paulhar

1. 1C-1H-4H. Since partner could have about 6 points for his response, opener should have about 20 points and 4 hearts. (say 19+ counting points for shortness.) (Beginners should go forward to #2 now.) If you play splinter bids, there is an implication that opener doesn't have a singleton (or if he does, it's a singleton honor), since 1C-1H-3S and 1C-1H-4D should show the same range with a singleton in the bid suit. If the pair doesn't play splinters, there is no such implication. I'm against these fake jump shifts and reverses planning to come back to hearts (with 4H) because too often the opponents can usefully double for a lead. If you do that, you have to be showing something special, like a hand that revalues to somewhat more than an opening 1 bid. 2. 1C-1H (2D) 4H With a student, I would think that #2 shows the same as #1. Some experts might say that 4H is a more distributional raise, using 3D followed by a heart raise with the good hand. This might get hairy if the opponents preempt, so I'm not so convinced that student bridge is so bad. 3D could also be bid with a strong club hand looking for 3NT. (Beginners should go to #3 now.) My regular partner and I play (I assume this is common) that 1C-1H (2D) 4C would show the same hand as 1C-1H-4C without interference, i.e. 6+ clubs and 4 hearts, a game going hand without that many high card points, so for us, the jump to 4H to show distribution isn't necessary and our 3D cuebid in this sequence would just about always be clubs. 3. Because we're anxious to show support, I believe that the strength shown by 3H and 4H over the auction 1C (P) 1H (3D) is just slightly less than without the interference. With a dead minimum, IMO opener passes and can show the heart support if responder reopens. I might bid 3H with 15 and 4H with 18. 4. Bearing in mind that partner could have a 6-count and four hearts, opener still needs to be cautious. However, you can't let the opponents steal and I might bid 4H with about 16.

I don't cheat either, but the cheaters are pretty clever! One way that's obvious to even the most casual of observers: OOPS - I wrote this whole paragraph and then decided it would be better to leave it out in case any cheaters were snooping around for good ideas, but Dwingo's 8 precautions will not prevent this method. I will gladly E-mail this method of cheating to the yellows or anybody of the people that posted before me that are clearly looking to stop cheating if they promise not to publish it. My E-mail is paulhar@juno.com. Unfortunately, I don't think there is anything you can do to stop this form of cheating save having a chaperone in the room of every potential player. Y'know, with the seemingly thousands of threads about cheating in tournaments, I realized that it would be impossible for me to win a tournament, especially matchpoints, when there were people in the event that knew all the cards. I was going to previously write this (plus a win) as evidence that cheating might not be as widespread as expected, but was afraid that people would tell me 'well, HELLO - maybe your partner was cheating!' (I picked up said partner and didn't know him.) I am very happy to see on a recent thread (maybe this one!) that this partner railing against the cheaters, so I can now happily say, 'if there's so much cheating out there, how could I possibly win one of these tournaments with neither pard or me cheating? It would seem as though one of the allegedly several pairs cheating would have been able to amass a higher score than we did - I think it was only about 70% which should be easy for a cheater to beat.' And this tournament allowed kibitzers! As this appeared to be a tournament where winning allowed you to play in some special events, the incentive to cheat in this tourney should have been higher than average. I'd like to add that in the few tournaments I have played in on BBO, I have not noticed any pairs that took unusually lucky positions that might have implied that they had information they shouldn't have had. Maybe I've been lucky, but I haven't noticed the proliferation of cheating that others are talking about. But I'm going to join in the chorus - where there's money involved, there's likely to be cheating.

Yes, partner has a good hand (if we are to beat this.) And partner needs information about our hand to help him defend. If I don't lead a club from this six-card suit, partner might place declarer with a lot of club tricks that he doesn't have, never playing me for all these clubs. If you think that declarer is getting bad splits and we should beat the hand anyway, let partner in on this fact so he doesn't defend agressively, because he thinks that declarer has a lot of club tricks. If dummy comes down with enough extra, a lucky club find might be the only way to beat 3NT. Of course, my signature will tell you the usual success with my opening leads... :lol:

Of course, once the 8th player was in place, all 8 players would have to be told that the match was about to start when somebody finished a board, so that none of the others would start a new board. (If they did after the warning, then it would be fine to whisk them away from it.)

