Kaitlyn S

Answers: (Material that might be confusing to beginners is put in blue) [hv=pc=n&s=s62hkqj63d863ca74&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1dd2d]133|200[/hv] HInt:Do you know what should be trump? Do you have a game? Do both your jobs with this bid. How do you think this hand will play opposite partner's very likely short diamonds? Answer: You are mostly right if you jumped to 3H. If you bid 2H, realize that you could have bid 2H on far less as you should bid 2H to compete with six points and four hearts (as partner with a minimum takeout double has already shown his hand and can't be expected to bid yours also.) You jump to 3H to show your 11 points (I'm counting one for length) and desire to have hearts as trump (partner has support for all the unbid suits.) If you bid 4H, look at the advanced discussion (TL/DR: I love it) ... [What is this hand really worth? You have three small diamonds, and although partner's double tends to show short diamonds, the opponents confirmed it with their raise to 2D. Your partner counted for shortness but wasn't sure how much the shortness was worth since you could have useless diamond honors, but you don't. Partner's shortness is pulling it's full weight - you will gain a ruffing trick opposite a doubleton and you will gain two ruffing tricks opposite a singleton. Also, where your points are matters - partner needs you to have cards in spades, hearts, and clubs; all your cards are working so this hand is worth more than a hand with more HCP but some of the points in diamonds. The third thing this hand has going for it is that partner's cards in the black suits are likely to be sitting over opener's so finesses are more likely to work. I would bid 4H with this hand and be quite surprised if it didn't make if partner has his takeout double. Say partner has a minimum such as Kxxx,Axxx, x, Kxxx. Only 10 HCP but assuming the SA is with the opening bidder, you'll lose only 1 spade and 1 diamond when you trump two diamonds. Even if partner has two diamonds and only three hearts, as in: Axxx, Axx, xx, KQ10x - you'll make 4H if you can trump a diamond, and if the opponents lead trump at every opportunity, you'll make it if the CJ drops.] What if partner has AKxx, x, Axx, Qxxxx? Then you need to have a long discussion with partner about what a takeout double shows, or find a new partner. Yes, there are a few people that double with minimum opening hands with bad support for one of the unbid suits. Don't be one of them. [hv=pc=n&s=sj6hkq653dkj4cq72&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1dd2d]133|200[/hv] Hint: How do you think this hand will play opposite short diamonds? Answer: If you said "Partner has an opening hand and I have 13 points counting length, so I should bid 4H", kudos to you if you are a beginner. That's a much better bid than the 2H advance I see so often in classes. Did you consider notrump? Partner is likely short in diamonds and it's better to get a ruffing trick or two with hearts trump than to have one trick in notrump. Think of the play: LHO leads a diamond, you win cheaply, but if RHO can get in, the defenders cash the entire diamond suit. Sometimes RHO has the DA and can win it and return a diamond and your stopper will be gone right away, making both opponents dangerous. In general, play your eight-card major suit fits in that suit, not in notrump. So if you have an opening hand with hearts, and I want you to choose hearts as trump, why am I balking at 4H? Again, it's judgment on how I value this hand. [Partner has already counted 3 points for a singleton diamond or maybe 1 point for a doubleton diamond; and my DK and DJ are almost worthless. Remember that partner is looking for high cards in clubs, hearts, and spades, and I have 4 points in diamonds that even if my diamonds take a trick, it was likely a trick I could have gotten anyway by trumping a diamond if it were a small diamond. However, there's a good chance that opener has the D-AQ and my holding is virtually identical to three small diamonds. Based on the bidding, I don't think this hand is worth the 13 points that I would have counted for it if I was the dealer. However, the diamonds are worth a teeny amount and I think the hand is worth a jump to 3H.] [hv=pc=n&s=sk764haqt2da86c95&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1dd2d]133|200[/hv] Hint: Do you know what should be trump? If not, how could you find out, considering that most of your advances would be non-forcing? Answer: Here, you have enough for game for sure. You could guess 4H, 4S, or 3NT. Given that both my opponents bid diamonds and know to lead them, that would be my last choice; even playing in a 4-3 fit and trumping a diamond in dummy is better than playing 3NT where the opponents can run their diamonds once they set them up. However, it would be better to play in the major suit that partner has four cards in. You might think that would be difficult, seeing as 2H, 2S, 3H, 3S, 4H, and 4S are all non-forcing bids and partner would pass any of them with 3-card support and a dead minimum double. Is there any call that would be forcing? Think of a call that could never mean that you wanted to play the contract that you are bidding. If you aren't coming up with it, think harder. Is there any suit you couldn't possibly want to declare on this auction, regardless of what your hand is? You would never want to declare this hand in diamonds. So a bid of 3D can't possibly suggest that you want to play in 3D; after all, you can defend 2D simply by passing. 3D has been chosen by the experts to make a forcing bid; to say that you are in doubt about the final contract (usually between the two majors or between one major and notrump.) This 3D bid is standard bridge and everybody that has "advanced" or higher marked on their profile should know it (most "intermediate" players know it too, I would guess.) Partner will likely bid a four-card major and you will raise to game with this hand. You use it when you need it. On Hand 1, you didn't need it - if you used good judgment and realized your hand was worth bidding a game, you knew hearts were going to be trump, so you bid 4H - there was no reason to go through 3D. Here, you have a very good reason, that being that you don't know what, if anything, should be trump.

