rhm

Better to congratulate yourself for your braveness when partner instead turns up with ♠KQJx, ♥-,♦Axxx,♣AJxxx I, a coward, prefer to bid and fight it out at 5♠, if my vulnerable partner, who was not in the pass-out seat, and really came in at the 4 level with KJxx x Kxxx Axxx opposite a hand who had already passed over 3♥. Rainer Herrmann

Better to congratulate yourself for your braveness when partner instead turns up with ♠KQJx, ♥-,♦Axxx,♣AJxxx I, a coward, prefer to bid and fight it out at 5♠, if my vulnerable partner, who was not in the pass-out seat, and really came in at the 4 level with KJxx x Kxxx Axxx opposite a hand who had already passed over 3♥. Rainer Herrmann

Partner should have known this before bidding 4♦. If it turns out that 5♦ or 6♦ has play, but not 4♠ (you loose control), it can not have been such a stupid idea to suggest ♦ as trumps at some stage. Rainer Herrmann

So you want to play 4♠ with a small doubleton opposite a 5 card suit, when your partner shows weakness, in the face of opponents, who told you that the suit is not breaking well? Sounds to me like a sort of hara-kiri at the Bridge table Strange how many people want to play 4S when opener has not guaranteed more than 5 cards there. 4♠ could easily be down with 5♦ or even 6♦ on. It is even imaginable that opener has opened a minimum hand 1♠ with 5 cards in ♠ and 6 cards in ♦ Rainer Herrmann So partner opens 1♠ with 5 spades and 6 diamonds because he isn't prepared to bid 4♠ over heart preempts after opening 1♦, but he is willing to bid 4♦ over heart preempts after he opens 1♠? No thanks. In any case I would take 4♥ as slammish in support of diamonds, so I have to make a choice between 4♠ or 5♦. I would bid 4♠ as I think partner will be 65 more often than 55. Btw, even cooperating with a slam try is absolute nuts. I doubt that there are many Bridge players, who would be prepared to pass over 3♥ with an unbid 6 card ♦ suit and I also doubt that many would pass with 5-5 and a void in ♥ for example and many would do it with less. Where we may differ is that I believe that choice of games bids are crucial in modern Bridge and have to take precedence before slam invites. Choice of game bids are frequent and important (like here), while with slam invites there are usually many other options available. Nowadays many experts agree on this. For that reason I interpret 4♥ differently as a choice of games and n o t as a slam try, unless 4♥ is followed up by another bid. (e.g. If this hand bids on over 4 ♠ from partner) If I wanted to invite slam directly (with a very different hand of course) I would either bid 5♣ or maybe 5♠ or I just bid the slam Rainer Herrmann

Why do you expect partner to have at least two Spades? I have 4 Spades and RHO rates to have at least 6. There appear to be (at most) 3 spades out there. I'd say that partner's expected Spade length is 1.25 or so. Why would you expect partner to pull any time he has short Spades? Doesn't think mean that partner will pull any time that you have enough Spades to double? Of course I would double. Partner can hardly be in doubt about the maximum number of trumps you can hold. Why did partner double first and then pass if he was not interested in defense? If partner is short in spades he has no business to leave the double in and it is his duty to move. Rainer Herrmann

So what do you expect partner to do if 52 in ♠ turns out to be inadequate? Is he supposed to correct to 5♦? Rainer Herrmann

I see that playing pro is making you a lot less confrontational when expressing your views - what happened to the old Justin who would start off with, Jane, you ignorant slut!? :P Because it's not that horrible to X first, you may get to a 4H game you miss by passing and doubling. I mean you do have NINE POINTS so normally you would double, they just suck. I try to respond with the appropriate level of hate/like for a bid. Exactly. There was nothing wrong with South double of 2♦. Since 2♦ was artificial, double showed values. It was South pass, in particular South final pass, which shows a lack of basic understanding for IMP odds. It is clear that opponents have at least an eight card fit in spades and judging from their lack of high cards East will have a long suit. South has one (!) defensive trick to contribute in 2♠ doubled. Surprise, surprise North has no more than 4! South should bid 2NT at his second turn. Since he is not interested in 2♠ doubled he must be short in ♠. Since he neither cuebid 3♠ nor bid 3NT South can have only invitational values. Note, that North has more or less 8 easy tricks in notrump and a good player is likely to find another one (After a spade lead East as well as West can be end-played for a ninth trick), while 2♠ can not be beaten. Rainer Herrmann

