beatrix45

:) I don't feel very strongly about any of the possible bids. I looks like we have game, and it is going to be hard to catch them in 2♠ doubled if that happens to be right. Could you give us the whole hand? I am curious about what actually happened.

:) Applying top level 'ethical' standards to even ordinary duplicate players is absurd. Outside of a small top echelon of professionals, the game is played purely for enjoyment. When this sort of harassment happened to me as a beginner, Oswald Jacoby who happened to be playing that night at a nearby table, put a quick stop to it. He said, "take as long as you need". He then turned to my partner and said "you are not to draw any inference from your partner's mannerisms or hesitations, that would be unethical." Bridge used to be a much more popular game in North America, no wonder why.

<_<7♦. I think you have to sac at IMPs at this vul. You might have bid more diamonds earlier. By passing, you are betting everything on setting 6♥. Indeed, once in a while, the 7♦ save may go for less than the game. Besides, they may bid 7♥. I don't see that the various hesitations mean anything significant. These are difficult hands, and they take some time to try to figure out. Try to win at the table, not in the committee.

:) Pass. Both partners think NT is the spot. I have NO ruffing trick. wtp?

B) [hv=d=n&v=n&n=sk93h654dqj8c10543&w=saq5hkqd97542cq97&e=sj8742h972d103cak6&s=s106haj1083dak6cj82]399|300|Scoring: IMP 1♥-P-1NT-P P-P[/hv] Three times 2♠ making 3 Once 2♥ down one Once 1NT down one Once 4♥ down three

;) Thanks everyone for your responses. The hand was played six times in a BBO indy with the following outcomes: 2♠ making three by EW for -140 for NS. Three times 2♥ down one by NS for -50 for NS. One time 4♥ down three by NS for -150 for NS. One time 1NT down two by NS for -100 for NS. One time. It is harder for for EW to enter the auction when South responds 1NT. Winning the 'race to one notrump' is only a good idea when one is non-vul, i.e. fifty a trick(-50 vs-90 or -100 vs -120). Also, much more important at MP's than IMPs.

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sk94h853dqj6c10543]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♥-P-???[/hv] Simple bread-and-butter bidding situation. Playing SAYC BBO style - i.e. 1NT non-forcing and 2♥ not 'constructive'. Your bid? How much, if any, does vulnerability and type of scoring affect your bid?

:( For what its worth, imo. what you did was just free speech and OK. The subsequent threats from the authorities were childish and uncalled for. Best of luck, Trixi

:) Scared bridge is losing bridge

:) 4♥. The very idea of any other bid is an abomination. I would love to hear arguments for any other call - esp. pass. Bridge can really be a difficult game to learn if one pays the slightest heed to such advice.

:) 4♠. You can pretty much count 10 or 11 tricks in spades. On the odd occasion where 4♠ goes down, they probably have game in hearts.

:) Whether or not you agree with him on his each and every point, Lawrence has the best discussion of this matter in general. He also points out that on many hands, the first decision to make is what suit to lead irrespective of your high card holdings in the various suits. During my BBO kibitzing, I have noticed that there is more underleading of aces on the go at the highest levels of bridge than Lawrence would recommend. One old-fashioned argument was that it was safer to underlead a king than a queen, because with the king, the trick sometimes came back on the third round of the suit.

:blink: 5♣. My earlier 4♦ bid confirmed spades as trumps as far as partner is concerned. He cooperates with a cue bid of the heart ace - he does not guarantee the spade queen or extra length in spades, but he might have skipped the heart cue bid if that was his only value. My master plan is to harass partner into bidding seven spades or even seven clubs if he has anything extra. Over my 5♣ bid, if he bids 5♦, I will bid 5♥ (not liking the putative duplication of values). He is unlikely to bid 5♥, but if he does, I will bid 6♣. Over 5♠ sign off, I also bid 6♣. Now I have forced the hand to small slam, and I am clearly not looking for some specific value in order to bid the grand. Worse case, I may end up in seven spades looking for the trump queen, bfd, I've been there before.

B) I think the actual hand argues in favor of a 5♠ call, although a double would have garnered +800. Imo, partner's 4♠ was about what she should have had. [hv=d=n&v=e&n=sq432h107daj9852cq&w=s65hkq6542dkca862&e=sj7haj83d643cj1043&s=sak1098h9dq107ck975]399|300|Scoring: IMP 2♦-P-2♠-3♥ 4♠-5♥-???[/hv] Justin's observation for bidding one more with evidence of a two suit fit is, imo, sound advice. In addition, notice that south has a singleton (heart), another sign that bidding one more is called for. Also, the Q107 diamond holding enhances the probability that the hand is 'pure' in terms of minor honors in the opponents' suits. Finally, north has two factors that support bidding on, and underpin her earlier jump to 4♠. FOUR trumps to the queen make the hand MUCH stronger than a mere three trumps. Further, the singleton club, an unmentioned side suit, is HUGE even though it is an honor. Put this all together, and you have an almost unambiguous case for bidding on, and a fairly decent argument that 5♠ may be a make even though we figure to have no more that 20 HCP between our two hands - we actually have 22.

