Kaitlyn S

I'm not sure I want to double even seeing both defenders' hands! I think the only thing that changes for me seeing both hands is that I table a trump instead of the DJ.

Since 3S is forcing over 1D-1S-3D, what is wrong with it and what would you prefer West bid instead? I wouldn't bid 3S with anything less in spades but opener can easily have three spades or a doubleton honor and jump to 3D. And 4S will often be the best spot even opposite two small.

East has a 5 loser hand (4 1/2 when adjusted for aces/queens.) East can make a slam oppositeJxxx, xx, Axx, QJzx or Jxxxx, Qxxx, Qx, Ax*, and yet both of these hands have an easy pass after opener rebids 2D. Sure, the hand could be a misfit because partner responded 1S, but partner hasn't denied some diamonds so I can't see how just bidding 2D is enough. * I'm waiting to hear how the defenders are going to lead DA and another trump against 6D from Axxx, xxxx, Ax, xxx or KQxx, xxxx, Ax, xxx.

With the two hands you've given, 6D is best. However, why can't partner hold either of these? S-Axxx H-Axxx D-AJx C-Jx or S-Axx H-Axxx D-Axxx C-xx In the second one I clearly want to be in 7D. In the first one, 7NT gets the top score in Challenge the Champs but 7D is respectable.

In old fashioned Goren, redouble was the only call with 10+ so the answers are 2C, not forcing, and redouble. I tend to play that a new suit is forcing only on the one level after a double, so my answers would be the same as the old-timers.

Yes. I could now rejoin the ACBL and play as a professional in the novice game! :D

Everybody wants to quote this statement and I am no exception. The organizations that want to promote bridge would not serve their interests with a true rating system. Let's look at USCF and ACBL. USCF: you play chess. You play more, you get better. Your rating goes up. Cool. ACBL: Lets assume they implement a true ranking system. Would I go and mentor a friend that is a newer player if it means my rating goes down? Me, if I was still playing in the ACBL, maybe yes, but most people, no. Would I try a new partnership if I cared about my rating? New partnerships have results that tend to be worse than either of the players in an old partnership, so new partnerships that may blossom and become tournament regulars just don't happen. Say I have this one partner that I do well with but he's getting on in years and can only play a couple of games per month. However, we have a great partnership and understand each other so well, so if I play with anyone else, my rating will go down. The ACBL wants people to go out and play with many different partnerships as many times as possible and to go to tournaments as often as possible even if your favorite partners aren't available, and they certainly want people to go out and play with new players, especially young ones that they can hook for 60 years. Putting in an ELO-type system would be an disincentive to players to do exactly what the ACBL wants them to do.

I don't agree. If I take the first available seat, my partner might play ACOL or the Polish Club (he won't enjoy seeing me either.) If I click on the players' names, I can see their profiles and find a partner that plays something that I also play.

With 2-1 trumps I should be able to trump all my hearts and lose only a club and a diamond. Leading a diamond hoping to get rid of a club loser shouldn't work. I think your only legitimate chance to make 6 is to hope that RHO started with H-QJ or H-QJx so that you can discard all three of dummy's clubs on your hearts and trump your club loser.

With 2-1 trumps I should be able to trump all my hearts and lose only a club and a diamond. Leading a diamond hoping to get rid of a club loser shouldn't work. I think your only legitimate chance to make 6 is to hope that RHO started with H-QJ or H-QJx so that you can discard all three of dummy's clubs on your hearts and trump your club loser.

With the assumption that the 2C response is "SAYC" showing at least 11 (some might say 10), I would say that both 3D and pass by opener are forcing. The way people float in nowdays, giving up a cooperative penalty double of 2S to create a forcing bid seems wrong. By cooperative penalty, I mean responder defends 2S doubled unless he has a heart fit, is really short in spades, or has a ton of clubs.

Your players know what a reverse is? Your field isn't that weak then :D I love this discussion only because on another thread someone told me I should go out and play some live bridge to improve my game. And those auctions I was talking about? Beginner to low intermediate? From my limited experience you lead a charmed life on BBO if the advanced players and experts (and even a couple of World Class players) wouldn't have exactly these auctions. I have seen such atrocities committed routinely by experts in the Competitive Team Matches on this site. I've played several matches in the last couple of days and the "beginning to low intermediate" bidding has been present at my table in all but two of them. What's amazing to me is that I had a match where one seat was a revolving door of experts (I think 4 different advanced/experts in an 8 board match) and he every one of them made bidding errors that were covered in an Introduction to Bridge CD that a friend had.

