AL78

Matchpoints, game all: Here is a problem hand my partner held during the following auction: [hv=pc=n&w=sk96hdaqt76432ca2&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1h1s2h]133|200[/hv] What do you do now?

If West had a spade less I might have bid 3♠ with seven to the KQ rather than 2♠.

I think they misplayed at trick one. If they duck my opening lead they can win a heart switch, cross to hand with a trump, take the marked spade finesse and discard the losing heart on the ace. It makes no difference if partner can ruff with the master trump. It is bad enough when opposition make wild bids but worse when I reward them for it, which just encourages them to keep bidding wildly.

I took the line suggested by Mike. Won the ace, exited with a spade, the defence cashed their two spade winners establishing my ten, then exited with a heart. I then tested the clubs, they broke 3-3 so ran them, overtook the ♥Q and cashed the spade. I played a diamond but the king didn't come down so I lost a diamond at the end. Ten tricks was worth 2 out of 16 matchpoints. Three pairs made 11 tricks and three pairs managed 12 tricks although four of those played it the other way around and got a red suit lead. Just realised I have the auction and the hands wrong although the play problem is the same. It was me holding the weak hand who was declaring. The deal and auction is as follows: [hv=pc=n&s=st532hk43dqt65c43&w=skqj4hj9752d2c975&n=sa98haqda94cakq62&e=s76ht86dkj873cjt8&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=ppp2c(8PT%20or%2022-23%20bal)p2d(relay)p3cp3nppp]399|300[/hv] I was attempting to rotate the deal so South was declarer (we were EW at the table) and I got muddled between this deal and an auction on a different deal where I held a similar strength hand to partner and opened 2♣ followed by 2NT. Most people were declaring the other way because partner for reasons unknown chose to emphasise her club suit instead of the shape so I ended up bidding NT.

Matchpoints: [hv=pc=n&s=sa98haqda94cakq62&n=st532hk43dqt65c43&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=ppp2c(8PT%20or%2022-23%20bal)p2d(Relay)p2np3nppp]266|200[/hv] ♠K led, how do you plan the play?

Sorry I'm an idiot. I've posted the wrong dummy. I'll start a new thread with the correct hands.

[hv=pc=n&s=sa98haqda94cakq62&n=s76ht86dkj873cjt8&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=ppp2c(8PT%20or%2022-23%20bal)p2d(Relay)p2np3nppp]266|200[/hv] ♠K led. How do you plan to play this?

MPs: [hv=pc=n&s=saj3ha852dt8752c8&w=s54hk7643d9ckj763&n=st6hqjdaj643caqt9&e=skq9872ht9dkqc542&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=1n(12-14)2spp3dp5dppp&p=sksas5s6d2d9dj]399|300[/hv] I had yet another situation where I have two choices. Playing a heart might work but do I need to cash the spade winner first? I decided to cash my spade winner then switched to a heart and that was -400 and a joint bottom. I was thinking that since declarer held two hearts and five diamonds, he must be 5332 so can only get one of two possible heart losers away the spade jack. There is likely a way I could have worked this out properly at the table but it didn't come to me. I was worried about declarer holding ♣AKQ and getting dummy's spade losers away but now realise he would have done that at trick two with that holding. This is makeable double dummy but declarer didn't get off to the correct start so we should have got it down.

On a bad day my main error is turning up. :lol:

I try to do this but it hasn't worked that well for me over the last five or six years, hence why I tend to believe my bridge has regressed over the years.

I play 1NT (overcall) X as takeout as well and similarly 1NT (overcall) P (P) X. When playing 5CM 15-17NT I do play support doubles with one partner. With the first niggle hand in this thread this was with a new partner and we had forgot to agree support doubles.

This is what I suspect and probably my partner(s) needs to balance more as well. Last week I played against one of my partner's where I opened 1♥, she (LHO) doubled, my partner raised to 3♥ passed out and I made 10 tricks. LHO held a 4333 19 count and tried to blame her partner for not bidding 3♠ with a 4 count (holding 5044 shape, ♠KJxxx). I said with a hand that strong she should have reopened with a double, they can make 3♠. The reason it was a 50% board is because other tables were allowed to play in 3♥X=. You are correct that in the fields I play in, people do bid hyper-aggressively at times overcalling on rubbish, but they have a habit of finding partner with wonderful support or mamage to do it at the perfect time to stuff up our bidding, and it is difficult to punish them properly when they are wrong. Once they get used to getting away with poor bidding it fuels more poor bidding. Several times I have asked a couple of my partners to stop overcalling vulnerable at the two level on five to the KQ and barely an opening hand. Expert players have solid methods and judgement which allows them to work out what is going on and swing the axe on poor bidding, and have the defensive skill to take the full multiples of 100.

My partner held that hand, I was the one who overcalled 3♠. As it happens, once the opponent's prevent me from playing in 3♠ we are destined for a poor score unless we can find a double and get them down which is extremely unlikely.

I do play weak NT with the partners I play Acol with. With the 5 card major partners I play strong NT. One of those partners (the one who is often criticised on here) doesn't like Acol and is unlikely to change to a weak NT. One of the issues of playing a strong NT is when the opponents come in at the two level and I hold the weak NT hand as opener. I am reluctant to bid again unless I hold a maximum weak NT for fear partner will place me with a better hand and bid up to a losing contract. It is a bit easier playing a weak NT because I will not hold a poor 8 loser flat hand (I'm either intermediate or strong or have a long suit) and so I can either support partner at the three level or bid NT and I will have the playing strength to justify that. I'm guessing from your question you are visualising me as a player who has played Acol weak NT for years and has fairly recently in his bridge career moved into playing strong NT and isn't getting the competitive decisions right (e.g. being too timid) due to lack of strong NT related system knowledge/experience. If you are spotting a common pattern that is possibly causing me to lose in the competitive auctions I would be interested and grateful to hear it.