If I'm playing 3NT and I play two top diamonds and find that West had a singleton, that gives West 12 empty spaces to East's 10; meaning that each pertinent card (SA, SQ, CQ) is a 6:5 favorite to be in West. Why wouldn't I want to play for a 6-5 favorite (CQ in West)...OOOH NEVER MIND THE ODDS - If West showed exactly 4 hearts by the lead and a singleton diamond, this is a no-brainer; West is 4414 making West a 2:1 favorite to hold the CQ! It would truly be a sad play to play spades instead of clubs. Now, let's say that West shows exactly four hearts again and diamonds are 2-2. While you don't know the club and spade distribution, you can essentially rule out West having 5 (didn't lead them) but you can't rule out East having 5; so if both players are 4423, it doesn't matter who you play for what card but if West is 3424 and East is 5422, playing West for CQ is a 2:1 favorite while playing East for a specific spade honor is 5:3, again playing clubs is the winner if only making the contract matters. Of course, if the auction eliminated a minor suit lead, sometimes that heart lead is from a three card suit! You might lead a heart from Qxx rather than a spade from Axxx; but when you find 2-2 diamonds, this again makes West a 2:1 favorite to hold the CQ. It gets more interesting if you find West with 3 diamonds after hearts are assumed to be 4:4 and spades are assumed to be at least 4 with East. For now, East could hold 5 spades and clubs could be 3-3. Now it seems like the spade finesse is a better shot. I would lead to the jack, as West is more likely to have chosen a spade from Qxxx than Axxx (given that the lead was the H2, West doesn't have a sequence of honors to lead from, and might have chosen a spade from Qxxx but less likely from Axxx.) EDIT to add: Beginners, don't read this at the risk of being confused! When West is "proven" to be 4414, there could be some restricted choice issues if West is either an expert who would always choose a heart over any 4-card spade holding headed by the ace; or against a new player who "always leads 4th from the longest and strongest but even with that, I think it's hard to get above the 2:1 odds offered in the club suit.

I don't consider your criticism unduly harsh. I've already misplayed this hand twice - you're just giving me an indication of just how careful I should be, and that giving my analysis in the time I would normally play the hand at a bridge table (or here on BBO without being booted by the host!) is unwise.

Good catch! That shows the problem with analyzing a hand too quickly. In fact I have to be far more careful that I was. First, I need to draw only one trump. Second, when ruffing the third club, I must ruff high. You'll see why in a minute. Third, when they make me ruff the heart, I must lead a spade now. This will allow me to trump the third spade. However, they might not make me ruff a heart; they might lead a trump. Now if trumps are 3-1, they can get in with their spade and lead the last trump, which will prevent me from trumping the last spade. However, if I still have the D6 in hand, I can win the first trump with the D8! That will give me an the extra trump entry to enjoy the last club. T1: heart lead. Win the ace. T2: High trump. T3: CK. T4: C to CA. T5. C ruff WITH D10. Dang it, they don't split! T6. Heart. T7. The opponents return a trump. I cleverly win on the board; if I don't, trumps split 2-2 and I'll be able to trump the heart and the spade, and make 5 by getting the spade finesse right. T8. Finesse the spade. Say I play the SJ and lose to the ace. T9. Back comes another diamond. Bye bye two ruffs! But I can win this one on the board too. T10. Ruff the club good with my last trump. T11. Cash the good spade; and board is high with a trump to get there! Let's try this again with them tapping dummy. T1: heart lead. Win the ace. T2: High trump. T3: CK. T4: C to CA. T5. C ruff WITH D10. Dang it, they don't split! T6. Heart. T7. The opponents return a HEART to tap dummy. T8. I must lead a spade now to finesse. Note that I am threatening to trump a spade for trick 11. A trump lead can be won cheaply in dummy (else trumps are 2-2 and I simply ruff my spade) and I can set up a club trick, using a high trump to get there to enjoy it. Alternatively, depending on overruff scenarios, I might just be able to trump the spade (I think setting up the club is surer.) I think my roughly 66% figure is still good though, I just need to play it less like a mouse in a maze and more like a bridge player.

