luis

It's not about bidding space, it's about the number of hands you open and how high you open them without losing control. As known 8-12 is the most popular range for a bridge hand so opening 8-12 hands with 1x maximizes the number of hands you open 1x. The idea is simple start early, found your fit and or strength early, save space for your constructive bidding and asfixiate their constructive bidding when appropiate. The only problem with forcing pass systems is that they are against the business of bridge which is teaching social players how to play SAYC so they can play at the club once a week.

I can't remember the thread (Ben surely knows)... Some time ago I conducted a simulation and study about the lead against the auction 1N-3N when the leader has from 0 to 7 HCP. The results were surprising, one common rule was that with 4333 hands you should lead your 3 card major not the 4 card suit. Even when you have values in the 4 card suit and nothing in the 3 card suit. 3 card majors were better than 3 card minors since the 1N-3N auction tends to make your pd have more major suit cards than responder usually. The logic behind this is that the best approach to defeat 3N when holding a bad hand is to find pd's good suit and after 1N-3N when you have 3 in a major there are chances that pd has 5. So no matter the result a spade is the correct theorical lead on this hand. Luis

I will be there regularly, I strongly believe that one of the best ways to improve bridge is tom ake it more appealing and more interesting for young people. As long as juniors don't get tired of me I will be very happy to help. Luis

North: xx xxx Jxx AK10xx South: KQJxx AKxx - Qxxx (1d) dbl 3c 4d(exclusion RKCB) 4n (2) 6c pass Luis

Interesting to know that 3NT is better than 4♥ because I think I would have bid 4♥. Hard to see 9 quick tricks and we may have a big problem in clubs. I was also afraid of being cut out off dummy. Wayne, when is 4♥ better than 3N with this type of hands? Luis

If you play 4♦ showing a 7-4 hand with 7 clubs and 4 of a major with a void or singleton in spades then you can bid 4♦ with this hand. If you don't play that you can just bid 2♣ then spades and then more clubs as any mortal human would do. Luis

Yippie! "This slam was brought to you by BudWeiser the Slam Beer...."

I'm thinking about trying this structure of 2 bids. My last structure used multi 2♦, 2♥ 5+sp 5+m, 2♠ 5-5 minors, 2NT 5he, 5m. All weak. But the 5-5 hands never appear so we were giving up a lot of bidding space for free to the opponents. I'm really interested in the 2♣ opening development if you get some infor please let me know and thanks a lot for the information! Luis

On your first turn I'd bid 1NT, pd asked for a descriptive bid not for stoppers and we do have a balanced hand, so 1NT is the most descriptive bid. 2♣ in my opinion showing 9 cards in the minors is too missleading. Once you bid 2♣ over 2♥ you can bid 2NT or 2♠ 2NT showing 2-2-5-4 or 2-2-4-5 is probably better than 2♠ showing 3-1-5-4 or 3-1-4-5. Anyway when I have a 4333 hand I like to bid 1NT if I can....

To Rebound: "I would like your opinion of bidding 1H over 1D with the intention of reversing into spades. If you consider this a reasonable idea, I would also be curious to know how you would forsee the auction progressing from there." I think 1♥ would be atrocious. I don't think it would be reasonable. And I foresee the auction ending in some horrible way. To the poster and others: I think that 1s and 3h are both fine as long as both bids are forcing. Once south bids 3NT 4♠ is a mistake, the best bid by North may depend on your agreements but with such a freakish hand a leap to 6♥ is reasonable. Luis

I can't believe a director really ruled this. I found it very hard to believe your report because even a very bad director can't rule in this way. If the opponents really announced that they were in a 4-3 fit then it really doesn't matter if your double is for penalties or not. Let me explain it. If your dbl is penalties then you may have 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 trumps since you know they have 7 and you know how many trumps your pd has. So you can double for penalties based on what you have in spades or what pd has in spades. If your double is not for penalties then pd is allowed to leave it if he thinks so. Even if there's missinformation there's no damage since declarer can't pretend to get any information when the trump position is known to both defenders. Horrible ruling, horrible, terrible. If you can present a note so the TD can get a suspension or something like that you have to do it.

This is a VERY common combination so the answer is plain straightworward theory. Low to the ten is the correct play for 4 tricks in the suit. (wins against AJxx, Jxxx, AJx, AJ, Jx, Jx, Jxx) So declarer played correctly. Luis

uh, how did west counted 13 tricks here? i can see only 11 (7 solid diamonds plus 3 clubs plus heart ace). True, probably 6d then from any position.

Viking Club: If East opens: 1d - 1h 3n - 4c 5s - 7d 1h = natural or GF 3n = Solid diamonds 4c = shortage? 5s = spade void If west opens I can't reach 7 :-) Luis

Thanks Not sure how much MOSCITO had to do with the win, sadly. Free and I both made some decisions that seem very clear-cut and yielded ridiculous dividents: Case in point: The auction starts 2N - 3C 3D - 3N You hold 643 T85 T643 KT5 Whats your opening lead? I considered a low club lead automatic, while the field preferred a Diamond... If you are going to lead a club the Ten is the right lead to unblock the suit. I'd have lead my 2nd spade. Luis

I bid 6♣ with the south cards. I know it can be wrong but under the circunstances pd will forgive me.

