dave_w

What you like might not be relevant. You could easily be damaging your ability to improve as a bridge player. Most (?) of the top players overcall very aggressively (Meckstroth, Lauria especially). It's probably just winning bridge. Liking it or not shouldn't really matter. I propose that your dislike for weak overcalls is self fulfilling. If you respond to an overcall as if it were sound (when it's not) then you will get bad results with weak overcalls. Thus you'll like sound overcalls and get better results with them. To improve you'd need to do a lot of hard work in changing how you respond to an overcall (and it's a subtle change which is the hardest) and then seeing if weak overcalls get better results. Sorry for the thread hijack. And also for unsolicited advice on how to improve at this complex game - that's just rude.

Well known to you and well known to me might be different things. As to which card to play next I'd have thought the 8. Surely we can't have 82 doubleton. And can't play the 8 without the 7. This will make declarer's card seem odd (and partner might work out that we have chosen _not_ to unblock. Alternatively give false count at trick 1 and partner might play us for 5 Hearts (and thus work out that we chose not to unblock). I'm glad this wasn't given as a bidding problem. I'd not answer on the basis that it's in the wrong forum. Not bidding 2♥ with this hand is pure insanity.

It can be that you use 1♣ - 2♦ as the mixed raise but that over 1♦ you wish for 3♣ to be a natural invite (so that 2♣ can be GF). This means that you have more room in your 1♣ auctions where you _need_ to differentiate mixed and preemptive due to partner possibly being 18-19 balanced. If you can fit it in your system obviously having more raises is better. The problem (as always) is that you lose the possibility of using the bid for something else.

I've played it before - but in pickup partnerships (yes I know that's odd, but it's when I get to experiment with system ideas, obviously the other person's opinion too!). We didn't have much fancy system - just play as if the auction had started 1C-1M; 1NT. That's what they've shown (weak NT with 2-3M). Whatever system you like after a 1NT rebid (2 way checkback, Leong transfers) will work well. You even get to play the same system after 1C-1R; 1M/1NT. The only other bid which needs discussion is 1C-1D; 1H-1S: I'd have guessed this is 44 Majors and F1. Suddenly we'll play the right partscore with 44 Majors opposite a balanced opener with 4 Spades without having to rebid 1S with balanced hands. This is nice!

Double isn't as crazy as most people make out. Over spade bids you bid Diamonds showing a flexible hand. It doesn't show a strong one suited hand, that's what a jump to 4D or 5D shows. If partner jumps to 4S then we know we want to play a game - maybe 5D isn't the game we want to play - but it's the one we are getting to. I wouldn't double (I don't think it's quite strong enough), but I wouldn't be so fast in denouncing it.

I like ♣K, Club to the Jack. If it loses then I'm backing diamonds to be no worse than 3-2. If it wins then ruff a Spade, Cross to the ♥Ace, draw the trump and claim. If Clubs are 4-0 (either way) then I think I'm struggling a lot. If RHO shows out on the second club then I'll lead a diamond towards dummy, take the Heart hook, ruff a Diamond, ruff a Spade, play a good Diamond pitching my Heart. This seems to fail when LHO is 1-3 in Diamonds and Clubs and I can't pick up Hearts for no loser or when RHO has 10 cards in the Majors and I can't pick up Hearts for no loser. Seems like pretty good odds to me - especially as in the failing cases of needing to pick up Hearts I'll know whether to play for Kx of Hearts or Tx of Hearts.

Why can't you double? You aren't broke. If partner bids at the 5 level you can correct to 5♥. If partner passes it's going down (partner might pass with balanced-ish hands for his action so far if making anything at the 5 level opposite a passed hand is too much to ask). I can't imagine passing. Surely we were making 4♥ - I know I was going to bid it to make.

Don't tell anyone but this is my favourite method in this situation: 1 over 1 is Forcing 2 over 1 is NF 2NT is a 4 card invite+ raise The cue bid is like a responsive double (ie exactly this hand) and is overloaded like a responsive double should be overloaded (forcing single suited hands) and also with hands with fit. Partner responds as if facing a responsive double. Then we can correct to 2NT (invite "balanced"), correct to partner's suit (invite with 3 card support), correct to a new suit (forcing). Given that I'm not playing that method I'd have thought 2S, 2D and 1NT were reasonable. I'm surprised no-one has suggested 2S yet. And I'm being convinced by JLall that 1NT looks pretty good. Partly cuz it's JLall and partly because he's put a good argument to it.