By "weak field" I presume you mean weak players Why would you expect weak players to reach 3NT with a singleton in each hand? The only way a weak pair might get to 3NT that I can think of is 1D-1S-3NT or maybe 1D-1S-2NT-3NT. If you expect the field to bid 1D-1H-3C-3D-3H-3NT or 1D-1H-3C-3NT or 1D-1H-2C-2D-2H (or 3H)-3NT then your idea of a weak field is a heck of a lot better than mine. Personally I would expect most of the field, if it's truly weak, to be in 5D, drawing 3 rounds of trump as soon as they get the chance. And I wouldn't be at all surprised if the auction started 1D-1H-3D at a lot of tables (of course some will start 1D-2D.) So if they're in 5D pulling a lot of trumps, they have 9 tricks plus whatever the defense gives them.

So, a red suit is a logical lead. Leading a suit with an ace without the king isn't logical unless something in the bidding says tricks are going away (not this auction!) So half the time the leader holds the HA and a diamond is the most logical lead from any holding and the other half it's a tossup. So much of the time leader is leading a diamond regardless of his holding. I would play diamonds hoping to discard the club. If the bidding had gone something like 1S-2D-2H-2S-3H-4S, now the leader risks seeing the defensive club tricks going on dummy's diamond suit with a passive diamond lead, so I would suspect a singleton diamond. I've already told you more than I know so if this is baffling, don't worry - read it again in a few months and it may make more sense.

duplicate post

Think of it this way. The reason 2NT shows 11-12ish when partner could be minimum is that two minimum hands want to try to stay below 2NT (unless they have a fit and the opponents push them.) Note that 2NT isn't forcing. Over the reverse, 2NT isn't forcing either. What does your partner have? You don't need very much to have enough for game. If you bid 2NT non-forcing, you are saying you don't have enough to make game opposite a minimum reverse.

Did you bid diamonds?

What if your plan was to double and correct clubs to diamonds showing a huge spade-diamond hand? Partner doubling 3H to stop you from bidding 4D now would be calamitous - with the big club fit the other way, doubling 3H could give you -930 instead of +1370. I think I've agreed with just about everything MrAce has said this thread.

Sadly, if you polled the USA's ten million bridge players, you would probably find at least 10,000 that say 2S isn't forcing there. Of course, calling them "bridge players" might be a stretch...

A call is forcing if (a) the call is in a known ridiculous contract (such as a cuebid or Blackwood) or (b) the side could have game (or slam if the bid is a game bid) and only partner knows that. As North has only passed, and South didn't open with a forcing opening, South can't need another bid to make sure N-S get to game opposite nothing. (a) also is false; we all think 3C shows clubs. I'm not sure how 3C can be taken as forcing.

Answer: You are still minimum and don't want to get higher than 2S in case partner is minimum. However, partner might have as much as 18 points so it would nice to let him make a game try which you will accept if partner does have that much. You know you have 7 diamonds between you and you also have 7 hearts between you. However, passing 2D won't let your partner make a game try and bidding 2H will. If partner has AJ4, A10654, AQJ5, 3, he can bid 2S in case you have 5, and you'll happily bid 4S. (If you had the 6-point response, you could just pass 2S since partner does not have a maximum - he didn't jump shift.) If partner had 4, A654332, AQJ5, A7, he can bid 3H, non-forcing, and you will accept by bidding 4H. His hand got better when you showed that you had two hearts. If partner had 4, QJ1095, AQ65, AK3, he can try for game by bidding 2NT and you'll raise to 3NT. If partner has the normal minimum like 4, QJ1095, A865, KQJ, he'll just pass and play in 2H. Of course, if you pass 2D, partner will play in 2D with any of those hands, which is the whole point of bidding 2H.

I prefer double to 3C since if I bid 3C I expect to play 3C. Doubling and correcting 3D to 3S probably shows almost this much. I bid 3S over 3H. That doesn't seem that painful. Did partner not think you were this good for that sequence?

If partner passes and you're cold for five, it doesn't matter that partner knows you could hold this hand type because he's going to play you for the hand type you are much more likely to hold. This is similar to the situation where someone plays all their two bids (including 2C) weak. "Partner knows I might have 28 points when I open 1S" but he's still going to play the odds and pass with a random 2-count; if he doesn't then you're going to be in a lot of hopeless games when you have the more typical 20 and play him for the more typical 6-point minimum.

Very interesting discussion in light of what just happened. I opened up a 4-table team game. My partner was a 2/1 "expert" and yes, I ignored my own advice and played with an unknown partner. First hand, I had --, AQ10xxx, xx, K10xxx which I think is a lot closer to a 1-bid then the actual example in this thread since I might have 1.5 tricks on defense. (I have 2QT.) I opened 1H. Partner held a 24-count with heart support and after a couple rounds of bidding, bid 7H which got doubled. Turns out I was off a trump trick as well as the ace so 6H doesn't make either. As soon as he saw my hand, I had to find a substitute for the rest of the match. Funny how a lesser player can't bid a slam without Blackwood and yet that seems to be missing from the arsenal of some experts; the other boards were pretty non-descript so I would have won the match with a novice who knew Blackwood. But you 1H openers on this hand, be prepared to play in a team game and have your partner leave in a huff 30 seconds into the match.