LBengtsson

It is just a unlucky hand. Partner is minimum for 1NT. Has just 2♥. 6-0 split. West hand auto 2 x X. East auto pass. I would not lose sleep over what happened.

Agree. Though I would add 4441 hands can be a problem generally, especially if partner replies in your stiff (short suit ♥) I am a optimist and think that I have three suits where 4 card trump support would be useful to partner, and although the hand looks a bad 11 points (and as beginner we are told not to open) we have 2.5 honor tricks in our hand with good controls in two of our 4 card suits. The hand has 7 losing tricks, and that is the maximum (as far as I know) accepted for a opening bid at the one level, so on that count I would open...but as mikeh says it does depend on your partner and what agreements you have made.

Six down (vulnerable) is not good bridge...by the robot, as the contract should be X. When robots can not work out - like human bridge player - that 3♥ by North is a crazy contract, I feel happy :) Computer chess now beats any human player, and has done for some years. Computer bridge is still...garbage!

A very good point. The West hand is immediately thinking 'SLAM' if East opens, and when East shows a second suit where there's a fit, it is then like '6/7 level here we go!!!' I used to play a Precision system with a 3♦+ and 10-15 opening. Because opening could be only 10, partner had to apply brakes sometimes. Yes, it is a matter of style whether to open these hands in 2/1 or SAYC, but partner should be aware you open lighter and poorer and apply brake if that is so.

My sorry for saying this, AL78, the one bid that wasn't there (imo) is your opening 1♦ bid. Opening a vulnerable 1 honour trick, aceless minor suit 11 point hand in second position with 1♦ when a opponent has passed, even though you have an easy rebid with 2♣ is not constructive. Other than this in the actual auction, your partner can bid 3♣ after 2NT (if your partner's 2♠ bid is GF), which will probably lead to him suggesting 5NT later as pick a slam, and you will then go for the 4-4♣ fit given the misfit.

I think the problem is not knowing the structure of responses to the 2NT bid and after. Partner bids 3♦ shortage, you bid 4♥. Both 2NT and the 4♥ bid have used up valuable bidding space, and whilst your ♦KJxx as you say are opposite a stiff and therefore probably not of value, jumping to 4♥ is making life difficult for partner. I agree bidding 3♥ instead of 4♥ here shows interest in slam, but maybe it should be a 'relay' bid when partner has shown shortage in a minor with 3♣/3♦. What you want to know about is ♠ control: what partner wants to know about is your ♣A. Jacoby auctions are deciding about where you want to go after discovering the 9 card major fit. You have to know who is boss in auction also. Does 3♣/3♦ show extra values after 2NT also? Or just shortage with either minimum or maximum hand? What have you agreed in your partnership? Can shortage show stiff ♦A? Here is similar hand with less which also fit good for slam. [hv=pc=n&w=sk65hakt92dacqt98&e=sqjt3hqj73dkj65ca]266|100[/hv] Partnerships should also understand that when a 9 card major fit has been found, the opener with ♥AKxxx now has odds in his favour on trump suit without knowing position of ♥Q. Either 2-2♥ split or 3-1♥ with ♥Q drop is 52% I think. You have to agree what you and your partner play here. Your partner bidding 4NT here with maybe 2♣ losers is poor bid but auction before is ? Have you discussed this between yourselves? Having a bid like Jacoby 2NT on your convention card is good but not good if you have not discussed follow up bidding. This applies to any conventional bid that you use, not just Jacoby.

Pass is not helping partner, 3♣ sounds pre-emptive and defensive. 2♠ shows good ♣ limit raise. It also allows partner to explore a 5♣ or 3NT contract with the right hand.

Interesting forum question. Although in defense you sometimes do not know what trump fit declarer and partner have reached, it must make a difference if they are playing in a part score, game or slam contract, and the likely variations of fits for each. I guess - and this is a total guess - most part scores are played in a 4-3, 5-2, fit, whereas most games and slams are played in a 4-4, 5-3 or 6-2 fit. There's a bridge saying: "If in doubt lead a trump" That's crazy! As other forum commentators have said you have to look at your own hand and the bidding before making a lead. And obviously, it also depends on what trumps are in your hand. As DavidKok indicates, leading a trump from KJx is not an easy lead to find but it might be the only lead that sets the contract or gains an extra defensive trick. I have a few notes/books on opening leads, but everyone quotes Bird/Anthias so that will be the next bridge book that I need to buy.

I would bid 3♦ here. That is the suit you need help. I would not bid 3♥ as if partner then bids 4♠ the opponents could not lead that suit imo. If you bid 3♦ the ops. do not know that you have ♥AQ(98) and they might make an attacking lead of a ♥ into your tenace. Though partner is limited and with the wrong cards 4♠ will not make, though with >7 playing tricks in your own hand, you do not need much from partner to find game.

2♣ 100% of the time. It is a strong 6/5 with partner only needing one small card to make 10 tricks. 10 playing tricks, 3 losing tricks. Opening 1♥ is not what I would do. (It also makes it easier for the opps. to compete in the ♠ suit.)

It is good to tell partner that you have 4♥/4♠ support by bidding 2NT but I think that using Jacoby 2NT is not always the best bid to use, especially in 2/1. Nine card fits in a major suit are good information but using Jacoby 2NT can take away bidding space. If I had a hand such as ♣AKQJx ♦xx ♥Qxxx ♠xx I would rather bid 2♣ (to a 1♥ opening bid) instead of 2NT in 2/1. Bidding 2NT here might prevent the opps. competing in the ♠ or ♦ suit, but as we have the majority of the points I would rather take the bidding slowly. That is just my opinion. It might not suit everyone, but I like a 2NT call by my partner to tell specific information beyond that we have a good trump fit.

