LBengtsson

Pass. That's not my bid btw, that's my reply to "To save or not to save" :) What I do not get here is how partner can X now, and only bid 2♦ first time round. It does not add up imo. Except if West has overcalled on 4M at the one level (!): it happens, and the opps. are in a Moysian, and partner has 4 trumps and about 9 HCPs. Maybe West has psyched, that is a possibility here, but not much of one imo.

Here's a agreement I made up from studying the fix, I would not recommend it though. lol 3NT minors 4♣/4♦/4♥/4♠ one suited hands 4NT big minors X is a relay (!) Partner bids 3NT. If you want to play there you pass (!) The strong hand is on the table [i know it is garbage so no comments please :)] After partner bids 3NT, you bid 4♣ for ♣/♥, 4♦ for ♦/♥, 4♥ for ♥/♠ and 4♠ for ♠ and a minor two suited hands. You saw it first here: the Bengtsson Convention :) :) :)

3♦ would be a trial bid here. It would establish if partner is short in ♦ and maybe able to ruff some of our losers. I am not going to give up on slam because with the right cards and shape it will be on. It might be difficult to find though, and I agree with DavidKok that it is difficult to evaluate. There is space to explore, and I think we need to at least try. We might end in 5♥ when we can only make 10 tricks, but taking the cowardly option with this hand is not something I want to do. It is a strong 6/5

I do not think I would have bid any different to you. There is a case for 1♠ - 4♠ immediately to show this unusually strong hand, a sort of super "Leaping Michaels" as ♥ and a [stronger?] minor. The reason I say this is I am sure I have seen this unusual bid in a book somewhere, but which book I am not sure. Or someone used it once and his partner worked out what it meant. The hand you posted has 14 cards but I guess you were 5♥1♦7♣. This sort of hand comes up so rarely that having specific bids such as 3NT, 4♠, even 4NT after the bidding sequence you described have probably not been discussed, even if a established expert partnership. It is a matter of 'go figure partner'.

It is an optical illusion that this hand will somehow be good for 3NT, if that is what you are thinking if partner has a max 1NT response bid. I go with the simple statistic that he is more likely not to have 11, and 3NT is not on.

Using the Gazzilli Convention should get you there, especially an extended version as opposed to the simplified option, especially if North upgrades his hand to a 2♦ positive response after 2♣. I think the upgrade is right here as North has a doubleton honor in the ♠ suit, a stiff, and good intermediates to support the honors in the minor suits. Similarly South has to upgrade their hand to use the Gazzilli convention in the first instance also. The suit quality of the ♠ suits merits a upgrade imo. So 1♠ - 1NT - 2C (Gazzilli) - 2D(8HCP+) etc so result in game being bid.

Agree. Bidding up to the level of the fit is not a total rule when you have a bit of knowledge where the cards are. Either partner has bid up to the level of the fit on garbage or he has some useful defensive cards. If on garbage you do not want to be in 4♠, and he will need exactly the right defensive offensive cards for 4♠ to make. I am happy to let the opps. play in 4♣ here. East might have stretched to 3♣. You are not going to bounce them into 5♣ if you decide to bid 4♠ immediately, and I think it is a 80% chance you will go down in a 4♠ contract. I would rather be cautious here even at white/red.

Agree. If your partnership opens all 11 counts then you are forced to make as suitable rebid as you can. Rebidding 2♥ here just seems wrong with such a poor suit. 2♠ may be a option if partner realises that this is not a reverse in this sequence, and you have previously agreed this. Personally, I would prefer not to open this hand as you do not have a good rebid imo. A case for Flannery as a convention, defining the hand specifically with 5♥4♠ shape and a limited point range.

Here I will guess that the robot bid 5♦ only. With a human partner I would bid a conventional 3♠ - a minor suit slam try - followed by 4♦ which is forcing to at least game imo. We maybe missing two aces, but I would not stop below 6♦. You have an alternative, the ace and king asking 4♣ bid, Gerber, but even if partner shows 2 aces, except if he shows 4 kings, you do not know which kings he has, and a slam might depend on a finesse. I prefer the 3♠ followed by 4♦ route and try to find out what partner has.

You can not change history, or its records imo. But you can comment on events afterwards. The wiki entry below that I found mentions this book, so the cheating allegations are there for all to see. It was wrong to cheat, but altering facts and records is 'cheating history' also. The Blue Team have been found 'with their pants down' and that is enough imo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Team_(bridge)

The math is like something out of "Gravity's Rainbow" by Thomas Pynchon. A friend said I needed to read this book: no, I did not lol. I think you are either good with math, or you do not have a clue. I am good with math but it would probably take me 4 hours, or should that be days(?) to solve, not 4 minutes, though I admit I can not remember most of the stuff learned in my youth :(

What system are you playing here, jillybean? Weak NT with 5M, I guess. 2/1 or not 2/1 responses? Certainly do not like to open 1NT here with two suits open and without a honor. Do I prefer rebidding 2♥ with ♥AK542, or rebidding 2♥ with ♥J106543? I guess it is a matter of style. Interesting that no-one has mentioned if the bidding goes 1♥ - 1♠ raising to 2♠? That does not look quite right given its 5332 shape, but raising to 2♠ does not guarantee a 4 card suit. At least partner is likely to play the hand, in ♠ or NT and if there is a unsupported honor in the minors, it will be sort of protected on a opening lead. If you cannot raise to 2♠ here then opening 1♥ and rebidding 2♥ is the least evil, except if partner insists that you open 1NT with all 12-14 and 5332 shape. One for the post mortem, I guess.