Hi – there have been some threads in other forums where the virtues & downsides of disallowing advanced or better kibitzers from a beginner/intermediate lesson were discussed. Rather than agreeing to disagree, I’m asking for your help. Hopefully, your votes and thoughts in this thread will help improve BBO lessons you may attend in the future. Most of the poll responses are too long to put on one line, so I’ll describe them better here in the post and only briefly in the poll. Please do not vote (although feel free to comment) if you do not consider yourself a beginner, novice, or intermediate. Also, please don’t vote if you would never be interested in an online lesson, even a free one. All discussion pertains to a lesson that is aimed at your level. Assume a room where questions and discussion are encouraged rather than a lecture where only the teacher (or lecturer) is supposed to chat. My basic question is how you react when there are people in the room (other than the teacher) that are more experienced than the level that the lesson is intended for (i.e. intermediates in a beginner lesson, advanced in an intermediate lesson, etc.) Description of poll choices: (1) I don’t mind anybody being in the room. I’m going to freely ask and answer questions and speak my mind as if I were the only student regardless of who is in the room. (2) I don’t mind anybody being in the room. However, my chat will be inhibited by the presence of better players kibitzing. The reason is that I’m afraid of what they’ll think of me or my ability. (3) I don’t mind anybody being in the room. However, my chat will be inhibited for some other reason (explain in a post.) (4) My chat would be inhibited by the presence of any other students, regardless of level. (5) I prefer to only observe, so I wouldn’t be too talkative or too quick to ask or answer questions even if I were the only student. (6) I like the better players being there. Maybe I’ll impress one of ‘em with my questions or answers and they’ll offer to play with me. (7) It’s okay for other advanced people to be there, but only if they’re introduced as teacher’s helpers. I would still be less likely to chat. If other advanced people were in the room, I feel uncomfortable speaking. (8) It’s okay for other advanced people to be there, but only if they’re introduced as teacher’s helpers. I would still openly ask and answer questions. If other advanced people were in the room, I would feel uncomfortable speaking. (9) It’s okay for other advanced people to be there, but only if authorized by the beginners/intermediate lounge (because these people would be there to help you.) (10) I do not like having advanced kibitzers in the room at all. They make me feel uncomfortable and should not be allowed. (11) I do not like having advanced kibitzers in the room because I have previously received chat from them which made me feel bad. (12) I do not like having advanced kibitzers in the room because they make me feel dumb. (13) Other (post below.) Thank you for your responses.

A few of us have avatars on this forum :blink:

You also see cards in your hand that aren't there. :) Or perhaps your partners are very conservative.

1. (I think it's attitude - it's very likely declarer has 5 clubs and partner has 3, but I'm not sure why the dummy didn't pass 2Cx) I think I have to play pard for the ♣K. Cash ♠Q, win ♣A, club to pard, take the ruff, take the other high trump, lead a heart and wait for partner's ♥K. Partner's double on ♣Q9x seems remote. I'm not sure I can do anything about it, and anyway if I cash the ace of clubs and pard had Q9x, I've blown it already. Underleading the ♣A might work sometimes, but it gives up on down 2 and it makes if declarer has only 2 hearts. 2. I like the early DQ throwing a club, but I must admit that my first line (which appears to be inferior) was to crossruff hearts and diamonds, then lead DQ throwing a club at the end. When lefty leads a club, I win, lead DJ coaxing a ruff, and my 5th heart is good. 3. It would be useful to know what kind of signals the opponents are using so I know how to strip East's hand before I throw him in to lead a heart from the king (or whether to drop it!) East is unlikely to signal to help me but West who has nothing probably thinks partner needs to know the count to defend. I now know why people prefer the green club the the black one - the black one looks like a spade :D

would be nice if you got a chance to win a second heart, but the King of hearts wins, declarer goes to dummy with the DK and plays ace of spades throwing the other heart. Takes the diamond finesse, and when clubs luckily split 3-3, the slam comes rolling home.

On this hand a RKCB for hearts hand would have redoubled 3Hx.

