ArcLight

>Any takers? Sure! Spades had better be 5-3 with the short spade holder also having the Club Ace. So put up the Queen (in case of a weirdo lead from KJ) and duck till your ace is forced. The odds are against you but they aren't miniscule. You have a real shot at making. Besides in 4♥, when LHO leads his stiff Club to his pards Ace and gets a club ruff, then to his pards Dime Ace and gets another Club ruff, all those 4 heart bidders will be doing down. :)

>1) Some of our customers want to use our CDs on more than one computer (at home and at the office for example). We do not want to prevent our customers from being able to do this. OOPS - BUSTED! ;) I've done all the Mike Lawrence software at work, twice. Soon I'll bring in my Larry Cohen and Kit Woolsey CDs and install them too. I even have the software on both the net work drive and my local drive at work. Just in case ...

I've seen it called "Smothering" or "squashing". Run the jack, smothering the 10. (I think in one of Mike Lawrences software lessons he mentions "squashing")

>Do I understand correctly that the difference between the two is that with five spades responder will bid 2s with drop dead (removing an option for in invitational hand with with 5 spades and four hearts) in drop dead, while with garbage responder always bids 3h regardless of whether 4/4 4/5 or 5/4? I might be misunderstanding, but why would you want to get to the 3 level with a weak hand, unless you had great length (6). Better to just pass 1NT. I wonder if you are confusing this with SMOLEN thats used with 5-4 hands that are game forcing. You respond 2 Clubs, and raise pards major response to game. Otherwise you bid the shorter major at the 3 level over the NT players 2 Diamond response. People may consider Crawling, Drop Dead, Garbage Stayman to be the same. There may be some difference, and I'd be curious! Mike Lawrence presents a weird match point convention he calls Son of Drop Dead Stayman where you can bid 2C over pards NT with a stiff Heart as long as you have 4-4-4 or better in the other 3 and you bid 2S over the 2D response. THEN the NT bidder canb pass or bid 3 Clubs which is passed out.

>I had to scrap a lot of these ideas just because they were too complicated, too difficult to play This coming from a man with 800+ pages of system notes! Frightening. B)

From problem 2: LHO Deals pass - 1 Spade - pass - 1NT (forcing - playing 2/1) 2 Hearts - X - pass - ?? I'm a bit confused. LHO is a passed hand, who now makes a 2 heart overcall opposite a passed pard(at least non-overcalling pard). If you have 1 heart, and opener has heart shortness (if thats how you interpret the DBL - as take out) then the opps have 10 hearts bewteen them, yet they passed. Doesn't that seem odd. If dealer passed, then overcalls 2 hearts, wouldn't his pard (with 4-5 hearts) raise to 3 or 4? But that didn't happen. Doesn't that imply the opps didn't have a ton of hearts? How would one penalize the overcaller? If opener passes, and responder has 6-9 will they not pass? Is there no way to double the overcaller? Why would double be for takeout as opposed to penalty? The 1NT responder has not bid yet. They may have a delayed Limit Raise (3 trumps and 10-12 support points) or a minor or something. If its takeout, then responder is forced to go to the 3 level with 6-9 HCP and shortness in spades and hearts, meaning you play with a 5-2/3 or fit, which I guess isnt too terrible.

>Of course it is a matter of "politeness" Of course its not. What is accomplished by requiring the dummy to stick around? Especially if they don't know the declarer. Are they supposed to sit in silence, then leave after the hand? Gee, that accomplishes a lot. Should Dummy offer comments on Declarers play - "Had you tested the Club suit to see if they were 3-3, before taking that finesse, you would have made it" Will that be appreciated? How about this? Don't leave your seat, just walk away from the computer. Get a drink of water and/or go to the bathroom. OR put the clothes in the Dryer, whatever. Say BRB. Make the other 3 people at the table wait 10 minutes for you. Let them get a black mark for booting you! You will get a black mark too, ok, it will go awya in a day. And maybe if you are lucky you will return in 7 minutes and they will not have booted you. Then you can say BYE, and leave. The end result is that you will have wasted the time of the 3 other players. >If people behaved online a little more like they do in real life we wouldnt have half the problems we do. I agree, but this is one case where the Internet is different from a live game. I'm not talking about a tournament where a player quits in the middle, 'm talking about pick up games in the main room. Someone doesn't want to watch, fine , leave. The Dummy sticking around doesn't help me or harm me.

