LBengtsson

No one has considered what if partner bids 3♠ instead of 3♥ here? I do not sit comfortable with East bidding 3♦ here. Yes it is game force but it takes away a level of bidding. I could risk another X here instead of 3♦. Then bid 3♦ after he bids. It is not likely partner will pass my second X for penalties, but if he does then his shape will be without a 4M. If partner is 3343 shape and v. weak, 3NT may be the only making game.

Why, in the English language, is 'abbreviation' such a long word? The same in Swedish 'förkortning' :) I have personally never seen 'Cue' as 'Q' though obviously others have. However, it seems very wrong to use an abbreviation in the game where it also has another meaning that has been there from the very beginning of the game. Using 'text lingo' at the bridge table makes the game lesser, and I am sure over 99% of bridge players would have said that 'Q' = 'Queen' even though 'Q' is a phonetic sound for 'Cue'. However, it is for the opps. to enquire before making the opening lead... Anyone, with the slightest bit of bridge knowledge, would have queried why North was showing the ♦Q on the bidding? With Precision control bids that can be, but after Jacoby 2NT has anyone come across where partner shows 3rd round control on their next bid? Of course not.

What else can you use the 3NT opening bid for? 25-27 balanced? Last time I had a hand like this was when....before the year 2000 :) (And you can bid these hands through a game forcing 2♣ opener.) A minor suit with ♣/♦ AKQxxxx or AKQJxxx That happens a lot more so that is why it is used as a 3NT opening bid. As other forum commentators have said, you need to know that it is a specific hand with a minor suit like this and no more than a Q outside in any of the side suits. If you feel that 3NT is not the best contract you need to pull the contract from 3NT..

♠ for me. Though with West's actual hand I would logically think it meant choose a lead other than a ♠. So given that information I would choose a ♥ as there was no Stayman enquiry HOWEVER this only works on the actual hand because of West's ♠ holding. If west did not have this holding in the ♠ suit I would still lead a ♠.

At least you found the right lead, pilowsky :)

LOL. Though the description of your X after 4♠ is just as crazy - Takeout! At least the Robot North did not remove to 5♦ :)

Your analysis is always excellent, mikeh, however can we be sure that West has ♣Q9xxx? If East has ♣A10x what would be correct card to play on the ♣4 lead from your partner. The ♣A looks right but it might be best to keep communication with partner open, or if declarer has ♣KQ(xx) I agree it is more likely that West has the ♣9 from the law of restricted choice and that West has probably led from a 5 card suit as opposed to one with four clubs.

This is a good hand to post as 1NT is a difficult contract to make most times. My first priority is to make the contract obviously as other tables will probably have passed out this hand. It has 9 losing tricks despite its 2+1/2 quick tricks so I would not open this hand in 2/1 myself. I like that the opps. have not overcalled 1♠ here, but the danger is that you could lose 2♠ + 2♥ + 3♣ if the opps. get the defense right. Timing is all here. I am tempted to cover the ♣10 with the ♣J but that just feels the wrong move. I will go up with ♣K and play on ♥ suit hoping for split honors while I have entries in the ♦ suit. I need just one of the red suits to split 3-3 to get to seven tricks before they get to their seven. Edit: I had to smile :) as no one else has tried to answer this problem in the last 9 hours. My line might be wrong, but when some problem hand appears (especially in play or defense) - and I have noticed this more than once on here - there seems to be reluctance to provide comments. It is a very good hand that pescetom has posted. I think there is no wrong or right answer to the problem as it all depends on how the opps. hands are shaped, and what honors they have. It is so difficult to calculate at trick 2, especially not knowing what carding the opps. play. All I have seen as declarer is 4 points ♣A out of a possible 20 the opps. hold. I assume that the ♣Q is on my left due to the lead, so that adds up to 6 points total but still the other 14 points have to be somewhere, and we know that both East/West did not have the values for an overcall or a balancing bid here. Trying to establish the exact hand shapes for this contract to be made at trick 2 is so, so difficult. And the vulnerability is a clue here also, because the opps. would need slightly better hands to intervene. I welcome other players ideas...

It is a 6-5 hand with a good card ♥K. If you do not 3♦ here, then partner will probably let the auction die. Double here is a ambiguous/poor bid. Show partner your shape. Pass is just letting the opps. control the bidding.

The question that needs to be asked also is "How is this alerted?" Does his partner know that the 2♥ overcaller makes this sort of bid on a hand that looks not adequate for the bid. Or does the overcaller alert the opponents only that my 4♥ bid could be what normal partnerships bid 2♥ on? It is definitely a psychic bid imo because it overstates the strength and shape of the hand. I would be angry if this happened at my table :angry:

hehe :) Though you will always know who has the Ace of Spades...lol

Partner will know what sort of hand you have rebidding 3NT here. Any other bid is a lie, denying the hands playing trick strength. I would not argue with a beginner or novice rebidding 3♣ here, but the advanced or expert bid should be 3NT imo.

