GIB goes to slam whenever its partner redoubles at the 5th level? Here it would work. Does any of you do that as well? Petko