AL78

We have entry problems to the East hand. I suspect the ♣A is a singleton and the ♠K is onside. Problem is if the ace is a singleton there is no way to the East hand without going down. I think I would cash the ♠A and try to drop a stiff onside king playing North for 2821 or 2731 shape. If the king drops, cross to East with a trump and play to a low club. If that holds we are home with six spades, four clubs and two diamnonds, we have trump entries to enjoy the established long clubs.

I am close to mastering it, I have had so much practice with the hands I typically pick up that it is probably the best part of my bidding. :-)

No idea about the auctions but the other four pairs were in 3NT N. One pair got a low diamond lead and made 9 tricks. One pair got a low spade lead (nice) and somehow still managed to go one off, no idea how as after that lead you make at least nine tricks even if you don't drop the stiff offside club king. The other two pairs got the same lead as me (so maybe they got the heart overcall as well), one going one off, the other making 11 tricks.

jillybean got the right answer. I took the spade hook immediately which lost and when my ♥Q was knocked out I didn't think there was any chance of making, so took a failing club hook and went two down for a bottom. If I'd have thought about this a bit more I would have worked out the club finesse cannot possibly work with RHO's overcall and should play for them to have a stiff king. If I take that line I make the contract for an average plus. The full deal: [hv=pc=n&s=st975hadqj3caqjt3&w=s863hkt9643dk86ck&n=saqhq752da95c9742&e=skj42hj8dt742c865]399|300[/hv]

I'm surprised East didn't overcall hearts, I estimate the majority at my bridge club would on those cards. Although the South hand is 6-5 it is only a powerful hand opposite a fit in one of the suits. Distributional hands do not play well opposite a misfit so I think 2♣ on the second round is best on the South cards assuming that is natural, which North will pass. You might make 11 tricks but whatever, it is not going to be easy finding a 22 HCP minor suit game on sub-optimally fitting hands.

If it's a misfit, quit. I'd be concerned partner holds values in the red suits given that opponents couldn't find a red suit overcall with two opportunities, so I am keeping the bidding low until partner shows some support for one of my suits.

♥6. The spade finesse loses and the ♥8 is played.

I punted 3NT on the half heart stop, gambling on one of the following scenarios: 1. Partner has a half or full stop and the opps cannot run five heart tricks. 2. Partner has three hearts and opponents cannot cash more than four heart tricks even if my queen isn't a stop. 3. One opponent holds both top heart honors. 4. Partner doesn't have help in hearts but the suit is blocked and they cannot cash all their hearts. 5. It's MPs and others will punt 3NT even if it goes down so it will not be a total disaster. Scenario 5 happened, this is the full deal: [hv=pc=n&s=s4h7dak862cakq742&w=s76hkt864dj743ct8&n=sakt953hq93dqt9cj&e=sqj82haj52d5c9653&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=p1sp2cp2sp3dp3nppp]399|300[/hv] Opps cashed their five heart tricks for down one and a 50% board. One other went one off in 3NT and 4♠, one went three off in 5NT (I've no idea how they got there)and one made 4♠. I thought at the time partner maybe could have bid on and looked for a minor suit slam but my 3NT bid suggesting heart strength put her off, but on further reflection I could be resulting, my 3NT bid wasn't great and I should have bid 3♥ FSF and not been overthinking the possible situation of partner holding ♥Ax and wanting the likely heart lead to come to my queen in that case.

I tried an aggressive 4♥ which worked out badly: [hv=pc=n&s=st632h2da9874cj63&w=s74hak54dkj52c842&n=s8hqj8763dt3ckt97&e=sakqj95ht9dq6caq5&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=pp4h4sppp]399|300[/hv] That got us a magnificent 1/8 MPs. The full traveller: 4♠E 12 -680 3♠E 12 -230 3NT E 11 -660* 4♠E 12 -680 3♠E 12 -230 *Declarer got a club lead into the AQ so I don't know why they didn't manage to make 12 tricks by knocking out the ♦A. Normally I wouldn't open as aggressively as that but decided to have a go after some inspiration on this forum.

♠8 ♥QJ8763 ♦T3 ♣KT97 Matchpoints, green against red, two passes to you. Your call?

[hv=pc=n&s=saqhq752da95c9742&n=st975hadqj3caqjt3&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1n(12-14)p2c(Stayman)2hdp3nppp]266|200[/hv] Matchpoints. West leads the ♥J. What is your planned line of play?

[hv=pc=n&n=sakt953hq93dqt9cj&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=p1sp2cp2sp3dp]133|200[/hv] Matchpoints. System is Acol weak NT. Your bid?

