zhoraster

There's a better one: D. Ultimate (aka Solitaire) membership - always most even breaks, finesses always work: defenders' cards are rearranged if you misguess. In the case of overtricks, the contract is upgraded to the actual number of tricks taken (unless the contract is (re)doubled).

I know some methods against doubled transfer bids on the second level. What about the third level? What would pass, xx, 3♠, 3NT mean here? Say, if N has three small hearts, 3NT may be better. How does one show both spade support and a good stopper?

The hand posted.

Ok, ok, some solid arguments at last. I agree to most of them and admit that I was pretty carried away. Anyway, I ran a double dummy simulation given the data (North passes, East opens 1♦). Here is the deal script: proc notrump {hand min max} { if {![balanced $hand]} {return 0} set hc [hcp $hand] if {$hc < $min || $hc>$max} { return 0} return 1 } south is "86 Q96542 84 975" main { accept unless {[hcp north]>=12 || [hcp east]<11 || [hcp east]>21 || [spades east]>=5 || [hearts east]>=5 || [notrump east 15 17] || [notrump east 20 21] || [clubs east]>[diamonds east] || ([clubs east]==3 && [diamonds east] == 3)} } Now the statistics: out of 500 deals, 2♥ doubled compared to the best EW contract gives on average 324 poins, or 8 imps. (Also the median result is close: 254 deals yield 8 or more imps). Of course, EW will be more inclined to punish when this is profitable for them, so here is more detailed statistics of losses : In 136 deals (27.2% of all deals), 2♥ doubled gives a worse score than the best EW score. 77 of those (15.4% of all deals) lead to 1-4 imps loss (almost half of those is 1 imp), 39 (7.8% of all deals) lead to 5-9 imps loss, remaining 20 (4% of all deals), to the disaster of 10-14 imps loss. Now in order to get a profitable result, the opponents should pass 2♥x and defend well. In around 8% of the deals, my result will be bad, in 4%, terrible (if they defend well). Given the level of interference this bid creates, I'm taking the risks. But now I agree with you, the bid is not essential, or even nice to recommend on this forum.

I gave my arguments and logic, but you rather appeal instead to Culbertson, rules, books, and experts. No point to discuss. Speaking of experts, I've started a poll, let us see. I agree, the word "huge" is an exaggeration. But it is a mistake imo, and I explained why.

Of course, one might. Not with the hand you pictured, but it is possible. But the probability of EW getting a higher score by setting 2♥ than by playing their own contract is very low. The "sometimes" you are referring to now is a fraction of already very small fraction of deals, like the one you pictured. There's no novice bridge or beginner bridge. Bridge uses the same logic on any level. And I have given mine arguments for overcalling, they are hopefully not very involved for a novice to understand them. And there can't be a universal advice which works in 100% of cases. For each advice it is possible to construct a hand, maybe even many hands, where it fails. My advice works well for an overwhelming majority of hands, so I find it suitable. And you didn't comment on everything else - does it mean you agree on that?

Of course, normally you shouldn't overcall with hands like that. But after your partner had failed to open (and only after that) this is absolutely necessary, as I have explained.

