Double !

In fact, I had never met nor had the pleasure of playing with Toystar prior to this travesty. We had just started playing, so prior discussion other than, possibly, "your profile, P", had not occurred. (No one plays my profile, It's too schizophrenic.) I didn't have a clue about what my P was up to until a little light bulb went off (well, more like flickered) when he raised 3H to 4H...........I said "hmmmmm". DHL

Let me add some additional information to this saga. 1) I was Toystar's partner and I only rebid 3H because i had xxx in his help-wanted suit. My club king was of questionable value. 2) He played the hand very well and made 7. 3) FWIW, as I told him, I agreed with the 3D bid. Actually, had I bid 4H after 3D I could see someone accusing me of fielding his psych. 4) As I was typing vwdp, all of a sudden, Toystar was gone. No one said anything. He was just gone. He asked me why I had booted him but I told him that I didn't boot him nor had control of the table. I asked both opps why he was booted and to please let him sit, but received no response from the apparent booter. IMO, he deserves an apology for being subjected to this. 5) Question: doesn't the BBO site have very specific rules stipulating when one may and may not boot a player? To the best of my knowledge, psyching is not one of the conditions. DHL

This is an interesting topic. Pardon the following dissertation. If one looks at Kaplan's book on Competitive Bidding from sometime in the 60s (guess) my recollection is that he gave as a template wjo a hand with something like a QJTxxx or a KJTxxx suit and little if anything outside the suit. Needless to say, this description of a wjo has evolved over the year. Some people play them relatively disciplined, some play that the range of the hand strength and suit can vary and use some type of response for clarification (or not), some have played very undisciplined wjos, and some have sacrificed the semi-constructive nature of the bid in favor of even less disciplined bids in order to create more pressure bidding approaches. Many play that almost anything goes when white vs. red. Then there is the issue of what type of hand might be expected when partner is a passed hand. How many liberties can the partnership take. Does the wjo even promise a 6-card suit at this point? (This philosophy for this approach is that, since partner is a passed hand, the pre-emptor is bidding the extent of the partnership with the wjo or 3rd seat weak 2-bid.) My suggestion is, if you are going to play wjo, remember that partner is likely to lead your suit, especially from 2 or 3 cards to an honor. Do you wish to encourage that, knowing that without a some decent internal solidity, you are placing cards for the opps. With a pick-up or even a semi-developed partnership, i would recommend keeping some degree of discipline in your wjo's. At least P then can't accuse you of making some crazy, insane bid. A wise older sage many years ago once said to me, "don't make bids that partner can criticize". So, to a large extent, you need partnership agreements of requirements for and responses to wjos (and 3rd seat weak 2-bids). In the K-S system, it was recommended that the partnership keep opening 1-bids up to strength and open hands with less that opening strength with a weak 2 bid, even on a 5-card suit. So, you can see that, ask 100 bridge players from all different skill levels, and you are likely to receive 150 answers with various degrees of conviction. If I had my preference, I would play Gardner 1NT overcalls where a 1NT bid is either a strong NT or an unspecified wjo. However, it is my understanding that this is not permitted, that is falls under the category of controlled psyches. IF anyone out the with a good working knowledge of what is and is not permitted, I would greatly appreciate a definitive and answer re whether or not Gardner NT overcall are legal. TIA dhl

4 spades establish the fit first, then you can hunt for other game if need be. Just hope I can make 4S. dhl

Anyone for having the 4S bid as a roman asking bid in spades (CAB)? lol. I just heart someone say "what the H is a roman asking bid?" (Am I showing my age?) Maybe a crazy idea. dhl

Whether or not this hand is worth a 2C opening is irrelevent. The issue is what methods one can use to expose suspected psychics. One possible method is to play neg X's with neg free bids in such a situation. Unfortunately, many players have adopted using a double in this situation as showing some type of double-negative. Perhaps this approach as well as the dbl-neg 2H response to 2C (which wrong-sides heart contracts) might benefit from some re-assessment. dhl

I think I agree with the 2NT rebid, at least as the least lie, although I might also pass in an attempt to get out quick: maybe the opps will balance. But, IMO, this hand is worth more than just the 9 high card points that people have mentioned. You have honors in combination with a supporting 9 in partner's second suit (diamonds), You have an Ace of clubs accompanied by a decent interior sequence in clubs, and you have a supporting 9 in your Q9xx heart suit. Partner might surprise you and table a supporting club honor (probably has dbltn club, maybe singleton). You have some cards that will permit communication between the hands. You just might scramble home more tricks in NT than 9hcp without also looking at the supporting spots might initially suggest. The other alternative is to rip up your cards, drop them onto the floor, and inform the director that you accidentally dropped your cards and that they broke. dhl

