coyot

I play 2NT opposite reverse as Lebensohl. Reverse being 16+, this denies good 8 or more HCP. Opener can refuse Leb by not bidding 3♣ (which is the only bid I could pass). If reverse is almost GF, you still need a "bad" bid. I mean, what do I do with a totally crap hand? Partner promised 5 clubs and 4 diamonds. With 3532 I could possibly repeat hearts (but don't want to), but what to do with a minimum 4432 hand??? I would prefer 2NT as the escape bid - can't support partner and can't show GF.

I would agree that against precision opening, pass over 5♣ is not forcing - but it is one of the things you really need to discuss with your partner, not just rely upon. Without the agreement, though, pass is forcing - because: 1) East bid his hand only once - and he might have values for 5♠ if West has values for 4♠ 2) You need to protect your matchpoint score - even at the cost of doubling a laydown game for opps.

2♣ is a nice system bid, showing 10+ with 4+card and without majors :rolleyes:

I would not really care if 90% of the tournaments disappeared. I think that pretty soon, a good half of them would be back. My guess is that at least 50% of the problems with TDs are caused by lack of knowledge. Since online bridge prevents a lot of problems (revokes, out of turn bids, insufficient bids, wrong leads etc.), the knowledge needed for TD shrinks to a small portion of the f2f TD. The TD basically needs to know the following: 1) wrong claims and how to handle them (pick basically any line of play that is not nonsensical. The only details are i.e. is crossruff obvious or not? 2) Non-alerted bids - judging whether it caused any damage and adjusting 3) Use of UI (which narrows to hesitation here) 4) General behaviour issues (i.e. refusing to explain bids as above) Add anything I left out... And ask yourself - is it so hard it would scare out anyone good from the 90%? (I really don't mind the systematically bad TDs to leave...)

As to the frequency of various SJS types: The ones with a good suit are less frequent and more useful. If you know what the trumps will be, it is a good idea to get this to partner quickly. If your suit is not good enough to play against void or singleton, you don't need SJS to bid it :rolleyes: (I see this as the only advantage of SJS - setting trumps early. If I ever play SJS, I will want it to promise a good suit.)

Is the hand shown the one that passed after 2♠? Clearcut pass then, 2.5 tricks and no reason to run anywhere... (neither 3NT nor 5♣ are likely unless we can defeat 3♠ by 2 tricks.

1) If the 2♠ bid was alerted, then I would want the explanation as well. I mean, when I'm making a no-agreement natural bid, I don't alert it! The only reasonable explanation of this alert is trying to trick opponents into lead-double or something like that... 2) Yes, I strongly agree that there should be some standards for TD quality. Let's have a TD "licence". Let's force the TDs to PROVE that they know the basic rules! We don't need babysitters that replace red players, TD is much more than this.

I don't think that 4♦ must be strictly forcing. True, with a hand with so many quick tricks, you would most likely hope to bring 4♠ down two instead of trying seriously to make 4♦. But, then, with a forcing hand, bid 4♠ or 4NT instead (partner, I don't have hearts and want to play game. The correct 5♣ to 5♦. You could have significantly weaker hand and WANT to bid 4♦ as nonforcing. IMHO the TD should ask north what is their agreement on forcing/nonforcing of any such bid - if it is forcing, the ruling is ok. If it is nonforcing, the hesitation might have helped.... but, then, 5♦ will make against as little as two red jacks, so I think that it is a reasonable bid and would not adjust.

If your super accept can be done unnaturally or passes extra info, rules tell you to alert it. If 1NT-2♦-3♥ shows any maximum with 4 hearts, but denies 3 hearts, the alert is questionable. If it shows any maximum with more than 2 hearts, it is undoubtedly natural. Yes, you have to alert bids that carry any agreements. As for alerting various passes: If all the negative inferences (i.e. what you can't have with that bid) are covered by your pass AND this bid is not forcing or non-forcing in an unexpected way, you don't need to alert. (That is, you HAVE to alert forcing passes :)) So I believe that most passes don't need alerts since your CC will clearly covers the negative inferences. (See my favourite example in a few threads - 1x-1y-1NT that denies a major fourcard that could be bid on 1st level IS alertable negative inference, unless your CC says that your system has the general approach of limiting shape and strength before looking for major fit.)

Why would you call the TD? I see absolutely no reason for that, unless you're expecting your LHO to lead something strange BASED on his partner's hesitation. But, a spade lead in this case would be nothing strange - you're bidding 3NT so you don't seem to be interested in majors...