[hv=d=n&v=e&s=sak1098h9dq107ck976]133|100|Scoring: IMP 2♦-P-2♠-3♥ 4♠-5♥-???[/hv] Playing IMP pairs with reliable partner and decent opponents. The 2♠ bid was forcing and constructive.

B) 4NT. Time to roll out 'the tool' as asking bids look like the ticket for this hand. Playing 1430, partner will usually bid 5♦ showing zero or three controls - that is to say the AK of ♥ and the A of ♦. Given that, I am willing to take the position that most of the time at least one of the major suits will yield six tricks, the other will yield at least three, and the minor suit AK's add up to 13+ tricks - so, I am bidding the grand in NT on this auction. If he lacks the ♥Q, I've got to hope for the ♣Q or the ♦Q and some length. I'm still bidding 7NT. If partner is missing one of the prime red controls, I'll stop at 6NT - the missing control might be the ♦A.

3NT, wtp? Sure, sure you have other possible bids, 3♥ or 4♦, but the ability to play 3NT is normally the most important line to pursue. This time you have a decent (but, by no means a 100%) 6♦ spot, but 3NT always makes.

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=saq97hk9da987ca107]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♣-P-1♦-P 1♠-P-???[/hv] What is your bid, and what is your plan on this hand? Do you think there is any possibility for slam?? If so, how to explore it? We are facing quality opponents.

:P Do you play 3♦ as nonforcing? If so, then 3♦. Otherwise, pass. The spade king is a huge negative in terms of our trying to buy the hand. Put that king over in the club or diamond suit, and you have (almost) a strong two bid opening. The opponents clearly have the spade suit with the ability to take 8-10 tricks there. The 2♥ opener has disrupted their auction already, and if I can bid 3♦ w/o worrying about pard getting serious, I am happy to do so. Otherwise, I only hope pard's weak two did enough damage. I think I could pass in tempo with this hand, but if not, then 3♦, even forcing, is a bid that can win. I would prefer it to a slow pass.

:P I vote for 3♣. Pard can show three card heart support and extra values if she has them. P.S. Reviewed the thread. Wrong again! But, only due to the lie of the defender's cards. I presume some game will be reached over a 3♣ bid.

:P Fourth best spade. Pard's club ten is an eye opener. Why can't winning bridge be easier than this? P.S. Reviewed your thread. I will take a 75%+ board anytime (very small gloat).

:P 6♠, going down one about 1/3 of the time. I would have liked to have bid 6NT, if indeed I had thought of it, but the hand obviously has an extra trick playing in spades. Having enough tricks, as opposed to losers, may be the issue given our probable combined high card count of around 30.

:P Perfect analysis IMO. I would have bid 4♠ with the south hand based on a wholly different type of analysis. From the bidding, it sounds like pard has a stiff diamond. Combined with my doubleton club, the sum of our short suits would be three. I have 13 or 14 working high card points. Partner's raise advertises another six. Applying Mike and Anders' favorite formula: 13-3=10 (maybe 9 if pard's raise was very weak). 4♠ figures to make or go down one. Even if our limit is nine tricks in spades, 4♠ down one could be right if there were 19 tricks in the hand. Depending on how you play a competitive raise to 3♠, the odds of there being 19 trumps vary, but I can almost count 18 for certain. Either a void or two suit fit might or a fourth trump in pard's hand offer the prospect of one more. Can 4♠ lose? Of course, but what are the odds? A pass (or double) of 4♦ leaves a huge burden on the weak hand. Who has better information here, me or pard? IMO playing to avoid criticism in the post mortem is losing bridge. Who are such critics, anyway?

:P My guess is PASS. Why help the opponents? If they settle at six, maybe, just maybe I will try the sacrifice at 7♥. I can't save over seven spades. P.S. Reviewed the latest thread. Wrong again! Would they have reached seven anyway?

:P Why can't the opponents leave my auction alone! We could easily have six, or be down one at the five level when the opponents are -500 in clubs. I can't say I feel very strongly about 5♥ versus a pass. Commiting to the six level is WAY too rich for my blood. Have to bid 5♥ anyway. It figures to make opposite two useful cards in partner's hand plus the fact that, given the bidding, any finesses should be 2 to 1 to be onside. Also, given my club ace and the bidding, the odds of pard having club tricks is minimal. P.S. Reviewed thread and see that 5♥ was the winner (very small gloat), but on the actual hand, why didn't pard correct to 5♠? Did she think I was doubling 3♣ based on my (world famous) good looks alone, or because I could play in more than one suit?