Echognome

Why is this concept so difficult? If someone gives you a pair of hands single dummy and tells you a contract, can you not judge whether it's a good contract? Maybe someone else will give you a pair of hands and an auction (including opponents bidding) and ask you if it is a good contract. What will you say? It depends on if we're judging by #1, #2, or #3 criterion? No, you will base it off the information available. And that's what we generally do when people ask us a question. We can ask them for more information of course, but if they don't have it, we can give them our view based on the information we have. I think you are over-complicating matters.

1. 5NT. At least try to get to the right strain. 2. 6♣. Many reasons why this may be the best spot. The 4-4 can often be the better contract and protects partner's potential diamond card on the lead. 3. I think I would pass. Hate not to bid a 6 card heart suit. One alternative I haven't seen mentioned (maybe I'm blind) is double, planning on bidding hearts cheaply next round. We obviously don't expect partner to leave it in, but when we bid hearts next round, we have limited our hand.

If pass is truly not desirable, then the question is how important is it to bid this hand - should we change the meaning of double or 1NT to accommodate this hand? If we are unwilling to sacrifice the meaning of any other bid to accomodate this hand, then we don't really have that strong of desire to compete. If the answer is only: all actions are worse, then pass is the best bid and thus it is the desired action. I have to say that this sounds like an awful lot of semantics.

I dig. Again, I note I didn't criticize partner's bid. I was more curious if others agreed with the post mortem of raising hearts and how one should consider it. Given that there were some reasonable players advocating such a call, I didn't find it as trivial as many of you have. I can't really say what I would have bid at the table, as I didn't hold the hand. However, it does seem to me that rebidding KQT9xxx is a good thing to do.

Partner's hand was: ♠ ♥KT8xxxx ♦xxx ♣xxx Not that it proves anything, nor that you agree with partner's call. I think the expected heart length is 8 (6+2) with a relatively low variance. I think the expected spade length is 8 (7+1). Then the question is whether we expect the hand to play better in spades or hearts and despite what others have said, I will note that there was a 1NT overcall on our left, so I think we should at least consider (even if we ultimately reject) playing in hearts. In this case, partner happened to have a spade less and a heart more than we expected. I think Justin did hit an important point of whether we should rebid 2♠ or 3♠ and he does goes plus on the deal.

Why would you think that? I can tell you that... 1. At both tables the auction started this way. 2. At both tables opener rebid 3S. 3. After seeing dummy, several people commented that this hand should have raised hearts instead. For what it's worth, I was responder on the hand and didn't make such a comment (I hadn't paid attention to what partner's hand was). ;)

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=skqt9xxxhaxdaxxcq]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♠ - (1NT) - 2♥ - (P); ?[/hv] What say ye?

I think your example hand is a lot different than the one I gave. I'd be much more inclined to open 1NT with the hand you give as it has a lot more meat in the short suits. Original hand: 6 points in short suits, including J J A. 9 points in long suit, which is nearly solid. Your example: 10 points in short suits including A J KQ with two intermediates in those suits. 6 points in long suit, which is decent but not solid.

Not that it's anything to go by, but K&R puts the hand at 17. I feel off the deep-end, but trying to work out why 3♦ is a huge overbid. Doesn't our hand have loads of offensive strength?

I personally think this is a 1♦ opening and 3♦ rebid. For me, 3♦ is not an overbid even accounting for the dubious values of the Jx's. AKQxxx with an outside A is a really nice combination. Playing MP or opposite a passed partner, I might be more inclined to open 1NT. I don't have any issue opening 1NT with a 6-card minor, I just don't think this is the hand for it.

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sjxhjxdakqxxxcaxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Which is your preferred opening?

I think jdonn has the edge through more experience with these tourneys. However, I think jlall will work out how to fit in 2-3 more boards a tourney without much loss to his play and regain that edge. The question is whether he will work that out in enough time to regain the lead with the remaining boards...

Has anyone considered that East asked a question, received the information that the hand made the weakest possible bid and then passed anyway? Alternatively, East received the answer that would make it most likely to want to bid and then passed anyway. My question then is why East was asking any question at all during the auction. Of course it is not illegal to ask such a question, but I think we should also consider the UI that West had in addition to any issues of MI for NS.

Mike mentioned another point which I hadn't really considered. I typically play a semi-forcing, rather than a forcing NT, so 2♣ is a much bigger distortion for me. I'm also used to playing a 1NT opening as 14-16, so rebidding 2NT is not much of a concern either. Those "small" difference can make a big difference in how you view the problem.

I can only think of one auction where we play a lead directing double of a game contract and that's when the opponents bid 1NT - 3NT. For all other cases, double is penalty or penalty-oriented (as I don't reverse the meaning in some auctions as others do).

Certainly a good hand to be playing intermediate 2's with a mini multi (as then it's an easy 2♥ rebid). However, that was NOT the question. Playing a standard 2/1, I would open 1♥ and bid 2♥ over a 1NT response. I would rebid 2NT over a 1♠ response as the fitting spade values make the hand worth it and now I get to also protect my tenaces. I'm not so worried about the 2NT bid over 1♠. I don't really like the 2♥ bid over 1NT, but I would rather hear partner bid again before going higher.

I am all for getting opponents who step out of line over our weak (or mini) NT. That's half the fun of playing it. Here I would definitely play a takeout double for much the reasons mentioned above. Sure that means you can't get them when opener has a small doubleton and can't double, but it is probably best just to defend undoubled then anyway.

6♣ certainly has some play at least. Josh gets to the easiest contract to make however.

1. 6♦ - Partner has some soft cards, but should have the fillers needed to make slam good. 2. 4♥ - Partner has a spade control in my book, but I don't think our hand is worth more than the one slam try. 3. 6♣ - Guessing, but dislike not having methods to bid more scientifically on the hand.

Partner either has AJTxxxxx in diamonds and thinks that qualifies or some strong balanced hand or pulled out 3NT by accident instead of 3♠ and the next hand passed or something completely wacky and wants to know if I can take a joke. I will bid 5NT and pass whatever partner bids next. (obviously this means I can't take a joke)

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sa7xxhxdxxcakjt9x&s=sjxxhaqjxdkjtxxcq]133|200|Scoring: IMP 1♣ - 1♦; 1♠ - 2♥; 3♣ - 3NT; All Pass[/hv] Opening Lead: small club Plan the play.

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sahkqjda98xxck7xx]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♦ - 1♥; 2♣ - 3NT; ?[/hv] 1) Do you agree with the bidding thus far? 2) What is your call now? 3) What do you think 4♥ should show here (whether you make that call or not)?

[hv=d=n&v=b&n=sxxxhqxxdkxxcqjxx&s=saq98xhkxxdajckxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP P - 1NT; 3NT! - All pass[/hv] Nevermind the bidding, just focus on the play. T1: ♠2 - x - J - Q Opponents lead 4th best. Plan the play.

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sxxxhaktdkj9cxxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP (1♠) - Dbl - (P) - ?[/hv] What's your call?

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=sxhatxxdakqxxcxxx&s=sjxxhqjxxxdxcakqx]133|200|Scoring: IMP 1♥ - (2♠) - 4♦* - (P); 4♥ - (P) - 4♠ - (P); 5♣ - (P) - 5♦ - (P); 6♥ - All Pass[/hv] *Fit Jump After the spade was cashed, the heart finesse lost. Down 1. ATB