So you want to play 4♠ with a small doubleton opposite a 5 card suit, when your partner shows weakness, in the face of opponents, who told you that the suit is not breaking well? Sounds to me like a sort of hara-kiri at the Bridge table Strange how many people want to play 4S when opener has not guaranteed more than 5 cards there. 4♠ could easily be down with 5♦ or even 6♦ on. It is even imaginable that opener has opened a minimum hand 1♠ with 5 cards in ♠ and 6 cards in ♦ Rainer Herrmann

I would bid 4♥, not so much because I want to invite slam, but as a choice of games. Playing 4♠ with a small doubleton opposite a 5 card suit and one opponent known to be short in ♠ is scary would be an understatement. If partner bids 4♠ over 4♥ I will pass and otherwise I will bid 5♦ next and hope partner is on the same wavelength. If this hand is enough for slam partner should need no further encouragement anyway. Rainer Herrmann

Why? If you bid 3♥ over 2♠, defined as invitational, a good bridge partner should know: You are short in ♠ and any ♠ honor with the possible exception of the ♠ ace is likely to be wasted. Honors in any other suit are useful Length in ♥ is good, not least because it implies ruffing values in the minors Is it really so difficult to see that all things being equal game in ♥ must have far better chances opposite 3 cards than one? The fact that you hold a distributional hand does not automatically mean partner can not judge. 3♥ takes a partnership and its agreements seriously 4♥ is ego Bridge Rainer Herrmann

Yes, I agree; however myabe it was explained as that? Maybe, but why ask people what to bid where the given bidding has no relationship with the actual hands held? Rainer Herrmann

I am not so sure that SOS RDBL with a void and no HCP is such a clever thing to do. To me this looks scary. What is overcaller supposed to do with 6 mediocre diamonds and no major over an SOS RDBL? An SOS RDBL of an overcall should contain the option that partner can pass. If you are void in diamonds you should at least have some tricks in HCP if overcaller decides to pass with a chance to scramble home. The trouble with a ♥ raise is that it is your RHO who will have the option to double a third time. If he holds Axxx he will decline. If he holds AQJx he will double athird time. Now after queen of ♥ lead I wish you good luck in 2♥ doubled Even if your partner has 5 ♥ I see 3 tricks in ♥ and the ♠ ace. 800-1100 on the horizon, maybe 500-800 if 3NT does not make Rainer Herrmann

I agree that it is better to play 2 ♠ immediately if clubs do not break and you will not overtake in trumps. There are differences between the suggested lines of play, though not earth shattering ones. For example if RHO has the singleton ♥ 9 winning the first trick in dummy wins. If you intent to overtake a trump honor it can never be right to win the trump lead cheaply in hand. It must be better to win with an honor in dummy. Rainer Herrmann

Actually I don't think you want to overtake. At that point the trumps in your hand will be ♥A86 (assuming the 9 forced your ten at t1). If you overtake and find East with an original ♥9754, you cross back to dummy with ♦A for a trump coup with spades to pick up the ♥7 (abandoning the clubs you worked so hard to set up!), but if he ruffs the third spade (making him 2434 and West 5152) you'll find yourself with a diamond loser left. If you don't overtake, then either trump are 3-2 and you can ruff a spade high to hand, draw trump, and use the long spade to pitch your diamond loser; OR you find East with the same four trumps. Now you play the same trump coup, but with ♦A still intact, you can get to the fourth spade winner if he ruffs the third one. Both lines fail to West holding four trumps, of course. Which only proves that it is fallacy to win the first ♥ cheaply. Win the first ♥ with an honor in dummy. Now you will always end up in the South hand after two ♣ ruffs and can still play for the trump coup if RHO has 4 ♥ Rainer Herrmann

