kgr

What is the best way to verify if a convention is good or not. I was thinking to take hands from BBO my hands from somebody who plays the natural thing and verify what would have happened with my convention. If there is a difference then try to guess what the final contract would be with both systems and number of tricks and then compare the result. It would help if I could load a number of deals with bidding and result in Jack. Then I could easier get the par score and see what system come closest to it. Is it possible to download a range of hands from the my hands site and convert them to PBN? Or is there a better way to do this? I want to verify: I play 2-suited overcals: (1m)-1NT=H&m (1m)-2m=majors (1D/H/S)-2C=C&highest (1H/S)-2D=D&highest ...

Would it be a good idea to play this as transfer to 3NT? and bid it with eg ♠Ax(x)? [hv=s=saxxhkjxdxxxcaqxx]133|100|[/hv] It would say: "I have a balanced hand and want to play 3NT, but maybe it is better if you play it. Even if you have no Spade stop I think that 3NT is the best contract"

I would have bid 3♥ or DBL in the previous round (invite for 4♠). 3♠ is only competitive imo and I think that I have an invite. Because of the double fit, I would still bid 4♠ now.

Thanks all for the answers! For those who prefer 1m above 2NT: Is that a preference with this particular example hand or is that a general preference with a 1-4-4-4 hand a a singleton A? We normally open 1D with 4-4 in the minors and we also play T-walsh. I think I would open 1C on this particular hand.

With 4=1=4=4 or 1=4=4=4 , singleton A in S or H, and points in your 2NT opening range. Do you open 2NT or do you prefer to open 1C / 1D? Yesterday I opened 2NT with 4=1=4=4: [hv=d=s&n=sq8xxhxxdxxxc987x&s=sakxxhadktxxcaqjt]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] 2NT was down on a Heart lead and ♣K wrong, while 4♠ would make. My concern: When you open 2NT with a singleton then either partner will insist to play in that suit with length OR opps will lead it against 3NT.

After 3th hand opening 1C we don't play T-Walsh. (We also alert that 1C opener because it can be very weak, not sure if that alert is needed...Maybe that alert helps us more then the opps)

I wont comment on the decision, but 2S did not show a min. hand, if I understood the system description, 2H promised another bid, i.e. 2S simply denied the ability to make a more descriptive bid, but it did not deny a better than min. opener. With kind regards Marlowe It showed less than 15 pts. was 2S passable? With kind regards Marlowe Not really. Responder will always have enough to bid 2NT or to raise to 3S.

I wont comment on the decision, but 2S did not show a min. hand, if I understood the system description, 2H promised another bid, i.e. 2S simply denied the ability to make a more descriptive bid, but it did not deny a better than min. opener. With kind regards Marlowe It showed less than 15 pts.

Are opps not allowed to receive this info? Shouldn't you tell opps that you psyche early in the match and not so much latee on? Shouldn't you tell the opponents if you do not do this? If you have an arrangement explicit or implicit to psyche early in a match then I think effectively that means that you have an implicit understanding that is different than your explicit understanding and disclosure by way of your convention card to your opponents (unless this is actually written on your card). Depending on the nature of your likely psyches it seems reasonably likely that your implicit agreements would fall foul of the system regulations. Nevertheless it gets problematic if you have to disclose psyching tendancies as who do you expect to make such a disclosure? Everyone - hence the question at the beginning of this post? If not where is the list of psyching tendancies that need disclosure? ...created new post for this: http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=33808&hl=

Your tendency is to psych mostly early in a team match. This will make opps unsure for the rest of the match. Should this be indicated on your convention card. (e.g: Psches: mostly early in the match): - when you never discussed this with your regular partner (He has seen it, but maybe does not really realise that this is your strategy). - when you told your partner that this is a good strategy and you will try to do it. ...Or can this be considered as general bridge knowledge and no disclosure is needed? Thanks, Koen

I like Helenes reasoning and also bid 3♠. I hope partner will bid 3NT with some kind of ♦ stop. Very possible that 3NT will be the only contract we can make, but partner will need a stop for it.

