miamijd

Not so easy. Winston's suggestion looks reasonable. What did the book recommend?

You probably should pass this hand and not respond 1nt forcing, but that wasn't the poster's (nekthen?) point. Make the clubs QJxxx, and no one would seriously consider passing, yet not only do you not want to be in slam, you don't even want to be in 5H, which could easily fail.

With the hitch, I think North ought to pass 4H. Sure, partner could have hesitated because he has only three hearts and was considering NT, or because he has 3S and 4H and wanted to figure out what trump suit was best, but it's likely that he was considering a stronger bid than 4H (most folks play some sort of 4m cue bids here). So that means that the hitch carried the suggestion that South had more than a junk raise, which suggests bidding on. Since (in my opinion), pass is a LA, North ought to do so. Without the hitch, I'm not so sure passing is clear-cut. Partner ought to have 4 hearts, in which case as little as Jx Jxxx Axxx xxx makes slam a decent shot (and the Qh makes it almost icy). Cheers, mike

Why would the a priori odds favor going up with the Queen? There are only two holdings for LHO that matter -- KJ7 and JT7, and both are equally likely.

In F2F, it seems like it ought to depend on LHO's playing level. The key case is when LHO has KJx. If LHO is anything less than expert, he'll either rise with the King or else give the situation away by hitching. If he plays the J smoothly, he's more likely to have JTx. On the other hand, if LHO is an expert player, he'll play the Jack in normal tempo. Now you have a pure guess. With computer bridge, it's not quite as easy, because you can't get a good read of tempo a lot of the time. Cheers, mike

In first or third seat, 4H at favorable or equal; 3H at unfavorable (just too easy for the opps to crack 4H for -2). In second seat, 4H NV, 3H both vul, pass or 3H unfavorable. In fourth seat, pass it out. I'd rather the Kd and Jacks weren't there for a high preemptive opening. To those who think the stiff Kd is a good card, I can't agree. You are correct for defense, but not for offense (where it will never win a trick unless partner has the Ace). Same with the Jx in the pointies. Those Jacks are worthless on offense, but they take defensive tricks more often than you might think. But a preemptive bid is pure offense, zero defense. Partner will bid as if you have no defense, and on this hand, if he goes to 5H over 4S, you aren't apt to like it. If the Kd and Jacks were low cards, there would be 5 more points for partner, and he might have some useful values (like a heart honor or an ace). Cheers, mike

As others have noted, 4NT (two-suited, NOT minors) is the best call here. I'm surprised so many are advocating (or even seriously considering) passing. The secondary values in the minors are great for offense, but not so good for defense. With the opponents likely having a 10-fit (sure, partner could have 2-3 hearts, but he rates to have a stiff), opener could easily be 1741 and responder 5314, in which case the opponents will probably make 5H. Cheers, Mike

All the bids look just fine to me. There's a reason why the top pros preempt more and higher than the average player. Preempts cause BIG problems, even for world champion class players. This is one of those deals. It's easy to criticize Xs like this when they don't work. The problem is that pass is even riskier. If you are conservative over preempts and pass hands like this, you will get taken the cleaners day in and day out by high-level openings. It's also easy to criticize North's bid given all the hands, but I think he has a clear 4S call. You can't pass with a stiff h and let the opponents play at the 4-level with a presumed 11 card fit. Let's give South a more typical double by giving him West's Queen of spades and King of diamonds in exchange for a low heart and the Ace of diamonds. Now East makes 4HX easily. What is North supposed to do after the X? 4S was normal; if he's fixed, he's fixed. And what is South supposed to do? 5 of a minor could be much worse. Sometimes @#$% happens. You have to make the bids most likely to land you on your feet, and I think both N and S did. Cheers, Mike

Given the bidding system presented (and even if you played 5-card majors), I think you must decide between 2S and 2D. Sure, partner could have 1354 with the right cards to make 4H, or even 3-card spade support, but it isn't likely. I prefer 2D; with 17-18, partner will bid again. If he has 16 or fewer, chances are pretty good the hand is a misfit and any plus score will be halfway OK. At least you ought to have 7 decent diamonds between you. 2S is possible at MPs, but it's awfully unilateral. Partner is going to show up with a stiff spade much of the time, which you won't like at all. If the suit were just a little better (say JT87xx, so that a stiff honor gives you a good 7-card suit to work with), I would go for 2S. 2H game force seems like a massive overbid. If you played it as a one-round force, or like I do with some partners (where it's a game force UNLESS I rebid 3H, in which case it's an invite), I think 2H as the start of an invitational sequence is aggressive but reasonable (right at IMPs, a crap shoot at MPs). Partner will get a chance to show 2-card spade support after the 3H bid, so you'll hit all your fits. If you have to play 3NT or 4D, you'll be disappointed, but nothing is perfect. Cheers, Mike

