Dinarius

Do people combine Losing Trick Count when calculating Bergen Raises? If not, would there be any point to it? Consider the following; 3♣️ = 9 losers 3♦️ = 8 losers 2NT = 7 losers Maybe this is normal for some. I’m just curious. On a related matter; When calculating LTC losers in a hand where you hold four card, or more, Bergen support, would the knowledge that you have at least a nine card fit affect that loser calculation? For example, in response to a 1♠️ call by partner... ♠️Jxxx ❤️Kx ♦️AQxx ♣️xxx ...would the above 10 count be 8 losers? I presume yes. Thanks. D.

Am not looking at the diamond suit in isolation. Am trying to consider best MP strategy. If you commit to finesse, you also commit to cashing the Hearts first. On the bidding, I expect it is more likely that Hearts won’t allow you to cash them before taking the finesse, than it is that one of South’s Clubs might be a Diamond. Though I’m not a mathematician, so I can’t prove it. I’m still playing Diamonds from the top. D.

With most partners, I open 2♣️ with East, rebidding 3♦️. This show 8 tricks. Given North’s pass, over 1♦️ by East, I bid 4♦️with the South hand. Finally, where’s the finesse? As in, if you cross to take it, you’re still minus 1, correct? On the bidding, you don’t expect diamonds or hearts to break, right? So, playing for one down, by playing diamonds from the top is the better MPs strategy, no? D.

As someone who tends to play with a lot of different partners, and not anyone very regularly, I am coming more and more to the view that, Five Card Majors/Strong NT is best with regular partners. The semi-artificial nature of this system (better minor or prepared ♣️; lots and lots of artificial sequences such as Bergen and all it entails, along with Jacoby etc.) has me convinced that it is too much for occasional partnerships. In truth, I prefer to work it out at the table. Secondly, given that I’m playing mostly matchpoints, which doesn’t reward those marginal games and slams which a more sophisticated approach can use at IMPS, I feel that since it’s all about tricks, the play is the thing, not so much the bidding. At the end of a night’s Pairs, you’re far more likely to say; “I could have played that for one down, instead of two.”, rather than, “If only we’d been playing xxx gadget, we would have found that contract.” This is a roundabout way of saying I’m more drawn to natural bidding and focusing on play and defence. So, why Strong NT/Four Card? Well, it all but eliminates the chance of the fatal -200 at MPs. It allows 4/4 fits to be found at the one level more frequently. But, of course, it loses the pre-emptive value of the weak 1NT opening, and it permits more interference bidding by the opponents. However, everything is natural, pretty much, and an entire system can be reduced to about a page. So, what am I missing? I know that most of the planet plays Strong/5, but has anyone ever done an analysis of their relatives successes? (Obviously, of the likes of Zia play it, it kind of distorts the picture! 😎 Any advocates for Strong/4? Over to you. D.

Ps. You say that if you duck the ♠️ lead, West switches to ❤️9, on which East plays low: I presume East plays low under your 10? D.

Assuming you are losing trump Q and a Spade and assuming a normal 4/3 split in ♠️ and ♣️; You make six tricks in high cards, one ♣️ ruff, one ♠️ ruff and two long trumps. Right? But, this assumes normal distributions in three suits, I think. I don’t think the contact can be may come what may. Your ♠️A could be ruffed, for example, as could either of your ♣️ honours, when setting up the cross ruff. So, I assume GIB is saying it’s a make for reasons of reasonable distribution. D.

Yes, me too. But, I’m sure I saw a sequence recently where the bid showed trump queen and one King. The next suit up would have shown two kings, etc. But, I can’t find that approach on any website. Thanks. D.

I win the ♣️9 with the ♣️A. I then cash ❤️K and then duck a ♠️. West could have lead through dummy’s Spades if he had shortage, but didn’t. So, I’m playing for ♠️ 3/3, and keeping all other options open for the moment. If West wins ♠️ what can he return after I have unblocked ❤️? If East wins ♠️ and returns ♣️, they’re probably 3/3, which is good. If he returns ❤️, I play J. Even if this loses, my ❤️9 is now a very good spot card. I think that unblocking ❤️ and ducking ♠️ makes defence do the work. I can afford to await developments. D.

I usually play 1430 RKCB. When responding to the Queen asking bid, do you show the Queen + the lowest King, or do you show Queen + number of kings? E.g. 1❤️:4❤️ 4NT:5♣️ 5♦️:5♠️ In the above sequence, would you play 5♠️ as ❤️Q + ♠️ King, or any one King? Or do you play something completely different? Thanks. D.

