jdeegan

:) The Year of Living Dangerously The Big Lebowski - delivers, according to a recent poll, the fifth best cinematic portrayal of Jesus

:) Over the years I have heard of it being played both ways. I prefer the side 5-bagger approach. I don't see why the second suit has to have holes in it. The important thing is that pard appreciate that I have only (at most) three outside cards, and that the second suit is a potential source of tricks.

:) Really glad to see the 2/3 vote for 2♥. I thought, perhaps, I had recently lapsed over into a heretofore unexpected parallel universe where things looked the same but were actually just slightly altered. The joke on this hand happened on the next round where my actual partner in an indy bid 2NT with a balanced 11 HCP. Looking at a possible combined HCP count of 23-24 and no known fit, I naturally passed. Now, I don't mind bad partners, else I wouldn't play in indies, but I wasn't prepared for this player's outrage at my final bid.

:P Playing MP's with a reliable, but pick-up partner. You hold: [hv=d=s&v=n&s=sahj985dqj7cakq84]133|100|Scoring: MP 1♣-P-1♠-P ???[/hv] Your call?

:) Let's look at the bids in order: a. S might open 1♠ third seat, BUT being vul takes most of the luster from this bid. A good 1♠ open non-vul becomes sub-marginal vul - too easy to go for a quit -200. No charge here, but also no charge for 1♠ either. b. Over 1♥ N might make a light passed hand double, BUT he is vul and holds ♥Q doubleton - a very bad holding for offense - 10 WORKING HCP and 4-2-4-3 distr. would make a dbl OK, but not mandatory. Imo. dbl is wrong and pass is clearcut. c. Over 2♥ S has to pass. "Prebalancing" is imo. not totally crazy, but you are vul and LHO is unlimited. It's a pretty desperate act. d. N is in the balancing chair over 2♥. It is almost never right to pass this auction esp. at MP's. Imo, the only two options are dbl and 2♠. My preference by a considerable margin would be 2♠, but one cannot argue that dbl would be wrong. Charges: N 100% for not balancing on an auction that begs for it. I have heard of one world class player who claims 100% balancing action is correct regardless of your hand. N had a hand within shouting distance of bidding on the previous round of bidding. All of the choices except d. depend to an extent on the strength of the opposition and the state of our game. I would generally advise not to be eager to bid against strong players unless you enjoy being endplayed or doubled for a telephone number. Also, W choice to open the bidding in 4th chair was way against percentage esp. since he lacked spades. Were I S, I would be mildly insulted. My result, playing vs myself would be Passed Out, a below average result - oh well!

;) Playing either SAYC or 2/1: a. 1♥ is fine b. 2♣ is OK c. 3♣ is bad - 3♣ tends to show extra values, either distributional with 4 card support or with three and 15+ in dummy points either way. 2♥ is THE correct bid with any min unless you have a (weird) agreement that it shows 6 or more. d. 4NT is from hunger. You have an easy 3♦ bid to start the investigation for some number of clubs or NT. For all you know you might have 7♣. In this case, you might overcome partner's ill-judged (i.e. bad) 3♣ bid.

B) It is not written. All continuations over the J2NT are up to the individual partnerships, although in the US the simple continuations thru 4♥ have become fairly standard. With interference I would suggest that in the absence of prior discussion it should be for penalties and show a ♠ stop. You might want to limp into 3NT occasionally, and there is no better way since double gives you a two way shot and leaves the decision to the hand best equipped to make the right choice.

B) Can't believe you didn't double 4♥. Is there ever going to be any better hand for that bid? Now I think you have to bid 6NT - after all, you do have second round ♥ control. 6♠ is out, and 6♣ might mislead partner into thinking you had a real club suit.

:D Thanks for the comments. It looks like the modern IMP scored game with very light opening bids is a different world from back in the day. While watching top players in action in major events, I have seen a lot of attempts to steal hands with the light openers and responses. Is this just the passing modern fashion, or the future trend?.

:) Not much help from the panel on this subject. I learned bidding (to the extent possible) from Kaplan-Sheinwold. They saw no reason to assign the 2 ♥ or 2♠ rebid over a 2♣ response as showing extras. Theory says that unnecessarily using bidding space has to have a good reason. For example, my grounding in the K-S system made it clear that the Jacoby 3NT as a strong major suit raise (as he presented it to me) was no good, so I suggested the use of 2NT as a strong major suit raise. Jake adopted this, and it is now a convention most people use.

:unsure: Playing BBO version of SAYC after the auction 1♦-P-2♣-P ??? does a 2♥ or 2♠ rebid show extras? If so how much? Playing BBO 2/1 w/o interference, the same question. Playing BBO 2/1 with interference, the same question. Any comments as to the relative merits of each treatment?