There are some things to consider: 1) partner's suit may be a 3 or 4card 2) your combined hands are most likely to have one heart stopper. I don't want to push partner into game on general "values" principle. 1NT seemed to be a good idea, because it gave me the room to find out wherher partner has some extra shape or not. I was ready to carry the blame, should partner have KQ in clubs, AJxx in diamonds and A in spades. Note that if I had as little as extra 9 in hearts, I would bid 2NT straight away - the only reason for the underbid are the clear heart tricks opps have developed after the opening lead.

I pass, acting on the opp's hesitation. This is authorized information - and it is most likely that he either has pretty good spades or a hand that considers 3NT. Without his hesitation, I would have to bid 3NT, source of tricks or not, 17HCP is simply too much.

At the table, I decided to go for a big underbid, 1NT. My reasoning was simple: I see one heart trick, probably 4 diamonds, one club. Partner rates to have 7-9 more HCP. Unless he has a good shape, it is quite likely that some of the black honors will be behind him, in the overcallers' hand. Now, given my heart holding, I cannot stop opps from developing 4 heart tricks. Unless I can cash 8 more winners straight away, I'm toast, even if partner's hand is good enough to accept my invitation. At IMPs, I would bid 2NT, though. Partner's likely shape is 4243 or 3253. Unless his black suits can provide 3 top tricks, we're going down in 3nt. But, if his shape is better, he might bid again over my 1NT. And this was exactly what happened :). Partner bid 2♣, showing 5-4 in minors. RHO bid 2♥. Now the chances are much better, so I jump to 3NT. Partner turns out to have Kx-Q-Axxxxx-Kxxx, 9 sure tricks. The opps had a chance, but spade honors are split favorably, QJxx in leader's hand does not look too attractive with his partner bidding hearts twice - and the obvious heart lead gives me ninth trick.

This basically says that whenever a bid is "natural", it does not need to be alerted no matter what understandings you have. Therefore, 1♠-1NT will not need to be alerted when it will guarantee 4card support without shortness? No, this is not the way to go. You don't want to have to ask about every non-alerted bid, exploring whether the partners are sharing extra information. The rules say that you shall alert every bid that carries explicit or implicit agreements or partnership experience! The goal of bridge game is to give everyone the same chances, not to burn beginner players by their lack of experience and lack of awareness of other bidding styles. Every bidding system I know has some general guidelines. Most natural systems are based on "majors first, notrump later, minors last". Then there are systems that focus on point strength or shape, then there are relay systems that describe only one hand. In a natural system, any call that deviates from the above priorities or carries extra information that can not be deduced from the priorities should be alerted. If your system prioritizes spade rebid above notrump rebid, it is natural. If it goes the other way, it is not natural. If the spade rebid denies balanced hand and your partner knows it, opps are entitled to know it as well. You should also bear in mind that using those alerts, you protect also your side! You prevent opponents from passing UI and acting upon it. Imagine, in a matchpoint event, a pair that investigates opps' bids of the above type if they're interested in overcalling and does not investigate with a bad hand. They might not realize they're breaking the rules - and no one else would notice, as well. (The same goes for weak NT opening - I am glad when people alert it because then I do not need to shut my mind from the fact that partner asked what is their notrump range before passing. I learned to ask about the NT range every time and my partners know that I ask even with a totally useless hand - but there are lots of pairs that don't bother about active ethics and they're almost impossible to blame and punish...)

[hv=d=n&v=e&s=s532hk532dkq5ca86]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] North opens bidding with 1♦, which promises longer or worse minor. (You play 1NT 15-17), East overcalls with 1♥. What is your bid and why? (I will show you all both hands and our bidding later :))

Agree with Brandal. It is better to use full disclosure principle and alert opponents whenever you have a partnership understanding than to rely on opponents to be able to use the same judgement your partnership uses. And certainly it is better to alert and explain than to make your opponents ask about everything everytime. Example: Image you're a beginner whose system says to rebid with one spade whenever you have the 4card. You sit at the table with some pair you don't know that plays a system that happens to have a name quite similar to yours. They don't alert the 1NT rebid. You make (from your point of view) perfectly correct assumption that the opener does not have 4 spades. You get a bad result for leading a spade just because you've never before seen anyone conceal 4 spades and therefore ruled this out as a possibility (or more likely, it never occured to you that this could happen). Do you think you deserved that bad result? I don't find it fair. Therefore I always alert all bids that carry hidden information - and I don't care whether it is the common treatment or not. I'm not going to replace clearly stated bridge rules by some common sense or common treatment, especially when there is no guarantee that your common is the same common as my common :)