The first bid that came to me is 5♠ without looking at the replies. So we might miss a grand... But I assume that as the players are expert the opps. interference bidding will be the same, so both tables will be in this dilemma. Yes, we might lose 11 IMPs if we do not bid the grand, but we gain 14 IMPs if we bid the small slam and the grand goes down. But the opps. have taken away our space for investigation so any plus score is better than no plus score. 5♠ it is.

My guess: "Dinner is ready in five minutes..." :) (My ex-wife said exactly that after I bought a new car.)

LOL I love cats, and I am not crazy. That is what my psychiatrist thinks :) (Btw I do not have a psychiatrist, but if I had one...)

There is no reason for North not to lead the ♥ suit. As beginners we are told to lead from our longest suit against no-trump contracts. The vulnerability might have stopped South overcalling 1♠ had he had a overcall, but making a passive lead here is crazy imo. But robots do crazy things :)

Agree. The danger is declarer has ♠KQ2 ♥Qxxx ♦KQxx ♣Ax and guesses right after the ruff. So I would lead a small ♣ at trick 2. It is as though declarer is inviting the ruff. Ignore it. It can wait.

It is a easier lead problem than most as there are only 3 suits to lead from :) Either 3NT is making without problem, or partner has cards to put it down. With only one entry I am not leading a ♥. On auction like this it is sometimes best to lead dummy's second suit, but partner has not overcalled 1♠ on first round so I am going to lead the unbid suit ♣. ♣7 is my lead. (The ♣3 might confuse partner that I have length so that is why I like ♣7 better)

3♦ opening bid, and 3♦ now after 2♥. If you have not got a weak 2♦ bid available, and Benji Acol is 2♣ and 2♦ bid are strong (right?) then you have to have a partnership where 3♣/3♦ are made on 6 card suits with little defense if you bid aggressive. Otherwise your partner and you have to agree to 'pass' losing momentum and not blocking opps. bids.

I think 4♠ doubled here shows general strength rather than distributional strength. Partner can bid 4NT instead as two places to play (not just minor suits). So with a balanced hand and two aces I would choose to pass. Other players might think differently to this analysis. Preemptive bids are there to make bidding for the opps difficult. Passing could be wrong, but it's a guessing game sometimes at this level what might or might not make.

This is a very good question because players do not think that the 2/1 GF sequence will be overcalled by the 4th player often. But it happens. I think it needs partnership discussion and agreement, especially given if the overcall is made at white vs. red. Any bid made by 4th player could be real suit or more lead directional with partial suit (5+). The example given by pescetom is more easy to counter as it is only 2♦. Every sequence where the 4th player bids here from 2♦ upwards needs to be discussed, especially if the 4th player makes a bid at the 3 level. I would be happy to jam a 2/1 auction at white/red with 3♦ with 6421 shape and ♦KQJT9x, maybe even ♦KJT9xx and take my chance that pre-empting the opps. works well as the space 2/1 gives to find the right contract, be it game or slam, is effectively lost.

It is an interesting board to post nige1. By the way you played the hand you gave yourself extra chance to make 12 tricks with East ♠Qxx as opposed to some other declarers who I looked at who lead small ♠ to ♠J10 at trick 2. I assume this was robot at advanced level. If so, then either robot is programmed badly, or robot cannot signal suit length to robot partner. This gives me hope :) Robots are still years away from playing bridge at expert human level. If four human players were at this table, I would assume that 90% would have got defense right and held declarer to 11 tricks as opposed to poor defense with inaccurate declarer play that gave all other tables 12 tricks. In America they have an expression for this: you got screwed over (by machine) :(

I realize you know GIB bidding, smerriman, and I am not familiar with GIB bidding myself, but what opening bid will GIB make with a 4432 hand that can not be opened 1NT? I realize also that with 4432 partner has an easy ♥ raise to 3♥ but it takes away bidding space using Soloway. There again different partnerships use Soloway differently. I prefer to use it with a solid suit or semi-solid of 6 cards+ missing just the ace - for your example AKQJxx or KQJT9x so partner can support with stiff only. Useful for MPs when a 6M slam scores more than a 6m slam. And I agree, maybe I was being a bit too defining with my Soloway structure: South's hand is worth 2♥ over 1♦ on the hand given, it was just crazy when the robot added 3 points for void in ♥ suit and went to 7♦.

The robot defense on all the other boards stinks!

I personally would not have used a Soloway jump shift as the ♥ suit is not good enough imo. Though that does not excuse the robot bidding a grand slam missing an ace. Maybe it just added 16 points to 17 and thought 'grand slam' (but that is a crazy decision!)