luis

I also missed that it was mps :lol: So, I am sorry, Luis, but everything I said applied to imps as well: I guess we have to agree to diasgree on this one. And as for the double gaining only 5 imps (+300 v +100): I don't know about you, but I cannot afford to allow the opps to steal 5 imps on this kind of board very often :lol: Yes, we agree to disagree, 5imps are not worth the risk in my opinion, one day the 4♠ bidder will have 8 or 9 tricks in his own hand and you will go for 1880 or something like that :-) Luis

Yes didn't see it was MPs. At MPs I would double automatically, at IMPs as I said I pass automatically and as the result shows converting 50 in 100 or 100 in 300 is not going to be the winning board :-). I understand now why Mike said it was a losers idea to pass, at MPs passing 4♠ seems to be certainly a bad idea. Sorry I'm just too used to IMP problems, my apologies for not noticing it was MPs, everything I said holds for IMPs. For a good player pass is not a LA at MPs.

Double is clear.

Let's see: opener jumped to 4♠ white v red and we are passing out of fear that he will redouble, partner will pass, and the contract is cold? Playing in fear is no way to win. Your 3♥ bid could be on a poor hand with long, good texture, ♥, without the playing or defensive strength of your actual holding. Pass may work on this board. However, if I were playing a long match, I would expect to routinely beat any team whose members thought that pass was the percentage action on this type of hand/auction. BTW, opener is NOT comletely unlimited, if he is a good player: on many power hands, he would have involved partner in case we bid 5 of a red suit. Vulnerable opponents tend to NOT bid 5 over 4♠ when the NV side has the strength, I've seen some intrepid red vs red sacrifices but a red vs white sacrifice would be a novelty. Yes I'm afraid they might redouble 4♠ and make me look like an idiot, when double is right you convert 50 in 100 or 100 in 300, do you feel like a hero or what? Luis

I agree the bidding is worth a serious investigation of the NS pair.

Pass, I don't think I can get 500 against 4♠x and 100 instead of 300 is not a crime, double is very very dangerous at this vulnerability, if opener has a distributional hand and he is sure it can't be worst than down 1 he will redouble 4♠ and it will be painful. For example a hand with a void in clubs and 7 spades will redouble in a breeze. Opener is unlimited and pd passed over 4♠. Definitevly doesn't look like the right hand to double. With the usual respect that characterizes my noble person I think the doublers are completely crazy here.

I would lead a spade here, the queen being a good option in case opener has a singleton jack. Dummy is either 4-3-1-5 or 4-3-2-4, in both cases to defeat 4♥ I need to stablish some spade tricks before declarer can discard them in the clubs, the location of the club king seems to be very bad so an agressive lead is probably needed, a trump looks too passive with the club threat and might blow a trump trick while a diamond will be a waste of tempo when dummy has only 1. I think: A spade or the spade queen might be a good agressive lead A diamond (unbid suit) is probably "defaultish" and can't lead to anything but it can be an option for some players. A trump looks to be too dangerous but some people can lead it to stop diamond ruffs in dummy overlooking that with a singleton diamond dummy has 5 clubs and declarer's plan will be to stablish the club suit. The only lead I would consider suspicious is a club. A club can only work when pd has Ax of clubs. I will strongly hate to think somebody found the spade queen lead strange here because it makes a lot of sense to me, it is agressive yes, but has a purpose and a logic behind. Luis

Grow up Luis: This is a matter of partership agreement. I don't really care what that agreement looks like. There are a variety of different styles, all with different pluses and minuses. The one thing that I am damn sure about is that open 4♠ with this hand when partner is expecting a better trump is a recipe for disaster. Do you really think that North expected QJT9xxxx in Spades when he bid a grand holding Kxx? You say that 4♠ is an automatic bid vulnerable at IMPs? I say prove it. I've never many formal game theoretic proofs applied in bridge. I'd love to see one. Richard, I respect your opinion but if holding an 8-3-1-1 hand with 8 spades you can't open 4♠ there is something completely wrong in the Universe. Playing Namyats you can choose 4♦ / 4♠ depending on your agreements. Without Namyats this is a normal, obvious, solid, textbook 4♠ opening. If you ask 1000 good players 1000 of them will open 4♠ playing 2/1 or Sayc without special agreements. Maybe 1001 if someone decides to vote twice. QJT is the most offensive heading you can have in a suit, I can understand reasons for not opening 4♠ with for example Ace 7th and a side ace where some people would open 1♠ because of the 2 defensive tricks but with an offensive hand 4♠ is so clear so clear that I really think you are absolutely wrong about thinking this depending on anything. BTW: North bid 7♠ to punish pd for his 6♠ bid it is a clear allergic reaction to the 6♠ bid to me.