If you reduce North’s losers to five, because of the (assumed) 10 card fit - only a 3/0 Club break giving a loser- then 5 losers opposite 7 should alert North to making a move over 3NT. The thing is, Pairs, which is what I mostly play, does not reward bad games & slams. So, most will rest in 3NT. D.

[hv=pc=n&s=sjhj8543dckt96432&w=sk82ha97dqjt93cj5&n=sq953hktdak8752ca&e=sat764hq62d64cq87&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1d]399|300[/hv] Time for the full deal... To save you working it out, par is 4♣ Doubled minus 1 by N/S, because E/W can make 3NT, though even Double Dummy 3NT isn't that easy, particularly if N has passed. Thanks for the responses. D.

Ps. If it’s passed round to partner and he is stronger than a 10/11 protective Dbl, I expect him to bid 2♦️, most times. D.

I agree. Pass keeps every option still open, pretty much. If it’s passed round to partner and he protects with a Dbl, I expect to make +200 (or better) which is almost invariably a top or second top at matchpoints. There is no perfect immediate bid. I think Pass is probably best option more often than any of the others. Matchpoints tactics do not repay marginal games or slams. The worst that can happen is both East and South have nothing, and 1♦️ is passed out. But, then a possible +100 will be more matchpoints than any minus score. So, keeping Michael’s, Pass is number 1 bid in my opinion. D.

If a partner bids 1♠️ with that hand, I’m looking for a new partner. D.

Ps. I’ve edited the original post. It was Game All. D.

A few points. I like the idea of switching off Michael’s against Better Minor bidding. Useful tip. Secondly, I think that Double says things about every suit except Spades that you simply can’t stand over, so I think it’s out of the question. I think there is a strong argument for Pass. Finally, playing Stayman and Transfers opposite every NT, as I do, I don’t really like 1NT. I see why people suggest it, but I think it will lead to trouble on this hand more often than not. 1. 2 Diamonds (if possible) otherwise PASS 2. 1NT D.

[hv=pc=n&n=sq953hktdak8752ca]133|100[/hv] Vulnerability: Both At Matchpoints, West, as dealer, opens 1♦ E/W are playing Five Card Majors and Better Minor, so the ♦ bid could be three cards. What do you bid as North? 1. Pass? 2. 1NT? 3. Double? 4. 2♦? 5. ? It is a case of telling the lie that will cause the least damage and misunderstanding. So, what's it to be? D.

Yes, that may be true. But, my point was in reference to leading from four to a King (i.e. K,x,x,x) not five. D.

Apologies for any lack of clarity on my part - though everyone else appears to have understood me - I was talking about leading Aces against slams, never, ever underleading them. D.

Yes, I realize that factors such as the auction come into play. But, for example, I understand that research has been done, using computer simulations, to show that leading from K,x,x,x against 3NT does not pay off in the long run. (I think I read somewhere Tony Forrester does not permit his partner to lead 4th best from K,x,x,x against 3NT) Has any similar research been done regarding leading from A,x or A,x,x or A,x,x,x, etc. against slams? Thanks. D. Ps. If you Matchpoint and IMPs strategies differ (I suspect they do) please say so. Pps. This is food for thought.

[hv=pc=n&s=skj975hdkqt965ck5&w=s32hak875d4ct8732&n=saqthjt62daj3caq4&e=s864hq943d872cj96&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1d1h]399|300|...over to you[/hv] If North bids 3NT, I bid 4♠ as South. I would now take 4NT by North as key-card agreeing ♠ Easy to bid 6♠, but can you bid seven? D.

The reason I'm asking is that I like the unambiguous clarity of splinters and control bids showing *only* Aces and voids, and I hate the ambiguity introduced by also allowing singletons (usually as part of Splinters). Simply put, short of a ruff or an over-ruff, an Ace or a void are cast-iron first round controls. A singleton isn't. What do others think? D.

Interesting that East is happy to pay in 3NT and only get nervous (or so it appears) when it's doubled. If East doesn't like 3NTx, might it be less ambiguous to force partner to choose by bidding 4♣️ rather than redoubling? Though, I guess he does give West the option of passing XX if West thinks that South has blundered. D.

What I thought it might be. Thanks. D.

♥9, 8, 2, ♥A, K, J, 4, Probably not even an expert question, but I figured I may as well ask the experts. What is the correct play for one loser. For what it's worth, if the finesse (hook) is correct, you do have entries to first cash a top honor (to cater for singleton Q with West) and then crossover to take the finesse, if Q doesn't fall. But, missing Q, 10, and holding J, 9, 8, I'm guessing that cashing Ace/King is the correct line for one loser. Thanks. D.