The 1D overcall was strange but is hardly a good reason to commit suicide now, which bidding anything but Pass is. LHO should have 4 cards in ♥ for his second double and your partner ran only after opponents wanted to play 1♦ doubled. It is anything but clear that partner holds all the remaining ♥. Partner could hold 3=4=0=6 or even 4=4=0=5 (Pray that he does not bid 1S now). Thank partner for having the courage to bid 1♥, ♦ is probably opponents best suit. If partner has 3-4 HCP, 3NT may not make and one down doubled will be a very good score but for the opponents. If partner is closer to a yarborough you may well go down more than you think after the indicated trump lead. Those who believe there are 8 tricks in ♥ are dreaming Raising ♥ is asking for trouble and accomplishes nothing. Rainer Herrmann

Obviously West must have at least 2 cards in ♥ for success The general plan should be to ruff only one ♣ and to squeeze West in the minors. But there are complications in the trump department. If you play a ♠ honor to Wests ace he may continue with two more rounds of ♣ and you will have a nasty guess if the ♠10 did not drop on the first round. So it seems best to win the first trick (too dangerous to duck) and to play a ♦ to hand and now play a trump to dummy's ♠ honors. If this wins and East does not show out you can continue with dummy's second trump honor. This may loose if East has a singleton ♦, but the danger that East has no more than 2 cards in ♣ is much higher. If West tries to kill your ♦ transportation for the minor suit squeeze by continuing ♦ instead of playing a third round of trump you will play a ♣ next and threaten to ruff 2 ♣ on the table should West continue with diamonds (if neither ♦ 3-3 nor trumps 2-2). If trumps turn out to be 4-0 play that the ♣ queen will drop in 3 rounds or that diamonds will break. Rainer Herrmann

Why does 2NT look silly? It is the right bid, inviting 3NT. (3NT is wrong with no honor in clubs) A good player should either accept or sign off in 3C. He should never want to play 2NT after a competitive sequence. Rainer Herrmann

While there may be a few hands where game could be reasonable a) is clear at any vulnerability and form of scoring. Rainer Herrmann

You can not bid 4♠ over 4♠, but you can cue-bid 5♣ The alternative is to invite or bid slam by raising ♠ directly To cue-bid 5 ♣ assumes you would never want to correct a 4♠ contract to 5♣ after this sequence; a dubious proposition. Assuming you cue-bid 5♣: OVER 5♥ invite a grand with 6♦ If partner signs off with 6 ♠ pass. You can hardly underwrite 13 tricks If he bids 6♥ accept and bid 7♠ Rainer Herrmann

1♠ (2♥) 3♣ 4♥ 4 NT 5♣ Pass 4NT RKB (1430) 5♣ 1 (or 4) key card I prefer 3♣ to DBL because it shows a game forcing hand while DBL does not 4♥ splinter in support of ♣ as a slam try is more important than rebidding the ♠ I would rebid the ♠ in a pairs tournament Rainer Herrmann

(2♠) 3♦ 4♠ 4NT 5♥ 7♦ Introducing ♥ over 3♦ is the mark of a weak player Far more important to show your ♦ support with a splinter in ♠ advancer should see that over 3♦ there is great slam potential in ♦ Rainer Herrmann

♥J opponents have no ♥ fit and declarer has a penalty double of spades with the ♣ king. To beat this contract partner needs 2 entries or one entry and the ♣10(9) to push clubs through. Rainer Herrmann

Under-leading the ♣ ace can cost an over-trick, unless declarer has bid 2♥ with a doubleton ♥, in which case he would have to be 1=2=4=6 and might have prefered to try his luck in 2 ♣ with the ♣ king. Since you needs imps invest the over trick imp and under-lead your ace of ♣ and hope your partner has a 4th ♦ and Qxx in ♥ (Likely because declarer did not play any rounds of trumps at trick 2) Rainer Herrmann

Using 3NT for a strong major preempt is not the same as Kantar's idea, because as you point out he required a solid suit. That is also why Kantar's idea is much less frequent. Rainer Herrmann

What is the "better method" you are talking about? This is not intended as a dog yapping at your ankles. I'd like to know but if you prefer not to tell, NP:) I can not speak what others "better methods" are, but Danny Kleinman has an article called something like 'Namyats has it backwards'. He suggests using 3NT as a strong major suit preempt and keep 4C and 4D as natural minor suit preempts. This is what I like to play. I tend not to preempt with solid minors. I open and rebid them. Rainer Herrmann