Hi - these problems should be very easy for experienced players but a beginner needs to think about the right things in an auction. If you are a beginner and get them wrong, don't feel too bad as long as you understand the rationale for the answers. I'll provide the answers later but I'll put a hint as a spoiler. Try to solve the problem without the spoiler. Also, let me know if you would be interested in seeing more of these from time to time. Assume you are playing standard bridge (SAYC) and nobody is vulnerable. Some background: When your partner makes a takeout double, he can handle anything you bid. Except in the rare event where partner changes strain after your takeout double, which shows a hand too good to overcall (probably 18+ in a suit; 19+ in notrump), your partner should have support for each of the unbid suits (at least 3 cards) and usually has shortness in the suit opened. You, as advancer, have two jobs. You should choose the trump suit, which is any suit except the opponent's opened suit, preferring a major suit, and you should show your strength. We teach beginners that you should jump one level with 11-12 and bid game with 13 (both of these are non-forcing) to keep the ranges consistent with the medium and maximum responding ranges. However, 0-10 is too wide of a range for a non-jump bid and most experts reduce the strength needed to jump to about 9. While you should take the double out even with nothing since letting the opponent play in their one-level contract doubled with many overtricks would be a disaster, if the next player bids, you are "off the hook" and can pass with a bad hand. Bidding typically shows a hand that would have responded to a one-bid. [hv=pc=n&s=s62hkqj63d863ca74&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1dd2d]133|200[/hv] [hv=pc=n&s=sj6hkq653dkj4cq72&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1dd2d]133|200[/hv] [hv=pc=n&s=sk764haqt2da86c95&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1dd2d]133|200[/hv]

This is the statement I was responding to. I don't doubt that it's just as good that it's just as good to bid 3NT over 1NT; in fact, I said I would probably do that myself, given that sometimes East has a double of 2S which will make any game unmakeable. However, if these two hands are in a bidding challenge which is scored by IMPs, I would have to think that 5D would get the higher score. I'm not going to argue that 3NT doesn't get as many IMPs on average in practice; given that the defense has to defend against 1NT-3NT or against 5D in an informative (to the defense) auction. But I will argue against the prospects of 3NT on a heart lead versus 5D on a heart lead in IMPs. But essentially we mostly agree.

It isn't? Which of my following calculations is wrong? 3NT: Slightly better than 50% because I have to find the CQ and can find out a little bit about the opponents' hands before doing that. 5D: Win the HA, draw 2 trump, play CK, CA, C ruff. If the queen falls, draw the third trump in dummy, cash two clubs discarding hearts, take the spade finesse for an overtrick. If I lose the spade finesse, I take 5D, 4C, the HA, one spade ruff. If the CQ hasn't dropped, give up a heart. Assume they lead a third heart to take away a dummy entry. Ruff a club (making dummy's 5th club good), draw trump ending in dummy, cash the fifth club, lead a spade. So a close approximation is that you need either 3-1 or better diamonds, plus either 3-3 clubs or 4-2 clubs and a spade finesse. If diamonds are 4-0 you find out early enough to trump two cards in dummy and still need the spade finesse (you can probably play around in clubs but the risk of an early ruff might outweigh the advantage to doing that.) D 4-0 10% I make with a spade finesse - 5% make 5% down D 3-1 or 2-2 90% (I make with: 3-3 clubs (36%) or 4-2 clubs with the queen doubleton (16%) or other 4-2 clubs with a winning spade finesse (16%) = 68%) 90% * 68% = ~61% total odds of making 5D on a heart lead: about 66%

