Wackojack

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=skj96hq9d63cakj52&s=s852hak85dakqj2c10]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Bidding playing Acol S W N E 1♦ p 2♣ p 2♥ p 2♠ p 3♦ p 4NT p 5♣ p 6♦ p p p West leads ♠A and continues with ♠3. North goes up with ♠K on 2nd round and East follows with ♠7 then ♠10. This is my analysis of the possible lines of play. 11 top tricks if ♦ not 5:1 or 6:0 (84%), how to make 12th. 1. Finesse clubs =0.5 x .84 = 42% 2. Ruff 3rd heart in dummy. Works if hearts 4:3 or (5:2 and ♦10987 with long hearts) = (.62 +.005) x .84 = 52.5% 3. Play ♣AK then ruff club in hand then if ♣Q comes down (34%). If not and all follow (62%), then play to ruff a heart as before. = ((.34 ) + (.62 x .62))x .84 = 61% 4. Play out all diamonds watching discards. If club is discarded, play out clubs and if the ♣ Q does not fall there is a likely squeeze in hearts and spades. If more than 1 heart discarded then play out hearts. If ♥J10 does not come down there is a certain squeeze on the other hand in spades and clubs. = 75%? (The ♠ threat is in either hand because the ♠10 has already come down) Would the experts play for a squeeze in this way? Would the experts prefer to play in 6NT? I would be grateful for your views

So as I understand you, you would signal club length here. Then surely it should be done before declarer switches to a club i.e. immediately; to tell partner to hold up for one round. Then nothing can go wrong. However, if you signal attitude in diamonds first and then declarer switches to a club before you have a chance to signal length in clubs, then partner might play the ♣A on the first round. I suppose things shouldn't go wrong now, as he should switch to ♦4 (if you play 4th highest) so I will now know that declarer started with 2 diamonds, and so continue with a diamond. But which diamond should I play? Remaining count signal? It is crucial that I now give partner my count in diamonds so that he does not play declarer to have started with 3. Otherwise he might play play a 3rd diamond. I confess that I might be missing something when you say this is a not a good hand if you play count signals. It seems to me that ONLY if count signals are played and then in the right order that both know what is going on and will not go wrong. Thanks Cardsharp for your observation. I can see that if West does not hold up the club on the first round because East has not given him the count in clubs, then he should play ♦K so that West can give him the count in diamonds. Remaining count? Which diamond? Is this unambiguous? Partner got it wrong after my first discard was 2 diamonds and I feel very bad for not making my first discard 9 clubs.

[hv=d=w&v=e&n=s82hk108763dq6ckj3&w=s109hqj5dkj94caq107&e=s4ha94da7532c9642&s=sakqj7653h2d108c85]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] At a UK county pairs qualifier, I was sitting west against an elderly couple. Partner opens 1NT (12-14), RHO passes and I pass. (you might think this was wrong but we didn't have the tools to show a weak minor 2-suiter and anyway that is another story) LHO then comes in with a leap to 4♠, which we all pass smoothly in spite of me thinking about a double. We play ordinary count in following suit and discarding. (except Ace attitude) Mckenney when obvious. Partner led ♠10 taken by king in hand. Declarer then played ♠A to which pd followed with ♠9. What do you discard to help partner? I won't go into the gory details of what actually happened after I made a rubbish discard of 2♦, but we got a 0 on the scoresheet. I believe I should have played ♣9 to give partner the count so that he can hold up if declarer switches immediately to a club. If declarer plays of all her spades I can throw 3 clubs if necessary to show that I definitely started with 4 and then diamonds upwards. Then partner cannot go wrong and come down to ♥Q, ♦KJ, ♣AQ if declarer plays off all the spades. I am interested to know how the players who play attitude or other or no signals would discard on my hand. Also suppose South had been dealer and opened 4♠ with the same lead? Would those that play count discards do anything different?

dealer: ????? vul: ???? scoring: unknown ♠ ♥ ♦ ak109 ♣ ♠ ♥ x ♦ j8 ♣ 2]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] You have played east for a club singleton since it wasn't returned, so your ♣2 is a threat card. Double dummy I suppose the threat against west can equally be in the north hand (Upper) but west under pressure might just forget that you have ♣2 in your hand and discard all his clubs. OK unlikely :unsure:

We play "sane" WJO's. So VvNV it would be 6 playing tricks, 6-card suit possibly 7. 2S over 2H to me would be saying "I have a decent spade suit and tolerence for hearts, inviting game if partner has a feature in spades. So I wouldn't wish to bid spades here. I think X over 3C should be optional, competitive, cooperative whatever, but not a command to pass for penalties. Since so many contributers say penalties... I invite all to give me a bidding sequence of their choice playing their system that ends in the optimum contract of 3H. :D

