Rebound

I am wondering if it would be better to try to drop the ♥ Q and then play for split club honors ([edit] that is, by ruffing a heart in addition to cashing the A and K. This gives 2 club pitches.)

I think this hand underscores very well the importance of partnership agreement. Your system accounts for this hand so certainly it makes sense to bid with it. It's no different, I would say, than determining whether to open it with a preempt if you were dealer - answer is, it depends on your partnership agreement. I like the idea of responding 1♥ with that hand, but I almost certainly would not do it with either of my current partners, and if I did, I would have to fight very hard to not pull the double of 5♦ since I may be expected to contribute a little something to the defense. I have one semi-regular partner in particular who likes to make thin doubles - I try to ensure I have at least something like what I have promised. 1♥ doesn't promise much, but this hand ain't got it for me.

LOL it strikes me funny we can have such different opinions on the previous hand, Mike, and yet agree on this hand - taking for granted 1NT may have been more good luck than good management. I am confident that our reasons for bidding 4♥ with the South hand coincide. The A of ♦ opposite expected shortness, the low doubleton in partner's suit offering good prospects for setting it up while the hand is essentially unharmed by spade leads are all favorable, not to mention the expected strength on our right making any missing high cards in hearts finessable. We apparently different completely on the other hand I posted. Your opinion of the contast?

I never doubted your seriousness, however, I am interested in the reasoning behind some of your choices. For example, regarding the West hand, I feel applying the expression 5-5 come alive is apt. Whether you feel the hand is too good for micheals and choose 2♥ instead, I feel a call of some kind is appropriate. Why pass? Regarding partner's 2♠ call over 2♥, I agree 3♠ is better, incidentally, but you seem to forget I am not responsible for any calls other than 1♠ and 4♠. My second question also had little to do with whether you agree with the early part of the auction. It was, were the auction to go 1♠-2♠-3♠-4♥ to you what would you do?

[hv=d=e&v=b&n=sh98642d52ckqj862&w=s62hj73dq943c10943&e=sqj109875haqdkj10ca&s=sak43hk105da876c75]399|300|Scoring: IMP Auction: (1♠)-1NT*-(Pass)-2♦** -(2♠)-Pass-(Pass)-3♣*** -(3♠)-4♥*-all pass[/hv] *I know, probably insane but as in my previous post, I was the system we were playing was 2/stunned - I was beat. **Systems on - heart transfer and see ***. ***I agree with partner's call, but what do you think? As previously, I was South, playing with a semi-regular partner, E/W were pickups. East made 4♥ easy at the table by cashing the ♣ A when in with the ♥ A. Forcing me to ruff in dummy instead would be painful, but I think the contract could still be made. So, give it to me straight, doctor, I can take it :-)

Yes, overbidding just a tad on occasion is one of those errors I find crops up frequently when I am tired. I also blew the defense on this hand.

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=s10974hj975da6cj75&w=s52ha10832d2caq832&e=sj6hk64dkqj103c1096&s=sakq83hqd98754ck4]399|300|Scoring: IMP Auction: 1♠-(2♥)-2♠-(3♥) -4♠-(5♥)-X-ap[/hv] Note: E/W were a pickup partnership while I was South playing with a semi-regular partner. So, first of all, {be}rate the auction. I mainly wonder about 4♠ and 5♥. Funnily enough, I bid 4♠ mainly with the intention of preempting the auction. It doesn't rate to be pretty, but I figured this was going to 4♥ anyway so the best chance to play 4♠ undoubled was to bid it immediately. Second, had I held the West hand, I would have bid 2♠. If this had occurred at the table, how would your auction go from there...(2♠)-?-?-? My vote goes to 3♠-(4♥)-4♠. The principle thing I wish to know is if you are South, after 1♠-2♠-3♠-4♥- what would you do?

Errr deleted post since it mainly echoes Justin's.

I somewhat agree with Chamaco. I would open 1♠ with AKxxx Ax xxx xx and I agree that an immediate 2♠/2♥ would show something extra, as this hand has. Better suit quality would make it worth 3♠. Just mho.