It can still quite easily be best. It only matters if it gives up exactly the 12th trick, and if you can't get that trick back elsewhere. Your argument is like saying exercise isn't healthy because it dramatically increases your chances of a sprained ankle. I like how the spade is just 100% to score if we don't lead it. As though opponents in 6♥ and lacking the king of spades and queen of hearts won't have a minor or two to throw any spade losers on. :( :D :D Your last statement addresses the whole point. When I started constructing hands for RHO where 3-4-2-4 distribution let two spades go on diamonds (remember, Cayne is very unlikely to open 2NT with two doubletons), I saw that this made LHO at most 2-2 in the black suits, so 6♥ makes even if pard has the ♠Q and a ♦ or ♥ trick whenever dummy gets a spade pitch on a club. Essentially, when we gamble on finding pard with ♠Q, we still don't win probably more than half the time. As far as waiting on the ♠K, if we don't make a ♠ trick, we probably aren't going to beat the hand anyway. :D :D :D

Nice posts. They might even help jdeegan to "to gauge the quality of commentators." :D :D :D It really has. One reponder wondered about the meaning of the 5♦ bid. I specifically stated that it was a Q bid showing the ♦A or KQ. Remember, south was Jimmy Cayne and north was Chuck or Susie Berger. Personally, despite my liking for old-fashioned bidding, I favor Q bidding the unsupported ♦K if it looks to be the best bid, but I certainly wouldn't do it sitting opposite JEC, and neither, I expect, would the burgers. I pays to know your opponents. The other issue I haven't heard mentioned is that more than 2/3 of the time a ♠ lead will give up either a trick (very often) or at least a tempo - and, you know this from the bidding - no simulations needed. When you start from that deep a hole, how good can a ♠ lead be? Just wait on your ♠ trick (you are behind the ♠A), and hope pard's 3-6 HCP turn into a trick. If declarer is missing the ♥Q with nine, he will normally misguess. Time now to crank up my ancient MS DOS copy of RPG and do my own simulations. :D :D :D

:D :D :D At last something we can all agree on. You only agree with my wife and most of my bridge partners. Two or three years ago this thread was a treasure for serious players, but imho it has been going down hill lately. Back then, whenever I had a bridge hand that baffled me (and they came up all the time), I would submit it and learn something useful. Nowdays, the post-mortem discourse is sometimes little better than one finds at the average suburban duplicate club. I just wanted to stir things up a little. :D :D :D

:D :D :D I am not saying I learned much from Mike's CD's - they are too elementary- but his lessons on opening leads really helped me. Lots of very fine players are not so good when it comes to opening leads. [hv=d=e&v=b&s=sk10763h10d753c9863]133|100|Scoring: IMP 2♣-P-2♦-P 2NT-P-3♦-P 4♥-P-5♦-P 6♥-P-P-P[/hv] strikes me as a pretty good case in point. About half of the responders to this thread led a spade - which is a pathetic 7 to 1 underdog. :D :D :D

:D :D ♠ lead is a 10-15% play according to the simulations. At the table I think: "I know about half the HCP's - ♠AK, ♥ AKJ, ♦A and ♣ A or (maybe) K. About 20 HCP left and pard has 6- or about 1/3. So, Probability of ♠ Q about 1/3 minus a little. But, wait! Lottsa ♠Q hands where ♠ lead won't help (that's about as far as I got, and decided it was worth $20 US to get the damned problem off my mind for a while since I had long age solved the problem as a practical matter)." So, if you had asked me, I would have thought 7 to 1 against a ♠ lead was a shade too high. Still, I maintain that it is a clear error much, much weaker than playing for the Q drop vs. finesse with eight trumps and no other info. There are some larger issues from this hand as well. #1 Don't underlead kings (esp. from length) vs. small slams w/o a plan, esp. vs. balanced hands and strength on your right. #2 Don't believe everything you read.

:) :) Congratulations jdonn!!! :D :D for presenting the first valid answer. Well done karlson for a second valid answer!! My point in presenting this exercise (at the cost of $20 american, by the way) was to illustrate how hard it is to find hands where a ♠ lead wins. Just the odds of finding pard with the ♠ queen are pretty low, plus you need so much more for it to be a winner. Meanwhile, the probability of giving up a trick by leading a ♠ is way more than 50% - maybe 75%. Best hope on this hand is to hang in there, hoping to get your ♠ trick and maybe another from pard - ♥Qxx or ♦K or ♣A. To me a ♠ lead on this hand is so low percentage as to be a clear error.