It is exactly the opposite, Queens and jacks are offensive values, Aces and kings are defensive values. If you have QJTxxx in a suit If you play the hand you have 4 tricks and 2 losers in the suit If they play the hand you have 0 defensive tricks (the queen never scores) But when you have AKxxxx in a suit If you play the hand you can make 4 or 5 tricks in the suit and you have 1, 2 or 3 losers If they play the hand you have 1 or 2 defensive tricks (probably 2) Aces and Kings will take tricks in offense AND defense while jacks and queens in your suits only win tricks if you play the hand. In your long suits: ACE / KINGS = defensive QUEENs/JACKS = offensive In your short suits: ACE / Kings = neutral Queen / Jacks = defensive That is a very simplistic summary of course.

My view: 4♠ is automatic and with respect people discussing 4♠ should have their head examined. 5♣ is probably wrong, certainly you do have a cuebid in clubs and slam intentions but what are you going to do next? I mean you also have diamond AND heart controls in your hand. 5♣ in my view is used in hands where you are lacking a control in a side suit and need to investigate that. For me there are two options with the North hand: 6♠ or 5NT, 6♠ is the conservative view, 5NT asking pd to bid 7 with AQxxxx(x) of spades is the agressive view. It seems that 6♠ is the "right" bid but I can live with 5NT if you needed a good result. After 5♣, 6♠ is a good way to destroy the auction completely and 7♠ is a "punishment" bid for bidding something that can't exist because south either has a diamond control (5♦ or he doesn't and then he bids 5♥ or 5♠). It certainly looks as an auction that can finish a partnership, but once I have a similar disaster with my pd and the conclusion was that the board was the one to be blamed because if North doesn't get the hand he has over a 4♠ opening this doesn't happen, and south unfortunately decided to do something silly and north did something even more stupid, the chances of this happening again are almost null so let's keep playing together. Blame the dealing software!

I pass because I know what to lead agaisnt 3♦ Luis

The most common treatment is that they are OFF when they overcall 1 of a minor. Using the cuebid as a limit raise or better. When they double I have seen very different ideas so I would say it depends on agreements, simple people like to keep the same system ignoring the double, fancy people add a ton of transfers and gizmos when they double.

My second option to pass would be double

I disagree with most of the posters here I will start with the 6♦ bid. Pd bids 5♦ over 3♠ this can be based on many things but he does have a long diamond suit, having a long diamond suit and bypassing 3NT usually means that the hand is distributional and unsuitable for 3NT. So your spade ace is probably wasted, pd usually expects some moderate values in pd's hand when bidding over a preempt so I don't think north should bid 6♦. When pd bids under pressure taking your plus result is usually better than trying for a magical contract. Can pd bid 5♦ with 8 diamonds and nothing on the side? Of course he can. Can pd bid 6♦ with a 7-5 hand with diamonds? Pd can have just too many hands where 5♦ can be made and 6♦ is down 1 so passing the north hand is clear. This leads me to the idea that the 5♦ bid based on a strong hand with a long suit is wrong, pd will pass with many holdings over 5♦ and you can be cold for 6 or 7, a double followed by 4♦ or 5♦ is more clear to show you are bidding a long diamond suit in the context of a powerful hand. But that is just my opinion. Luis

Assuming the raise showed exactly 4 cards in trumps the bluff is quite safe. Assume this happened before and is properly alerted, I think you are in a worst position with your lead compared to the pairs that don't ask for the Q. So the question is: Is asking for the Queen when having it (alerted and all) always a good way to improve your chances because you create losing options for the opening leader ?