What do you bid in these cases (?? indicates its your bid) All IMPs 1. IMPS Non Vul vs Non Vul, You hold ♠K 9 6 5 4 ♥ 5 ♦ A Q 3 ♣ Q 6 4 2 LHO Opens 2♥ - pass - pass - ?? 2. IMPS, Opps Vulnerable, you hold ♠ x ♥ x ♦ K 9 6 5 4 2 ♣ A J T 5 4 LHO Deals pass - 1 Spade - pass - 1NT (forcing - playing 2/1) 2 Hearts - X - pass - ?? 3a. IMS all Red, You deal , what do you bid with: ♠ void ♥ 8 7 6 4 2 ♦ A Q ♣ K Q J T 9 3 3b. You decide to open 1Heart the bididng goes: 1H - (1S) - 2H - (4S) ?? 4a. IMS all Red you hold: ♠ x ♥ K Q T 9 5 3 2 ♦ J ♣ Q J T 4 Pard opens 1 Diamond - pass - ?? 4b. Same hand, the bidding goes: 1D - p - 1H - (1S) 2H - (2S) - 4H - (4S) X - p - ??

I find it far worse for a defender to quit during the play. That tends to screw the hand. Quitting as Dummy has no impact. There is no reason for Dummy to have to stick around if (s)he doesn't want to. It's just a waste of their time because they can't do anything but watch. I can see more restrictive rules in a Tourney, but I don't see a need to stop Dummy from leaving during a pick up game in the main room. I don't think the suspension triggers with just a few quits though, I think it takes around 6 quits in a day as dummy to trigger the suspension. In BIL my mentor used to let me declare all our sides contracts, and critique my play. But he got a suspension, and we found out it was because he was letting me play and quitting as declarer. >In f2f bridge you would obviously not leave a table if you are unhappy with your partner, In F2F bridge you have commited to play a certain number of boards (lets say 21-24). On the internet in a pick up game in the main room, you don't need to stay around as dummy. They don't need you to "turn the cards in dummy". Just leave. Its not a matter of "politeness" to expect the dummy to stick around, its 100% a waste of their time.

>- new stars are not given out unless the player in question has his/her full real name and proper country in his/her profile. Stars that subsequently edit their profiles to remove this information have their stars removed (they can get their star back exactly once in this case by correcting their profiles). This rule does not apply to people who had their stars before this rule was in effect. I'm curious why a top player wouldn't want their name on their profile. It's not like they have to also give an email address. Is it because they don't want other experts studying their play and bidding? Is it because they don't wnat to be seen making mistakes in a meaningless game? If thats the case, make a second alias/nic and rate your self expert and see if you can play other strong players (make an Expert only table). I think I was kibitzing either Alfredo Versace (or Lorenzo Lauria ) partnering a non-star. I asked one of the kibitzers who the non-star was and they told me it was Lauria (or Versace).

I'm surprised that RHO with very little bid 4♠. I would have expected some shape, but I'm surprised he has 3 clubs. 5 Spades, 3 Clubs, and maybe 4-1 in the reds, say Kxxx in hearts? With 5-3-2-3 and 5 trumps, is 4 ♠ really a good bid? What does LHP have for his 1♠ opener? Does he open light shapely hands? Some use LTC and open distributional hands (without a known fit). Another thing, the contract is cold UNLESS East has the heart King, so make that assumption. 5=4=1=3 probably. I think 5=3=2=3 with a Club J and Heart K is less likely, though its possible. That means West has the diamond Ace. I lead the J♦, then a ♦ to the Q, then finally the K. (If west takes the 2nd Diamond I'm happy.) In any case I should soon find out if East has the ♦ Ace. If not, there is still a chance Diamonds are 3-3. In any case, I want to eliminate ♦ before playing hearts. Since East has 5 spades and 3 clubs, he can have just 5 reds. So Diamonds will be eliminated unless West takes the Jack, and leads a heart, which I'll duck. If East is 3-2 in Hearts and Diamonds I think we probably go down If the defenders cooperate and I can eliminate Diamonds then start on hearts. After Diamond, turning to hearts I try multiple finesses, lead low to the 7, then play the 9 when back in hand (ruff a diamond).

