akhare

Lead trumps against a grand slam :P? Oh wait, I can't revoke in a suit I don't hold, so maybe ♠?

MPs is war - 2♥. It may go for -500, but that's no worse than the 0 that we get when pard fails to find the right lead..

6♠ for me...

[hv=pc=n&s=sj92h9873dk3c25&e=sk5hat2dj95ckjt84]266|200|E opens....(1C)..(3N) (presumably balanced 13-15ish and denying a 4 card major)[/hv] Trick 1: Pard leads a "low from interest" ♠4 spot card (declarer has < 4 spades if it matters). Declarer puts up ♠K at T1 and plays the 3 from hand. Trick 2: Declarer now plays J♣ off the board and ducks into pard's ♣Q. Pard holds♠A and needs to know whether declarer has a doubleton ♠ or JXX or QXX (assuming the QC duck was avoidance play). 1) Is the standard treatment at T1 to give present count in this situation? 2) If playing (reverse) Smith echo, should the spot cards played by South at T2 be a signal for ♠Q? In this case assume that you are playing reverse Smith and the C2 is an unambiguous spade encouragement signal. [Edit] BTW, the above hand is intended to be an illustration of the problems and not a question regarding a specific hand. It would be interesting to hear about your defensive agreements.

T♣ for me...maybe declarer rattles off AKQJX, AKQ of ♦, when a major suit lead would have set, but c'est-la-vie...

Nitpicking on point miscount in a specific hand detracts from the actual discussion -- remove JC from partner's hand if it's that important. The main question here is whether responder should show shape with GF values without necessarily promising extras. I think that the answer should be yes because: 1) Opener only has 11-13 balanced and the danger forcing to slam is exagerated and if so, we might make it anyway 2) While it may tip off the opps, it's probably what they would have lead anyway 3) The tipoff may actually result in a better lead for our side in 3N 4) We may actually find the better minor game

Here's my dealer script -- it's pretty vanilla and gives West 5-9 HCPs and 7 hearts. It would be interesting to restrict it further and give West at least A / QJ of hearts, but it really depends on the opps' style. predeal north S984, HK, DAQJ8, CKQT97 condition hcp(west)>=5 && hcp(west) <=9 && spades(west) < 4 && shape(west, x7xx) I thought I had pasted all hands, but it's a pain -- I should should have used "printcompact" or "printoneline"

Let me put this another way. 1) The question was posted to the forum to solicit opinions. 2) Though there haven't been many responses, most people would bid with most hands 3) Your interpretation of one expert's purported opinion seems to suggest passing on many of these hands If 3) always trumps 2), why post the topic in the first place?

My authority is called dealer.exe. I have already noted that A) is marginal, but the rest of the hands warrant a bid. Here's a sample set of 50 E and S hands and my interpretation of E and S actions after N make a X with B. Let's tally up how they fare if "Mike Lawrence" passes with B. and then compare. 1) P, 4D 2) P, 3S 3) P, 4C 4) P, 4H 5) P, 3S 6) P, 3S 7) P, 3S 8) P, 3N? 9) P, 4S 10) P, 3S 11) P, 4S 12) P, 6S 13) P, 4S 14) P, 4S 15) P, 4S 17) P, 3S 18) 5H, 5S 19) P, 5C 20) 4H, 4S 21) P, 3N 22) P, 3S 23) P, 4S 24) P, 3S 25) P, 3N 26) 4H, 5C 27) P, 3S 28) P, 3N 29) P, 4C 30) 4H, P 31) P, 4D? 32) 4H, 4N 33) P, 4C 34) P, 3S* 35) P, 3S 36) P (trap), 3S 37) P, 3S 38) P, 4S 39) P, 4S 40) P,5C? 41) P, 4S 42) P, 4S 43) P, 3S 44) P, 3S 45) P, 3N? 46) P, 3N 47) P, ?? 48) P, 3N/5C 49) P, 3N? 50) P, 4S East hands (note: not in sequential order): 1. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 5. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 9. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 13. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 17. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 21. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 25. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 29. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 33. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 37. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 41. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 45. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 49. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 2. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 6. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 10. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 14. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 18. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 22. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 26. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 30. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 34. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 38. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 42. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 46. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 50. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 3. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 7. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 11. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 15. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 19. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 23. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 27. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 31. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 35. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 39. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 43. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 47. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 3. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 7. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 11. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 15. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 19. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 23. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 27. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 31. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 35. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 39. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 43. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 47. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 South hands: 3. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 7. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 11. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 15. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 19. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 23. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 27. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 31. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 35. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 39. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 43. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 47. 9 8 4 K A Q J 8 K Q T 9 7 14. A K J T 7 5 3 2 J 3 K 4 6 18. A Q J T 7 6 3 2 3 2 4 8 3 22. Q T 7 6 2 8 6 4 K 7 6 5 A 26. Q 7 6 5 3 K 9 J 8 5 4 3 2 30. T 6 2 6 5 K 9 7 5 J 8 5 2 34. K Q 7 3 6 5 2 9 4 J 8 6 5 38. K Q 7 5 7 2 K 7 5 A 6 5 4 42. A K 6 5 3 2 A 6 4 2 8 5 3 46. Q T 6 A 6 3 K T 7 A 8 5 4 50. K T 7 6 5 A Q 7 K 9 5 5 2 14. A K J T 7 5 3 2 J 3 K 4 6 18. A Q J T 7 6 3 2 3 2 4 8 3 22. Q T 7 6 2 8 6 4 K 7 6 5 A 26. Q 7 6 5 3 K 9 J 8 5 4 3 2 30. T 6 2 6 5 K 9 7 5 J 8 5 2 34. K Q 7 3 6 5 2 9 4 J 8 6 5 38. K Q 7 5 7 2 K 7 5 A 6 5 4 42. A K 6 5 3 2 A 6 4 2 8 5 3 46. Q T 6 A 6 3 K T 7 A 8 5 4 50. K T 7 6 5 A Q 7 K 9 5 5 2 14. A K J T 7 5 3 2 J 3 K 4 6 18. A Q J T 7 6 3 2 3 2 4 8 3 22. Q T 7 6 2 8 6 4 K 7 6 5 A 26. Q 7 6 5 3 K 9 J 8 5 4 3 2 30. T 6 2 6 5 K 9 7 5 J 8 5 2 34. K Q 7 3 6 5 2 9 4 J 8 6 5 38. K Q 7 5 7 2 K 7 5 A 6 5 4 42. A K 6 5 3 2 A 6 4 2 8 5 3 46. Q T 6 A 6 3 K T 7 A 8 5 4 50. K T 7 6 5 A Q 7 K 9 5 5 2