Very difficult. My hand is offensive, but I don't have enough power or enough trumps to bid 4♠. Being vulnerable vs not I think I would bid 4♠ because with values in hearts pd is not forced to bid 1♠, this may be a very thin inference but I suspect pd doesn't have values in hearts and then all he has can work well for 4♠ and I ruff in the short trumps so I'm not going to be in a trump control problem soon. Can they double this after a non vulnerable 1♥ overcall and a non vulnerable 4♥ bid? Maybe not because both might suspect pd can be weakish for his white vs red bid. So I bid 4♠ and I don't really like it a lot but...

I won't post this as a problem because it's not my idea to let everybody go wrong and then say "haha you are all wrong". Amazingly this happened at the local club and it is based on a problem almost identical that appeared in BW last month. Try it as a problem if you want first: [hv=d=e&v=n&s=sjt94ha92dk7643c8]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] East opens 1♥ and West makes a bergen raise showing 7-10 and 4 heart support, over this East jumps to 4NT RKCB and west bids 5♣ showing 1 or 4. East then bids 5♦ asking for the trump queen and West bids 5♥ denying it. The bidding: ----- 1♥ 3♦ 4NT 5♣ 5♦ 5♥ pass What is your opening lead and why? Assuming the opponents are missing the trump ace and the trump queen you lead a diamond trying to build a diamond trick, and 2 trumps for your side. This is the full deal: [hv=n=sqxxxhxdaxxcxxxxx&w=sk87ht873dqjt5cat&e=saxhkqj54d9ckqj76&s=sjt94ha92dk7643c8]399|300|[/hv] Declarer asked for the trump queen missing 2 aces and holding the queen himself to avoid a singleton club lead that might defeat 5♥ when the club ace is missing or the trump ace is missing and they can get a club ruff. So leading the singleton club, and then ducking a heart to see pd's signal would have worked perfectly to defeat 5♥ while the "normal" diamond lead just destroyed your defensive communications. The interestng questions to debate are: Are there other situations where asking for the queen that you have in your hand can work in your benefit? If it becomes a habit of course pd will have to alert "he has done this with the queen in his hand before". As a defender how do you know which case it is? Luis

Probably pass, defensive hand.

Double and lead a trump.

People what the hell is going on? 3♦ natural and forcing! A transfer to a minor followed by a new suit is usually used to show shortness and decide between 3NT and 5 of the minor or to start a slam investigation. Playing 3♦ here as non-forcing doesn't make any sense at all. Luis

PASS! , what are you doing with all the spades? I would say the 2♣ bid is absolutely insane, specially when pd will/shoud/may take it as a cuebid and even when he doesn't do you really think you can achieve something good bidding 2♣? I don't think so. Luis

2♥, this is not over.... yet!

I would bid 3♣ usually 13-15 with 5+ clubs. It seems to be quite a good description of what I have. Luis

5♠ when they open 5♦ they are usually prepared to play 5♦x

What I question in Luis' statement is this: I see a LOT of confused players alerting things they shouldn't and I see a lot of (****) players demanding explanations about bids that don't need any explanation. BBO rules: I know Luis is teaching beginners. I think a sentence like this: People think that playing online you have to alert what you have in your hand for your bids when they are not natural. is not to come up with. Luis knows that it is very difficult, even correct of course, deliberately to lie about your holdings you look at yourself. I have had problems with that too. Deliberately lies are not what you have in mind if you think you need to alert in order to explain a bid. I would have been pleased for a statement like this: Try to make solid agreements before you accept a partnership. Use a default convention card. For continuations outside specific agreements try to agree on pure natural. For clarification - I don't have the problem myself - I let FD handle according to rules. What is the problem? Both what I wrote and the alerting policy of BBO say the same. Many many beginners are forced to say what they have or say what they have because they are afraid when playing with more experienced players. So I'm going to defend them and tell them to follow the rules! Luis