Perhaps, in theory, I don't know... But in practice, are you really sure ? I agree that it makes sense to use wjs *after opps overcall*, but -honestly -how many times was it useful to you *when opps were silent* ? I also like to preempt, but I found out that the frequency was too low, mostly because too many hands were TOO STRONG for a wjs (= using a wjs with those hands would have resulted in preempting a strong pard rather than preempting opps). Say you hold AKQJxxxx-void -xx-xxx You do not play SJS. If you could, you would like to set trumps, and then verify via cuebids the controls in the minor suits, and finally use EKB 1D-1S (1) 2C-2H (2) 2NT-3S (3) 3NT- ?? 1- I have time to set trump (!?!?!?) 2- I need 4sf cos 2S and 3S are both NF 3-now I have tld pard that I have long spades, but he does not know I have a selfsufficient suit. I would have bid the same even with AJxxxx-xx-Ax-Kxx, and this is wrong, wrong wrong, to bid the ame way these totally different hands 4- Now what do I bid ? Ideally I would have liked to check side controls and use EKB, but now I am stuck ==== Using SJS, you just set trumps, then use serious 3NT, cues, and RKCB/EKB to find the small/grand slam. Quite a few times we were able to bid a grand thanks to the ability to set trumops early in the bidding (something that 4sf auction do not allow) ============================ I am sure, in practice as well as in theory. And, yes, I use WJS even when opps are silent - and it is usually a good idea. Unless your WJS hand hits a void in opener's hand, you're in the clear. You're in the contract you're most likely to end in anyway... I play WJS as 2-5 HCP, concentrated into the bid suit if possible. Imagine something like KJxxxx or QJxxxx after partner opens a minor. With this hand, you have two options only (if you don't play WJS) 1) bid 1M and on any partner's response bid 2M 2) pass and when opps reopen, reenter the bidding. Either option gives opps chance to either hear more about your partner or to bid themselves. The example is really nice, apart from the fact that your opps have a ton of hearts and forgot to interfere with your bidding :-). Also, your partner has shown good heart stoppers and no interest in spades. But, if you bid 4♠ over his 3NT, do you think that he will NOT get the message that you're interested in spade slam? Why would you bother with bidding FSF and 3♠ if you just wanted to blast into the game? I admit that SJS do have some merits, of course, but on quite a lot of hands these can be worked around. I can promise to start making notes about hands that could use SJS and see if we would be able to arrive in a better contract with SJS or without :) but I'm not going to just take your word for it :). The merits of WJS are good enough for me not to get converted so easily :)

If I recall correctly, there is a rule (meaning a hint, not a law) that says that when you bid over a preempt, you borrow 7HCP from partner. Therefore, going to 3rd level would require something like very good 13 HCP. At matchpoints, a little more aggresivity is of course called for. With the above hand, 3♥ is a good minimum, because if if goes down one, you're most likely competing with 3♣ for 110, so -100 is OK. If it goes down for 300 or 500, chances are that opps have 3NT. (But the risk is too bid at imps).

Guess I'm too old for light opening bids :) I open most 12 HCP counts (avoiding only exceptionally ugly 4333 hands). I open 11 HCP hands with major 5card. I open 11 HCP hands with any 5-4 shape, unless the honors are scattered in the short suits I open any A A K hand if the king is with the ace. I open 10 HCP hands with 10 cards in 2 suits (one major) with no wasted values I very rarely open 9 HCP hands with 11 cards in 2 suits :) I will never open 11 HCP without good shape (4432 is not a good shape, 5332 with long minor is not a good shape). Once you read a good book on reopens and balancing (i.e. Lawrence), you'll find that with many hands, you don't need to rush as you will have your say later (if it is a good idea to have your say on that board).

See the above... WJS definitely has significantly higher probability (my guess would be a number between 2 and 3). The harder part would be determining the wins/losses. How many slams would you miss because you could not establish trump suit at 2nd level? (Usually you establish it on 3rd level in those cases) Honestly, I don't know. I play WJS because I like to preempt :-) (apart from believing in the higher occurence). WJS has it's beauty. Against weak hands, it shuts out the opponents quickly. Against stronger hands, it warns partner. I have been playing WJS for 4 years and do not recall a significant disaster (some must have happened, but nothing big). It will be in fact impossible to establish the costs/gains properly. It is easy to compare two ways to bid an identical hand, but impossible to compare two hands bid with identical bid :)

