jdeegan

:D This is an excellent piece of advice. When you play the weak two bid, you must decide in advance whether to play it as a constructive bid (disciplined, almost a picture bid) or a disruptive bid (undisciplined, say 4-10 HCP and playing strength based on vulnerability). With the disciplined style, the emphasis is reaching game or slam whenever possible - suit requirements are strict, and 2NT asking for outside strength makes sense. With the undiscipled style (which I greatly prefer, esp. at matchpoints) you should have an LOTT 'pure' hand (ie. no Q or J - late round tricks in the opponents suits), and almost always a six bagger so that partner can cooperate with my mild preempt and increase it with confidence. Our intent with the undisciplined weak two bid is merely to survive with an average when it's our hand, and Ogust is better for that task. My experience is not that the undisciplined weak 2 bid will 'fix' the opponents all by itself very often, but it throws so much sand in their bidding gears as to average 60+% on such hands. Also, it is more fun. :D :D :D

:rolleyes: I must say, with the actual hand a 2♣ balance should work out just fine. If need be, we can successfully compete to the three level. Defending 1♥ is a loser. After a balancing dbl the auction is unclear. Most likely responder would bid the 1 NT he might have bid in the first place. After an intervening pass, I believe I have to bid 2♣. This amounts to getting to two or three clubs the hard way.

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sq4ha5dkq92cq10864]133|100|Scoring: IMP ???[/hv] Your bid as dealer?? No comment please, save that for the preceding thread, just take the poll.

:rolleyes: Another issue I have not seen discussed in this forum is auctions after partner makes a negative double. Since, by definition, you don't have the other major (except for the rather rare 0-4-4-5 or 4-0-4-5 hands), opening the hand 1♦ leaves you better placed. For most players, the negative double shows the other major (4 cards) and either the other minor or tolerance for opener's minor. If you open 1♣ and it goes: 1♠ - dbl - pass - ???, you may be in an awkward position with no spade stopper. Bidding the four card diamond suit is liable to force partner to correct to THREE clubs, and this may be too high. Starting with one diamond leaves you able to stop at either 2♦ or 2♣ and know what you are doing. The same arguement holds for opening 1♦ with 4-4 in the minors. Examples showing the 1♣ - 1♥ - dbl - pass - ??? auction are similar.

:rolleyes: 5♥ is a brave effort, but is it worth the trouble or the risk? The hand is something of a read out. A passed partner likely has 3-4-1-5 distribution and around 10 HCP (he doubled in a live auction for hearts and clubs which have very little preemptive value, so he should be a fairly solid citizen here). Almost sure losers are one spade, one heart (RHO bid 1NT), and one diamond. How many club losers do we have? Losing 2 clubs for down three is one major risk. Another would be a club ruff. Or if partner has two diamonds to lose. Worse yet, LHO may have a stiff heart or club so that 6 ♠ is a make - I don't want to push them into that when 3 ♥ would have been enough to put sand in their bidding gears. In short, a 5♥ bid is betting on exactly nine tricks for us and 10 for them (or 11 if they don't take the push). Every other outcome is a loser. I am not ready to make that gamble even at matchpoints.

:) Just an historical note. The original Kaplan-Sheinwold system, circa 1963, included a controlled psychic opening bid with a very weak hand. It was not manadatory and was fairly disciplined as to its composition. Many pairs played K-S in ACBL tournaments without any comment by anyone.

:) Many moons ago I used to play the opponents convention card when playing with one of my regular partners. We could not agree on a system. One of our cards read: 'We play what you play' the other read: 'See partner's card'. No doubt you can guess our ages at the time. Funny thing was that it did not appear to hurt our results. We won several tournament pairs events, and generally received the number one seed in our section. Overall, we scored about the same as with our regular partners. Opponents generally seemed bemused by out antics, and they may have relaxed a little too much. Every once in a while an opponent would get a bad board against us due to the bidding and remark: "I would not have made that bid, and you are playing our system." My partner had a standard reply: "We play WHAT you play, not LIKE you play."

<_< I find the very idea of awarding an adjusted score repugnant. Indeed, it would violate the laws of the game, and any tournament director doing so would be subject to repremand. The only excuse for calling the director would be to build a file on this particular pair. If they keep doing this kind of thing AND win every time, then a case can be made they are cheats. The idea of the game is to have fun, and whiners like you detract from the experience. Maybe you should bar yourself until you get an attitude change.

