miamijd

Ducking the second club isn't so easy, especially at MPs. You are really going to play the J from J9x? Two problems with that. First off, declarer may be able to get a count on the hand sufficient to tell that you don't have a stiff J. Second, you don't know whether declarer needs 4 H tricks or 5; if it's only 4, you've just handed him the contract. The 9 makes more sense to me.

Who knows what is right? I know I don't, and I'm pretty sure none of you do, either! Seriously, almost anything could be right. A spade could hit partner's suit, and at least it probably doesn't give much away. A heart could set up a long-card trick for your side, but it could also give a trick. A diamond could also set up a long-card trick, but it may be too late to take it. A club is risky, as that could be declarer's suit (he might hook twice otherwise), but partner might have JTxxx. I think at MPs I would lead a low diamond, but questions like this don't seem very useful to me, because there is too much guesswork and luck involved to really come up with a "best" answer. Cheers, mike

This is NOT a normal structure and it stinks, to boot. Let's say you have: KJT9xx xx Kx xxx What are you supposed to do here after 1D? Make a WJS? I sure hope not. This hand is way too strong for that. Lose the KC and you have a WJS. OK, so you bid 1S and partner bids 2C. Now what? 2S is an invite? Then you have no bid! If you're saying 2S shows this hand, then what do you do with KJT9xx xx Ax Kxx That's an invite; what can I do with it? Can't bid 2S; can't bid 3S; can't use 4th suit. I know of no structure where BOTH the second round jump AND fourth suit are GF. Can't be. In addition, I know of no "Bridge Magazine" Challenge the Champs. I think you mean "The Bridge World." In Bridge World Standard: After a one-level new-suit response and opener's simple new-suit rebid: (a) two notrump or three of any suit previously bid is invitational; (b) a fourth-suit bid at the two- or three-level is forcing to game; ... This makes sense. The 3S bid is an invite; 4SF is GF. Cheers, mike

So 3NT is supposed to be a "mid-range' hand: better than a minimum splinter but not a really good hand, which makes the GF 4+ trump raise? Or is 3NT supposed to be the really good hand, with the mid-range hands not making the splinter? Or is 3NT supposed to be any splinter better than a minimum? I think the first treatment is OK, but it robs you of a lot of bidding room (you even lose "Last Train" when the stiff is in H or C, rather than just in H). Do you think you gain a lot over a simple 4+ GF raise (whatever you use for that)? I'm not sure you do (I think the 4+ GF raise might be superior here). The second treatment doesn't work well. Why jump the bidding that much with a moose? The third treatment I think is unworkable, because your partner can't tell your strength and there's no room left to find out. I suppose you could use regular splinters for minimums; 3NT for the intermediates; and 3H for the maximums, but why? If you have a good hand, aren't you better off keeping the bidding low and finding out about partner's hand by making a simple 4+ GF raise? In addition, losing the 3H bid over 1S is a problem. You need this to show the 9-11 6+H hand. Cheers, Mike

That sort of "unambiguity" isn't really what splinters and cue bids are designed for (and isn't needed). First, splinters. When you jump the bidding, you need to show a very particular type of hand (a "picture bid" as it were). Otherwise, you are wasting valuable bidding space and not getting enough in return. That means splinters need to be limited to a pretty narrow range. I would say that if you are an ace better than a bare bones minimum is too strong. Over 1S, I think: Kxxx Axx x Qxxxx is about the weakest splinter I can imagine. But if you make it: Kxxx Axx x AQxxx I think you are too strong to splinter originally (some would disagree). With that hand, I'd just bid 2NT (or whatever your 4-card game forcing raise is) and get a better idea of what my partner had. The idea, of course, is to allow you to get to the "perfecto" slams when partner has something like: AQxxxx x xxx AKx Put that opposite hand one above and you have a cold 6S with 22 combined HCP. You'll never get there without the splinter. You can also avoid exploring for bad slams when you have wastage: AQJxxx xx KQJ Kx This hand is better than the last one in terms of HCP, but it's much worse opposite a 4D splinter. If you know partner is minimum other than the splinter, you can safely sign off in 4S (which is probably all you can make). Now for control bids. If you only like Aces and voids, I suspect you may be using cue bids to determine whether you have the necessary power for slam. That's generally not a good idea unless you're using them in conjunction with Serious/unserious 3NT and Last Train (see below). There are three things you need to determine when probing for slam: 1. Do we have the power? 2. Are we off two quick losers in a suit? 3. Are we off two quick high cards? Cue bids help with #2. They allow you make sure you aren't off two quicks in a suit. So yes, second-round control is just as important as first-round control if what we're interested in is avoiding two fast ones. Of course, Keycard BW or Kickback or whatever you use helps with #3. For #1, there are a few good tools. One is to have bids that indicate your general strength once a fit is found. Most 4-fit GF bids (like Jacoby 2NT) have this feature. Another is to play two Meckwell-originated conventions I think are essential to good slam bidding: Serious 3NT (or unserious 3NT if you prefer) (Eric gets the credit) Last Train (to Clarksville) (Meck invented this one) Serious 3NT allows you to make cue bids two different ways. You can say "I have a really strong hand" and then show controls or you can say "I don't have that good a hand -- you interested anyway?" and show controls. Last Train allows you to check back one last time on hand strength before you commit to slam. And both of them allow you to do all your cue-bidding below the game level -- where cue-bidding belongs. I think Gitelman did a good series of articles about these conventions some time back. Cheers, mike