I don't think the posters that said the club was "friendly" meant that not sticking to the rules is what makes a friendly game. At least I hope not. When there is any sort of irregularity, players should always summon the director in a cheerful manner, without any ill will toward the alleged offender. In this case, I think the posters praising the club meant that the way the OP described the players there, they sounded like folks who were always very pleasant and tried to bend over backward to be nice. I'll take that any day over playing vs Negative Nigel and Crabby Cathy. Cheers, Mike

I think Pass over 1D stands out. I want to know what XX meant before I advise what to do over 2DX. 2C is highly obstructive over 1D, especially if your partner can raise, because it puts a lot of strain on responder's negative X. The opponents can end up in some very bad contracts. Here, however, your suit isn't great; you don't have extra strength and your hand is lousy for offense. 5332 hands don't produce a lot of tricks, and you have two rather useless major Jacks. Forget about responder penalty passing 2C (which would be awful). If 2C gets passed out, you won't be happy, either. If partner raises to 3 and that gets passed out, likewise (you are probably going set). X is similarly flawed. 3325 is a poor shape for a double, because partner is going to bid to 3M with a five card major. What's even worse, however, are your actual major suit holdings. Jxx Jss is lousy. If you want to double here on 3325 (which is pretty poor), then you want to have a lot more than 2 HCP in the suits you're asking partner to bid. I certainly wouldn't quibble with a X on AQx AQx xx Jxxxx. On the hand you posit, I think X is very unwise. So I would pass 1D. If responder raised to 2D and opener passed, I would probably reopen with a X if partner were silent. After the negative X, you didn't tell us what XX means. Is it club support? Majors? Cards? That matters in evaluating what to do after advancer's X of 2D.

Not trying to show deep knowledge. I think most folks missed my point, which is quite relevant to an int / adv forum. The point was that holding to hard and fast rules, which several responders recommended, Is not good strategy in bridge and teaching players to "always" do x or "never" do y doesn't serve them well at all. Bridge is about logic and analysis not merely blindly following a bunch of rote rules. If you want to argue with my example, fine. That wasn't the point at all. The point was that saying "I'd never play with someone who did x" is silly. There are going to be rare times when x is reasonable and top experts might do it. Cheers Mike

MrAce: Of course the X is penalty. The only reason we went down a rabbit hole is that a responder indicated that she would never play again with anyone who opened a weak 2 and pulled her subsequent penalty X, presumably because such a player was a rank beginner far weaker than she. I was just trying to point out that lots of expert players would on rare occasions pull such a penalty X, so to understate things, her comment was a bit of an overstatement.

Maybe I should have made my example: void QJTxxx QT9xx xx I wouldn't sit for a X of 2S on that, either. I was just trying to make the point that virtually nothing is 100% hard and fast in bridge. 98%, sure. 100%, not so much.

Didn't say I was right or wrong about opening 2H on that hand (I really think it's closer to 3H). Just said that if I opened a weak 2 on that hand, I hope my partner wouldn't expect me to sit for a penalty X of 2S. And I don't think I'm "right" about what a weak 2 is. Depends on your style. If I were playing with Kaitlynne (don't think that's going to happen), I would play her style of weak 2s, and then I would always be passing her subsequent penalty Xs. Mike

Your tone is inappropriate for such a forum. You have your style of weak 2-bids; other players have theirs. I doubt that any of the players in the recent USBF finals would pass that hand as dealer. Some might have a 2-suited bid available; others would bid 2H or 3H. If you want to define weak 2s to a narrow range, that is, of course, your right. And that's very playable. Not "wrong" in any way. But please don't pretend that "this is what a weak 2 is and anything else is wrong." Just not so. And let's can the attitude, shall we? Cheers, mike

I admit that NV it's probably a 3H bid.

That's silly. You really want partner to sit with something like: void QJTxxx Qxxxxx x Of course you don't. Yes, 99% of the time, partner is going to sit for it. If you preempt, you generally never bid again unless partner forces you to. But there are oddball exceptions to every "rule" in bridge. Mike

While you generally are right, suppose I made a weak 2H bid on: void QJTxxx x QTxxxx You really would expect me to sit for a penalty X of 2s? I hope not. Cheers, Mike

Hi Stephen! Good to hear from a fellow Bay area player. Sure, you're right - 50% is the break-even point at IMPs. But that assumes double-dummy play, and having just watched the USBF finals and seeing players far better than I take substandard lines on key hands, I don't want to be in 50% slams for the most part. I agree with you on #2. There's no way to evaluate the 98 of spades. You know partner is short, and there's no guarantee he has the Q.