All the things I said about opening 1NT apply here too. Because of no invitational bid, I like 2NT to be a 2 point range also. Let's pretend it's 20-21. If I had 19HCP and a good 5 card suit, I would open 2NT, and if I had 21 and a good 5 card suit, I would open 2C and rebid 2NT. Because strong one-suited hands are such a bear in standard systems, if your system doesn't have a special bid for these, you might open 2NT to avoid complications. Example: Kxx/Ax/AQ/AQxxxx. Pretty tough after 1C-1H response. Too strong for 2NT rebid.

1/. xx AKXX AKQXX XX A minimum reverse. Open 1D, rebid 2H over 1S response. Hopefully you and partner have agreed what responses are forcing after this reverse. If you have no agreements whatsoever, opening 1NT isn't such a bad idea. (K/R = 17.30) I expect to be all alone with that opinion, by the way. 2/. XXXX AJ KQJ KJXX http://www.gg.caltech.edu/~jeff/knr.cgi?ha...xxx+AJ+KQJ+KJxx The above link to Kaplan/Rubens evaluator comes up with 13.40 points. (K/R) I would open 1C although I would have no problemwith a student opening 1NT. 3/. AKXXX AXX QX QXX I think either opening is OK. If my 5-bagger were hearts, I would open 1NT since I would have trouble after a 1S response. (K/R=14.70) 4/. XXX XX AKQ AKJXX (removed spade) This hand is too good for 1NT. I would open 1C, planning to rebid 2D over 1S or 2NT over 1H. (K/R=18.20) 5/. AXX AXX AXXX AXX You can't bid this hand if you don't open 1NT, so despite the advantages of having partner declare, I open 1NT. 6/. QJX QJ109 KJ AJ10X Those 10's and 9's are valuable, but try plugging this one into K/R (13.90) I probably would have opened 1NT, but I guess I'm not supposed to :rolleyes: 7/. QXX AX KJ AKXXXX This hand is a 1C opener and a 2NT rebid IMO. Aces are undervalued in the 4-3-2-1 count. K/R rates the balanced 4-3-3-3 with three aces and a king in the fourth suit as 15.40 or 15.30 depending on if the king is in the 4-card suit. Note that this is with NO spots although K/R doesn't seem to differentiate between A9x and Axx. Guidelines: In general, open 1NT whenever you can. Very descriptive to partner. You frequently have to open 1NT with five hearts because you'll have no comfortable bid over a 1S response. A decent five-card suit is usually worth a point, which may take put you into or take you out of your NT range. I try to have a balanced hand. I'll only open a 5-4-2-2 or 6-3-2-2 hand 1NT if I perceive rebid problems. Generally I'd like to have 'stuff' in my doubletons to do this. Bear in mind that if I have too much 'stuff' in the doubletons, the hand probably isn't worth what point count says it is, since you have to set up long weak suits, and are forced to win your high cards in your doubletons too early. For example, AQ, AQ, Q654, Q7654 is an ugly hand, and although the ACBL beginner course tells students that this is a 17 point hand (1 for the extra club), this hand is a disaster with those sundry honor combinations and all the queens and all the strength in the short suits. I would open 1C intending to rebid 1NT, and would not be totally surprised if someone passed (!) as dealer and got a top. K/R=13.70 Kx/Ax/AKxx/Jxxxx looks more like the 5-4-2-2 1NT opener. (Let the 1D openers planning to rebid 2C play in their 4-2 diamond fit, I'm not chagrined if partner transfers me to a 5-2 major suit fit with this hand, especially as I might score a surprise ruff in my hand.) A 6-3-2-2 hand would be a 1NT opener if I felt uncomfortable about jump rebidding my suit. I would try to avoid this if my 6-card suit were a major.

Ben: I couldn't think of an instance where a 3D preempt would be right on that hand. Apparently I didn't think long enough. Although you could have had a game (the 1H bid could be on junk), a 3D bid here seems quite reasonable. By your posts, you seem like a fine player and a 3D preempt just caught me by surprise! (Really? is he on drugs?) My faith in you has been restored. This would have been a good time for me to remember that "a closed mouth gathers no feet." :rolleyes: Quite honestly, I agree with about 90% of your suggested bids in your posts (even most of the ones you consider unpopular.) When I do agree, you've usually already made the point better than I could have, so I have no reason to post if our answer is popular. I might post if I agree with your unpopular opinion just to show support for that opinion. Where we differ, I feel I have to post my thoughts so that you and the other posters can tell me where my thinking has gone awry.