I've seen a lot of such "good players" on bbo. Their "goodness" is the desire to give opponents a lot of imps. So please, good players, punish me! I would love to sacrifice at least two levels below your contract! This "punishment" will result in -1, sometimes -2, sometimes made, sometimes with overtricks, against a game. And this is an awful hand - I agree - for the defense! Zero defensive strength with everything breaking even for the declarer. For play, it is much better. Having six cards in hearts is already a shape. Opposite nothing, it is at least 3 tricks more than in a shapeless variant of this hand (xxx Qxxx xxx xxx). Give me seventh heart, and I'll overcall 3♥ even without the queen (actually, without the queen I'm even more inclined to overcall as I know that my opponents are stronger). Add sixth ten in clubs to this - and I'll bid 5♥ (as bidding 4♥ won't stop them from finding 4♠) or 4nt (less likely, as it gives too much information to the opponents). I don't. Equally I don't have any desire for partner to lead anything else. Do I desire that my partner leads towards my empty suits? No. I don't want my partner to be on the lead at all! And my preempt helps that too. Moreover, preempts normally don't show any desire that my partner leads the suit called (sometimes he will even have a void there). What they do show is length in that suit and the desire to play rather than defend. And yet moreover, further you'll contradict yourself saying partner could promote his king leading towards your queen. But we'll discuss this in time. No it's not. I've seen a lot of such "experts" on bbo. Besides naming themselves experts, they frequently write "prefer fast play" in their profile, which hints at the real level of judgement involved. Leading from a king is indeed often a right choice against a small slam but even a beginner needs very little judgement to understand it isn't the right choice now. He just needs to hear the bidding and count his points to infer that after the opponents reached their slam in few bids, it is highly unlikely that his partner has anything at all, not even speaking of the queen. I would say there is 95-99% probability he has zero points. And what would your active lead achieve? Just helping the opponents to get clubs right. Guessing the king, guessing the ten (this can be crucial too!) So in some 70-80% of the cases your active lead is a valuable gift for the declarer, which gives him his contract. And moreover, even if your partner does have a queen, your lead will in most cases only help the declarer to win his slam. Say, your partner has Q75, and the declarer, A96 opposite J83; there are two club losers unless clubs are led. It is, of course, much safer to lead from a suit headed by a king when your partner has a long queen (which he might have shown with his 2♥ bid).

You don't have to blame yourself for the defense. Your partner made a terrible lead (imo), which highly likely will present declarer a trick, given the bidding. He then discarded the K♣ knowing that you didn't have the Q♣. The robots on BBO often defend very poorly, but you partner had managed to defend even worse here. You did make a huge mistake though, but in the bidding, when you failed to overcall with 2♥. You know by you partner's pass that your opponents have at least a game balance, and they will certainly find the right game or even slam unless you interfere. 2♥ is not so much of interference itself. But let us imagine what happens next. Obviously, W cannot bid spades. And he has a difficult choice now: to double, showing the 4-card spades or to bid 3♥ showing huge hand with diamond support. The spades are just too good to be missed, so he would most likely double. But N now raises to 3♥, again passed to W. The problem became much worse. He may double, partner bids 3nt - now pass? Yes, probably, and farewell to 6♦. He may bid 4♥, which is not good, as this is farewell to 3nt and gives partner a headache. His partner would probably bid 4♠ over 4♥, taking them to 6♠, which are hopeless, since you would certainly lead a heart against that. Bottom line: use every opportunity to hinder opponents' bidding, especially when you know for sure that they have a game balance. (Some players in my club may even psych 1♠ with your hand.)

http://tinyurl.com/y72xwwqo The 2♥ bid is (correctly) explained as 17- HCP, exactly 5 hearts and exactly 4 spades (with 6+ spades and 4 hearts I would continue bidding spades, with 5-5 or better, the first bid would be 2♦). Even with 6 spades, 2♥ is often better, as spades could be promoted by ruffing in dummy. So why the robot "corrects" to 2♠? Post mortem, 2♠ is pretty hopeless (though can be won on open cards); in 2♥, there are 8 easy tricks (9 with some defence).

If someone fails to find a sense in something, this does not mean that it is nonsense. I play all kinds of things on BBO - tournaments, just declare things, bingo, goulash etc. I enjoy them. Having fun is not nonsense. Someone's not having fun? You have my sympathy.

Of course, it's convenient to have good agreements for such situations, especially with with weak NT opening. I played this standard SOS system: with one-suited weak hand, redouble with two-suited weak hand, bid lower of the suits with any strong hand, pass, which forces the partner to redouble with weak 4333, pass and then bid 2♣ over partner's redouble. he may pass with 4 cards or correct to his longest suit Anyway, without an agreement it would be wrong to bid anything but pass here: the worst outcome would be if partner takes exactly 9 tricks in 1nt (which loses to 3nt=). If the opponents bid 2♣ or 2♠, you can improvise with 3 of this suit. If they bid anything else, double is for penalties.