Here's what a simulation showed for hand B. Spade fit: 7.02513 Club fit: 8.06228 Diamond fit: 7.41436 Their heart fit: 9.50177 Average combined HCP: 23.9649 Average combined losers: 14.0615 Here's the combined HCP distribution assuming the X has has 15+ HCP and no other restriction. Do you still think that bidding slam is very important consideration based on these statistics? 15 0.02% 16 0.22% 17 0.67% 18 1.59% 19 2.59% 20 4.06% 21 6.20% 22 8.70% 23 10.28% 24 11.19% 25 11.51% 26 10.98% 27 10.16% 28 8.03% 29 5.93% 30 3.72% 31 2.38% 32 1.15% 33 0.45% 34 0.12% 35 0.05% 36 0.00% 37 0.00%

Finding games and playable partscores should have more priority than the 16 opposite 16 slams after a high level preempt. To that end, the evaluation should focus primarily on the risk / reward of action in the immediate seat vs. pressuring fourth hand to take action. Regarding the stealing comment, how is responder supposed to know who's bluffing if the auction goes: (3♥) - P - (4♥) -- ?? What does responder need to come in after this auction? Should second hand X back in now, having failed to take action over 3♥?

Does D. bid 3N? In terms of dangerous actions, shouldn't P fall into that category as well (because it could place pard under increasing pressure to act with lighter hands)?

I might considering passing on A), but not bidding on the rest looks like bridge suicide to me....

The point is taken, but the only reason to "waste" 2N when 2♣ GF is available is to handle preemption by fourth hand. The idea is that after 1M - 2N - (4♠ / 5m), opener might be better placed to make a decision knowing that we have at least a 9 card trump fit. Granted, 2N doesn't have to be GF, but do you think that all hands with slam interest should go via 2♣ regardless of combined trump holding?

Glen's suggestion about 2♦ being various GI hand types with 3+ ♦ looks very good. Also, instead of using 3♣ as WSJ: 2N: GF raise 3♣: Mixed raise / LR ......3♦: Ask, presumably wants to bid game opposite LR ..........3M: Mixed raise ..........Other: LR ......3♥ / 3♠: To play

One possible solution is to play what Zelandakh proposed a while back, i.e., bring back the forcing NT and make the 2-level bids as natural, but NF. The point range for the 2-level bids can be adjusted to taste. 1M ========= 1N = Forcing 2C = 8-11, 4+ clubs 2D = 8-11 4+ diamonds 2H = 8-11, 5+ hearts 2M = 8-10, 3+ M 2N and up = various raises with 4M Edit: The scheme below may need adjustment to fit all shapes, but this is the general idea 1♥ - 1N ============== 2C = Unbalanced shapes, at least 4 card side suit 2D = 5♥332 shape? -> relay break at 2M 2H = 6+ ♥ 1♠ - 1N ============== 2C = Unbalanced with 4+ hearts(2D = GF relay, 2S = LR, 2H/2N/3m = natural invites) 2D = 4+ diamonds (2H = GF relay, 2S = LR, 2N/3m = natural invites) 2H = 5332 shapes / 4+ clubs -> relay break at 2M 2S = 6+ ♠

In the context of a limited (< 16) 1M opening with a 14-16 NT range, does it make sense to try and partition opener's rebid after a semi-forcing NT? Note that all 2/1 responses are GF. The idea here try and tackle the awkward responder hands in the 11-13ish range. Basically after 1M (10-15) - 1N (semi-forcing): P: Usually min-balanced 2♣: Any worse hand (unbalanced min) ..........P: Responder has long ♣ ..........2♦: P/C ..........2♥: TP ..........2M: Preference 2♦ / 2♥: Better hand with 4m / 4M 2M: Better hand BTW, this is just a strawman -- suggestions and alternatives are welcome..