What was your partner's hand? ...I don't know, but here is a guess from what I remember of the play. [hv=n=sqt9xhxxdakj9xcax&w=sxxxhjxxxdqcqjxxx&e=sakjxxhxdtxxxckxx&s=sxhakqtxxdxxxctxx]399|300|[/hv] I was more interested if the South hand was ok to overcall, independent of the result. Thanks, Koen

I did overcall 3♥ and my partner did bid 3NT, but he considered a slam try. 3NT just made.

Thanks for the answers, partners hand was something like: [hv=s=sxhakjxxxdqxxcqxx]133|100|[/hv] 3H made +1 (note that it is difficult for partner to bid 4H without knowing that we have a fit)

Are opps not allowed to receive this info? Shouldn't you tell opps that you psyche early in the match and not so much latee on?

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sajxxxhxxdaxxcaxx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] Opps pass: 1♠-2♥ 2♠-3♥ ?? Your agreements: 2♥ is not Game forcing and 3♥ is 6 card and limit. Your 2♠ was the only bid that is not game forcing. Do you have enough to bid 4♥ (or 3NT) now? Thanks, Koen PS: We feel that this bidding is not flexible enough and consider to make this sequence GF. Responder should then rebid 2NT iso 3♥ without a GF hand.

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sxhakqtxxdtxxcxxx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] RHO opens 2♠ Muiderberg (Weak with 5 card ♠ and 4+ minor). Is this enough to bid at MP's?

Three bidding situations of yesterday. Not sure what best agreement is (No problem if you don't anwer them all, Answers to one or two are also welcome): 1) splinter You have the agreement with your partner that 1♣-3X is a splinter. Do you like that agreement or would you rather have it as a preempt in X. If 1♣-3♦ is a splinter, is 1♣-(DBL)-3♦ also a splinter or is a preempt more useful here? 2) inverted minor ..Probably most agreement on this one: You play inverted minors, also in competition (in this case you have added 2NT as VERY weak with fit). Is this also inverted?: 1m-(1NT)-2m ....Probably not as you could DBL in that case? 3) 1♦-(2♣)-DBL-(2♦!) DBL 2♦! = good hand with fit for ♣...the normal. Is DBL for Diamonds, extra's, for the majors, one major, support DBL... (My partner had 3=3=6=1, and had no real problem to DBL. ...But what is best meaning?)

Pass (With the system I play with my partner: 1NT for minors, can be 4-4)

1NT. Prefer to bid my values asap.

Why not 4♠ iso 5♣?

Thanks for the answers Stephen. Probably I will never play this one from the top after the finesse lost.

[hv=n=s65h542dak9542cqj&w=s92ha96dq83cakt62&e=sjt87hkqdjtc97543&s=sakq43hjt873d76c8]399|300|[/hv] 1♠-(2♣)-2♦-(3♣) Pass-(Pass)-3♦-All Passs 3♥ would have been better then 3♦ (but I think you can only stop in 3♥ if you first pass over 3♣)

...Correction for OP: Now you can finesse the 9 or play AJ1) play AJ: Wins if East has KTx (4.44%), KT (0.73%) 2) finesse the 9: Wins if West has Txxx (8.88%), Txxxx (3.63%), Txxxxx (0.48%) Good program 1) 4.44 + 0.73 = 5.17 2) Suppose defence ducks as often from Kx as from Kxx then probzbly of finesse 9 is better: 8.88 * x + 3.63 * x + 0.48 with x the percentage that defence ducks the K. => defence should duck at least 37.5 % of the time. If not then it is better to finesse the 9 if the Q lost to the K (I guess that most experts will finesse the 9 against unknown opps?)

AQJ9 vs xx You play small to the Q and that loses to the K. Now you can finesse the 9 (..or is this called finesse the T?) or play AJ 1) play AJ: Wins if East has KTx (4,44%), KT (0,73%) 2) finesse the 9: Wins if West has Txxx (8.88%) But suitplay says to play AJ after finsse of Q lost to the K? Am I missing a combination that makes a difference? ...This will be something stupid...