kgr

http://books.google.be/books?id=r0dtP5H3NJ...page&q=&f=false Eddie Kantar Teaches Modern Bridge Defense; p.32

Story I was told (no more info then this). I wondered what kind of ruling would be considered. Team match in Belgium: - hand was played at other table. Deal comes at the 2nd table and one of the hands only has 12 cards. 13th card cannot be found anywhere. What do you rule: - if hand was played out completely at 1st table (so probably there was no missing card) - if a claim was done at 1st table (and possibly card has been missing all the time). - Is it important if deal at 1st table was clearly bad for one pair?

That is probably the reason of my question. I tend to lead very passive, and certainly in relation to leading from K(xxx) in a suit contract. This habit probably comes from playing a lot of MP's club tournaments. I guess passive leads are more appropriate there? Maybe I should force myself to lead active whenever I'm playing IMPs and if there is no very clear reason to lead passive.

In another topic Frances said: Opps pass: 1H-2H-4H ...an auction that suggests an aggressive lead... Why is this auction 'suggesting' an aggressive lead? Dummy will be limited and maybe declarer pushed to bid game. It is possible that opps don't have extra's for 4♥ (or even not enough)? Is an aggressive lead rather clear after this auction or is 'suggest' meaning that it is not clear at all?

I also play 2NT as transfer to ♣, but invite+. What strength is your 2NT? Opener always has to bid 3♣?

2♥ or Pass, depending on the day. For the DBLers: Do you play ELC? Or do you think that the risk is smaller because you will RDBL if it goes: (1♠)-DBL-(Pass)-2♣ (Pass)-Pass-(DBL)-(Pass) (Pass)-RDBL?

I voted DBL and I don't like it with a void. It will not be difficult for an expert to convince me that 4♦ is better..(or 4♣ followed by 4♠) It was very clear (hand with 13 cards, you even mentioned vuln and format :o ) ..but I prefer a shorter notation of bidding: (pass)-1♥-(pass)-1♠- (3♦)-?? It better shows what happened (no bidding before and after the hand, clearer that RHO passed initially, clearer that you opened and not partner)

I have that book (I will give it another read ...3rd or 4th :( ). This is one of the 2 best sources I have about squeeze...the other one were Inquiries posts about squeezes on this forum.

Thanks! So opps can potentially be squeezed and throw-in if you have one less winner then the contract and that opponent has the number of winners to defeat the contract by one tick + a guard in another suit. (He will be squeezed out of a winner and be throw in OR if will have to let go his guard). In 3NT: Opponent has 5 winners after we take our stop in the suit (or 2 suits) and a guard in another suit.

[hv=n=sqjhkj53dj8543ck3&w=s65432ht972d976c5&e=sat8hq64d2caqt964&s=sk97ha8dakqtcj872]399|300|[/hv] (1C)-1NT-2C 2D-3NT The above hand comes from http://www.bridgeclues.com/ (I hope it is no problem to mention it here. If it is a problme then moderator may remove link and/or hand above if required. The real question below.). Opps lead ♣ and RHO plays ♣Q, ♣A and a ♣. You now have 8 winners and 3 losers. RHO will later be squeezed and you will get 9 tricks. I thought that if RHO plays ♣T 1st trick and let you win the first trick with ♣J then maybe the squeeze/throw-in would not work. But it seems that it does not matter. With 5 losers it still works. I'm trying to better understand these squeezes and try to understand how this works with 3 and also with 5 losers. Could anybody explain this?

I thought longer before posting the same.... :lol: If you play 2 trumps before ruffing a ♦ then if trumps are 2-2 you will need 2 ruffs in S and a trump as an entry to N (To keep ♠ finesse in both hands) + the initial 2 trumps => no more trumps in hand and ruff/sluff does not work anymore.

Is 6S a gamble with 2 KCs missing or did you have a bidding misunderstanding with yourself (...will that be UI or AI?).

It is also possible that LHO wins the 3th ♠. You are confident enough that he also has ♦A?

I wonder if it is the same MP's or is the risk of giving a trick away with Qxxx too big?

I'm surprised that 2♣ would be rebid with this hand. It is MP's: my partner did consider 1NT iso 3♣.

What do you bid iso 3♣? (I'm in fact surprised that my partner - who often opens an off-shape 1NT - didn't open 1NT with his hand. Probably he thought that his hand was too goood)

Thanks all for the answers. The complete bidding (with a DBL by RHO) and hand in: http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...=0entry423257 At IMP's I would bid 3NT, but I choose to pass at MP's.

Thanks for the answers. This was the full hand (not sure if North was 3-3 or 4-2 in the reds): [hv=d=n&n=skhqjxdkxxcaqjxxx&w=saxxxhtxxdtxxctxx&e=sqjxxhakxxdqjxxcx&s=st9xxhxxxdaxxckxx]399|300|Scoring: MP[/hv] 1♣-(DBL)-1♥!=xfr♠-(pass) 3♣-All Pass Maybe if I bid 3NT then it makes (West need to lead my suit; or they need to develop a ♥ for North: opps are not expert, so this is possible!), ...maybe not.

The bidding was slightly different. RHO DBL'ed. See: http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=36417

[hv=d=n&s=st9xxhxxxdaxxckxx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] 1♣-(DBL)-1♥! 3♣-?? 1♥! = transfer ♠ 3♣=standard, but denies 3c♠ MP's 3NT or Pass ; Does the DBL by RHO change anything to your decision?

[hv=d=n&s=st9xxhxxxdaxxckxx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] 1♣-1♠ 3♣-?? Matchpoints Club tournament with good and bad pairs. Opps are average in the field. Pass or 3NT? Would it be different at IMP's?

Is there a difference between ...3♣...3NT...4♦ and ...4♦? Or is the auction via 3♣ not really showing something different, but trying to get more info. E.g with short ♣ you are more interested in 6 (or 7) if partner cannot bid 3NT.

I would think that 3♣...3NT...4♦ is stronger then 4♦?

Hi Anne, That was a good guess. Our current position is this: - We are not actively involved in improving the Windows client in any way. - We are heavily involved in improving the web-client in many ways. - We are hoping that we never have to release another new version of the Windows client. - It is not clear how realistic this hope is. - As the number of people logged in to BBO increases, the performance of the Windows client decreases. At some point it will become unusable. We don't know the location of this point. I am guessing that, for most PCs at least, we are not very close to it. - We have no plans to retire the Windows client. Fred Gitelman Bridge Base Inc. www.bridgebase.com The windows client would not be required if it gives same functionality as the Web client. What is the reason for the difference (Technical difficulty to implement function in the web client OR another choose of the way the go)? I use the windows client because I prefer that my hands are saved on my PC for easy access for later review...and I guess that the reason that this isn't foreseen in the Webclient is that it is more difficult to access the PC in the Web-client?

If your opps seriously always play up the line, then there is no read when all the small cards are played. However if one person plays the highest card (the jack in this case), it is 100 % that the other person has the fourth card. So if Jxx is out you will ALWAYS know who has the fourth card, and if there is Jxxx out you will have no clue. yes, right (I didn't even think about that) ...If opps play 2xJ (or x2J) against you, will you rather play him for 3-card or 4-card? I mean: Do opps at your level mostly play these cards random or rather up the line, and certainly the higher cards like the J (certainly if the T did not appear yet)?