:D I see this as an instructive hand. Despite the actual hand, it really looks to me (given the information from the bidding) like I have the crucial information here at the critical time. It's my turn to bid, and I should take action. To wit, most likely I can see six spades, one heart, two heart ruffs and something in clubs. The most likely situation is that we have one club trick, the ace or king. On offense this would mean that 5♠ is down one and 5♥ would be down one (assuming one spade cashes). At matchpoints, I might just gamble on this, but at IMPs??? Why not just bid 5♠, maybe its right, maybe the opponents will make a mistake, or maybe partner has FIVE spades and the opponents have a spade void and partner may bid again. Any way it slices, I think the percentages favor bidding 5♠.

:) Maybe 3♣ is sick, but my goodness, I am looking at a hand that, while one winner short of an opening two bid, is quite remarkable, esp. opposite a six+ count with spades. It now looks better than half of my two openers. It takes so little in pard's hand to roll six or even seven (the KQ fifth of ♠ and the missing ace). To me 4♥ feels like I am taking a position and masterminding the hand. Of course, bidding 3♣ makes me a little nervous, too. The auction might get out of control. Ah!, Risk versus reward, the same old story. For me, greed trumps fear. Sick or not, I have to try 3♣. Can't I at least find out if partner has five spades?

:unsure: I am not optimistic about partner holding the magic hand. Consider that for partner to have a stiff heart, the opponents must have overlooked a nine card heart fit in favor of diamonds. If partner has two diamonds, the opponents have ten (certainly possible, but slightly off percentage). Partner has to have five clubs, and with an AJ10 suit, he is more likely than usual to have six. To summarize: ♥ - two or three ♦ - three, plus or minus ♣ - five or six ♠ - ???? - chances of having three (or more) not encouraging I agree that 3♠ is de facto forcing, unless overcaller has misbid earlier, but on this auction shouldn't overcaller be interested in playing the 10 trick spade game with honor doubleton? By bidding 3♠, you could easily end up in 4♠ on the existing hand - possibly makable, but lower percentage than 5♣.

I don't really disagree. The way it was explained to me about a lifetime ago was that 3♠ indicates a 'tolerance' for clubs. About the only possible exception would be a hand with 3 or (better) four small diamonds and a 1 or 2 loser spade sit that wasn't right for an opening 2 or 3 bid. Not a common occurance. Still, bidding the ratty spades with such superb club support has to be on the edge of the envelope - not bad, but not the only decent bid. The actual hand is a sample of one suggesting that raising clubs is a viable (perhaps better) alternative. To me, 3♠ bespeaks fear and matchpointitis.

:) This thread contains lots of erudite discourse on why bidding spades must show clubs (how convenient) and how bidding spades allows one to reach a 3NT game. I am obliged to point out that raising clubs in order to show clubs leads to a 5♣ game that is a bit higher percentage than 3NT.

:) Where are the hearts for that matter? The only reason I see to double is to cater to a penalty pass by partner. So the auction goes dbl-pass-pass-pass, and one heart doubled goes down a lot and we get a good score??? Does this look likely to you?? Not to me. So, if I'm not to double, should I pass or bid 2♣?? I dunno what's going on, but 2♣ looks better. At the table, I would pause for a moment and be paying serious attention to LHO's table vibes (if any) since, one possibility is that LHO has bid 1♥ with a super heavy hand and very badly wants me to reopen.

Fi fi fo fum I smell 6♦. A splinter seems odd here, it would be a 'picture' bid, and I am not looking at the right picture. Faking a club suit with a 3♣ bid also seems wrong. I'm not in a position to mastermind this hand just now. 4♦ focuses our bidding effort on what should be the right topic - all the more so because it bypasses 3 NT in a matchpoint contest. If partner wimps out with 5♦, so will I with a pass - my 12HCP opposite an indifferent 11 HCP makes 3NT worse than 5♦, or so it seems to me. A 4♥ cue bid exposes the duplication. If we do have the 'magic' fit. we will find it after a 5♣ cue. If partner was temporizing with spade support, I will subside over 4♠ - after all, I do have just 12 HCP despite the two suit fit and the heart void. If pard has substantial extras either in high cards or playing strength, he will take control of the auction. I will be a happy dog. My bidding up to now has conveyed a lot of (correct) information, and I have first round control in three suits and good diamond support (even the ♦ 10 may mean something).