I think it's an excellent idea. Maybe people would be more apt to rate themselves correctly. Yeah, I know it's been said a hundred times before, but... I'm not sure this has been said: What's success? To some, 2nd is not success. To others, 25th overall is success. What's major? IMHO, The North American Swiss Teams (or whatever it's called now) is not a major event since it runs opposite the Reisinger. But try telling that to someone who won it. Also, just my opinion, but if you're under average as often as over average, you're not consistently successful.

I took the poll and was encouraged by the results. Of the 8 people (besides me) that replied, all would be helpful and none would be annoyed. Based on that, I think you should feel free to ask your favorite stars when they intend to play a high-level team match that you can watch.

Maybe people on this forum are more helpful and more likely to give back to the game they love, but I'm encouraged by the results. So far, 8 votes and everybody would be helpful. Counting me (I haven't voted, not wanting to skew the results), that makes 9. I'll let the wannabe kibitzers know that they shouldn't be afraid to ask their favorite stars on the appropriate thread. Ben - love your 4♥ opening; love your DK play, like to think that I would have found the same play.

I thnik y'all are doing a disservice to your weak partner by trying to teaching him anything of the sort. Presumably, you are playing with this partner to help him learn. If you clutter his mind with junk like pulling 3NTx on this hand (which may come up again in ten years), the poor guy will be so confused and unable to learn the routine concepts he should be learning. Not to mention that the next time it does come up, his partner might have 3NT cold in his own hand. If your beginner partner displays a misconception which is going to hurt him on a lot of hands, now you might want to say something. Not because his misconception cost on this hand, but because it will help him frequently in the long run if he learns the concept. Different people have a different capacity to learn, but in my experience, if you give your partner more than three lessons in a 26 board session, you are asking for trouble. Your partner will play worse and also will be less receptive to learning. If you're playing with the poor player in an individual or a random click in the Main Bridge Club, I still think you're doing your partner a disservice by 'teaching him THIS lesson' unless he asks. He's probably thrilled to be playing with you; don't change that fact. If you guess wrong over the double, admit that you guessed wrong and get on to the next deal. Don't berate partner for his ignorance. Hey - we're bridge players and keeping our mouth shut is tough! But I have found it to be worthwile when my partners play above their expected ability.

I'm not surprised that you were alone on the first hand. You have full values for a 1D opener followed by a 3D rebid, which is going to get you to a makable 3NT a lot of the time. I would expect to have decent play for 3NT even if your 3D bid was over an opponent's opening bid if your partner has some values. Now, if you had preempted in 4th seat after three passes, then the opponents should expect this hand and got exactly what they deserved in 3NT. Unfortuately, it's tough to collect a big number when the opponents are wrong. If you double 3NT and one opponent has D-KQx and your partner is entryless, you might watch them make 3NT with overtricks. Your partner can never double when you have all the stuff. This point was driven home hard the other day when I used one of my favoirte preemptive tactics - a preemptive overcall with a good hand after partner passed, then double giving pard the choice if the opponents bid more. I held something resembling S-AKQJxxx, H-Kxx D-x C-Ax. LHO opened 1D, pass by partner, RHO bid 1H. I bid 4S. P, P, 5D to me. Double. (To protect our score for 4S as much as anything else.) P-P-Redouble. Partner was broke and -1000 wasn't a success. Not that I wouldn't do the same thing next time. The point I'm trying to make is that when you "suck the opponents in" after your preempt with a strong hand, it is not an automatic bonanza. To do it with without a game bid when your side might easily have a game seems like a losing strategy. (I could see it if you were trying for a swing.) Although it will make your opponents think more over your preempt... I would have taken the same hit. Double seems pretty clear to me. If they never make a doubled contract against you, you're not doubling enough. If you never go for a number, you're not bidding enough. Partner could be quite strong if he has spade length and no attractive bid. I guess that expresses my view about balancing against preemptive opening bids :rolleyes:

51 views and 3 votes! I guess the rest of you, like me, couldn't even imagine themselves in that position :lol:

Am I misunderstanding the convention? Since neither opponent has promised diamonds, couldn't East bid 3D over the double (which might be expected based on West's shortness?) However, I think West dug himself into more trouble by bidding 3C. West can't have a substantial spade holding, having failed to bid nonvul the first time, and yet East made no attempt to rescue. If West trusts his partner, he will sit for 2Sx.