If weak = 0-6 hcp, then I wholeheartedly agree. I agreed to play wjs = 0-6 for about 2 years and it came up only twice, ehereas hands suitable for strong jumpshifts came up about 15 times. And it's a myth that "if you have a hand suitable for SJS, you can bid them slowly", because you have a hard time to describe your honor concentration. The power of SJS is to be able to set trumps immediately, below the level of game: if you start slowly, your pard will always "refuse" your offer to play there, and you'll reach game without being able to check for side controls. Since when we adopted SJS, our slam biding has improved dramatically, without losing much on the 0-6 wjs. Things would be more shaded is the jumpshift was slightly stronger (say 4-8/9 hcp), but then it would easy to bid these hands going slowly... :) I happen to have some clue about mathematics. Odds for a 0-6 hand are 20.56%. (2-6 18%) Odds for a 12+ hand are 26%. This might seem to speak in favour of strong jump shifts, BUT: The odds that you get 12+ hand opposite a partner that already opened bidding are much lower, as this is conditional probability. The only way to calculate it correctly would be to determine the probabilities for 12+ hand against all possible strengths for opening, as for each opener's extra point, the probability of 12+ decreases since there are less HCP to divide. The point that seems to speak in favor of WJS is: SJS happen only when your partnership has 24+HCP (17% of hands) WJS happen when your partnership has 12-25 HCP (cca 80% of hands!) The probability difference between WJS and SJS hand (generic probability above) is about 6%, but the theoretical range space in which WJS can occur is at least 4 times bigger! The conditional probability involved may change things, but I doubt that the chance will be of the similar order. If WJS does not happen to you too often, bad luck :). Anyone care to do the real math? What are the odds for getting 12+HCP out of 28 remaining for three hands? (and 27... and 21)? (Or a real big simulation, I don't have the proper tools). I would bet a good sum of money on WJS coming more often :-).

Sorry, but doubling and then bidding 4♥ over 3NT shows a hand that is TOO GOOD to bid 3/4♥ directly. If you have moderate hand with hearts, either bid them directly or shut up :).

Threesuiters are a pain - but if you're prepared for them. I am in the "NT is sacred" camp. If you lie a doubleton in your partner's suit, he will NEVER give you a ruff :-) If the responder bears in mind that the opener can be 4441 after the first rebid, things are usually easy... I would see the only problem with really strong hands (where you simply have to open 2♣ or equivalent). We solve this by embedding this into 2♦ multi, which covers weak majors, 24-25 bal or 22+ threesuiters. But it requires a lot of debating and agreements, especially when it comes to competitive bidding...

I have this feeling that everyone here is an optimist :D or that noone wants to defend :). What you should bear in mind: RHO rates to have (on average) 7-8 HCP. That leaves 21-22 HCP between your partner and LHO. Since you know your partner's upper limit, while no limit applies to LHO, I think the probability is against you... What is the statistically most probable shape of your partner? Clubs quite likely divide 7222 Shape or RHO is quite likely the same (2227) Hearts tend to be 6322 as well. Given the cards you see, you can expect partner at best with something like 3262, 4252 or, the ideal 4342. Give the RHO any major singleton and LHO almost sure has a trick-costing major holding! Bidding 3♥ would be really betting your neck on partner's sharp values. From the remaining 29 HCP, fully 12 would be a waste (KQJ in both minors). So, even if partner has the statistical 9-11 HCP, 37% of it is garbage. In the long run, partner will have 6-7 working HCP. What are the game probabilites of your hand against 6-7 good HCP? Only with spade K10 and heart Axx the game looks good. (apart from singleton club with LHO and trup promotion of his J10x.) Any other holdings carry the same or bigger risks. And, if partner happens to have a GOOD hand (singleton club and some sharp values), I trust him not to let opps play 3♣. In any other case I will pass - with the exception of white vs. red at matchpoints, where it is worth going for -1 doubled against 3♣ or -3 against 3NT :).

No, the idea is as follows: 1m-2M weak jump shift. I play it as 6-7card, 2-5 HCP. (Partner usually passes even with 18-19 balanced, only a hand with good support and a shortness bids something) 1m-1M-rebid-2M - very nonforcing 6card (usually up to 9 HCP) 1m-1M-rebid-3M - almost GF. (Partner passes only with extremely unsuitable hand - minimum, singleton trump) 1m-1M-rebid-GF or a new forcing suit-rebid-3M - natural... The last two variants can be merged together as GF, but I've been grateful a few times for having an invitational hand that specifically says "partner, if your hand is good, I want to play in my major, but if it is bad, 3NT is not a good idea".