OK I accept all of that and if west doubles after 3♣ is passed round, it is NOT a take-out double and neither is it a penalty double. Following a recent strand on doubles, it seems that you cannot limit types of double to penalty or take-out. As you say this double is optional or cooperative. Below is the full hand which came up in a club duplicate. I was sitting west as passed as many of the contributors recommended. I was afraid that partner would think it was unambiguously for penalties. The result was a round zero for us when 3♣ came in for -110. We might have defeated the contract for +50 for a near bottem, but partner mistakenly led a 3rd round of hearts looking for an uppercut trump promotion. This exposed the club position for declarer dropping the doubleton queen. [hv=d=w&v=n&n=s107652h6dakq7c864&w=skj8h10852d9632c93&e=saq4h74d54cakj1075&s=s93hakqj93dj108cq2]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] West North East South p p 1♣ 2♥ p p 3♣ p p p It seems clear now that I should have taken some action and doubled. The double MUST be saying "I have a shortage in your suit but I have tricks in my hand and don't know if it would play better in defence or attack. I will leave the decision to you. Contrast this with another hand that came up the same evening. [hv=d=w&v=n&n=s107652h6dakq7c864&w=skj8h10852d9632c93&e=saq4h74d54cakj1075&s=s93hakqj93dj108cq2]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] South West North East 1♣ 2♦ p p 3♣ p p p This time I was East with clubs sitting under the opener and was content to pass, leaving South to go down 1 in 3♣ for an average score. :(

OK what do you bid as North holding ♠107652 ♥6 ♦AKQ7 ♣864 3♥? 3♦?

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=s93hakqj93dj108cq2]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] West North East South p p 1♣ 2♥ p p 3♣ p p dble p ? South's vul against not overcall of 2♥ shows about 6 playing tricks with 6 hearts. Obviously South's bid depends on what is understood by North's double. These are the rules that I would apply: 1. Double is for take-out when a possible fit has not yet been found. Is there a possible fit? Partner knows you have 6 hearts so could raise on a doubleton + 2 possible outside tricks. Partner with 5 good spades and a willingness to compete, would have bid 2♠ earlier or if not 3♠ now. 2. Double is for take-out sitting under the suit opener. 3. Double is for penalties when partner's suit bid is narrowly defined. E.g. 3♥ -3♠-dble. After all this deliberation I think that the double is not based on holding a club suit and is competitive based on values in the 2 unbid suits and probably a singleton heart but certainly no more than xx. So I bid 3♥ expecting to make. Do the experts agree?

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sq1032h109732d42c53&s=shaqj86dakq106caq8]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] Thanks for the opinions. Bidding: 2♣-2♠-p-3♠, ?. We play: Pass after intervention over 2♣ = 0-4HCP 2♣2♦2NT = 23-24HCP I like Luke Warm's simple approach to bid 4♠ and then 6♥ over partner's 5♥. Even opposite ♥xxxx slam looks a reasonable prospect. However, it would have been better had the contract been right sided. The downside of bidding 4 of a suit is that partner would expect a single suited hand of at least 6 cards so would not correct. At the table I doubled (no one voted for this) although I see the danger of partner passing as minimal and if he does it may well give us the only plus score say QJ10xx, xx,xx,xxxx. After the double partner bid 4♥ and 12 tricks rolled in after a spade lead. I think after this I should have bid 5♥ or possibly bashed 6. Anothe thing in favour of double is that if partner has diamonds it does give him the choice of bidding 4 or 5 according to distribution. Over 5♦ I would go 6♦. Pass seems to have the same benefits as a double but without the downside of a possible penalty pass from partner. But wouldn't partner think that I had a balanced 23-24 and pass with a balanced yarb? inquiry Posted on Nov 17 2004, 03:12 PM This hand looks very familiar. When I held it, or one like it, I bid 4♥ with the clever plan of carrying on to 5♦ over their possible 4♠ sacrafice. If this is the hand, what happened to me was that when LHO bid 4♠, my partner bid 5♥. How could I, given parnters raise to five, not bid 6? Sadly on 11 tricks. Upon reflection, 4♥ wasn't horrible, but a forcing pass here or a creative 4NT (pick a suit), where I pull 5♣ to 5♦ seems about right. If partner has a little something after this we get to 6, and if not, we should be in five of our best fit. Sorry the quote is not boxed. Difficult to see how a slam would fail if partner voluntarily bids 5♥ ove 4♠. Also if 4NT is pick a suit, how is this different from 4♠?