I have made a million and one really poor bids or plays in my life, some due to lack of skills, some to fatigue, many to insufficient attention. I could write a book. Anyone who's ever played with me or kibbed can attest to this. Yet I don't consider any of these to be the dumbest thing I ever did at the bridge table. The dumbest thing I ever did at the bridge table (please understand that I rarely play live bridge anymore) involved doubting myself and not trusting my judgment. It occurred a number of years ago during the 4th session of 6-session NABC LM pairs in Toronto. We were playing against a couple of international stars from Poland who were playing the Polish club system. (I knew nothing about Polish systems at the time.) They had a bidding sequence that started with 1C and ended up in a part score contract. I asked for an explanation of the bidding, received a good explanation although at first i was confused, and finally had to make the opening lead. I selected a lead which turned out to be the best start for the defense. However, I then permitted myself to feel intimidated (partly due to lack of familiarity with the opp's system) and I started to doubt myself, my initial lead decision, and I didn't follow up on the defense that I had initiated. Instead, I shifted gears because I thought that I had been wrong. We were headed for an above-average score on the board had I continued with the initial defense. No matter what one's bridge skill level might be, there has to be a lesson somewhere in this story. dhl

Anyone for playing 2NT in response to a wjo (assuming i read the hand/ question correctly) as Ogust and let partner clarify the nature of the wjo relative to the vulnerability. Take some guesswork out of the situation. dhl

Vulnerability is red vs. white Game format is imp pairs LHO deals and opens 3♦ CHO doubles RHO bids 5♦ You bid 5♠ LHO passes CHO Bids 5NT How do you interpret the 5NT bid? as always, TIA dhl

If given the choice, I Strongly prefer strong jump-shifts by an unpassed hand and as a fit raise by a passed hand (part of the bidding dinosaur in me). With a couple of friends we combine the two so that the jump-shift is either a fit-raise after 1m, or strong. IMO, there are just some hands that one needs to be able to get off one's chest quickly in terms of strength because otherwise one just can never catch up in the bidding with much confidence. I am starting to look at Reverse F-word as a possible alternative if I can still have a way of handling strong J-S hands (a work in progress). I don't play invitational jump-shifts (although I can) because they are not needed when playing 2/1 GF except for suit rebid by responder. I have no problem playing disciplined weak jump shifts (3-6/7), like a mini weak-2 bid. And it does fit in well with clarifying ranges when the suit is rebid. The problem is that others don't seem to want to be willing to maintain the discipline. So, to each their own. dhl

re hand #2. If the double of 3H is business, then how does responder ask the 3C bidder to bid 3N with a heart stopper? Suppose you hold something like Kxx, xx, Axxxx, KTx or some hand that rates to solidify partner's clubs suit with an outside trick or two. What would a 3S bid at this point mean? dhl

Not everyone would agree with me but, I suggest that you concentrate on bidding your hand and work toward reaching the partnership's best contract rather than keep trying to lure old George (or Georgia) to his/ her doom. If you miss an opportunity, chances are that some of that loss might come back in terms of misdefense or a favorable lead, to say nothing of the fact that the opp's bidding might help you evaluate your holdings better and locate a key card or two in the bidding. This is also one reason that I often hate redoubles just to show 9/10+ hcp. The opps usually find some escape and you've lost a round of bidding during which to bid your hand. The exception might be when you have a 3-card limit raise for partner's major, or some roughly 3-suited hand, short in partner's suit. Otherwise, I suggest that you bid as you might have bid had there not been an intervening takeout double. Don't let the opp's bidding disrupt your own bidding if possible. dhl

IMO, there is an important concept that needs to be considered when approaching this question. Assuming that partner has something close to the basic template hand/ distribution for an X of 1S (e.g.: 1,4,4,4 distro and a minimum opener), if you bid a suit at this point, you are technically supporting partner who theoretically bid hearts-diamonds-&clubs when making a takeout double. If you bid 3 hearts, you are raising partner's presumedly 4-card suit. The issue then becomes how to distinguish between weak raises and raises holding some decent values. One possible method is to play good-bad 2NT (or bad-good2NT) because there is a good chance that the opps can outbid you in spades. But, IMO, the concept that you are supporting partner seems like something to keep in mind. dhl

