AL78

There look to be three losers, ♦A, ♠A and a club. There is the possibility of a heart loser if they don't break and a second diamond loser if one of the opponents holds ♦AJx. I don't think East holds this otherwise West might have led a singleton hoping for a ruff, so the diamonds are either 2-2 or West holds AJx. The problem is if I duck and East holds the ♣K, they might switch to a singleton diamond and the defence get a diamond ruff, down one. This is where I struggle to work out the odds. Ducking will be fine when West has led away from the king, when East has the king and doesn't switch to a singleton diamond, or the diamonds are 2-2. The clubs look to be 4-4 and West didn't overcall 1♠, so if they hold ♦AJx and ♣Kxxx they don't hold ♠ATxx(x) or they would have doubled or overcalled, and we have to hope West has two or three hearts. I think I will duck the lead in dummy, it requires a very narrow range of layouts for me to get a diamond ruff against me via a singleton diamond switch, and with a layout consistent with West not finding a double or spade overcall. My plan after that assuming I don't get the unfortunate layout is to draw trumps and play the spade king, whoever holds the ace might duck eliminating one loser. Beyond that, if it comes down to playing the diamonds myself from hand for one loser, play from the top and hope for a 2-2 break or stiff jack.

Partner shouldn't get excited if I double to show hearts then support diamonds later. I can cue bid first time to show a good hand with diamond support, although doubling first would imply a hand better than this. I think I would pre-emptively raise to 3♦ (partner almost certainly has four), not ideal with an ace but sometimes you have to do something without a textbook hand, and I'm an advocate of showing support asap in a competitive auction, especially with a weak hand and when the opponents might hold a fit in a higher ranking suit.

Can you get to 7♦ when one of the opponents throws in a club pre-empt and the other one raises, which is likely given they have 11 including all three top honors between them?

The 1♠ wasn't a psyche, it was described as nearly always four+, but can be three very rarely with weak minors and short hearts.

I contacted one of the opponents on that hand enquiring abou the auction (and who pointed out theat "Expert View" on the boards referred to the auctions at the tables), and he said that it needs a trump lead to take 4♠ off. I (West) cannot lead a trump because North was declarer so my partner was on lead. I theoretically could have overtaken her ♦K lead and led a trump but that is too advanced a defence for me to find.

Firstly, I apologise for the poor formatting in my OP. I was trying to rattle something off quickly and was tired at the time, I can and will make better posts than this in future. Secondly, thanks for the instructive points. It is apparent there are situations I am not bidding when I should, and this is likely a contribution to the reason I declare four times in 25 boards. That sandwitch 1NT advice is very useful. I have asked one of the opponents on the defensivce error hand for the auction so will come back on that one. At least part of the reason I can't remember it is because it was very unusual so can't reconstruct it. Here is what happened on the couple of hands I posed as problems. Hand 1: [hv=pc=n&s=sht2dqt97432caj53&w=sj87642h63dakj5c4&n=s93h987d6ckqt9872&e=sakqt5hakqj54d8c6&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=5dpp5hppp]399|300[/hv] I decided to open an aggressive 5♦, which on the layout is the wrong suit to sacrifice in and had the potential to go badly wrong, but East decided to choose a major which ended the auction. 13 imps in when the other two tables find 6♠, so I got lucky. What can East do when it comes round to them? 5NT pick a slam and correct a 6♣ bid to 6♠? Hand 3: [hv=pc=n&s=sakq84hq5da94cq73&w=stha96dkj763ck985&n=s9752hk8d82cjt642&e=sj63hjt7432dqt5ca&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=pp1sdp4hppp]399|300[/hv] There is a new addition to the scorecards on the club website, it now has an "Expert View" below the board which gives some sample auctions, and this was one of them. Having looked at my partner's hand again I'm surprised she didn't bid a pre-emptive 3♠ raise at her first opportunity, I would then bid 4♠ over 4♥, and if I was very lucky I play there undoubled for one down if they don't find the club ruff (not easy). Still lose imps when the other tables are playing in 1♠ and 2♠ but not as many. Not much you can do if you get the most aggressive opponents in the field and it is right to be aggressive. There were two other hands we lost a game swing but I know why. One was my partner's fault and the other we could do nothing about. That is why we finished bottom, there were several hands we could have done more which turned out expensive when we didn't, and we were on the receiving end of bad luck on a couple of others. I've since found out the "Expert" view is the auctions that happened at the tables, so this is what happened on the 4♠ hand: [hv=pc=n&s=saq74hakj73d4cj52&w=st9832h4da862cq93&n=skj5h8dj9753cak84&e=s6hqt9652dkqtct76&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=pp1hp1sp3sp3np4sppp]399|300[/hv]