Double gives partner a choice of places to play. Bidding 2♥ is showing a poor suit at the two level that partner might not have support for. At least if partner bids 2♥ after the double they will very likely have at least three of them. No double doesn't promise 5-5 in my agreements but if it is a choice between double and 2♥ I choose double.

I passed and this was the result: [hv=pc=n&s=sqt9hak53d982c862&w=sh986daqt6cakt753&n=sakj875ht742d75cq&e=s6432hqjdkj43cj94&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=pp1c1sp2s3c3sppp]399|300[/hv] We have 5♣ on. Thankfully teammates found 4♠ and made it which brought in a few imps, but I was wondering if anyone would have taken any action in the auction on my hand. It is yet another hand where opps compete to the three level and I get squeezed out.

[hv=pc=n&e=s6432hqjdkj43cj94&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=pp1c1sp2s3c3s]133|200[/hv] Now what?

IMO the suit is too poor to bid at the two level, especially when opps have advertised the majority of the HCP and not found a fit. I think double is ok first time but not the second time. I agree that if you are going to double a second time and force partner to choose a suit at the three level you might as well have bid 2NT and got the full shape across.

[hv=pc=n&e=s6432hqjdkj43cj94&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=pp1c1s]133|200[/hv] Swiss teams, playing 5CM strong NT, not 2/1, 1♣ opening could be short. What do you do here?

Thanks for the responses. This didn't happen at the table, but it was related to a hand which I held where if we had the agreement that a double jump was a splinter, I would have bid 3♠. This is what happened: [hv=pc=n&s=saq4hj8dq9ckj7543&w=sj975haq642da84cq&n=skt8632h97dt75c96&e=shkt53dkj632cat82&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1c1hp2c3c4hppp]399|300[/hv] This was a Swiss Teams, 8 board rounds with an unfamiliar partner (only two prior practice sessions, one of which was of limited use because we were on the wrong end of a hand bias). I thought about bidding 3♠ as a splinter at my first turn but decided against it without discussion and took the route of going through a cue bid to show a constructive raise. We found game although a slam is on, a grand if you take the inspired play of dropping the ♦Q.

[hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1c1hp3s]133|100[/hv] How would you interpret the 3♠ bid?

Bridge is more frustrating and at times far more demoralising than chess because of the distribution of randomness on top of the variance in your skill. Chess is a game of complete information and has no luck so if you lose at chess, it is because you were outplayed. Bridge is a probabilistic game and consists of making decisions based on incomplete information where good decisions can be punished and bad decisions can be rewarded. MP scoring where you have no influence over your opponents (which is unusual in games and sports) amplifies the luck element. I'd say both are interesting where for me, interesting means beautiful plays that can theoretically be found but requires skill/excellent judgement based on the available information. Interesting to me is not a highly distribution deal where I get the only opponents to bid 5 over 5 where it is right and so get an unavoidable bad score, but many club players seem to find those sort of hands interesting, which I suspect is because of a higher luck factor. As far as a better scoring system is concerned, my opinion is that a score based on how close you got to the best score possible based on what happened in the bidding and play at your table would be ideal, but that would be extremely difficult if not impossible to implement.

I wouldn't with a flat ten loser hand and only three small hearts.

I found out one useful thing, when the auction goes 1m - 1X - 1M she could be 4-4 with a weak NT hand. I found that out after the auction 1♦ - 1♥ - 1♠ when I put her back to 2♦ with Jx and she played in a 4-2 fit for a bottom. That was entirely my fault as I should have bid 1NT instead with my 8 HCP almost entirely in the club suit.

Ideally I would have a thorough discussion on bids and sequences in competitive situations but given I am only playing with this partner in one event I'm not sure it is worth the time and effort to go into in depth discussion. Yesterday we only got 49% but that was mostly self inflicted, neither of us were at our best, and it didn't help that it took until round seven out of eight before I got to declare. 58% last week was a good result and I am happy with that. I was expecting much worse. When there are only a few tables and boards are only played three times, I question how meaningful the final scores are. The purpose of our recent sessions was not to win but to get a bit of a feel for each other. The session yesterday worked out badly for that because we were on the wrong end of a hand bias and hardly got into the auction on many boards. I've been getting less frustrated with results recently because I have been doing better which I suspect is due to a reduction in being on the wrong side of randomness but I haven't done any rigorous analysis.

This was a scratch partnership with very little agreement beyond cue bidding opps suit shows a constructive raise. A double by partner would have shown heart shortage and tolerance for the black suits. I assumed 3♦ was a better than minimum opener. There was no agreement on what a double over 3♥ by me would mean. North is a fairly experienced but not very strong player. South is a weak player.

It certainly worked for them. The NS pair here won convincingly with 65.14%, we were second by a fair distance with 58.73% so they weren't volunteering many boards to anyone else in the field either.