:lol: I will pay $20 U.S. to the first person who can construct and post on this thread a complete bridge hand consistent with the constraints imposed by the bidding in which the opening lead of a small ♠ is necessary to defeat a contract of 6♥. Your hand is: [hv=d=e&v=b&s=sk10753h10d753c9863]133|100|Scoring: IMP 2♣-P-2♦-P 2NT-P-3♦-P 4♥-P-5♦-P 6♥ -P-P-P[/hv] 2♣ was artificial and strong, 2♦ waiting, 2NT 22-24HCP, 3♦ transfer to ♥, 4♥ super-accept, 5♦ cue bid, 6♥ to play RHO, Jimmy Cayne, is constrained the have a normal 2NT opener (no singleton or two doubletons) with 22-24 HCP. His jump to 4♥ showed a max with 4 ♥. His jump to 6♥ showed the ♠ ace, a ♣ control, and excellent ♥ (AKxx, AQJx, KQJx) and likely a max in high cards. LHO, Chuck Burger, showed a ♦ control (A or KQ) and enough HCP so that the combined total for the two hands must be at least 31 for purposes of this contest. Pard cannot be void in ♠. To summarize the constraints: - 31+ HCP for the two hands - 23-24 HCP for RHO - 4 good ♥ for RHO - ♣ control for RHO - ♦ control for LHO - 5+ ♥ for LHO - no ♠ void Have at it gang. The winner (if any) will be paid through a funds transfer via BBO. :) :D jdeegan :D :D

im sorry maybe i didnt understand were you looking for advice or looking forward to lecturing the whole forums? either way is fine but it's usually better if you pre-alert. :D Sry. Next time I will pre-alert. Just trying to gauge the quality of commentators. It seems they are well-read, but not very well-educated. ♠ leaders might consider buying Mike Lawrence's CD's on bidding and play for a few hundred bucks. One of them teaches about opening leads. You learn a checklist to consider which includes evaluating the auction, counting the outstanding HCP's, etc. Why spent the time to pursue a hobby unless you know what you are doing? whats with all the smiley faces followed by insulting a ton of players who (you would think) have reasons for their plays? btw no one cares what the result on the hand was, that is completely irrelevant. run a sim, maybe someone will listen. i couldn't care less whether best play results in a contract going down. i'm interested in playing best bridge. :D Trust me, bubba, my smiley faces are NOT laughing with you. Curious how thin-skinned some bridge players seem to be, esp. when that is so detrimental when it comes to playing a good game. Actually, I really think my analysis of the lead problem in question was pretty good. Mike Lawrence's CD lessons would improve the game of many of the people who post here. But, as you may have begun to realize, none of this was really the purpose of this excercise.

:) Pass. Might or might not have seven. I stay fixed unless the state of the match means I need to swing. 7♥ is not terrible imo., but I hate looking at the ♠Q.

:) 3♣ seemed right to me when I saw the hand initially. I don't think it shows extra HCP, just good playing strength, which I have (I would make an unusual 2NT overcall with it, so commiting to the three level isn't at all crazy). Doubling with a void has always seemed to me to be a no-no, and this hand stands as a case in point. Of course, pard could have had a really wicked trump stack, but according to the laws of probability, hands like he actually had are many times more frequent. On the actual hand, I suppose pard will bid too much and we will go down, but, at least no -870.

you are a joke :D Right. My original post was a bit harsh. True enough, but not very constructive.

im sorry maybe i didnt understand were you looking for advice or looking forward to lecturing the whole forums? either way is fine but it's usually better if you pre-alert. :D Sry. Next time I will pre-alert. Just trying to gauge the quality of commentators. It seems they are well-read, but not very well-educated. ♠ leaders might consider buying Mike Lawrence's CD's on bidding and play for a few hundred bucks. One of them teaches about opening leads. You learn a checklist to consider which includes evaluating the auction, counting the outstanding HCP's, etc. Why spent the time to pursue a hobby unless you know what you are doing?

B) ♦ or ♣ Leading the ♥ is out since it could roll up the suit. A ♠ is nearly as bad, if not worse. RHO has the ♠ ace and 22+ HCP - so, leading around into the possible wheel is BAD, esp. when I have FIVE ♠. Neither opponent has advertised a long suit other than ♥, so a passive defense should be OK. Leading a ♠, I would be playing pard for the ♠ queen plus an entry - if the entry is an ace, then they have only 31 HCP. If it is an offside king (probably the ♦ king) then what's the hurry? RHO has a balanced hand. Wait on the ♠ trick and hope for the best. ♥ and ♠ leads are clear errors, but I don't see too much to choose between the other two suits. On the actual hand, the ♠ was the ONLY lead to allow the contract to make.

:unsure: El Paso. EZ bid. Not enuf for 2NT. ♠'s way too weak to rebid. 3♣?? really, am I worried about missing game? Need to pass fairly quickly since I don't want to bar pard from competing with 3♣. I'm sure not going to take any push with dubious trump length.