bluenikki

Actually, 18 would be extremely rare. 14 would be rare, but not extremely so. ACBL wouldn't care these days, I believe. Frankly, I think miscounting has higher frequency than either. But again ACBL wouldn't care.

Thanks. But I wasn't asking whether the agreement was a good idea. I was asking how it should be announced. Taken literally, it would be 14-18. But that would suggest 14 and 18 were opened far more often than they would be. Carl

His 1975 book "Win with Romex: the key to accurate bidding" covers it in detail.

Apologies for the off-topic question. But I've wondered for a long time: If your partnership agrees to subtract a point for no aces and add a point for three tens, how should that affect your announced range?

Of course FSF occurs when intending to show length in one of the previous suits, but when a direct bid would show the wrong strength. But the most common case is when responder would have bid notrump except for no stopper in the fourth suit. Of course, opener will bid some number of notrump with a full stopper. But what if, as here, they have a partial stopper? As best I can remember, the classic method 45 years ago was to raise the fourth suit. If there is NO way for opener to show a partial stopper, what is responder to do? FSF will then be no help. Are they supposed to blast 3NT with Qx at their second turn?

♣♣ I don't know how Precisioneers do it, but here is the scheme George Rosenkranz published 50 years ago. Actually, these auctions assumed that it was already known that the partnership held at least 10 control points; that is, it was missing at most an ace or two kings. I'll say more about that at the end. Opener replies to 2NT by bidding the first suit Qxxx or better. 3NT would deny any suit as good as Qxxx. Suppose opener has bid a suit. If responder has Qxxx or better in the suit opener named, they single raise with one top honor, jump raise with two tops. Otherwise, they bid the cheapest Qxxx or better at the three level. To be bid at the four level, a suit must be playable at slam opposite a weaker holding than Qxxx, because opener has denied such a suit. So Qxxxx, AKQx, or better. Responder's 3NT denies such a suit. If opener bids 3NT, denying Qxxx in any suit, responder bids a suit Qxxxx, AKQx, or better. Otherwise bids some number of notrump: No slam-suitable suit fit exists.. So far, so good. Thereafter, suits are bid where a slam-suitable fit has not yet been denied. All suit bids below slam are forcing. Here is an example: 1♣ - 2NT ; 3♦ - 3♥ - ? Opener has denied Hxxx in clubs, shown Hxxx in diamonds. Responder has denied Hxxx in diamonds, shown Hxxx in hearts. If opener has Hxxx in hearts they must raise hearts, jumping with two tops. Failing that, they show Hxxx in spades if possible. And then it gets interesting. Responder has not denied AKQx or Hxxxx in clubs. So opener's next priority is showing a possible slam-suitable club fit, even though they do not have Hxxx. So 4♣ shows xxxx or HHX or better. Likewise, responder has denied Hxxx in diamonds, but not xxxx or HHx. So opener's next priority is bidding 4♦ if a diamond slam is not yet excluded: Hxxxx or AKQx or better. Failing that, opener bids some number of notrump. Here is another example illustrating an important point. 1♣ - 2NT ; 3♥ - 4♥ ; ? Hearts have not been "agreed"! Responder has only one top honor. If opener likewise has just one, you are probably *not* going to play in hearts. Suppose opener has ♠ AQxx ♥ Kxxx ♦ Ax ♣ Kxx And responder ♠ Kxxx ♥ AJxx ♦ KQJx ♣ x Opener's ♥ bid was forced, not an expression of opinion. So in the auction above, opener raises hearts with two top honors, forcing if below slam. Otherwise, they bid spades with Hxxx or better (responder has denied *nothing* other than a second high heart honor.). Otherwise, holding a minor, they should tend not to show it at the five-level unless HHxx or better or unless sure of slam values. Otherwise, bid some number of notrump. Back to responder. They should single-raise spades with just one top honor (forcing!) and jump raising with two. If opener has bid a minor, they raise to six with Hxxx or better. Those are the priorities. Failing those, responder should show a minor with HHxx or better (forcing!) or bid 5♥ (forcing!) with something like HJ9xx or better, playable at slam opposite Hxxx. Otherwise bid some number of notrump, nonforcing. Once you understand the priority principles, these auctions are easy at the table. But you may have noticed that you are going to slam whenever you have a suit fit of at least 8 including AKQ. So you'd better not be missing an ace and a king or three kings. One way around this is for opener's suits at the three-level to count control points with 3♣ showing three-or-fewer. A better was is for 2♠ to show the 14+ hand. Opener bids 2NT to ask for responder's control points. Opener's suit bid at the three-level cancels the action, showing a hand with a 6-card suit or some 5-5. Responder in turn should should not begin this structure holding a 6-card or two 5-cards. In my opinion, you should xxxxxx as 5-card and xxxxx as 4-card. Carl

With this hand, the partnership has 26 out of 30 hcp. Passing 4♠ would mean you assume partner's game forces are overbids. Carl

It seems to me this is Defensive Bidding 101. You bid 1♠ in tempo, and partner apologizes if it works out badly. Carl

If partner will pass a takeout double with only five trumps, it is difficult to conduct *any* defensive auction.