In bridge, ya gotta bid your games. The South hand has to force to game opposite an opening bid -- period. If partner has a spade void and a bunch of minor junk, so be it. But treating this hand as invitational is, in the long run, losing bridge. To ask North to do anything other than bid 4S over an invite is silly, because South shouldn't have this hand and invite. If South has what I think is a good invite given the auction: AKJxxx xxx Jx Qx you'll be in trouble, as 5S may well fail. South should make a GF bid (seems like that's 4SF then spades in your system, as it is in most 2/1 systems) and not bid 4S over 2C. 4S over 2C should deny a side A or K and just show really good spades (better than South actually has). Cheers, mike

From a systemic standpoint, it's awkward to have both 3S and fourth suit be game forces. One of them should be GF; the other one should be able to serve as an invite (if you play 4SF as only a one-round force, it can be invite or better). Otherwise, you have no good way to show an invite with a good six-bagger. Some older 2/1 systems like Eastern Scientific played responder's second round jump in the major he bid on the first round as GF, with 4SF as a one-round force. So to invite, you would bid 4th suit and then the major on the cheapest (usually 3) level. That treatment is considered passe today, because for a variety of reasons, it's generally best for 2/1 to set a game force, so that the partnership can explore for slam. The immediate jump wastes some bidding room, so it's better to use it as an invite. Cheers, Mike

It depends what 2NT means. If 2NT is natural, then it has to show a good hand, because advancer shows only 7+ or so. You can't bid 2NT with a 10-count; you'll be overboard if partner passes with a minimum. I would think 15-16 is about right; maybe a bad 17. In that case, I would not have bid 3C as advancer; I would have bid 3NT. Advancer has a much better hand than a minimum. The As will help stop that suit; the KT9x D ought to be worth more than 3 HCP; the clubs could be a source of tricks; and Tx could solidify partner's 5-card H holding. Having failed to bid 3NT over 2NT, I would do so now. But I honestly think 2NT here should be extended good-bad. How is overcaller supposed to distinguish xx AKxxxx QJxx x from xx AKxxx AQxx Kxx? Both of these hands overcall 2H over 1S. If your answer is that the second one cue-bids 3S or bids 4D after the actual continuation of the auction, remember that advancer could have a bad 7-count. The better way is to have a direct 3m bid show the invite hand, and a 2NT relay to 3C show either a minimum 2H overcall (most common) or else some sort of two-suited moose that wasn't suitable for a double or a Michaels bid (rare). If 2NT is a relay to 3C, then partner is showing a minimum overcall with a diamond fit. He just wants to play 3D, so you should pass. Cheers, Mike