The only thing on my mind at the moment at red/white is to bid my best suit at the lowest level to show my hand and for a lead. Without Leaping Michaels that is all you can do. It has strong distribution but not defensively oriented. 2♠ is my bid and see what happens next.

You are right, jillybean. I had a look at some Acol (not my strong point) bidding after mikeh rightly criticized my (top heavy major suit) 2NT opening. North should show his hand by rebidding 3♥ here showing 18-20 and it is a GF. What concerned me is 3♥ showed at least 5/5M but that is not the case. A 2♣ response in Acol only shows 8+ (it said this on a few sites) so if opener is rebidding 2♥ only, except if you have an agreement that 2♣ promise another bid, responder could pass with something like ♠x ♥Qxx ♦xxxx ♣AKxxx or would that hand bid 1NT (even with the stiff ♠) as a response as opposed to 2♣? A 2♥ rebid by opener here could promise no more than a 5♠4♥ 11 count only.

Tough to be bid slam, even in Precision, I feel. Superprecision might go 1♣(16+) - 1♦(<8HCP) - 1NT (16-19) - 2S (6-7HCP at least 5/5 touching suits) but how we get to 6♣ from there is one for Meckwell to answer :) 25 HCP slams are difficult even for experts...

Good hand to post, AL78. I agree with Marlowe that X is extras here, and then we see what partner does next. 3NT maybe a possible contract (if West can cover the ♥ suit) with East's hand over North. The only problem with 3NT though is getting to partner's hand to lead towards the East hand. I think we have to think about game here not just a partscore as all we need is partner with ♦AQxxx and 5♦ is possibly on, but reaching that contract may be tricky.

If you can open 2NT showing 20-21, or 20-22 here, or maybe through a multi 2♦ with a big hand included, that is what I would do. Opening 1♠ just creates problems imo.

I think a additional question that needs to be asked is opposite a 12-14 1NT opener, do you always run with 5M332 with a very bad hand, or sit tight and hope the opps. bid a suit or convention and do not X. I think it is accepted that with a weak 5M332 opposite a strong NT the transfer is always on, and a superaccept bids up to the level of LOTT, the slight extra strength and trump fit making up for the lack of HCP generally, and that the opps. have less chance to penalise a 3M contract where the opener is stronger. Obviously, the percentage times that a superaccept exists is low for both NT ranges, simply because it needs opener to hold both 4 card trump support and a maximum, but also obviously a superaccept for weak NT will come up more times because there is more chance that opener holds 14HCPs than 17HCPs with a trump fit. Also, with a 12-14 NT there will be more times opener will be opening 1NT generally in the bidding. Imo, I feel a simulation may be the best and only way to test the merits of superaccepting with either a 12-14 or 15-17 NT, jillybean, and a variety of hands that cannot bid on to game (and stick in 3M) once the superaccept has been made may be the only way to determine whether with a weaker NT range it is good bridge. Bidding up to the level of LOTT is generally good bridge, but with balanced hands opposite each other LOTT values diminish slightly because there are less chances of scoring ruffs than with more distributional hands. And with more distributional hands, the opps. usually have there own contract to pursue also.

Yes, you are right AL78, on my analysis also. Though I am unsure whether you can bid it as a sacrifice that fortunately makes. Imo I cannot see a auction that arrives in 5♦X

Always easier making a comment seeing all four hands, but after North bids 3♦ opposite a doubly-passed partner at red/white, South must be worth 4♦ 99.9% of the time. The ♦K and ♥A are big cards, and partner should have cards/shortages in ♣/♠ to be able to bid at the three level like this. If the opps. then bid 4♥ I will X then, but not before. I am not frustrated here, just glad that I can finally show with a bid of 4♦ my meager but useful values.

'Wussy' good word, but I do not agree with its usage here. N/S should be in 4♠. 5♦X is a good save but whether you should take the hit at MPs I am unsure of. You and your partner are not at fault here imo. Just N/S for failing to get to game.

Gee whizz! The opponent complained? Oh shucks! I agree the explanation sucks but everyone must know what 1NT means here. Surely?

I am surprised that opposite a passed partner there is not a "Pass" option at red/white. That second suit ♣ is rags The hand could be a total misfit. I know, I know, it is 66 hand, better than a 65 come alive hand. It has virtually no defensive feature and bidding 3♦, imo, gives my partner the impression of strength: he's going to X 4♠ and then we will be in a fix as the opps. will be able to X any 5m contract more easily. You don't need much from partner to make 6m, but he has passed so there is less chance he has the right cards for 6m to make. Either you shut up and hope the opps. get too high, or you bid once, either 4♠/4NT showing minors and shut up after that. Just because it is 66 means you have to bid.

I have just read again Grand Slams by Alan Truscott. I used to read his columns in The New York Times. There are about 60 hands in the book, about 130 pages, all bid to grand slam level, but not all made! It covers so many different types of hand, and different plays, but what makes it enjoyable beyond the bridge hands is Mr Truscott's wit. I think he wrote the column in TNYT for about 40 years. There are other enjoyable, as opposed to technical, bridge books out there, but it left me a smile :) reading it again. A pleasant experience, and some great stories to accompany the hands. The hand on page 94 is my favorite.

Just a personal view but I do not like 2NT opening as 55M - what range for this bid? And what do 2♥/2♠ opening bid show if you now use 2♦ as either weak major?