That is a very good question in light of the fact that bridge teachers all over the country are telling students that you virtually shouldn't ever play 5C or 5D when 3NT is a viable option. I have been guilty of that myself, and with good reason. For most of the players that I teach, it is good advice; because it is rare that one of them will have the judgment to tell them that 5 of a minor is better than 3NT. The smartaleck will tell you that they're playing 5D because it's a better contract. If they lead a heart (not unlikely), you have 8 top tricks and if you misguess the CQ, you will lose at least three hearts, the SA, and the CQ and go down. [More advanced: In matchpoints, you want to play 3NT which will make overtricks on a spade lead or if you get the CQ right. You can increase your chances by playing 2 diamonds, keeping diamond entries everywhere, and playing the person who has a singleton diamond, if either, for the CQ.] 5D is theoretically cold, and even when misplayed by someone like me (those who can't teach), still has a 75% chance of making. Now let's look at the auction. South bids 1NT and North is apparently bidding minor suit Stayman. Why didn't North just raise to 3NT? I admit that I may have done that (I'd rather play 3NT without giving East the opportunity to double for a spade lead, if that's possible, and I'm a firm believer that one shouldn't use a convention if one doesn't need it), but here North clairvoyantly determined that 5 of a minor might be better than 3NT - either major could present a problem in 3NT. This turns out to have been spot on, as we will see. South admits to having four diamonds, and North bids 3NT, saying "I was going to bid 3NT all along, but I wanted to show you that I have an issue with the majors; if you do too, we should probably not play 3NT." North might also have mild slam aspirations. South now knows that North doesn't have many cards in the majors, and this concerns South who has three small hearts. South can easily see losing five hearts or four hearts and an ace. South does have an excellent hand for diamond play - an extra trump, an awesome fitting CK, and probably the SK isn't worthless. It's pretty nice to have 14 working HCP out of 15 opposite partner's distribution So nice, in fact, that in case partner did have slam aspirations, South made a control bid in clubs - apparently this N-S pair shows second round controls right away. Make no mistake, this pair is forced to game once North bids 3NT, so if North bid 4D, that would be stronger than 5D, and North has no slam aspirations whatsoever, so North signs off in 5D. Given that they had methods that worked very well for this deal, I thought the N-S bidding was quite good. It could have backfired in two ways I can think of - if South had a hand such that 3NT was the only option, East might double 2S and get the only lead to scuttle 3NT when 1NT-3NT would have made on a heart lead, and the other is this: You are on lead against 1NT P 2S* P 2NT P 3NT with: S - 9 4 3 H - 9 4 3 D - K 8 5 C - 10 9 8 7 * 2S by this pair = minor suit Stayman You have heard dummy look for a minor suit so probably dummy has both minors and you are leading a major hoping to hit partner's suit. Is it spades or hearts? Think about it before making your lead.

Ah, that's an interesting question. To pass, I would need an agreement that the double was intended for penalty, and since I have D-Axx, partner is doubling on speculation that the cards lie badly for declarer rather than on diamonds. What would make partner think that? Usually passing a 2D response to Stayman indicates a bad hand with short clubs. Club values in partner's hand would be poorly placed for two reasons: they could be finessed, or they could be trumped. So I suspect partner has poor clubs. Partner probably expects you to lead a trump so that your clubs won't get trumped. Surprise! You don't have much in clubs and know that defense won't work. On this lead, declarer will happily draw trump and run 4 or 5 club tricks. (Of course, they could be on a 4-2 diamond fit with declarer having strong clubs.) Instead I would try to get tricks in the other suits before they go off on clubs, so I would lead a heart.

If partner is making a takeout double of diamonds (and I think he is), and I have D-Axx, it wouldn't even occur to me that we might be in trouble; I suspect that 2H is a great contract.

Just so there is no confusion, I said you should assume partner to have at most 14 average points.

There goes well with the saying that invitations at bridge should be like invitations to a party: invite seldom, accept often.