One general piece of advice - looking at your assets, you want the opponents to open (break) new suits for you. If you duck the Diamond, RHO (East) will be on lead, and probably anything they lead will be benficial. It will at least reveal information if its a spade and you can see what honor west has. -From the lead, West doesnt have the ♠AK. -Given the # of spades the opps have, why didnt they lead them? Perhaps West has the Ace? Then don't play the Q, duck a spade lead from East and see if West has the Jack as well. - the ♦5 might be a stiff, so the finesse will lose. Also, if 2♠ makes, then down 2 undoubled is not bad.

- Championship Bridge - Jose Le Dentu - While the bidding sections are outdated there is a very nice 60 page section on deception. Not stupid stuff, but very common play that are available. Things like winning a trick in hand with an unnecesarily high card, playing on a weak suit to feign strength, and psychology. He gives quotes by masters liek Albaran and Garazzo, along the lines of "You must realize that the defenders dont know your hand". - The Tricky Game - Hugh Kelsey - False Cards - Mike Lawrence I didn't care for Pottages book on Pyshic bidding. Just examples with little instruction. Victor Mollos "The Black Arts" was better, with lost of interesting examples.

Partnership Defense by Kit Woolsey The book covers the basic signals (Attitude, Count, Suit Preference), discusses lead (Rusinow, Low from Odd) and carding conventions, gives many examples, and presents the reader with problem sets. What I found interesting was the creative use of Suit Preference signals. There are some nice examples of discard signals to help pard in a [seudo squeeze situation. The author gives some examples that might not occur to everyone. There was also an interesting section on Match Point defense. One partner KNOWS there is no set, and must "trick" pard into cashing out, so they miscard so as to fool pard. Some of the problems were a tad obscure, but its a highly worthwhile book. It's a bit advanced so I'd suggest first reading Eddie Kantars MODERN BRIDGE DEFENSE and ADVANCED BRIDGE DEFENSE. There is also a version on CD which has additional material, including a section on reading hands based on leads. The CD has some interactive hands which are harder to present clearly in a book. The downside is the CD costs $40 http://www.bridgebase.com/cgi-bin/store/co...id=197249.25090 compared with around $4 for a used copy. http://www.campusi.com/bookFind/asp/bookFi...odId=0910791686

Since we know pard has 2 (or maybe 1) Spades, we don't need Attitude or Count. So pard can signal suit preference, though that can be confusing depending on his/her spots if they are adjacent and low or high. (Ex: 34 its hard for us to decipher a signal). ♠ Ace ♠ King assume pards carding order is suit preference. Hi-Low = Dimes. Low -Hi = Clubs if its hi-low, cash the ♦ King, and play the 3rd round of ♠. (avoid Declarer playing dime as a loser on loser) If its low-hi, just play the 3rd round of ♠.

In Kantars Modern Bridge Defense and Woolseys Partnership defense the authors suggest that against No Trump contracts: The lead of the Ace asks pard to unblock any honors, else signal count. This is typically made from near solid suits like AKJT6. They also advise that the lead of the Q asks pard to unblock the Jack. Thus you lead Q from KQT94.

What is the opponents interference shows 2 suits? What does Lebensohl show? One stopper?

>Unfortunately, if I were to respond to this the way I would like to, I probably could be held liable for slander, and I really cant afford it...... >I knew there was a reason my profile says "NO BERGEN", I just couldnt remember why. Thanks for reminding me. I know Mike Lawrence is not a fan of Bergen raises, or using the LAW at high levels. But you seem to be implying that Marty Bergen is not a good bidder (not talking about preempts) or player. Considering that he is a multiple national champion, that would imply he is a strong player. Another way to look at it is to ask "Is Larry Cohen a strong player"? I think the answer is yes. And why would Cohen have played with Marty Bergen for all those years if Bergen was not around his level (or at least in the ball park, even if not quite as good).