Pass.... Doesn't look like the right hand to force. The doubles are like passes to me, my pass is not based on the doubles but on pd's bids and my holdings.

I also must confess I wouldn't have bid 2♥ playing Moscito and I do love 3-card raises but as Ron said I usually have a doubleton somewhere when I raise with 3 cards. 1NT seems to be logical I think that the fact that 2♥ worked doesn't merit 2♥ bids on 4333 hands, in this very same hand it could have turned into a bad result if you play 2♥ down 1 with the whole field playing, probably, 1NT. Why did west remove 2♠x to 3♣ ? That's an absolute nasty bid. You are in 2x doubled in your 5 card suit and remove to play a trick higher in a 4 card suit so when doubled you retreat to the 5 card suit again. Maybe any bid could have worked against this west player.

Well, the TD could ahve asked NS if EW had announced SAYC or "my profile" at the start of the round. He could check earlier rounds (this was round 3) to see if SAYC was announced. But I would accept the word of WEST who had SAYC on his profile (BTW, you you play SAYC you can load BridgeBASE basic CC which is essentially sayc, and shows negative double through... tada...2♠). North, opposite a passed hand, and vul at imps, and with full knowledge of the risk, choose a preemptive 3♠ overcall. He got caught out speeding, for his less than ideal 3♠ bid. Unlucky for him. EW are playing an inferior method, but on this hand, their method is just perfect for issuing suitable punishment. So, even if EW didn't have a cc filled out, I would let the result stand. This isn't even close given the information provided. After the hesitation, and then double, I would penalize the pull of 3♠X not the other way around, when they are playing SAYC. The way you rule, WEST can't make a winning action after EAST's hesitation (and over a preempt, you should get some time to think of course). Let's imagine it went P-1H-3S-X (double extremely fast).. would you now rule against WEST if he passed? Does the speed suggest, I got them, don't pull even with void? I think a few second think, then double is right. Skip bid warnings do serve a useful purpose. Ben I think you are wrong in this Ben: "So, even if EW didn't have a cc filled out, I would let the result stand. This isn't even close given the information provided. After the hesitation, and then double, I would penalize the pull of 3♠X not the other way around, when they are playing SAYC. The way you rule, WEST can't make a winning action after EAST's hesitation (and over a preempt, you should get some time to think of course)." The question is not if you penalize the pull or the pass, you must adjust if either of those is a logical alternative to the winning action. On the posted circunstances I think 4d is a logical alternative to pass so I'd adjust the score without hesitation. And you are right, west can't make a winning action after EAST's hesitation, it's the rule.

I'm not sure if you can let the score stand so clearly. First of all did they have a CC? If so did the CC say negative doubles where up to 2s only? If they didn't have a CC then they can't probe that the double is not negative or can be assumed as negative by pd therefore 4d is a logical alternative to pass and the score must be adjusted. Luis

The hand came from a teaching session. It was played in a mini-tournament prior to the teaching session. I am not sure if the bidding was like that at any of the tables in the tourney. EW were in fact vulnerable (not both as stated in the original post). A club (the four) would be the likely lead to the King and Ace. Trumps are 2-2 with the Ace held by South and the Jack held by North the 5♣ bidder. After winning the the ♥A South might safely return a spade or heart. If you play spades you will find that South has four and North two. Therefore North is either 2218 or 2227 and South 4234 or 4225. Either would seem possible at the vulnerability to me. I guess 2209 and 4243 is possible but less likely that South would dive with this. There're some reasons to play North to be 2-2-1-8 for his 5♣ jump with the diamond king. One is that with the hA and the dK south might not have bid 6♣ since it wasn't so clear to sacrifice. Another reason is that North didn't double 6!h maybe because he is afraid of his dK being dropped. I might play the dA directly after drawing trumps.

Misho my friend, I live in Argentina, do you want to swap countries? :-)

1) HJT/HJ9: if lead the J, it denies a higher honor, pard with a good holding may switch and lose a tempo; lead T or 9 may work, but potential blockage ? Playing J denies I guess that if you really think pd has length in this suit then it depends on where the entries to the defensive hands are. If you only have HJT and nothing else you can probably lead the T, if you have an entry the highest honor (A or K) is better. 2) AQT/AQ9: similar problem The Ace is here usually better, then you can catch a doubleton King or Jack depending on the count. 3) HT9: similar to HJT: leading 9 here promises, but pard has no idea of potential blockage Same. 4) in some instance, I have seen world class leading the highest honor from those sequences, as unblocking play. How to recognize these situations ? I think the idea is not only to prevent a blockage but also to get the count to know if you can pin a doubleton honor in dummy or declarer's hand. From the positions you mention there's one potentially blocking position that many players don't know and it's ATx or KTx (same with A9x or K9x) where the right lead is the T (or 9) to prevent a blockage. Luis

Disqualify EW from the competition and suspend them for some reasonable period of time. If you can put them in jail that may work too.

Borderline ? Cmon! Don't want to be disrispectful but this was really a silly question. Clear 1♦ opening all positions