Answers: I will put the material for more advanced novices in brackets and blue like: [this is material a beginner might not understand now] [hv=pc=n&s=skqhk7543dt873c95&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1hp1np]133|200[/hv] Hint: Do you have a game? If not, what is your safest place to play? Answer: You do not have the strength for game, and want to play in your safest spot. If you have an eight-card fit, you want to play there. Since the only time partner should open 1D with three diamonds is when he has two 4-card majors, which he doesn't have when he doesn't raise hearts, you have an 8-card diamond fit and 2D is likely to make. 2H might be in trouble opposite two small hearts and 1NT could have problems considering the shortness in the black suits. [The problem specified IMPs. If you were playing matchpoint pairs, and needed a decent score, you might pass 1NT or bid 2H hoping to make it for a higher score, but in IMPs you want to be in the partscore which makes most often. That would be your guaranteed 8-card fit.] [hv=pc=n&s=sqj4hqj75dj63ckj5&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1hp1np]133|200[/hv] Hint:How likely are you to be able to make a game? Answer: I don't think there is any doubt that we want to play in notrump with our 3-4-3-3 distribution opposite a balanced hand. The only question is how high. When I learned bridge, it was suggested that you bid game on 26 combined points. Now, the suggested number is 25, and that includes length points! The assumption is that declarer is going to play better than the defenders who don't see each other's cards, but normally, if you play well, 25 points will give you about a 50% chance to make a game. Partner, who is opening 1NT on 15-17 (and should be opening 1NT with 14 and a decent 5-card suit which plays like 15 points) should not have more than 14 average points. You have 11. Let's assume our hand is really worth 11 points for a moment. You're not going to bid a game yourself, so let's look at the ramifications of inviting a game. When partner has 14 points, he will bid a game, and you'll have a 50% chance of making it, so there isn't much difference in expectation between passing and inviting. The difference comes when partner does not accept. You are playing in 2NT if you invite, or 1NT if you do not invite. Some of the time, partner is not going to take eight tricks, so there is an advantage in passing 1NT. There is also the possibility that partner accepts on a "good" 13 and you will go down more often than not. So even if you value this hand at 11 points, and most beginners should because that is what they have been taught, passing is the wiser choice. [I stated non-vulnerable. Vulnerable at IMPS you can be more aggressive since you gain 10 IMPs for bidding a vulnerable game and make it versus losing only 6 IMPs for going down, assuming you go down only one. However, the IMP odds are almost even non-vulnerable, and there is no guarantee you're going down just one, as we will see.] Now, this hand worth 11 points? How does it stack up against other 11-point hands? First, it's nice to have some places to develop tricks. Your 4-3-3-3 hand has only one four card suit to develop where a 4-4-3-2 hand would have two possible "long" suits. One bad. This hand doesn't have 10's or 9's which take tricks sometimes but do not count in the point count. Another bad. Now, the kicker. Even though you and partner don't have a long suit, nothing says that the opponents don't, and the opening leader is going to try to set up his long suit. It will take him a while to set it up, but you have no aces and one king, which means that the opponents probably are going to get in a lot of times to establish and run their long suit. Even if their "long" suit is only four cards, your lack of aces and kings makes it quite likely that your opponents are going to score two tricks in their long suit and three tricks in outside aces and kings. [Aces and kings are undervalued in the 4-3-2-1 point count while queens and jacks are overvalued. We use 4-3-2-1 because it's a lot easier than using 4.3-3.1-1.7-0.9 (or some facsimile) but be aware that hands with lots of queens and jacks aren't worth their full point count value. This hand is the almost the worst 11 point hand imaginable and is worse than most 10 point hands.] Think of the play in notrump. The opponents are working on their long suit and your partner is presumably working on diamonds and/or hearts. Somewhere along the line, your partner is going to need to take his diamond and heart tricks and have enough aces and kings outside to make the total nine, before the opponents get five tricks. When you are providing no aces and one king, that's not likely to happen. You should pass 1NT and hope partner makes it! If you get nothing out of this example other than resolving close decisions aggressively with aces and kings and timidly with queens and jacks, you will have gained. I do not think this example is close to an invitation, but you might, and there are so many factors telling you to be pessimistic against no factors telling you to be optimistic. Using any one of those factors would have given you the correct result. [hv=pc=n&s=sa6hj97542dk4caj2&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1hp1np]133|200[/hv] Hint: Do you have a game? Do you have a fit? Where do you want to play? Answer: You have a game. Do you think partner might have a singleton heart? Partner could have bid 1S, 2C, or 2D with a minimum unbalanced hand, so partner should definitely have two hearts. You have an eight-card trump fit. Having an eight-card trump fit generally is worth at least a trick, so you want to play in hearts. You have enough for game but can't have enough for slam, so bid what you think you can make, 4H. 3H would be invitational in most of the systems I know and you don't want to play below game. If you play any gadgets, there is no reason to use them here; you know the level, you know the strain, just bid the final contract. Bad things can happen when you use a gadget for no reason - partner might forget and pass, or might think you have a reason to use the gadget and that the reason is you're making a slam try, making him bid again after you try to sign off in 4H later. [I would bid 4H in matchpoints also despite the 10 point bonus for making the same number of tricks in 3NT. Let's think about the play. I have a wretched heart suit. In all likelihood, partner is going to need to set up my hearts in notrump and will have to give up the lead several times to do that. This works fine if the opponents are docile and helpful, but most of the time the opponents are working on their own long suit, and if you give up the lead often enough, they are going to take some small cards in that suit. If hearts are trump, they aren't taking any small cards in their long suit because you will trump. Even if I had 3 heart losers, I would make 4H if that's all I lost; whereas in 3NT, the opponents will get those 3 hearts plus at least one winner in the suit they led, giving me +400 instead of +420. Possibly more than one winner, making 4H a big winner at IMPs.]