Thanks for your insight. On 2. I did receive explanation of the opponent's bidding, and North had shown a spade suit in the bidding, so there was no indication they were playing in a Moysian fit. On 5. is it not dangerous to overcall 1NT in the sandwich position when partner is marked with rubbish (unless opener has opened very light)? If it is accepted as a risk worth taking, I will suggest to partner that we play this.

Playing 5CM, strong NT. IMP pairs, three tables in total. [hv=pc=n&s=sht2dqt97432caj53]133|100[/hv] Non vul vs vuln, you dealer. Your call? One reason I lose at bridge, another defensive decision I couldn't work out: [hv=pc=n&s=saq74hakj73d4cj52&w=st9832h4da862cq93&n=skj5h8dj9753cak84&e=s6hqt9652dkqtct76]399|300[/hv] I can't remember the bidding, but the opponents were playing an unusual system and ended up in 4♠ (partner was silent) which apparently can go down on best defence. We or I failed to find the best defence. Partner led the ♦A then switched to the ♣T which went J, Q, K. Declarer led a heart to the ace and played the king. I have to decide whether to ruff high or low. I ruffed low and was surprised to find partner held six hearts when declarer overruffed. I think I blew that one by not ruffing high. One table making 3NT, the second table didn't get past 2♠ so that was 5.5 imps out. [hv=pc=n&s=sakq84hq5da94cq73&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=pp1sdp4h]133|200[/hv] I decided I was a bit too good for a 15-17 NT so decided to open 1♠, planning to bid NT showing an 18 count next time. What do you do now? [hv=pc=n&s=sak9hj942d92cq864&w=sjt853hkt8d753ca3&n=s7h7dakjt4ckjt752&e=sq642haq653dq86c9&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1d1h1n2hppp]399|300[/hv] Just making for 6.5 imps out. One table found the making 5♣ our way. I'm not sure if I could have done more as South. Is partner's hand worth showing the second suit at the three level? [hv=pc=n&s=sakqhq52dq6ckj753&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1dp1sp2dppp]133|200[/hv] This was a flat board for us, but I had a comment from partner (this was RealBridge) that I should have done something, like a double. What do you think? I was quite pleased with the way I played this one, admittedly the defence was sub-optimal. Minus 10 imps for that, we should be in 3NT: [hv=pc=n&s=sqt86hq65dqt7432c&w=saj972hj42daj8ck7&n=sk3ht873dk5cqj854&e=s54hak9d96cat9632&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=pp2d2sp3sppp&p=dkd6d3d8d5d9dqdadjh7h9d2h2h3hah5hkh6h4h8c2s6c7c4d7ckskc3s3s4stsjhjhts5hqc6d4s7c5sac8c9s8s2cjctsqdts9cq]399|300[/hv] [hv=pc=n&w=s8642hjt9753dca85&e=saha64daqj8632cq6&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=1dp1h1s3dppp]266|200[/hv] We should be in a cold 4♥, that was 5 imps out. Can't remember if we were playing support doubles, probably not or partner forgot. Maybe I should have repeated my heart suit. Stone dead last in the end with -19.5 imps, another evening to forget.

Yes I should have said in my line duck the heart at trick one which avoids having to do it later. A bit fortunate the defender with two hearts only has two spades so a heart loser can be ruffed.

Win in hand, play spades from the top, hope thay are 3-2 or singleton ten. Use dummy's two entries to take the diamond finesse twice. If it doesn't work the first time, hope for a 3-3 break in hearts. That would be my plan at the table. I suspect I am completely wrong as my line looks too easy for this to have been posted as a problem.

You get the same answer as MikeH. He says 37.5% for specifically two finesses out of three working. You then add the additional case of all three working which is 12.5%, 100*(0.5^3) to get 50% for the situation of at least two finesses working. Alternatively go through the combinations and count the favourable ones: LLL WLL LWL LLW WWL* WLW* LWW* WWW* * denotes a desirable combination, there are four out of eight possible combinations, so 50% probability. There are three out of eight cases where exactly two finesses work, 37.5%.