I certainly agree with: 1♦ - 2♥ - 2♠ -pass. But now opener is looking at a hand worth 18ish pts for spades opposite a 12ish (at minimum) partner. That makes me the best informed player at the table, just now, and suggests that I ought to take control of the auction. A 3♥ bid invokes a game force and says (unless contradicted later) that spades are the trump suit. Partner has an easy 3♠ bid which suggests, but does not promise, a sixth spade. Now, using RKC, I am in a position to identify virtually every important card in partner's hand. 4NT - pass - 5♠, showing two key cards and the trump queen. Bingo, slam is on. I bid 5NT looking for kings. 6♦ shows the diamond king and denies the club king. Now I can count five spades in partner's hand, the heart ace, at least one heart ruff in my hand, three top diamonds plus at least one long diamond in my hand, and the club ace. That's 12 tricks with numerous chances for the 13eener. With a pick up partner I would bid 7♠ straight away. With a good partner I bid 6♥ saying that seven is a live option if you can find another trick (controls are not a problem). Partner has the sixth spade and should bid seven. He would also bid seven with KJx in diamonds. To me the key elements are north's establishment of a game force with 3♥ (I am not hard core enough to play 2/1 game force in competitive auctions), and north's recognition of the need to take control of the auction with RKC. My goodness, how can one stay out of seven on these cards? The lesson here is, probably, the opponents' failure to jam the auction holding ten hearts. We might have still bid seven, but not with such confidence.

I am curious. What sort of a hand would make a takeout double in this auction. Could you give a few examples?

Excellent advice, worth the price of admission. IMO, priorities at IMPs are (1) don't miss good game contracts - 2♠ caters to this, and (2) go plus - I can't imagine doubling 3♥ with this hand - indeed, would you double even 4♥. RHO's neg dbl almost rules out the situations where partner needs to know if your raise is based on high cards or shape, so 2♠ works for our side and doesn't help the opps.

2♠, a tactical 'underbid'. Seriously, what is the problem? Pard is relatively weak in high cards, unless the opponents have psyched. Time to MASTERMIND with this essentially defensive hand. Our likely limit is 2 or 3 spades, they might make the error of blundering into a bad heart contract. 2♠ puts on the PRESSURE at the opportune moment. If partner does have the non-typical overcall with lots of playing strength, 2♠ will leave him well positioned. I am ready to bid a game with the slightest encouragement.

I think Marlowe has the better of this debate, so far. Over 3♦-PASS-??? there is certainly no game (or one round) force in place. Does a 3♠ bid invoke a game or even a one round force?? I can't see why it would unless you have discussed this particular auction in advance, something only a handful of pairs have done (I guess). The 3♠ bid sounds to me like a suggestion to play in spades - say, a 6-4 or 6-5 hand. Nothing in the auction, so far, says 'forcing' to me. So, I would think pass is an option. However, opener does not want partner to pass under any circumstances (assuming his bidding up to now has been proper). Hence, all of the blame should fall on opener since he made the first, irrevokable mistake.

Partner has lots of forcing bids here: 3C, 3D or 3H. You have 3D for the diamond hand that fits spades. 4D is a picture bid either way you play it (a spade fit with short diamonds or a diamond preempt. I think that this is a case of what comes up the most often and is easiest to remember. So, if we play weak jump shifts in competition, that's what this bid is.

This is a 4H bid at other vulnerabilties and/or table positions. I'm in an unfavorable spot, so 3H looks about right. The problem with bidding 2H is that it turns partner into an enemy. Opening 4H raises the prospect of a telephone number. To me, passing is scared bridge, and scared bridge never wins.

Justin's analysis is persuasive as it creates the occasional possibiliy of a hero auction when opener has a stiff club opposite no wasted club values and a fitting diamond card to provide lots of tricks. You can be cold for six with: Q10x x AKJxx QJxx opposite AKJxx Axxx Qxx x that's 27 HCP, folks, and no distribution more exotic than 5-4-3-1. Neither hand is much better than a minimum, and there is a plentitude of wasted values. My concern here is generated by the infamous invitational diamond hand. If you play 2D followed by 3D as invitational, then what do you do (as responder) with 13+ HCP and 2-3-6-2 distribution? Or worse yet 2-3-7-1? Partner's hand is so far unlimited, and 6D is in the air a far as you are concerned and you may need to decide whether it is best to play 4S or 3NT or 5D. But if you can't temporize with 2S, UR skrewed. The best bid, clearly, is the relay bid of 2 hippogryphs, asking partner to further clarify his hand, but tournament directors these days just don't seem to have as much of a sense of humor as they used to. Like most bidding agreements there is a trade off involved. In one case you get an occasional 'hero' 6S. With the other you get a few more 6D contracts and avoid playing a silly 5D contract when 3NT or 4S (on the 5-2) is best. Analyzing this problem in terms of which one comes up more often would require a lot of very cleverly designed simulations. Intuitively, I guess (???) the two situations probably come up with roughly the same frequency.