Color me chicken, but I would be wary of bidding on any of these hands, except E (and maybe D). Basically, I don't fancy KXX too much when sitting under a 1N opener and I don't think that assuming the risk at these colors is worth it, especially when they might not even land in 3N...

I am with the others on this one. Basically, a preemptive strike with B/C is best instead of trying to guess later. True, it's a point or two lighter than what pard might expect, but it's vastly better than coming in over 2♠ and at least one of the Ks in the AKK ranks to be well placed. The other alternative is to simply P and continue to hold your silence assuming they raise to 2♠. IMO, either option ranks to be better than coming in late at that vul...

A prosaic 3♣ for me...

Can't this be solved by the simple expedient of defining opener's first step to the QP ask as 9/10? The chances are that responder will sign off anyway after hearing about the low QP count. The first step in such a DCB ask is always reserved for the 9 QP hand and the 10+ hands simply flow on. If responder still has the hots after a 9 QP response :), we must be on for a small slam at the very least and so space shouldn't be much of a concern. Granted it wastes a step in this specific case, but if responder still chooses to launch into DCB despite the 9/10 response, we must hold at least 19 QPs between us and the 5 level ranks to be safe (it's possible to get out at the 4 level in many cases).

I do think that lead directing Xs are certainly something to be worried about. A lot of times, avoiding the adverse opening lead is just as important as right siding the contract. By not limiting responder's bid to simply the transfer bids this scheme does have additional exposure compared to simple superaccepts. Also, this might be a case of trying to be too scientific about things, i.e., if you have a max and can superaccept, just let responder know and decide whether to bid game. More often than not, the lack of information given the the defence will prove as effective as trying to split hairs on specific suit holdings during the bidding...

I play a similar approach in a partnership. Since, our first and second NT openings are 10-12 when NV, it makes perfect sense to have a 10-14 range for third seat openings because game is impossible. The 4th seat, should revert to a "stronger range" of your choice (12-14, 13-15, 14-16)...

Fixing some typos. IMO, the key point is not that it revolves around ♠, but what information the bids simultaneously convey about the other suits. Pass <All else> dbl-4/5♠, including GF hands 1S- Transfer to NT, could be NFB+ in ♣ 1N-5♠, 4+ cards in a a minor, forcing one round 2C-NFB+ in ♦ 2D-4+♦, 4♠, competitive 2H- 6♠, GI 2S: Competitive with the minors 3C/3D: GF Basically, except for 2D, responder gets two bites at the apple...

The 90% number is way too high -- it's more like 75%. I think you are forgetting that opener may have hearts length as well and the opps won't always have a 8 card fit. Responder has 5-4 in minors: 0.09098 Responder has club preempt: 0.03224 Responder has diamond preempt: 0.02967 Responder has club GF: 0.04557 Responder has club GF and 4H: 0.00301 Responder has diamond GF: 0.0427 Responder has diamond GF and 4H: 0.0025 Responder has five spades and a minor: 0.08283 Responder has four spades and a minor: 0.08283 Responder has five spades and balanced hand: 0.04274 Anyway, regarding the 4/5 ♠ differential, it seems in your proposed responses, the 1N bid specifically targets the the 5♠ in balanced hand. It may not be true from the purely design POV, but that's the only information the bid has conveyed. Basically, how well placed opener is to compete after an auction that goes 1D - (1♥) - 1N (showing 5♠) - (2♥). Opener can compete in ♠ with say 2♠, but we may have a much better fit in either minor. In the case of the of 1D - (1♥) - 1♠ (showing 4♠) - (2♥), opener is even worse placed than before. As you can see from the statistics, the 5♠ - side suit minor hands twice as frequent as the balanced hands with 5♠, and bids that immediately convey that information and least clue in opener about the possibility. The same is true for bids that convey 4♠ - 5 card minor. [Edit] With that in mind I think it's possible to meld the elements from both approches: Pass <All else> dbl-4/5♠, including GF hands 1S- Transfer to NT, could be NFB+ in ♣ or GF in ♦ 1N-4/5♠, 4+ cards in a minor, competitive 2C-4+♣, 5♠, competitive 2D-4+♦, 5♠, competitive 2H- 6♠, weak or strong 2S: Minors, competitive 2N-inv 3C: GF with ♣