Suppose North doubles. Say East now bids 3♥, what's South gonna do? I like 3♣. Seems to me it should work more often than not. That's all from North's perspective, of course. On the hand as actually given, I voted for 2♦ but I agree 2♣ may be better.

The "standard" meaning of passing a forcing, natural response is that the opening bid was a psyche. I don't think there's any need to alert this, it's bridge logic. In that case, it follows that 3NT involved UI and therefore, the adjustment to 2♦+1 would appear to be in order. However, I think that whether or not this statement is true depends a great deal upon the level of competition and how long the accused have been playing these methods together.

I can see that it has a certain amount of merit. I know I would prefer not to play in some rediculous contract due to such an error by the opponents. It isn't bridge to my way of thinking. I don't think the offender should get off scot-free however, and like the ave- max rule. But I still don't think I like it. My original post was intended only to point out that the laws appear to be contradictory, however, and something should be done about that.

I'm saddened by this as well. I hope some day you change your mind. I will attempt to make more frequent use of the privilege of creating tournaments in the hope I can keep you posted here in the event of marked improvement. Regrettably, I have really not had the time to host lately so it's been a while since I have run a tournament. However, that will soon change with any luck. Thank you for your contribution to BBO.

I am curious to know the results of a simulation. However, I would still wonder, should it favor a downgrade, whether it properly values the trick-taking power of the hand. A couple of quacks in the unbid suits in partner's hand is almost enough for game. When I first saw the hand I felt 1♣ was automatic, but the arguments for downgrading now have me sitting on the fence.

Thank you all for your comments. If there are more, please keep them coming :)

FWIW, just my 2 cents... While I appreciate the appeal and reasons for opening 1NT, I would open this hand 1♦. Opening NT with singletons just does not sit right with me. My lead is the spade Jack. The second paragraph of mikestar's post succinctly describes my reasons. "J♠ is a good lead when East has the spades and may be a fair passive lead if he doesn't. If West is aware that you will open 1NT with a stiff, particularly a stiff spade (most frequent rebid issues), this increases the appeal of the lead." I do not make this lead by rote, however, nothing else seems very attractive here. *Having said all that, I admit going down in 3NT on this hand was a little unlucky.

Probably an easy question to answer if we had their convention card :-) Perhpas that was the basis of the committee's decision.

b ), mainly with the focus of playing 3H or 4H. It is not a penalty double. Marlowe I was about to argue with you until I reread your post and found we agree on b :) However, were the scoring MPs instead, I think partner should pass the double as often as not at these colours if in the upper range and not in posession of a 9-card trump fit, even if not holding anything special in the enemy suit. Typically, the three level is for the opponents, and plus 200 would be great where minus 100 might be a disaster - although I admit this is just my opinion. Sometimes I like to gamble a little when the payoff is big enough and to me, +200 on a partscore hand at matchpoints is a humungous payoff.

As always, thank you all for your comments. I was interested to see the conditions under which 2♠ might be considered a psyche since my partner (who made the call) was the first person to use the term in reference to this hand. I disagree. We play fairly disciplined weak 2 bids, however, I don't believe this hand fits the "gross" part of gross misstatement.

Put me in the "club to the Ace, then play on spades" camp, FWIW. The bidding places the spade King with West. The question is, who has the 10? I'm going to play East for it and try to create an entry at the same time. I lead the spade Jack. I presume West covers. If not I have my three tricks. If the finesse loses, I'm wrong altogether and you can ignore the rest of this post, but I digress :-) I win the trick with the Ace and lead low to the 9.

I believe this contradicts the Laws. See Law 72B2. A player must not infringe a law intentionally, even if there is a prescribed penalty he is willing to pay.

Why does it matter whether it was a "psyche" or not? Psyches get good results too sometimes. It mainly matters only to me, I guess, for furture events I will play with this partner.

I agree entirely with this. I wished to get some additional opinions before approaching the pair in question to see if that's what they really think.

I did not say there was a problem, nor that I was seeking any form of adjustment. I merely wished to guage your response to this situation.

I appear to have left some questions unaswered. First, NT opening range was 15-17. The intent of the question was to determine your response as responder after partner opens 1♦. I felt this was such an in-between hand that I would solicit your opinions.