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=shaqj86dakq106caq8]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] You open 2♣= game force, LHO overcalls 2♠, partner passes, RHO bids 3♠. Over to you. Would 4♠ be showing an ace or void and double a singleton? If partner responds 4♥ to your pass or double or 5♥ to your 4♠, what action do you now take?

[hv=d=s&v=b&w=sa873hak1085da43cq&e=skjhq4dj98ck109832]266|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] Playing Acol club night MP against average opponents. Bidding: South West North East Pass 1♥ Pass 2♣ Pass 2♠ Pass 3♦ Pass 3NT Pass Pass Pass Partner was playing the hand North leads ♦K and declarer took with the Ace, South following with ♦6. He then played ♣Q (do you agree?), North following with 6♣ which South took with ♣A. South returned ♦2, which North took with Q♦ returning ♦5 which was won by ♦J in dummy. He now plays ♣K, South following and threw a spade from his hand, whereupon North also throws a spade. Has partner played correctly so far? (I believe he has). At the table I thought he then played against the odds, but in the post mortum, driving home, tried to convince me that the line he took which turned out to be a poor match point score was the best. Now I am not sure. Your views on how he should continue? Would the order in which South played the 6 and 2 of ♦ make any difference to your choice.

In the late 70's a friend of mine when taking time off after university study developed a forcing pass system. I have played this system socially. It was great fun and I thought it was well thought out and quite potent both as an accurate 2-handed system and a destructive 4-handed system. Browsing your forum I have seen references to fp systems. The opening bids are: Pass = 0-7 or 17+. Responder bids 1C with 0-7 or 17+. Then opener with 0-7 bids 1D and with 17+ makes other bids fairly naturally. 1C = 13-16 and a suited hand. Then 1D asks and other bids fairly natural. 1D = 8-12 balanced. Then 1H asks and other bids to play or pre-emptive. 1H/1S = 8-12 with 5 or more cards 1NT = 13-16 balanced 2C/2D = 8-12 at least 5 in minor 2H/2S =4441 After opener has passed and responder has 8-16, 1D and 1NT are unchanged and 2 bids extend to 8-16. Does anybody know of a similar recognised forcing pass system? :) My friend remembers in the 80's at a tournament in London he showed the system to a Polish player who became quite excited exclaiming " Oh it is an ambiguous forcing pass"

Thanks for all your opinions. This is what I now think for what it is worth: [hv=d=e&v=n&n=s974hak42d953cak6&w=sj1086hj85dk876c87&e=sa2h76daqj1042cq43&s=skq53hq1093dcj10952]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] East 1♦ South ? South should pass because the lack of HCP will be a nasty surprise for partner if he bids 3NT East 1♦ South pass West 2♦ North ? North should pass. Double has a very high risk. For example, if partner has a weak or very weak 4324 shape it could go for -500 or even -800 against a possible -110 or at worst -400 if opponents are left to their own devices. East 1♦ South pass West 2♦ North pass East pass South ? No question. Now it is safe to come in. East 1♦ South pass West 2♦ North pass East pass South double West pass North ? If North bids 2♥ it will result in +110 when partner has a less shapely hand like KJxx, Qxxx, xx, Qxx. Most times, however, even opposite 8HCP at least +140 will be made, e.g. Axxx, Qxxx, xx, Qxx and of course opposite a more shapely hand +620 can be made. So the reward for the conservative bid of 2♥ is a certain part score against a risk of missing a vulnerable game if partner can do no more. The reward for the "risky" bid of 3♥ is a possible +620 agaist a risk of -100. Suppose now North does make the conservative bid of 2♥ East 1♦ South pass West 2♦ North pass East pass South double West pass North 2♥ East 3♦ South ? The risk for South in competing to 3♥ is that North might have something like: 10xx, Jxx, KQxx, Qxx. Remember North's bid was forced. So it looks like you are committing a capital offence in competing for a part score at red at the 3-level if you raise. :rolleyes: So I agree with Mikestar that North should bid 3♥.

So the full deal was: [hv=d=e&v=n&n=s974hak42d953cak6&w=sj1086hj85dk876c87&e=sa2h76daqj1042cq43&s=skq53hq1093dcj10952]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] and the full bidding went: East South West North 1♦ pass 2♦ pass pass dble pass 2♥ 3♦ pass pass pass duly going one off for +50 when an easy +650 was there for the taking. It seems that we did not appreciate that our "weak" opponents had a 10 card fit in their suit. Neither of us could see that there were absolutely no wasted values in the way our hands fitted together. I don't think I had enough for a double over 1D at red and an overcall of 2H by partner looks gross. Then after I balance, partner's bid of 2H could be forced with wasted values in diamonds, so I don't want to bid on. Who was to blame or were we fixed by the opponents lack of ambition?