On the first hand, I think it's close whether or not to be in slam. Yes, it's slightly above 50%, but at IMPs that's not good enough and at MPs I want to be where the field is unless I have a decided advantage in the contract (I figure I'm going to play the hand better than most of the field, so I only want to give up that advantage if my contract is significantly better). If you want to get to slam, I think masse24's bidding is appropriate. On the second hand, you need to have a way to distinguish balanced / semi-balanced hands of different strengths after a 2/1 rebid. You play weak NT; I don't know if your range is 10-12, 11-13, or 12-14. I'm going to assume it's 11+-14 for this discussion, but the principles are the same. After 1M - 2X, a 3NT call generally has a very specific meaning: 15-17 balanced or semi-balanced. For a weak NT pair, that would be any 5332 or 5422 (not 54 majors) 15-17 hand. For a strong NT pair, it's the same, except that it will exclude any hand that would have opened 1NT. A 2NT rebid shows the 12-14 balanced or semi-balanced hand (could also be 5431 with a stiff in responder's D or H suit) OR an 18+ balanced hand that plans to rebid 4NT (18-19) or drive to slam (20+) over a 3NT bid. For a strong NT pair, that will include pretty much any of the 12-14 hands that fit the qualifications. For a weak NT pair, it will exclude those hands where opener would have opened 1NT. So here, opener should rebid 3NT, not 2NT. Responder probably ought to content himself with 4NT, because there is no fit in either major. Opener has an easy pass. I don't want to be in slam on #2; do you? Looks like it depends on a 3-3 H split OR the 10s dropping third (maybe a couple of other very minor chances). Not great. Cheers, Mike

Sure you can, but those hands won't come up that often, because (i) if your suit is ratty other than the Ace, 2x probably isn't a wise choice and (ii) if your suit is decent, you have a 1-bid. But something like: xx AJ9xxx xxx Ax is common enough. Cheers, mike

I don't think this is nearly as clear-cut as most of the posters have suggested. RHO (not LHO) opened (OP corrected this), so if RHO has a typical 7-9 count, that leaves 17 split between partner and LHO; each rates to have about 8-9. Any call you make here is fraught with danger. Either 2NT or 3H could go for a number, maybe Xed. Pass will miss a cold game if partner has a decent hand and cede -110 when you could be cold for +120 or +140. X could easily land you in the wrong strain. The two bids I would eliminate right away are pass and 2NT. Pass is just too unilateral; you can't consistently miss game if partner has a decent hand (he's not likely to reopen here). 2NT suffers from the same problem. If partner has a poor hand, you belong in 3 of a suit, not 2NT (which will go down a ton of tricks). And if partner has a decent hand, why unilaterally opt for NT instead of a 5-3 H fit? So that leaves X and 3H. X will be a lot better if partner has a bad hand. At least you'll end up in a playable spot at the right level. 3H is likely better if partner has a good 10 or better, because you are more likely to get to the right strain. So what about the 8+ - 10- hands, which are very common here? If you X, partner is going to make a constructive bid. If he bids 3H, fine, but then you're in the same 4H game you'd be in if you'd overcalled 3H. What if he bids 3C or 3D after a X (these bids show a good 8 to 11 or so)? Those bids are going to be very common here. What are you going to bid then? You are stuck. If you pass, you may miss game. If you bid, you may get hopelessly overboard or else end up in the wrong strain. Suppose you bid 3H and partner has 8+ - 10-? If he has 3H, he's going to raise and you're in good shape. If he doesn't, then he'll either pass, bid 3NT (9-10 and a spade stop), raise to 4H with decent two-card support, or try 4m with a good six-bagger. The only time you're in the soup is when he passes with something like 3145 with no spade stop. At IMPs, I prefer to get to the best game when possible, even if that involves a bit of risk. So I would overcall 3H on my ^%* H suit here, because it will give me the best chance to get to the right game when partner has a decent hand. At MPs, I am more likely to cater to the possibility that partner has a bad hand and make the more flexible X. But I think it's close. Cheers, mike

A rather simple structure that's quite common: 2S: range finder OR clubs Opener bids 2NT with a minimum; 3C with a maximum OVER 2NT: Responder passes 2NT with the balanced invite Bids 3C with the weak club hand Any other bid shows shortness with a gf hand with clubs 2NT: diamonds Opener bids 3C to decline invite; 3D to accept (some reverse these) 3C: Puppet Stayman asking only for 5-card major (if you're interested in 4-cd, use 2C) 3D: no 5-card major 3H: 13 in the majors (H fragment) 3S: 31 in the majors (S fragment) Better to bid the fragment to eliminate the lead-directing X of the stiff 3NT: to play 3H/3S: five cards in the major bid 3D: game forcing with both minors (generally 55) 3H: 55 major invite 3S: 55 major game force or better Cheers, mike

OK, but what you would do and what 95%+ of experts would do here are diametrically opposed.