I don't think that even the OP would bid 1H-4H. A friend who has been here long enough to get the client says that he sometimes checks the hands that he makes up for classes by making sure that some obscure line doesn't let the wrong contract make, which would embarrass him in class. He uses a Bridge Movie (someday I'll figure out what that is, but I don't think I can do it anyway with the browser version) to create the hand and then uses the GIB analysis to look for snags in his teaching deal. Do you think he would key in 1H-1S-2D-2H-2NT-3D-3H-4H if that is the auction he expects? Of course not! He has North open 4H, an absolutely absurd bid, so he can test the play sooner. I am giving the OP the benefit of the doubt and guessing he did something similar. Yes, all sane pairs would get to 3NT, but for the purposes of his argument, he wanted the pair in 4H. Mind you, he could have saved keystrokes by having the auction be a 4H opening bid rather than 1H-4H. Maybe it didn't occur to him. Then on the second one, he might have realized that people would get hung up on the bidding (and oh was he right!) so he decided to put in more rounds? We all agree that both auctions are ridiculous. He either (1) already knew that but needed to get the contract into a trump suit to show his point, or (2) didn't know it but is fully aware of it now. I hope that in case (1) he realizes that he has to choose his examples more carefully, OR just state the contract; which I'm not sure the hand diagram widget will let you do here, or in (2) will learn some basic bidding so that his examples will be consistent with bridge reality. For he is trying to make some general hand evaluation points, and his discussion is getting derailed by a discussion on how horrible his auctions are. Jogs, I don't mean to take away from your point that his auctions "need work" to put it charitably. You made a statement which I thought was misleading and I corrected it, however I totally agree with you that "nearly every reasonable pair would bid 1H-1S-1NT-3NT" is much closer to the truth than that some pairs would bid 1H-4H. You should note that I am not trying to flame you; I did change your 2NT typo to 1NT when quoting you. However, I'm still trying out if the OP is someone who has some reasonable points to make (or thinks he does) or is just a troll. At this point, I'm leaning toward the former, but I really question whether he has the bridge knowledge to make the points he's trying to make. On the other hand, if I assume he is legitimately put forth an idea, I'm not going to be the one to discourage it. However, if he thinks that 1H-4H is an auction that bridge players might have, I would strongly advise him to pick up a book on beginning bridge. The problem is that I don't know if that's true or if he just was trying to save time, and ironically he ended up derailing his thread.

I am somewhat surprised that 7 out of 22 people want to see this statistic. Do those 7 all think it's going to give them an idea of skill level, or do they have some other reason for voting yes (like wanting faster games)?

Not sure. Many pairs raise as opener on 3 cards when they have a side worthless doubleton. While I prefer 1NT myself, there are pairs that would bid 1H-1S-2S-3NT. The final call caters to opener having 3-card support, and opener would correct to 4S with 4. Similarly the second auction would go 1D-1S-2S-3NT for pairs favoring these 3-card raises; most pairs would bid 1D-1S-1NT-3NT. Now, if the OP wants to make the point that extra points are required for a 7-card fit; he has planted a seed. Here, let me help you out. [hv=pc=n&s=sq83hak75dq762c64&w=s64ht843d84cajt98&n=sak92hq6dkjt93cq2&e=sjt75hj92da5ck753&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1hp1sp3dppp]399|300[/hv] Note that N-S have 27 HCP here but in light of South's 3D bid rather than 2NT, North assumes that either clubs aren't stopped or that a club lead, indicated by the auction, will scuttle 3NT even if South has a club card, so South makes a reasonable decision to pass 3D. At some tables, North will open 1NT and South will be 2C, Stayman, doubled by West. Assuming that the pair has tools to stay out of 3NT without a club stopper, South might take a reasonable shot to play in a 4-3 spade fit to score a game bonus. As you can see, you need 3-3 spades and no diamond ruff. 4S is a horrible game despite 27 points. If N-S had one more spade and one less diamond, 4S would make with 3-2 spades and the diamond ruff would be a lot less likely. I presume that this was the point that bridgepali was trying to make.