My partner was sitting North with this hand against weak opponents [hv=d=e&v=n&s=s974hak42d953cak6]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] The bidding went: East South West North 1♦ pass 2♦ pass pass dble pass ? How many hearts should he bid? Noting the previous discussion what should he he expect from me as a minimum?

Thanks Luke warm, Paulhar, Erick for your views confirming that partner's bid was right and mine atrocious. I take it then that the types of hand that I would double on after 1m(1M) ? are: 1. "Pure" take out having M-m, 4-4, 5-4, 4-3, 5-3 2. Weak other M Other weakish hands not suitable for 1NT, I would pass expecting partner to re-open with suitable shape. But Erick, why would I want to double on a strong balanced hand? I have available 2NT (11-12), 3NT (13-16) with stops in opps suit, and a Q in opps suit without a stop or possible slam. btw Robson/Segal Partnership bidding seem to like only hand type 1 to double after the 1m(1M) sequence. They are also sceptical about negative free bids unless you play 4-card majors and strong NT. Have they changed their minds since writing? I don't like rebidding 1NT with a singleton but with AK32, 4, Q6432, A53, I agree this is the least of evils.Playing 12-14NT and Acol based system where all opening bids promise 4 or more (as I do normally), there is a problem as partner would expect 1NT rebid 15-16. I would perhaps have to bid 2C, hoping partner would correct to 2D with 3. btw, I think the hand is just strong enough to make a forcing bid of 2H directly, after all you do have 6 hearts and 3-card diamond support. Then the bidding would go 1D (1S) 2H p, 2NT p 3H p p, or 1D (1S) p 2H, 2NT p 3D p, 4H if you are feeling lucky.

Playing a 5M system (better minor) and 15-17NT. You open 1D at green, LHO overcalls 1S and partner doubles. This is passed to you and you have: ♠KQ8 ♥Q9 ♦AK987 ♣1095 You rebid 1NT. This is passed to partner who now bids 2H. What do you make of this bid? Assuming you are playing forcing new-suit bids over overcalls, can you assume that partner has 5 hearts (or more) and was not strong enough to respond 2H directly and therefore you must pass? I assumed that partner had something in clubs for his bid, and with my good 14, punted 3NT. Partner passed with unfortunate results when perhaps he should have converted to 4H having: ♠A103 ♥K106542 ♦1052 ♣7 It does look from partner’s point of view that had I responded in clubs, he could make an equal level conversion to hearts, and had I rebid diamonds, he would be happy to play there. Was this an intelligent use of the sputnik double? Of course I might have opened my hand 1NT, then no doubt we would have got to a reasonable 4H contract. As it happened, hearts split 5-nil so a pass of 2H would have worked out well.

He wanted to use only 2 bids. with the minors he uses 3 bids: cue, jump-cue and 2NT. with the Majors he uses only 2 bids. The problem with michaels is the ambiguity on the second suit, and it seems that's what our new friend wants removed. The price: 2-suited with both minors can't be bid anymore, unless with 3NT or 4NT perhaps, and cuebids with both Majors will result in a 3-level contract. I also have a question: what do you mean with "min 3" and "min 4" in QUOTE (Wackojack) 1♣-2♣ min 4 = ♠ +♦ 1♣-2♦ min3 = ♠ +♦ Yep, you were right - I wanted the ambiguity removed. I like your suggestion, its easy to remember (same as "Luke Warm") but it does give up the one-suit pre-emptive 3♣ overcall. I was prepared to give up on the ♣♦ 55 as it is easy for opponents to overcall and often benefits them in declarer play. Your question: With artificial club or short club in 5M systems a 2♣ overcall of 1♣ could be useful as natural and the 2♦ overcall is not much loss as 1♦ and 3♦ single suit overcalls are available. Thanks for the help :D

I wanted a system of overcalling with 55 hands without ambiguity using cue bids and 2NT only, which would allow partner to give suit preference at no higher than the 3-level. There is no bid for minor 55 as it is probably more of a liability than an asset as it is almost certainly going to be outbid unless there is a misfit. This is what I have come up with: 1♠-2♠ = ♥ + ♣ 1♥-2♥ = ♠ + ♣ 1♠ - 2NT = ♥ + ♦ 1♥ - 2NT = ♠ + ♦ 1♦-3♦ = ♠ +♥ 1♣-3♣ = ♠ +♥ 1♦ -2NT = ♥ +♣ 1♣ -2NT = ♥ +♦ 1♦-2♦ = ♠ +♣ 1♣-2♣ min 4 = ♠ +♦ 1♣-2♦ min3 = ♠ +♦ Remember: 2NT = suits close together 2 cue = suits further apart 3 minor suit cue = majors. Is this or similar a recognised system? What do you think of it?