You make a bid which is forcing to game, then you can have a discussion about which game. 3♣ forces to game and asks partner for more information about their hand. Nullve's example auction shows how to narrow in on a game, you choose game in one of your seven card fits once it becomes established the clubs are wide open (i.e. when neither of you can bid 3NT).

3♠ is pre-emptive and my hand is a maximum for that here. How can I work out that doubling is a reasonable action here? As far as I am concerned at the time East has their bid and 4♥= will be a common score.

There was this one where I don't think we could have done better: [hv=pc=n&s=st86h76dkj76ckt73&w=s43haj94dq85caj65&n=skqj9752hk85d32c8&e=sahqt32dat94cq942&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=p1n(12-14)3s4hppp]399|300[/hv] I thought East's last bid volunteering a four card suit at the four level was insane but it was a/the winning call and she drifted one off for a 20% score to us. Out of the other five tables three were in 3♠N, one doubled, all making. The only reason it wasn't a bottom was because one table played in 4♠X-1. If we cannot play in 3♠ we lose the board.

Another competitive hand where I got it wrong (I was North): [hv=pc=n&s=s4hakj62dj98c9764&w=sajt7ht4daq76ct52&n=sk86h875dt52cakqj&e=sq9532hq93dk43c83&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1c1s2h2sppp]399|300[/hv] I need to bid 3♥ which makes. Whilst I have four quick tricks in clubs I was again concerned with the high number of losers and that 3♥ would show a better hand with fewer losers. I didn't expect partner to hold a singleton. Again the weak NTers don't have this problem as East does not have a two level overcall and they can safely come to rest in 2♥ which is what happened at the majority of tables.

Yes I have just worked it out, we need to attack the diamonds whilst I hold the trump ace. After unblocking the spades declarer has no immediate way back to hand, their best chance is to try a trump, I go up with the ace and give partner his ruff and we have a second diamond trick. It is like mathematics, order of operations matters. I'm afraid I am not good enough to see that defence at trick one, I'll leave that one to the monks of St Titus. How do I know that isn't a frozen suit?

No we didn't. Partner led the ♣Q, I overtook (I mean covered dummy's king) and gave him a ruff, we only got one heart and one diamond in addition. I can't see the killer defence although I agree there is a way to get it down. Declarer can pitch a diamond loser on a spade and the 2-2 heart break means he can ruff two losers in dummy. Our first two tricks have set up dummy's clubs as well. What am I missing?

Thanks, that is useful information. I agreed with this partner (first time partnership) that 1H -(1S) - 2H - (2S) - 3H is competitive and 1H -(1S) - 2H - (2S) - X is invitational but haven't talked about similar situations like this. Going by what you say it should be possible to agree that when opponents support to the three level, double is invitational in our or partner's long suit and bidding is purely competitive.

Admittedly I have been going through a run of poor hands over the last couple of months (i.e. mean HCP well below 10). Last Wednesday was a good example, my average HCP 8.04, we declared 12 out of of 25 boards of which eight of those were declared by partner. Another niggle is hands like this: [hv=pc=n&s=saj2hkj983d973c86&w=s987643h64daqt2cq&n=skht752dk64ckjt32&e=sqt5haqdj85ca9754&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p1c1h1s3hppp]399|300[/hv] Sitting East I was reluctant to bid 3♠ with a minimal weak NT hand and badly placed heart honors. The field playing a weak NT don't have this problem as South will not overcall at the two level hence one pair plays in 2♠= and the other pair over-ambitiously plays in 4♠-2. I do somewhat frequently get these difficult competitive decisions thrown at me and get them wrong more often than not, only to find most of the field never got tested. I think there is a combination of mis-judgement in competitive auctions and being the only one to be put to the test, sometimes the opps bid one more where others don't and it is the winning action. I'm tempted to log the hands where we get pushed around and lose the board and see if I/we could have done more.

No, it says "declaring side", "defending side" and "pass". Unfortunately there seems no way of inserting a png image into a post otherwise I would show a screenshot.

On my recent thread where I made a questional pre-empt in third seat at favourable and ended up with a bottom, someone responded with this advice: "I would not try to win boards in the bidding." I can see where this is coming from and playing down the middle is arguably the most optimal way to get a decent score. On the other hand I get the impression I am not aggressive enough in the bidding, and on occasional hands posted on here, many people advocate bidding where I would have passed. I had a look on Pianola at my year-to-date stats and it says I have defended on 76.4% of boards. To my mind this does not look like an ingredient for winning bridge so I have been bidding more frequently in borderline situations where in the past I would have held back, and the 3♣ pre-empt is one example. Am I advised to avoid doing this?

I bid 3♥ (too much playing strength for 2♥) and it worked out badly as partner got too enthusiastic: [hv=pc=n&w=saqhkqj9653dj4c83&e=skj54hadaq52cq642&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=p1hp1sp3hp4np5sp6nppp]266|200[/hv] ♣A led followed by a club to the king killed it immediately. This was a scratch partnership so we haven't really got any feel for each other's bidding style.