There is one useful statistic that is already recorded that may give an idea of enjoyment but I can't see it either because (a) I am too new, (b) I can't use the client, or © I'm ignorant of ow to see the information. That factor is board completion rate. I can see my own - it is 99% (must be rounded down as I have played over 200 hands and left once) and the one time is a time when my partner on defense asked for an undo 25 times and was refused 25 times and left, and I didn't relish the opportunity to finish defending the hand with someone who knew nothing about the early defense (I asked for a redeal several times and was likewise refused; we were headed for a wonderful score if my partner remained someone who knew the deal but were probably getting an awful score with someone who knew nothing about the hand - something the refusing player probably knew and was just being despicable when not redealing. Essentially I left because I thought his actions were almost cheating.) In any event, I don't know if I can see the completion rate for others, if someone completes 60% of their deals, it means they are leaving at the first sign of trouble, like if you misguess a finesse, or even if an opponent annoys them, leaving you again to defend the last half of a hand with someone that doesn't know the early defense. Several pieces of **** avoid reducing their board completion rate by always hosting and booting their partners that misguess a finesse or their opponent that takes more than a second to play a card, so even this statistic is dubious, unless it's combined with a statistic about booting other players from his table. There is other questionably useful information that others can see but I haven't figured out how to see it. Apparently others can see my IMPs per hand for both the last 50 deals and for the last month. I have not figured out how to see that yet, and wouldn't be surprised if I can't because the client is not available to me. However, I am sure others can see it because someone posted that I had an impressive IMP ratio. TBH it was greatly inflated because I was trying everything including playing a lot in the relaxed room, where the opponents were twice as likely to have a 14-IMP disaster than partner. Full disclosure: I'm not an awesome player :) Even if I got that information, I don't think it would be that useful. For example, I can run my IMP ratio up by playing in the relaxed room a lot. Now I'm playing mostly team matches; the competition is a little better so my scores are a lot less. I also am picking up partners there which hurts my score. If I play a lot with the same person and we make agreements, my scores will increase again. I'm the same player in every situation but my IMP ratios are all over the place. I imagine the same is true for everybody else, not to mention that players who play against strong opponents a lot are going to appear to be a lot less skillful than they are.

Hi - these problems should be very easy for experienced players but a beginner needs to think about the right things in an auction. If you are a beginner and get them wrong, don't feel too bad as long as you understand the rationale for the answers. I'll provide the answers later but I'll put a hint as a spoiler. Try to solve the problem without the spoiler. Also, let me know if you would be interested in seeing more of these from time to time. Assume you are playing standard bridge (SAYC), 15-17 point 1NT opener, IMPS, and nobody is vulnerable. [hv=pc=n&s=skqhk7543dt873c95&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1hp1np]133|200[/hv] [hv=pc=n&s=sqj4hqj75dj63ckj5&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1hp1np]133|200[/hv] [hv=pc=n&s=sa6hj97542dk4caj2&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1hp1np]133|200[/hv]

This whole discussion brings up an interesting point: the OP wants a percentage of claims to see how good the player is? 1. There are players who have played for many years that might be able to claim accurately but they are wretched bidders, so bad that there is little correlation to what they are bidding and the cards they hold. 2. Let's say that you could determine the skill level of the player. That's not all that should matter to your enjoyment. I have played with many players here that are good but are not at all fun to play with - they are very critical about many bids and plays and not always right despite their skill, and while they are taking time to explain what you did "wrong", the opponents are griping about your partner slowing down the game (and you too if you respond.) Not all, but most of the players I have found enjoyable to play with here are weaker players than I am (I think.) I might do less well in the IMP score than I would with an arrogant partner that deserves his "expert" rating, but we might play somewhat the same system, and any discussion is constructive (usually either he or I will way "where could I have improved the auction"?) Quite frankly, a partner who interprets bids and defensive carding the same way I do but fails to make a hand on a baby squeeze that I would find in my sleep is close to an ideal partner, because the parts where we are communicating go swimmingly. Do the players who want to know others' skill levels want to find weak opponents so they can run up their IMP score and look better than they are? To me, that's not much fun. The games I enjoy the most are where the opponents are decent. I can see someone using skill level as a starting point to exclude certain players but in the long run, if you want to find partners that you really mesh well with, you're going to have to keep trying people until you find some you like. That's what I'm doing, and it's an interesting road. However, I am currently following some players marked as "Intermediate" because I enjoy playing with them.