>Contrary to what is being argued, most expert theory that I am aware of these days is that it only requires 24 hcp for 3N to make. And that does not have to be 12 opposite 12, 16 opposite a good 8 works just fine. I asked Marty Bergen about this and he disagreed. About responding to 1NT, he said: pass 1NT w 8 bid 2NT w 9 bid 3NT w 10

What I find interesting is some of the bidding problems that one sees in every day play. Not the crazy 7-4 hands where slam was cold because pard was void in another suit and had the trump Jack. But the more common ones, like do you bid over the premept, and if so, how? I'll take a dissenting view on the conventions people use here. While I enjoy reading about all these systems, for 99% of players they will have almost no impact (other than to confuse the opponents and pards). From time to time I have asked real experts (Bobby Wolff, Mike Lawrence, Larry Cohen, Fred) about a few conventions/leads/signals. They all pretty much said the same thing "it doesn't matter much". Since I throw away points left and right on bad play, gaining 0.0078 IMPS by using the XXX convention is a waste of my time. In reading books on defense it’s obvious that the name of the game is counting/visualization and reasoning what layouts can exist or need to exist. We are on defense about half the time, so that’s where we should concentrate our energies. Concentrating on complex conventions, rather than (for example) working on situations that come up frequently (NT contract - pard leads the 3, dummy has the Qx and rises with the Q, do you signal Attitude or Count?) will cause you to misfocus your time. Its fun to read about these conventions. Its fun to try them. It’s also unlikely to have much impact on your game (probably no impact unless you are at the expert level). The reason Experts use lots of systems, and accept the complexity is they are fighting for every edge. They are already expert card players. For those who are no (like me!) it’s far better to spend your time reading and rereading books on defense: Eddie Kantars Modern & Advanced Bridge Defense Mike Lawrence’s Defense Kelsey’s Killing Defense and More Killing Defense Partnership Defense at Bridge - Woolsey Test your Defense - Mollo (outdated bidding, but has a few nice hands and leads) Opening Leads - Mike Lawrence Older books I have but haven't read Defend with your Life - Kantar/Reese Defense in depth - Hoffman There are newer books I own but haven't read yet Demon Doubling, demon defense - Boehm Priebe has a book on Visualization on Defense Pottage has Defend these hands with me I see all these people in BIL with complex conventions on their profile. I see many BIL "graduates" that list themselves as Advanced. Complex conventions don’t make for a good or advanced player. Stick with the basics and forget all the complex systems, until you are very comfortable counting AND your card play is correct. :P OK, rant mode off.

Basic Stayman (2C to ask for a major) is quite useful. How many experts use 4 suit transfers? How many experts use Minor Suit Stayman? Are these of minor benefit, and experts use them to fight for a small advantage, but for those of us (me!) who are not experts they would be of less value? How damaging (helpful to the defense) is it to have to invite (1NT - 2NT - p/3NT) with the sequence: 1NT - 2C 2X - 2NT since declarer reveals a key feature about his hand? Does this tend to cut down on the benefits of 1NT - 2NT (transfer to a minor)

>It's closing everything, not just Bridge. The reason? Well probably it does no longer pay off - maybe everyone is playing games on their mobile phone? Wow, even the Spades site? Thats how I got into Bridge, by playing Spades with some good Bridge players. I guess there is still Yahoo Games.

>If you want to improve your overall level of skill, don't bother with books on squeezes and unlikely (in some cases =very= unlikely) card play situations until you are very advanced. I mostly agree except that simple squeezes are pretty easy to execute, all you need to do is be aware taht they might exist. Terence Reese says taht asqueeze may be available in around 1 in 6 hands. Even if simple squeezes come up less often, they are still frequent enough that one should know what to look for. I suggest: Mike Lawrences Private Lessons 1 & 2 Terence Reese - Squeeze Play made easy David Bird - Bridge Squeezes for Everyone After you have read all that, there are many advanced (non-simple/double)squeeze hands in the level 4 hands.

Step by Step Slam Bidding - Alan Mould Cue Bidding to Slam - Ron Klinger

>And I think the advantages of BBO are guidances in the bridge game I am not saying the Zone Bridge is as good as BBO. I'm just wondering why its closing. I wonder if Yahoo follows suit? The Zone shutting down can be good for BBO.