rhm

If you have 44 in the majors and a singleton diamond I would always want to play in the 5-4 fit, which is much safer, knowing that the short hand ruffs anyway. It is a myth to believe that a 4-4 fit always plays better. Meanwhile telling partner that you are really short in a side suit is usually very valuable to your partner. Rainer Herrmann

No Rainer Herrmann

4♥ looks to me like an underbid. If partner is short in clubs we might well make more. I will try 4♦ with a sophisticated partner but without special agreements. Opener could have ♠AQJxxx ♥AKxx ♦xxx ♣- Rainer Herrmann

Partner gave only a single raise showing a minimum opening bid with 4♥ and did not splinter over 2♠. Can you construct a hand where 6♥ is s great contract on a diamond lead? Rainer Herrmann

Partner obviously accepts a game try. But with shortage in diamonds and enough to accept he should have splintered instead, in case you have the hand you hold. So partner should be 4♠=4♥=2♦=3♣ Under those conditions I do not think that 3NT is a sensible option even if partner's hearts are poor. You obviously do not have enough to suggest slam. Just bid 4♥ Rainer Herrmann

Fairly straightforward. Unless South has opened 1NT with a six card diamond suit, where are declarer's 9 tricks if West holds the ♠A? Of course in a sophisticated partnership West might signal his heart entry by following with the appropriate club. (A lower club than the 8 is certainly more to my liking) But if you want to get anywhere in this game nothing beats logical thinking and counting tricks. Concentrate on that instead of interpreting partner's signals. Rainer Herrmann

And then ? Draw trumps and go down? Maybe I am overlooking something or I do not understand your point. In the 4 card ending you reached I see no winning play to make all the tricks, which is required for the contract. Why GIB knows single dummy to play the ♦9 instead of the jack escapes me. Even then you have to play diamonds to be 3-3 with the ace on your right to make an overtrick. Rainer Herrmann

A myth. These system were not a brainchild of anyone, different to most strong club systems. Swedish club is basically a variant developed out of Polish club and Polish club developed out of the Vienna system. In all old natural systems with few exceptions like Acol, the base is a strong notrump opening. So weak notrumnps were opened with one of a minor in 5 card major systems. 40 years ago in Germany forerunners of Polish club were popular called Small-Big Club. (Kleine-Grosse Treff) People simply realized that it might make sense to put strong hands into one 1♣, because 1♣ could take the additional load and it would keep the bidding lower when holding a strong hand. You sort of automatically reverse when you bid a second suit. No need for jump rebids to the three level. When people started to interfere against strong club systems they found they had a problem against such club systems. But these systems were not designed with such interference in mind. Rainer Herrmann

If the disadvantage of standard is their unlimited strength, cutting down on this must be worthwhile. You could simply argue Precision goes to extremes. In standard systems you might have to differentiate minimum hands from hands with one king, two kings and even 3 kings more than that and it often can not be done, in particular if opponents interfere. The latter (3 kings more are hands worth a 2♣ opening but unsuitable otherwise) In medium systems the idea is that you can have at most one king more than minimum (12-14 or 11-13). If you can not see the benefit you have never played such a system. Rainer Herrmann

If you ruff a spade and East goes up with a diamond honor honor and you go to dummy with a trump to play a second diamond to the ten and East goes in to play a heart there is no fourth trump left in dummy. It is still correct to rise with the ace. You can cash your trumps squeezing a defender who is left with ♦9x and the ♥K. But your line looses when West has ♦Hx and the ♥K. Anyway I am not convinced that this is better than simply the following. If trump are 2-2: A♠, K♠, ruff a ♠. Now Ace of diamond, diamond to towards the KT, playing the ten if East plays low and otherwise the King followed by the ten. Either West will be endplayed or diamonds will provide three tricks 60% of the time. If that does not materialize fall back on the heart finesse. Rainer Herrmann

Why? In fact I like to play it the other way round with good results. Make it easy for East to make a slam suggestion in a minor with the understanding that the partnership can still stop in 4NT. For sure I would not have chosen 4NT for that reason with East (because I am not prepared to stop below 6♦) nor would I have passed 4NT with West. Rainer Herrmann

I understand that. This is not too difficult to grasp. But what do you suggest instead? 1) If 2♣ is game forcing the question arises what do you do with invitational hands? It is nice being able to stop in 2♠ with 4 card support and an invitational hand or in 2♥ with hearts and an invitational hand. 2) If 2♣ is not game forcing, there must be non forcing sequences thereafter. Does this not defeat the advantage of being one step lower with a game forcing hand? For example: How do I distinguish a game forcing hand with hearts from one with invitational values thereafter, if the bidding starts 1?♦-1♥-1♠-2♣-2♦? If I have to jump to 3♥ with a game force where is the advantage? Rainer Herrmann

Would you mind elaborating a bit why you think XYZ is terrible for GF hands? Which alternatives are better? Rainer Herrmanno

Neither of you has bothered to answer the questions I raised. This is not about unclear signals. What problem is solved by encouraging, when in fact you need a switch and to discourage when you need a continuation, simply because you can not tell? What is subjective about refusing to do so? It is not that I am fond of playing an unclear card if I can help it. I am aware they are hard to read. But giving a clear but wrong signal is even worse. Rainer Herrmann