Draw 3 trump, CK, CA, run CJ pitching a heart. Works if East has the CQ or if I get spades right.

I have made several bad claims on purpose to save time. I'm in 4S on a heart lead encouraged. I know the opponents are taking 2 hearts, then I'm drawing trump and taking the diamond finesse. I will claim 5 immediately and say Please reject if East has the DK - I'm taking the finesse. If it's rejected, I will actually draw trump and take the finesse since once in a while it will get rejected even when West holds the DK either because they don't see it or because they are hoping I'll claim 4. Since I'm doing most of my play in team matches nowdays, half of these "conditional" claims are getting accepted and on we go to the next hand instead of that boring one we were on. You might say that it might save time just to draw the trump. That would be true if nobody had to discard; but someone might take some time to ponder their discard(s) when it doesn't matter, why make him do that? This way, even if the finesse is off, he can see my hand and can discard quickly.

I voted no for a different reason. If people think that claiming is a mark of a good player, they will frequently claim or concede at trick 13 to run up their claim record.

Yes. But not until after the game :)

OK, lots to discuss in this auction. 1S. Good bid! (2H) 2NT. OK, I just hate 2NT as showing spade support; what do you do with a random 11-count with heart stoppers, and no spade fit? 3C or 3D virtually forces to game. However, given that it shows 4-card spade support, I wouldn't do it. If you think 2NT shows 3-card spade support, what does 1S (2H) 3H show? But if your system says that 2NT shows 3 card spade support and either GF or invitational values, then I can't fault that bid, only players who would make this agreement. (4H) 4S. No. Your partner apparently bid a Jacoby 2NT or the like. You have a tremendous 4-loser hand. Since pass here is forcing (I'm assuming South showed substantial values with 2NT), and pass followed by a pull of a double is a strong action, I would choose it. If I didn't trust partner to respect my forcing pass, I might bid 5S or 5H depending on my earlier experiences with this partner. (P) 4NT. If I showed a GF hand with three spades and partner bid 4S, I would respect his decision. The fact that slam is cold is no excuse for not passing. South has an unremarkable opening hand with terrible support and queen doubleton in the opponents' suit. 4NT says: Partner, I heard you bid 4S but I totally don't respect your judgment and am willing to bet you screwed up and get a terrible result when you bid the hand normally. (I know this sounds really arrogant but it's one of my pet peeves when partner just assumes that I don't know what I'm doing and we get a zero because I bid normally. It will be much better for your partnership if South trusts North's 4S call and passes, and then explains nicely after the game that South thought North's 4S bid was an attempt to sign off. On the other hand, if North realizes that South made a call that can only work if North messed up, this partnership is in serious trouble unless they can agree they aren't going to do this anymore.) Also, I would write reams on the problems of using Blackwood with a useless doubleton - if North shows that one ace (or one key card) is missing, South won't know whether to bid slam or not - this of course assuming that South thinks there is enough strength for a slam. (5H) Double. I can only imagine that North was playing some stolen bid convention showing either two key cards or two aces (counting the heart void as an ace, usually a mistake but not harmful on this deal.) Not surprisingly, South wasn't on the same page. (P) Pass. Seems like a reasonable guess to me. I apologize if I seem unduly harsh here. It is not a sin for intermediate players to bid badly. It sounds like N-S were more than a casual partnership, so if they can learn from their errors on this deal, it will have been worth it. The sad thing is that if South had guessed to bid 6S instead of passing the double (I'm not sure what would possess him to do that, but let's just say it happened), we would have never heard about the deal and neither partner would have realized that there was room for improvement.

In standard bidding or SAYC, Stephen Tu is completely correct and said it very well.