Answer is a bit too late :) Anyway, some observations after my first 4-game Bingo (took me about a minute). first game http://tinyurl.com/yame5pxn . In normal game, I could upgrade to 2nt. Here, I don't. The thing is that you should let the robot declare as often as possible. But when you open nt, this is almost impossible: Stayman, transfers etc. So with nt hand try to open something else. This worked here well: the robot jumped to 4♥ after my 2nt rebid. second game http://tinyurl.com/y737wxf3 . It might be that 3nt has better chances. But not this time. Currently I have only one Bingo line to play so let's play it: 4♠. Fortunately, no thinking involved, even a bad trump break cannot sink the contract. Just don't forget to set the singleton autoplay in options. third game http://tinyurl.com/y93oohk2 . It would be nice to be able to set the system for Bingo. A very convenient system would be SEF or Forum-D, where you have two strong openings: 2♣ and 2♦. Why is it handy? The thing is that the robot tends to raise my preempts, and I rarely want this. With strong 2♦ opening, I could have passed the usual 2♥ response. Unfortunately, this is not available, so what are other options? Well, you can bet on your partner to have spades, open 1nt and hope to pass the 2♥ transfer bid. What is also important is that in all these cases robot is the declarer, so the play would be fast (I would like to see my partner's face in real life after myself passing his transfer bid :lol: ). Anyway, here I was already ahead of my peers, so just a cold 2♥ bid: sometimes, we'll end in 4♥, and I'll have an extra redeal. The play is also interesting: note the unnecessary but very crucial play of the J♣ in the third trick. Without that, West could have continued clubs for -1 (he has a diamond entry left for the second club ruff). After the jack, the robot thinks my spade losers can be discarded on clubs and continues spades. +1 instead of -1. fourth game http://tinyurl.com/y6vlltmy . Now at last the tactic explained in the previous paragraph works. You see, now I need 2♦ badly. The hand I've been dealt with A fourth in diamonds is very promising. But to stop in 2d naturally... Also (quite paradoxically) the danger of a 4-card suit is that your partner will often have good support (or the support he considers to be good from my bidding) and will bid 3♦ over weak 2♦ or will raise my 2♦ rebid to the third level. However, the "strong opening" tactic works like a charm: 2♣ opening, normal 2♦ waiting, pass. The vulnerable opponents won't interfere over the strong opening (and a very weird bidding overall). Last byt not least, the robot is a declarer, so it is a triple advantage. Of course, sometimes he will have a singleton diamond (I have two redeals for that), but here I was lucky to find KQJx opposite. Easy 9 tricks for the robot and a fast 4-deal Bingo. General advice: Open nt as rare as possible (I've already said this, but this is extremely important). You'll always declare when you open nt. Try to keep the opponents out of the bidding. You have no time to defend well, and their successful scores will reduce your redeal potential In competitive biddings prefer takeout doubles/cuebids etc to overcalls to make robot declare as often as possible While robot declares (preferably in the first game(s)), use your dummy time to study the best Bingo lines Among several alternative contract options, choose those which are on the card. If robot raises your in-Bingo bid to something out-of-Bingo, raise it to the game, hoping for an extra redeal Use redeals only when it is absolutely necessary (usually when you're BING along with several peers). Of course, I was very lucky today. But they say luck rewards the brave :) Good luck Bingoing!

Recently I got these challenge results The only different result is 3nt -1 (because it was late night and I took spades for clubs). Maybe someone have seen all identical results in a challenge?

Are you sure the opening bid was 1♠? Just checking. Anyway, with spades left I guess W would have continued them. So I assume J♠ was singleton. So I draw all trumps, discarding two spades and two hearts, take AK of spades and now lead a club towards dummy. If E has a long queen in hearts, he is squeezed in spades and hearts. Otherwise W was squeezed in clubs and hearts before this. I found no way to squeeze both opponents in spades (but I have to admit I didn't think a lot). So I'll go down if W has 3 spades (but in this case I fail to understand why not continue them).

Because in an average bridge club only few players have defense against that. Against good (or even ok) opponents I wouldn't bid that.

I use the third option. The strong enquiry is 2nt, the answer 3♥ meaning spades. The advantage over the second option are if the opener has majors, and the responder is weak, than the major will be played on the second level it is much harder to overcall this opening with 2♠