And some people consider the world black and white when in fact the reality is shades of grey. Rainer Herrmann

deleted

Playing on spades probably makes when you can keep your trump losers to one. This is slightly above 50%. Playing on clubs gives you better chances if clubs are 3-2 because opponents will have to waste a trump when we shed a diamond loser. Given the heart lead on this bidding West is very unlikely to hold a singleton club. This increases our chances that clubs break 3-2 to almost 80%. Accordingly I would play on clubs before touching trumps. Rainer Herrman

I might agree double dummy. But Bridge is not played double dummy and in my opinion the best declarers are those who give their opponents scope for errors. I am pretty sure I would duck at the table and would consider a club switch at trick two unlikely. If the club switch does not come at trick 2 I am in better shape. I beg to differ. I do not mind attitude signals. However most players seem to assume, when we lead partner knows our holding and can direct the right defense. Sometimes partner does, but more often he does not. If declarer has the ♦4 partner has encouraged. If declarer has the ♦8 and not the ♦4 partner has discouraged. And if partner has both the ♦4 and ♦8 has partner made a mistake? What is partner supposed to do if he does not know what is best? Let us assume for the sake of the argument declarer got ♠Axxxx ♥Kxxx ♦6 ♣Axx This gives partner ♠xxx ♥xx ♦AJ874 ♣KQx Now please tell me from partner's perspective when we lead a diamond honor why declarer could not have ♠AQx ♥Kxxx ♦96 ♣AT9x instead of ♠Axxxx ♥Kxxx ♦6 ♣Axx Now the right defense is continuing diamonds to partner followed by a spade switch. Partner can not tell what the right defense is at trick two. Please enlighten me what diamond spot partner should play under those conditions if not the ♦7. Rainer Herrmann

I never claimed declarer has the ♦A. I only claimed we might need 3 tricks from the minors For example he could have ♠Axxxx ♥Kxxx ♦6 ♣Axx But he could have the ♦A. For example ♠AT9xx ♥Kxx ♦A6 ♣Kxx He would have reason to duck, though it is not the winning line here against perfect defense. Declarer does not know where the black honors are. Rainer Herrmann

Switch to the ♣T Declarer could have ♣AKQx, but that looks not very likely. More likely declarer has ♠Axxxx and the club ace and you need to develop three tricks in the minors, before spades get established. Rainer Herrmann

If it does show a balanced hand yes. If it shows a long minor no. But why was declarer in such hurry to reach 3NT if he had Kokish available? Rainer Herrmann

or for that matter simply discards his heart Rainer Herrmann

Interesting. I made this comment, because I favor very basic carding agreements having been burnt frequently by misunderstandings. But if you use Bridge logic you could argue as follows: From trick one it is abundantly clear that East can not play a second round of trumps. So West must signal whether he got an entry to play more trumps and where. High card : heart entry Low card : club entry Middle card : no entry So with the second layout I would play ♦5 followed by the ♦2 (no entry) With the first layout I would play ♦8 followed by ♦2 (The 8 rather than the 9, because ♥K is not guaranteed to be an entry) So for me the actual carding would favor much more the first layout. That's the trouble with Bridge logic. There is more than one logic you can have in mind. That's why I keep my carding basic. Too much trouble at the table for too little gain. But then I rarely play big tournaments. Rainer Herrmann

I have submitted an article to the Bridge World with a pet idea of mine. The idea is a simple one: After 2/1 essentially switch the meaning of the next highest bid and 2NT. This follows Ruben's useful space principle. Since the next highest bid is cheaper than 2NT it can take more meanings. The next highest bid shows 1) any balanced or semi balanced hand 2) any minimum unbalanced hand with less than 6 cards in your major and where your second suit is a minor. So bidding a new minor shows extra. All other bids promise an unbalanced hand (singleton or void somewhere) including 2NT, which is the substitution bid for the next highest bid after 2/1. So after 1♠-2♥ 2♠ shows either a balanced or semi balanced hand or a minimum hand with 5 spades and a minor suit. 2NT shows at least 6 spades and unbalanced. If you are 6♠322 you bid 2♠ followed by 3♠. The same holds true for any 5♠422 hands. You bid 2♠ before bidding your second suit. The same holds true if you have heart support. If you raise hearts immediately you guarantee a shortage. Otherwise you bid 2♠ followed by 3♥. This avoids the complexity of a relay system, but delivers more information than standard responses. Rainer Herrmann

[hv=pc=n&s=saj965hqj984djck7&w=skqt7hk32d9852cj5&n=s8432h6dakq4cq642&e=shat75dt763cat983]399|300[/hv] [hv=pc=n&s=saj765hK9843djck7&w=skqt9hQJ2d9852cj5&n=s8432h6dakq4cq642&e=shat75dt763cat983]399|300[/hv] On the first layout you better duck On the second you better go in with the ♥A The examples are not exhaustive I leave it to super expert bermuda bowl partnerships why the diamond play 9,2,5 favors one layout for West over the other Rainer Herrmann