A new partnership should play it forcing to game. I learned this the hard way by playing a hand with 15 top tricks in 4C. I believe that most partnerships have getouts that allow them to stop in 4m but you must have firm agreements with your partner exactly when those apply. Most of these apply when you have a misfit with a suit that's weakly stopped for NT, or your fit is a minor and you know you're missing a stopper. I don't have a good answer, which is why I don't play it this way. I presume you have to make up a new suit, or guess to play the hand in notrump if that seems appropriate.

I presume the double of 2C shows clubs, so both doubles reduce your chances for slam. That being said, you stated that your 2C was game forcing or 23+ balanced. When your partner rebids 3D, I presume that this means that he intended to force to a game, quite possibly with diamonds as trump. (He doesn't seem to like spades or hearts.) A 2C opening bid intending to rebid a minor suit needs to be stronger than a 2C opening bid intending to rebid a major. If partner is missing a diamond card, I think he should have the rest of the aces and kings. I would expect something like A, Kx, AQJ10xx, AKQx, and still that's a sketchy force to game. With less, (say no queen of clubs), game is going to be pretty tough unless partner can respond or you hit a lucky DK in dummy. However, if the opponents' bidding is to be believed, you might not get good breaks and I'd give partner a chance to bail with a 4NT invitation. If this would be taken as ace-asking, I guess I take a shot at 6NT. I would guess that my 2C followed by 3 of a minor shows more than Ben's, or that my hand evaluation with the misfit is optimistic (or bad :lol: ), or both. This case is made even stronger if you have some other strong bids in your system to show hands just below game forcing strength. Unfortunately, I'm not aware of the requirements for some of these like Acol 2-bids or some other funny 2D openings that show strong hands, but I am aware of their existence and if you play one of them, then your partner must be serious about that game force (to 5D no less!) so I would take a shot at a slam even if I had an invitational bid available.

Count me in for (3D) 5C (P) P (P). With the preempt, 5C is an excellent spot. Without the preempt, I'd want to be in six but I would imagine that a lot of partnerships might have trouble getting there. Pairs starting with 2C (strong) - 2H (5 hearts with 2 of the top 3 honors) have an excellent start, although I could understand somebody not wanting to bid this way with five spades.

You are a real world-class player. A player that you don't know sends you a (BBO mail?) message something like: I feel that I could maximize my learning experience by watching you and your favorite partner play a team game against another tough pair. Because your system is something that I strive to play well, kibitzing you is more valuable to me than kibitzing other good pairs. If you could let me know when you were to play such a match, I would greatly appreciate it. How do you react? All can answer but clearly the answers from the world-class players are most important, and since all will answer, I'd like the top players to post as well. If you are good friends with a top player that probably isn't reading this forum, asking him/her to answer would be really nice. Thank you.

Great! It sounds workable. Chamaco: I'm going to once again state the obvious, using you as an example, for the beneift of the forum newbies in your position. You have your favorite stars you like to watch. They probably play a system simliar to yours and watching other stars wouldn't be as enlightening. If you mark these as friends, they will show up early on the list in BBO. If two of your favorite stars are playing in a team game together, this will IMHO be more instructive and better bridge than watching them in a tournament where they have to partake in bunny-killing in order to win, where there might be delays between the rounds, and where their opponents change after every couple of rounds. You might even leave them BBO mail asking them to let you know when they're going to play one of these high-level team matches. I'm tempted to do yet another poll to test this theory - something like, 'if someone sent you such mail, would you be annoyed or helpful or somewhere inbetween?' Clearly if most would be annoyed, this isn't a good idea. By the way, can you mark somebody a favorite when they're not online?