Probably not over five-level preempts, but it's really a logical extension of the more standard jump rebid control asks you've seen over 2, 3 and 4-level preempts. Most folks are familiar with auctions like 2M 4m 2h 3S 3m 4M 4H 4S (if not Kickback) 4M 5m and the like as control asking bids. Over 2M, for example, a bid of 4m has no real use otherwise (you can bid 3m if forcing first, or 2NT first with the normal type of hand). Same with 2h 3S (can bid 2S if forcing or 2NT if not first). Same with 4M preempts. The reason is that a preemptor (especially at the 3 level and above) has narrowly defined his hand. You don't want to show him what you have; you want to ask him to narrow his hand even more so you can basically see both hands. Indeed, if you are interested in a slam, you must have first round control of at least two of the three side suits to investigate a slam. If you have that, and if you clearly have the tricks for slam, what you generally want to do is ask about the preemptor's holding in the fourth suit. There are a number of ways to play responses, but you normally have to be able to show first round control, second round control, and no control, and then for a follow-up ask, you want to be able to distinguish the high card (A or K) from the distributional control (stiff or void). You probably also want some way to be sure your trumps are halfway solid. There's no reason why this shouldn't extent to bids over 5-level preempts as well. Cheers, Mike

5D seems like the normal opening bid and one that I expect 90%+ of experts would choose in a poll. Given that, how to reach the grand? Obviously, any bid of a new suit by responder should be looking for a grand (otherwise, just bid the small slam, as there is no room for exploration). There are two nethods you can use: asking or showing. For a variety of reasons, I think asking is much better when the opener has preempted. If you're going for slam opposite a preempt, especially for a grand, there will never be more questions than: (A) Do you have first (for a small slam, first or second) round control of Suit X and (B) are our trump solid? The showing method doesn't really get you there. If you use the asking method here to look for a grand, you have to have methods about what suit each bid asks about. Most common over a five level bid is that a bid of a suit asks about that suit up to spades, and then 5NT is clubs and so on. So here 5NT asks about clubs. 6C would show first round control but doubt about trump; 6D would show no first round control of clubs; 7D would show first round control of clubs and good trump. Since you can't have AKQ of d and Ac and open 5D in first seat, opener should just bid 7D over 5NT. How could he ever have any more than KQd and Ac? The other way of looking at it is that if partner lacked BOTH the AKQd AND the Ac, he has no business making a grand slam try. Cheers, Mike

I'm not sure there is any "right" answer, but this does seem to be our hand, so leaping around immediately would appear to be unwise. A 4C splinter would seem to describe this hand well. 5H, good diamond support, probably a club void (with a stiff, I would expect an invisible cue bid instead). But 3D or some sort of invisible cue bid are other alternatives. Cheers, mike

I'm going to assume setting the contract (even one) will get us a good score. Leading a trump will gain if South is 1534 or 3514, North has a doubleton in South's fragment, and South needs to ruff the third-round loser. It will lose if partner has a stiff J (or sometimes T) of trump. Leading a diamond will gain if South is 2515, lacks the Ad, and is able to pitch the diamond by taking 3 immediate rounds of spades. It will lose if it gives South a third diamond trick that can be used to pitch a losing spade. I am ignoring the possibility that diamonds could force declarer so that he goes down much more than one. Leading a spade will gain if South can't really do anything but hope for help from the opponents. Leading a club looks like idiocy. Tough choice. I think I will try the 10s, but a trump or a diamond could be right as well.

How is nekthen's line any different in effect from what declarer actually did? Cheers, mike

You can open 1nt with 5422 hands but only with 5c. 4d 15-16 5c 4h 15-16 5d 4h 15-16 With any other 5422 you have an easy rebid so there is no need to be a hand hog.

Seems normal to bid 2c. If it bothers you to have to bid a 4 card suit, the way around that is to play Fred Gitelman's structure and respond with 2s (using 2nt as the forcing 4 card raise) or 2nt (using 2s as the forcing 4 card raise), in either case showing 12+ - 15- or 18+ with 2-3 h, 2-3 spades, and no 5 card minor. Not sure I want to declare NT with a low doub spade but there is still room to explore and get to the right game.

You're right ex ante. But that means nothing, because the only situation you care about is one where you see three small cards on the first two rounds and have to guess whether trump are 3-1 or 2-2. The stiff Qs and the 4-0s can be eliminated. So saying it's 57 to 56 or some such thing is not correct after we have determined that trump are not 4-0 and there is no stiff Q. Now the percentages are different. This is where the so-called Law of Vacant Places helps you. Cheers, Mike

Any decent player is going to play low in tempo against a slam. GIB Bots will generally cover, but I wouldn't call them decent players,