I play 3♣ as weak, both minors with one partner so would open that. Failing that I would open a weak 2♦, and if I wasn't playing that I would pass and hope to come in with a 2NT both minors bid if partner can't open.

Now that is a good one. :lol: :lol:

Because they are your significant other. They are not your significant other, but they are small, cute and pretty, and nice to cuddle.

I reckon there are one or two people at my club who would open that West hand a Benji 2♣ followed by 3♥ after the relay. I'm not saying that is best but after such a start East is always driving to a grand.

No, The retired people now would be in their late 40's to 60's when I was young (late teens/early 20's) so middle aged/mature, not young. As I said I don't think demograph has anything to do with it. An arsehole is an arsehole no matter how old they are. You have summed it up by mentioning anonymity. Some people have only a thin veneer of civility in public beneath which is there true nasty side, and the absence of consequences allows this nasty side to come to the surface. You are probably right that if people online could be identified it would reduce rudeness, but then you get into privacy and safety issues.

It is ironic that rudeness is endemic in bridge, a game dominated by retired people. In my youth, it was common to hear of elderly people complaining about the bad manners of young people, and how young people have no respect. I don't think there is any generational difference in behaviour at all, or if there is, it is tiny.

Chess is completely different from bridge in that it is a game of complete information and there is no luck beyond who you are playing against and whether you are white or black. This makes it far more optimal for logical machines to play it to a very high standard.

Nice misfit deal.

This hand came up in relation to a discussion with one of the better players in the club. I was asking him how he made 4♠ on a different board and commented on how these two ran into a lot of bad luck (they had two slams against them consecutively, one was cold, the other requires a very unlikely defensive line to get down), and he replied by saying they should concentrate more on the boards where they could have done better. He used this board as an example of where they could have done better, and he was technically correct, but I don't think the killing defence was clear at all, hence why I posted it here. Here is the full deal: [hv=pc=n&s=sq764hk5dq74ck974&w=saj93hq8632d832cj&n=sthjt4datcaq86532&e=sk852ha97dkj965ct]399|300[/hv] After the low heart lead, East has to switch to a low spade won by the jack followed by a low spade back to the king, allowing the defence to take four spade tricks and the heart ace for one down. They didn't find this so 3NT made for an 8% board. The standard contract was a club partscore making 10 or 11 tricks, two were going off in a spade partscore EW, one EW went off in 4♦, and two NS pairs bid and made 5♣. Assuming I have the auction correct (and I may not have), I don't think this was a clear cut defence and so I think it is harsh to say they should have done better on this board, even though it is theoretically possible.

Low and 4th best from an honor, top or second top from rubbish.

Matchpoints. This hand came up with my friend and her partner. I am making an educated guess at the auction: [hv=pc=n&n=sthjt4datcaq86532&e=sk852ha97dkj965ct&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1cd1s2h3cp3nppp]266|200[/hv] West leads the ♥3. What do you do at trick one and if you choose to play the ace, what do you return?

A good example is Bridge Master Beginner level A-29. Trivial at IMPS, win the lead, duck a club, cold if clubs are not 5-0. What do you do at MPS? Go for the 3-2 break which is about a 2 in 3 chance and go off on a 4-1 break, or take the safety play, assuming you have no information about the opponent's hands and it is likely almost everyone will be in 3NT? My guess would be go for maximum tricks which will be a winner in the long term given the odds of a 3-2 break.

Unclear as yet. There is a lot of indecision on the committee at my club. There is a meeting with one of the local council's COVID information officer, I guess a decision will me made shortly after that.

To quote from previous e-mail correspondance when I asked her this question: "I have taken the Bergen responses out of Sally Brock's Book 'Easy Guide to 5 card majors'. This is what she says: * A 3C response shows 10-12 pts with THREE card support * A 3D response shows 8-11 pts with FOUR card support * A jump raise shows 0-7 with at least FOUR card support, one useful High card and a doubleton. I judge this bid on loser count and vulnerability. She continues: This makes it easy to distinguish between 3 and 4 card support and helps to judge slam expectations and whether to bid on if opponents intervene." Sorry, it was 8-11, not 7-11 for the 3♦ response.