When there is a 6-card side suit (or a 5-card side suit in a hand with 5 trumps), a singleton is just another 2nd round control.

After Goren's health collapsed, stuff still continued to be published under his name. Switched to 5-card majors and such. The advantage of playing SAYC with a stranger SHOULD be that it is specific about agreements, however unoptimal. Sadly, the name came to mean something like minimalist 5-card majors with strong notrump, so you have no idea what a stranger thinks it means. Why don't they announce minimalist SA or Standard American Green Card or something else?

Regardless of what Stayman variant you say you are playing, you are certainly responding 2♣ when dealt a weak hand shaped 3=4=5=1, right? And there is nothing rare about that. (Provided opener does not systemically rebid 2NT to show both majors! Stayman himself used the 2NT rebid to show full max with strong 5+ ♣.)

Surely, that is a *weak* doubleton. So that a borderline-invitational responder can identify wasted quacks.

In America 50 years ago, there was an unwritten understanding that this requested a *spade* lead. Earlier still, there was a wonderful convention called the Fisher double. After an auction beginning with 1NT and ending with 3NT, it requests a diamond lead if Stayman had been bid and a club lead if Stayman had not been bid. The theory, I guess, was that without a double, partner will tend to lead a major, it's 50% they'll hit your suit if it's a major. Carl

Whoever invented the name negative free bid has a lot to answer for.

Pretending you're weak doesn't come into it. But dealing with a 2NT overcall after a 1♥ opening is way simpler than dealing with a 4NT. overcall of a. 2♣ opening.

In a book of bidding quizzes, Terence Reese asked how to bid the hand with 13 clubs. Obviously it would be wonderful, he wrote, to declare 7♣ redoubled. But the practical goal is to be allowed to play in clubs at any level. (He recommended opening 4♣ . Then repeated club bids might sound like sacrifices.) In the case of this hand, it may not be wise to sound confident. Carl

What would/should west's double of 3NT mean?

Having to rebid AKJTx is no burden at all. The trouble is having to rebid Q5432. Seems to me that rebidding the suit over the intervention should show a good five-card suit or a fair (at least) 6+ suit. Q65432 should also not be voluntarily rebid. The criterion should be probably only one loser facing small doubleton. Carl

I am surprised that no one mentioned the most important opportunity given by the intervention: To deny a good holding in the suit opened.

This is the beginning of the chapter "Failure to Lead Trumps" of Kelsey's "Improve Your Bridge." "Of all the expensive errors that are made in defence the reluctance to lead trumps at any time is one of the most widespread. However, this is a bad habit that is easily overcome once the basic logic of the trump lead has been grasped. "The subject of opening leads is a thorny one, and many players will hold that the failure to find a critical trump lead should be classed as a ’wrong view’ rather than error. I disagree. The bidding will almost invariable give sufficient indication, and I believe that the failure to find a trump lead on the proper occasion is normally a clear-cut and demonstrable mistake."

When your partner has not bid a suit, the opponents have bid three suits, and you hold the empty ace of the fourth, what are you to do? If the strong hand seems to be on your left, underleading is attractive; but I lack the courage usually. Likewise, a doubleton lead is awful. But if that's the suit you need to lead ... Online play helps here: you can actually hold your nose. Carl

If the 3♣ bid does not show game interest, then what do you do with 16-17? If your answer to that is cue bid, then what do you do with 19? Really, contemporary defensive bidding methods make no allowance for the intervenor's having a really good hand. Seems like inviting frequent psychic openings.

Why would anything but double occur to anyone? Are they afraid of a 3-card reply? Are they afraid that partner will be furious at having to play a 4-3 fit? In the auction given after the double, the 2♣ advance is an abomination. Is there a secret agreement never to jump in a minor? Which would account for the absurd 3♣ rebid. Carl

A distributional gadget urges a trump lead when the auction ends in a partscore. 1♣ - (2♣) - P - (2♥/♠) - all pass. Declarer will often be 3-2 in the majors and will need the ruff to set up dummy's side suit.