The percentage analysis given above by a couple of folks is NOT correct at all. You can't simply add probabilities of non-mutually exclusive events. In the absence of any information (which you may have - more below) -- and assuming that your opponents are good enough to play low in tempo with Qxx -- the drop is slightly better as explained below. Let's say you have no clue as to how spades are divided (you know they are not 7-1 or 8-0, but let's say that's it). When you play the first round of hearts, everyone follows low, and when you play the second round of hearts, second hand plays a low card. That is the only situation that matters. The "Law of Vacant Places" says that it is now 12 to 11 (52.2%) to play for the drop. The player who has played one low heart has 12 vacant places; the other player has 11. It is therefore 12/11 that the player who has played only one low heart has the Q. Since both players have played two spades, you might extend this to say the odds are now 10/9 (52.6%). But you might have some other information. What are the opponents' leads? Did LHO lead the 3s and play the 2s at trick 2? If the opponents lead fourth best and don't play MUD from three, LHO either has 2 spades or 5 spades. You can probably tell which by noticing what card RHO returned. If you can determine who has 5 spades and who has 2 spades, you should play the opponent with short spades for the Qh. Cheers, mike

Yes, you're right. It's not 10 and 6 (that would be both vul); it's more like 6 and 5. Not a lot of difference. Sorry about that. My other points remain, however, so I don't think pass will be the winner in the long run. Cheers, Mike

Personally, I wouldn't pass at IMPs. There is too much that has to go right for passing to the be the correct bid: 1. Partner has to have exactly two spades. If he has one spade, 5D is likely odds-on. If he has 3, you probably belong in 4S. 2. Partner can't have strength outside diamonds. Then you belong in 3NT. 3. If 1 and 2 are correct, then the opponents have to find a spade lead. This sort of parlay is not a good bet. And if you lose the bet, you lose 10 IMPs (600 at the other table vs your 130), whereas if you win the bet, you only win 6 big (+130 vs -100 for a gain of 230 or 6 IMPs). I think 3S is reasonable. If partner bids 4D, I'll try 5D (and by the way, that might inhibit a spade lead). If partner bids 3NT, implying some outside strength, I'm happy. If partner raises spades, I'll hope he has 3 or else that the spades break. And no, the opponents aren't going to balance holding only about 15 HCP between them. Cheers, Mike

Why would LHO not bid some number of hearts with that hand over 1D? Wouldn't you? I would think it more likely that LHO has something like Axx AKQJxxxxx x void Cheers, mike

deleted

A lot depends on what opener's second round X of 1D means. If it's a 16+ hand, I would pass now. Chances are that we're outgunned - maybe badly - so if anyone should bid 3S, it needs to be partner. If it's hearts any strength, I think it's close (the opps rate to have 9C), but I probably still pass both vul (more later). If it's a support X for diamonds, however, then I'm holding my breath and bidding 3S, especially against less than expert opponents. The LAW does NOT say not to bid 3 over 3 at MPs with only 8 trump; you are generally right to do so at MPs IF the opponents have a 9-fit and your short-suit losers are minimized. Probably partner doesn't have 5 clubs (though it's possible), so the trump count rates to be at 17, where 3 over 3 is often right. Moreover, our short-suit losers (read Lawrence and Wirgren's "I Fought the Law" on this one) are 2 at most (0 in clubs; at most 2 in diamonds). That means bid more. The reason I'm cautious if the opener hasn't shown diamonds is that with both vul, there are too many ways to lose. If the opponents X for -1, that's likely a zero. Non-expert opponents probably won't X, but even then, -2 is a zero. Worse, with the opponents vulnerable, if partner has his expected 4 clubs and a good hand, +140 might lose to +200 for defending 3C. Both vul is the worst time to bid more (our side vul only is actually better in MPs). What was the X of 1d? Cheers, Mike

Really? And suppose North has a hand like: Ax AKxx Axxx AKx You make 6 hearts six days to Sunday. As it happened, North had a hand that's really tough: AKTx Kxx AQx Axx I have no clue what to do with that hand over 4S (I think I would X); whatever I do would end up wrong! Cheers, Mike

As Timo indicated, if West has a stiff diamond, your chances are pretty grim. You have to hope East started with Kx of spades. But if the lead was a doubleton, then all you need is Kx or Kxx with East to make, and even on K864 with East you have chances. Unless you think the lead is 85%+ to be a stiff, the odds would seem to favor Timo's line. Cheers, Mike