We can take two spade tricks with either QT onside or AQ onside. Opponents don't lead from AQxx but do lead from QTxx. So for 2 tricks we should play the 9. For one trick things are different. If the opponents win the ♠Ten and return another suit and subsequently get in and lead another Spade then we are at a guess for our trick. We can pay out to a lead from Qxxx/Axxx/Txxx (or longer) If LHO has 5 Spades then he'd always lead a Spade. If LHO has 4 Spades then he'd always lead from the Queen, only sometimes from the Ace, and from the Ten it depends on the rest of his hand but I'd think it's more likely than from the Ace. All this leaves me mostly confused .... I definitely want to play the Jack at some point - but I don't see that it has to be at trick one. From a whole hand perspective the danger is the ♠9 loses to the Ten and a Heart comes back. We have to win that (explaining to team mates how we went down in this contract with Diamonds 2-2 by losing the first 5 tricks will be hard). And then we play three rounds of Diamonds losing to the Queen and they play another Heart and we haven't established our ninth trick (indeed there might not be any winning line from here). (sorry about the spot cards - but I didn't look at the full hand) So at BAM I play the ♠9 (best chance for two tricks IMHO). At IMPs I play the ♠J to establish a fast trick (hopefully). Someone is going to complain that it's a guess at IMPs but the point is that we want to win quickly - the opponents might always be able to beat us with the AQ offside but why give them the chance to beat us with AT offside also! eg this is the danger layout for E-W [hv=pc=n&w=st832hq932d4cj932&e=saq54hj84dq32cq64]266|100[/hv] There's no way home now (except guessing Diamonds .... but the Diamond Queen can be moved and you'll pay off to a different layout).

Heart is obvious. I suppose it's right to lead the 9 in order to unblock when partner has 5 or in case the suit is laid out like this: Txx Q98x Jxx AKx but I'm a simple soul and would lead the 4.

I find this to be a waste of time. Partner has said "slam if you have no wastage in Clubs" (it must mean that due to us being so limited - if we were wider range then maybe it would be possible slam opposite no wastage). We have a hand with some wastage (the Ace) and very minimum (4333 11 count - as someone pointed out KnR says 10 .... that's what it looks like to me too). So this hand should bid 4♦. It's not good enough to go past 4♥ and it doesn't have enough wastage to sign off. For all the people who are signing off I'm guessing you wouldn't open this hand. Yes, it's a shocker - I'd have passed too. But if this is a normal opening hand for this partnership then there is no way it can sign off now.

I disagree that LHO wouldn't lead a 5 card Heart suit. Also I think vacant spaces tells us that he doesn't have a 5 card Diamond suit to lead from. Either way it shouldn't surprise us that he chose to lead a Spade when he has 5 of them (ie his odds of having another 5 card suit are now remote anyway). I think your argument is backwards - looking at the odds of different length spade suits - because that tells us his a priori odds of different length Spade suits. What I want to know is what is LHO's expected Spade length WHEN he leads a Spade. I suspect the answer to that is over 4. Thus this isn't enough evidence to sway my play in Diamonds. I just realised something weird about the hand: If I knew West had led from 3 Spades then at BAM I would finesse him for the ♦Q and at IMPs I'd finesse his partner. Nice hand Frances!

I don't really know why I'm replying. But if picking on someone's line can you at least choose a layout where their chosen line fails and yours wins? Or better yet - I don't care for the specific layouts. I don't want to think about all 423849723489238947238947234 hands that are possible, just say on what cases your line gains on and which it loses on (and if we care we can work out the maths - it's mostly too complicated ... a lot depends on inferences about the opponent's plays).

It's telling that the opponent's returned a Heart rather than switched to a Club at trick 2 (a good reason to duck?). I think I'd have ducked at trick one even without knowing about the continuation. It looks like either: 1) Trumps are 4-1 and the opponents are killing the Heart entry to the Diamonds (the trump entry is useless) 2) RHO has the Club Queen and doesn't want to break clubs (maybe even Qx) 3) RHO has Diamonds fairly well covered (KJxx might be enough that he doesn't see them as a threat or knows he has time to put a Club through later). Whatever, I run the ♦Q at trick 3 (Justin has explained the reason why: they'll duck with Kxx(x) because it's the right play and I'll steal a trick) If it wins then you are (almost) home (any time the hand is makable) If it loses then they should return a Club (obvious need to establish tricks with threatening Diamonds in dummy - failure to do so is telling ... trumps 4-1??) If it's covered then I win and play a Diamond (I think that means I'm home if trumps are 3-2 .... but see point one above ... I'm not thrilled) If they play back a Diamond rather than a Club then I think I'm playing for trumps 4-1: cash a high trump, if an Honour drops on my right then play to be able to pick up trumps for no loser and Clubs for one loser (needs the Club Queen onside ... ruffing a Club means going down as I'll have a trump loser). If no Honour drops in Clubs (and Diamonds aren't good) then I'm looking at minute chances with trumps 4-1 so I think I'd pray for 3-2 trumps and lead a Club to the Queen. I guess if Club to the Queen loses I'll have to try and ruff a Club in Dummy (nothing else looks better). Of course in all these lines I have to decide what I do if they ever play a third round of Diamonds through me (with Diamonds established/not established). Basically gnasher's line but running the ♦Q rather than the Ten.

So no wastage in Clubs, no Honour Doubleton in Spades, no Honour Third in Hearts. He must be 1273 or something? Either that or he can't bid (probably the latter). Bidding 3♦ on this hand is fine. We could be 5431 or 5422 with Hx - partner doesn't have to bid slam just yet. Partner can bid his values in a Major or bid 3NT to show Club values and a hand that wants to play 3NT unless I have extras.