I have tried to work out the logic behind this, and I guess that if I have to play a 4M system with weak NT, I open the 4M instead of a short minor suit with a 15-16 count hand. So, I guess also logically, with a 5M system that cannot happen, and opener can have 5(6)m4M hand or a balanced one? So bidding 2♠ here could be balanced hand (15-16) with no ♥ stop and 4♠, or 5(6)m4♠ with a minimum hand? Is that why this sequence is difficult? And bidding 2NT shows...I would think 15-16 balanced and a ♥ stop but not 4♠? That seems sensible, but what if you have 15-16 without ♥ stop and < 4♠ hand. Eureka! I understand why now you have posted this on the forum helene_t. I will let other people who play 5m/weak NT to comment as that is not what I play.

10 losing tricks. Partner has to have a few winning tricks (and a fit) to make anything happen. However, with ♠A108xx it is still 10 losing tricks but I would bid 1♠. Make it ♠K108xx it is again 10 losing tricks and just about worth a 1♠ response. If you are playing a short ♣, 5M, strong NT system like 2/1, pass could be right but as mikeh has said it is the methods you use to bid these light hands that matter. Without them I would certainly pass.

Handviewer. Easy to see :) [hv=pc=n&s=shkj932dq543cakj7&n=sk953hqt76dat7cq6&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1h2s3d3s6hppp]266|200[/hv] ♠A lead. Make 12 tricks.

The best team at the World Championships is the team that wins it! :) I have seen soccer games where one side has had most of the game, and then they lose 0-1. What matters ultimately is the result not how you achieve it.

White/red I always bid one more. The ♠K is, I guess, dead, West more like to have the ♠A. Also, looks like they have a 9 card fit with ♠ suit breaking 2-2. I would like to bid 5♦ here to suggest a lead as opposed to 5♥ direct, but that is up to partnership agreement. I do not wish partner to think that is a slam encouragement.

Whilst Smolen is the correct convention to use, the sequence 1NT - 2♦(transfer to ♥) - 2♥ - 2♠ showing 5♥/4♠ is forcing for one round for many partnerships, so you can use this instead though Smolen is the expert's choice I guess...as the stronger hand declares every time.

I guess 3♦ say that I have no interest in the ♠ suit here. So I am bidding 3♠ telling him we have a fit, and if partner bids 4♣, I bid 4♦. Bidding 4♦ immediately suggests a super-accept, but despite some good cards, the hand is still minimum. So 3♠ is my bid, given that 2♦ was GF. Bidding 4♠ immediately just wastes bidding space. Like the bridge club, jillybean :)

If you play strong NT with 5M and this bidding sequence, partner should realise that you might have this 3343 (weak NT) hand. That's why players prefer a 1♣ opening here. 2♦ is a false bid, promising 5+ ♦. 2♥ is better response to the neg X imo as you've been forced to bid, and partner should not expect 4♥ here. (Though one for partnership discussion and agreement.) Btw The negative X bidder does not promise 4M in either ♥/♠ but a hand with values to bid, but with no obvious bid.

I must have been half asleep when I posted this. There are three reasonable ways for 7♥ to make, plus a squeeze option. It is more easy to reach 7♥ in Precision - as long as I am not half asleep lol! - as there are specific control bids (as in mikeh auction).

Having Kokish here will help. 2♣ - 2♦(wait) - 2♥ (Kokish) - 2♠(wait) - 3♦(second suit) etc. but how does declarer find out about ♥Jxx ♦Qxx as specific cards, and whilst partner will know these cards are important the exact sequence to reach 6♥ I am not sure of, though I feel I would reach that contract btw. Good hand to post.

Good hand to post, mikeh. I considered the slightly better odds over 80% I guess (♣3-3/4-2) - I hope I have this right - of letting the lead come round to ♣A and then playing the ♠10 with the idea of setting up the 5th♣ as the discard for the ♦. (I realise a defender might duck the ♠10 but I think you are still in control.) But you decided to take the trick in dummy with the ♣K and the ♣Q falls. Now I do not know what is best... EDIT: Maybe playing the ♠A and then small to the ♠J is better and will fell stiff ♠K (in my line on 2nd trick)

Trust partner. You were prepared to defend 1♣X so be prepared to defend 1♣XX. Yes partner has made a balancing X but it could well be better than minimum. I would not care who was at the table lol! (Although the two players you mentioned, mikeh, I have great respect to) West has a good hand but will have to lead away from it as East is very weak. The problem here is being endplayed. You probably have 4-5 tricks available to help partner, but it will all depend on in which order they are played. The difficult area is to choose the opening lead ♥K or a ♠. A ♠ might help declarer establish a trick in the suit, and the ♥K looks danger. Bidding 1NT is an option, but its fun finding the right defense against a 1XX contract, I guess lol! :)

The actual hand does matter as there is a small inference that one of the opponents hold the minor suits as they have not gone through Stayman or any other convention. eagles123 is right!

You could play the ace also and make both opps. think the other has the ♥K :) I think it becomes more easy for East to discourage the lead if you play ♥Q on the first trick. At this stage we do not know who has the ♠A and the ♣ honors or suit. If West has the imaginary ♥K, then you would still gain two tricks from the ♥ suit as the cards lie. Is this the tiny bit of technique needed?