DEB: I am a STRONG supporter of weak NT's. Advantages include forcing the opps to start at the 2-level if they wish to compete, it allows you to "make a statement" regarding minimum balanced and semibalanced hands quickly, it is less pre-emptable than opening a minor playing 15-17 NT because responder often doesn't have a clue to what kind of hand you hold, it has pre-emptive value, it allows the partner to have some idea about how high the partnership can go in one bid, and i would suppose that it comes up more frequently than does 15-17NT. Drawbacks: risk of NT range fix when the 15-17 opps open 1m and find a 4-4 major fit that you miss (more critical at mps), there are some off-shape minor oriented hands that can become more difficult to bid playing 12-14 NT (but this can usually be addressed), it precludes being able to open 1 minor in 3rd seat light, planning to pass anything that responder bids (1of a minor always shows extra values either in hcp or distribution), it requires agreements regarding how to handle competition by opps (I prefer playing negative dbls), and I'm too tired to think of anything else right now. You also need agreements about bids when partner opens 1minor and the opps compete, e.g. which bids shows the default 15-17 hcp balanced hand, with and without a stopper in the opp's suit. Others will talk about the big risk of a big penalty. I say damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead! (Plus, I really don't like playing strong NTs as you know. so boring at mps, everyone is doing the same thing.) The key is to remember that, when partner opens 1 minor playing weak NT, partner does not have a balanced minimum hand. gl dhl

Phil: Thanks for the response. However, do you also lead lower of touching honors? Because, I have found that lower of touching honors doesn't blend in with coded J/T/9 leads (if J can show Q or could show nothing higher). I, personally, like coded leads. dhl

could be wrong but: I always thought that the traditional way to tell partner that you want to ruff something after you've pre-empted is to lead low in your suit, not an honor. To do so, however, can be a double-edged sword. There is a famous "Menagerie" hand where Papa underleads his honors to signal a wish for a ruff, and that permits Hideous Hog to discern where the cards in the critical suit are located and to make otherwise unusual plays to pick up the suit, all because of the opening lead. dhl

I play but struggle with UDCA, so I need some input regarding carding. 1) holding 2 smallish cards in a suit, should you decide to lead that suit at trick 1, which card do you lead? 1a) holding 2 smallish cards in a suit, should you decide to lead that suit after trick 1, which card do you lead? 2) If playing udca, do you also reverse carding when giving a suit preference signal such as when leading a card for partner to trump? e.g.: playing a higher card to ask for a shift to the lower of logical alternatives (as opposed to playing a small card to request the lower suit.) n.b. I have gotten conflicting answers on these topics, so, as always, TIA. dhl

Regardless of what your opening lead agreements are. If giving a count signal the second time the suit is played (or when playing a card from the opening lead suit as a discard) Do you 1) give a count signal that shows how many cards you originally held in the suit, 2) give a count signal that shows your current count or remaining count in the suit? 3) do something else? Please assume not playing some conventional carding agreement such as Smith or Foster echoes, etc. etc. Please assume that carding priorities are attitude>count>suit preference. I will be very interested to see what the responses to this question will be. as always, TIA dhl

This is such a basic question that it embarrasses me to even ask it. The opps are playing in a suit contract, but not at the slam level. Partner has overcalled in a suit, but you have not raised. Partner leads whichever card you have agreed upon to lead from AKx(xxx) of the suit that partner has overcalled. You hold Q72 in partner's suit. Dummy holds some trump support for declarer, and also has two small cards in partner's lead suit. The situation does not appear at trick 1 to be a cash-out situation. 1) What card do you play from Q72 to encourage partner to underlead the other honor? 2) What card do you play just to indicate holding the Queen? 3) What card do you play from xx in partner's suit, hoping for a continuation of the suit because you will be able to over-ruff dummy without the cost of a natural trump trick? In answering, please indicate what form of carding (count, attitude, suit preference, etc.) the partnership is playing. TIA DHL

I know you and Larry play Turbo. That's what got me interested in checking it out. Actually, I had been copying some pages from Ambra r.e. Gazzilli and decided to check out Turbo. Thanks for responding, Dwayne. Thanks, Ken, for all that information.....I appreciate it. DHL

Forum members may or may not be familiar with the convention named TURBO. It is discussed in about 5 very short paragraphs in the system notes for AMBRA, and is presented as having been substituted for RKC (presumedly Garozzo views the convention as an improvement). However, there is little meat provided to explain the convention further including when and how to use it. I know of at least one BBF poster who is familiar with the convention. I would greatly appreciate any additional information on the convention such as sequences that would preceed use of the convention as well as effectiveness and facility of use. as always TYIA DHL

Obviously option #2, bidding 4NT is an error, so please disregard. dhl

Game format is Imp Pairs Opponents both represent selves as Experts You are red, the opps are white Bidding: LHO is dealer and, nv, opens 4♠. Partner, red vs. white, bids 4NT RHO passes What is your bid holding ♠Axx, ♥ J9xx, ♦AKx, ♣975 ?

If it is risky to draw inferences from calls partner has made.. then what is left? 1) You could try trusting the opp's bidding, 2) You could try see if there were any breaks in tempo or facets in partner's or opp's behavior or other sources of UI on which to base your decision, 3) Encourage the opps to ask for a full disclosure explanation of partner's bids, Once again the need for a pair of Luis' magical sunglasses is demonstrated. dhl