kgr

Thinking more about this:Some levels of LHO might rather play the Ace over the K then over the Q. When you play the K they might think you had KJx. When you play the Q they might think you have KQ and possibly the Ten also, and you'll have a problem if they duck.

yes, interesting post!

This is more a question: It seems like LHO had lead problem. Doesn't this make it more likely that LHO has ♥A? How bad is it to play?: - ♥ to ♥K - cross to ♠T - run ♥T

Also if DBL is penalty?I thought it was off after: 1NT-(DBL pen) 1NT-(2C) And on after: 1NT-(DBL Artificial forcing f.i. DONT)

If Trumps are 2-1 then you can start - and it is 100% - with 2 rounds of trumps.

Is cashing ♦AK giving a net gain? Maybe the probability of ♦QJ falling is so low that you will loose on average more then you win by doing that?

teams; IMP's [hv=pc=n&s=sk32hkt2dakt2cj32&n=s4haj43d943cakt54&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1dp2c(10+%20with%20)p2d(Max%2014%20pts)p2h(Art%20GF)p2n(balanced max)p3nppp]266|200[/hv] LHO leads a small ♠ and RHO takes the ♠A and returns a small spade. From the play in ♠ you 'know' that LHO had 5c♠ and RHO had 4c♠. It is better to?: 1) play ♣A, return to hand and finesse ♣ 2) play ♣A and K and ♥ My initial estimate: This is 50% + 2% (finesse correct or Q single) versus 40% + 16% (♣Q double or 4 tricks ♥)? ...verifying with suitplay: 1) 40.0%+9%*51%=44.6% (making 5 tricks in ♣ + 4 tricks ♣ and 3 tricks ♥) 2) 33%+21%=54% (making 5 tricks ♣ when Qx + making 4 tricks ♥) => Does this look correct? Remark: It seems that: 1a) I overestimated the prob to make 5 ♣ tricks 1b) but when LHO has ♣Q 4th/5th then I still have some chances in ♥ 2a) I overestimated prob that ♣Q is double or single 2b) I underestimated the prob to make 4 ♥ tricks

We play 2♣ opening weak ..but we play Namyats.So the second hand we should not bid the Semi-GF. I wondered if anybody would bid 5♥..just in case.Actually I had a distributional weak 2♥ and wanted to go to 4♥. I didn't know anymore to show this with 4♥ or 4♣ and did take the least logical - and the wrong - one. We ended in 7♥X-3. At the other table our team played 4♠-2. ..clearly my fault, but 1% for partner because he had too much trust in me. ;)

I played this hand against Jack program and 2nd tick analysis shows that ♠-play is slightly better. (and I think that Jack doesn't take into account the psychology of the ♠-Ace play).

The problem with the 3♣...3♥ plan is that partner will bid 3NT without 3c♦.But maybe 1♣-1♦ 2NT-3♣ 3NT-4♥ should show this hand, but is 4♥ then to play, slam interest or even forcing?

We have in our multi:- weak 6c Major - GF in a minor - Semi-GF Major - NT 22-23 - NT 24-25 ....can sometimes get too difficult for us

Did you read the alerts correctly? Partner has 4 or 1 aces of 5 3♣ would show a GF in ♣. The assumption is that when partner showed ♥ by bidding 2♠, then your semi-GF in ♥ is now GF.

A hand from yesterday. Maybe interesting for beginner/interm [hv=pc=n&s=s2hakq432dq82c432&n=sa43hjt65dat93cak&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1h2s(weak)2n(4cH%20support%2C%2010+)p3n(12-14%3B%20singleton%20S)p4n(RKC)p5s(2%20aces%20of%205%20%26%20HQ)p6hppp]266|200|IMP's[/hv] LHO leads ♠K. How do you play this?

IMP's [hv=pc=n&s=skj92h85dakq85ckj&n=s3hak3d942cat8763&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=1cp1d(walsh)p2cp2sp3np4cp5dp6dppp]266|200[/hv] LHO leads ♥4 (3th/5th). You win ♥A in dummy and RHO plays an encouraging ♥2. What is best play on this hand? - Play 3 rounds 3♦ followed by ruffing a ♣ - Start with playing ♠ to the King

3♣ is transfer to ♦, but would deny more than 4-♥'s. Isn't that a consequence of (T-)Walsh? 1♣-1♦! (1♦=xfer ♥) 2NT-3♣! (3♣=xfer ♦) 3NT-4♥??? We don't have an agreement about 4♥ here.

Teams (IMP's)/All Green/You are dealer: [hv=pc=n&s=s2hqt5432dkqt32c2]133|100[/hv] You play T-Walsh: Pass-1♣ 1♦!-2NT (1♦=transfer ♥) Partner showed an 18-19HCP balanced hand without 4c♥. GF. How do you continue now? = = = Agreements if you want to use them: - 3♦ is re-transfer. Partner will accept the transfer with 3c♥ and bid 3♠ with a 4c♠. If partner does not accept the re-transfer (f.i bids 3NT) then 4♥ by you shows a 6c♥ with slam-interest, and 4♦ shows then a 5♥-4/5♦. - 4♦ is re-transfer ♥ = = = I'm mostly interested how you evaluate this hand and how you would bid it with a Walsh-like start. Bidding ♦ then will show 4c♥ and long ♦?

Teams [hv=pc=n&s=s32hkj32dkqjckqj2&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=2d(multi)p2sd4c(semi-forcing%20H)p4n(RKC)p5c(4/1%20of%205)p]133|200[/hv] Your partner has shown a semi-GF hand in H with 4 or 1 aces. What do you bid now?

http://rpbridge.net/bbtc.htm

Thanks all for the answers (Full Disclosure would actually be a good tool for this, if it would be possible to hide the bid descriptions and only show them when rolling over the bid)

I'm looking for a tool to learn our bidding system: A tool in which we can enter all our conventions or bidding sequences and that could then be used on your own to verify your knowledge of the system. The tool generates a bidding sequence (with or without intervention) and you can then enter a bid a the tools tells you what it means. (And ideally a tool that can be used alone or with a partner over the internet) Does anyone have a tool like this or has suggestions for a tool that can be used?

Agree with both statements. We play same system over 2NT as over strong 1NT. Maybe not best, but that is easiest. Over 2NT it is almost never done, so we think it is not that important. (and in the example given I could have bid 4S).

He sees ♥8xx in dummy. LHO knows you don't have ♥A or K (because 5♣ bid) and first trick taken with ♣A.

Right. If ♥A-K are split then you want RHO to win the first ♥. If LHO has a doubleton ♣ and ♥Hxx then RHO will have no entry to give his partner a ♣-ruff. So it is best to play a ♥ from your hand. That gives an extra chance that LHO makes the mistake of not playing his ♥-honour. At Matchpoints it can be wrong for LHO to play his honour if his partner has the other ♥ honour singleton. The actual hand was played at IMP's and LHO had ♥Axx and ♣9x. I played a small ♥ to dummy. LHO didn't play his ♥A (clearly a mistake a IMP's) and I made 5♥. (I think that against weaker players it is better to play a small ♥ to dummy then to lead ♥Q?)

It is in fact a bid that is not defined in the system.But a would say that it does not establish spade (if partner rebids 3NT/4H). This hand will be maximum for rebidding 3S because we can also bid a semi-forcing S-hand via multi 2D.

1C-3H 3NT-4NT (with 5=6=1=1) 4NT blackwood legal if you didn't chat: "Blackwood".