akhare

OK, instead of guessing, why not start off by looking at the probabilities of fits after a 1♦ opening and 1♥ overall. 1) The hands with 6+♠(6%) pretty much take care of themselves and we don't have to worry about combining them with the 4/5 ♠ hands. 2) Regarding your assertion about 2♠ being a huge winner, it may be true if you are willing to promise atleast 4-4 in the minors because 5-4 hands in the minors are exceedingly rare. Responder has 5-4 in minors: 0.08937 We have 8 card Clubs Fit: 0.36605 We have 8 card Diamonds Fit: 0.39567 We have 9 card Clubs Fit: 0.14739 We have 9 card Diamonds Fit: 0.16685 We have Spades Fit: 0.3018 Frequency Responder spades distribution: 0 518 1 4426 2 15502 3 27465 4 27692 5 16576 6 6203 Perhaps someone can check my dealer script for errors: # This example creates hands to illustrate the 1D opening # South is assumed to be the dealer in all cases #Balanced 11 - 13 hands BalancedHands = hcp(south) >= 11 && hcp(south) <= 13 && shape(south, any 4432 + any 4333 + any 5332 - 5xxx - x5xx) #Three suited hands ThreeSuited = hcp(south) >= 10 && hcp(south) <= 15 && shape(south, any 4441 + any 5431 + any 5440 - 5xxx - x5xx) #Diamonds and major DiamondMajor = hcp(south) >= 10 && hcp(south) <= 15 && shape(south, 4x6x + x46x + 4x7x + x47x) #Club fit ClubsFit = clubs(south) + clubs(north) >= 8 DiamondsFit = diamonds(south) + diamonds(north) >= 8 BigClubsFit = clubs(south) + clubs(north) >= 9 BigDiamondsFit = diamonds(south) + diamonds(north) >= 9 #Used to calculate 5-4 in the minors in responder's hand MinorsHand = (diamonds(north) >= 4 && clubs(north) >= 5) || (diamonds(north) >= 5 && clubs(north) >= 4) HeartsFit = hearts(south) + hearts(north) >= 8 SpadesFit = spades(south) + spades(north) >= 8 #Use to simulate heart overcall assuming 5+ hearts and 8+ HCP HeartO = hearts(west) >= 5 && hcp(west) >= 8 && hcp(west) < 15 SpadeO = spades(west) >= 5 && hcp(west) >= 8 && hcp(west) < 15 condition (BalancedHands || ThreeSuited || DiamondMajor) && HeartO produce 100000 action frequency "HCP" (hcp(south), 10, 15), average "Responder has 5-4 in minors" MinorsHand, average "We have 8 card Clubs Fit" ClubsFit, average "We have 8 card Diamonds Fit" DiamondsFit, average "We have 9 card Clubs Fit" BigClubsFit, average "We have 9 card Diamonds Fit" BigDiamondsFit, average "We have Spades Fit" SpadesFit, frequency "Responder spades distribution" (spades(north), 0, 6),

I am going to propose what Adam had suggested with some small tweaks: Given that we have a 80% chance of locating at least a 8 card minor fit at the 2 level after the overcall, the 1N as minors probably carries more weight, especially since opener can only have a 11-13 balanced hand and 2m might have a better play. Pass = <All else> X = At least competitive with 4♥ 1NT = Minors, competitive OR natural 2♣ = 5+ diamonds at least competitive 2♦ = 5+ hearts at least competitive 2♥ = 4♥ + 5+ m, competive 2♠ = 5+ clubs and at least invite 2NT = invite wanting to declare notrump 3♣ = 4♥, 5+ clubs [GF] 3♦ = 4♥, 5+ diamonds [GF] 3♥ = natural 6-card suit less than invite 3♠ = transfer to 3NT

IMO, this structure seems much worse than what had been suggested before. The statistics (80% chance of atleast a 8 card fit in the minors, but only a 32% chance of a 9+ minor card fit) point to what Adam suggested, i.e., but with some tweaks. Basically, 2♠ as 5-4 in the minors might get us too high. Also, responder has exactly 4♠ about 26% of the time and 5♠ about 16% of the time. Note that the inability to distinguish between 4/5 ♠ costs only when they can blast to 3♥. IMO, this doesn't warrant giving up a natural 1N given that responder ranks to have 4♥ 15% of the time and 3-4♥ 45% of the time (stoppers is a different issue). In the interest of symmetry with the 1♦ - (1♠) structure: Pass <All else> dbl-4+ spades 1S-Clubs, at least NFB 1N-natural 2C-Diamonds, at least NFB 2D-5♠, minor side suit, at least competitive 2H-6S weak or strong 2S- 4♠, 5+ m, competitive 2N-inv 3m: 4♠, 5+m, GF

While we are on the topic, about Slawinski leads? Basically, not leading a sequence, lead right side up with an honour or upside down without an honour. This roughly translates into 3rd and 5th with an honour and 2/4th without... Details here..

4♠ -- known 9 card fit. Yes they are supposed have only 8 trumps, but pard may have bid a slightly off shape NT and they have very well have a double fit..

4♠. Pard should expect a good hand with strong ♠, which is what I have...

Ouch -- make a negative X, retreat to 5♣ over 4♠ and hope to survive the auction. Hopefully they will have the same problem at the other table and it be a wash regardless of the outcome...

IMO, consuming bidding space takes precedence over Rosenkranz and it makes sense to play the X only with Hx (maybe Axx if you want to stretch it). Partner won't be afraid to lead the overcalled suit after a raise if that looks like the right opening lead...

I play 2) with a pard, but as others noted, it depends on the rest of your system. For example, our 2-level minor openings are natural, promising 6+ cards in the suit.

My guess is that it's probably a method to signal parity in another suit by discarding, but an education will be greatly appreciated...

[hv=pc=n&s=shj2dajt932caqt32&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=pp1s]133|200[/hv] IMPS, all red. In your methods 2N shows the minors.

Are we red? If so, seems like an easy enough 5♦ opening.

IMO, it's a toss up between 4♦ / 4♥. I slighly prefer the former call because it gets the ♣ length into the picture and pard may still bid 4♥ over it...

[hv=pc=n&s=sj8hkt5da3cakjt97&n=sak6ha743dt92cq84]133|200|You land in 6♣ after West overcalls 1♠. The opening lead is Q♥.[/hv] What's your line of play?

Unless pard has a chronic history of feather light TOXs, this looks like a GF to me, so 2♣...

LOL + n -- only lots of new year champagne can explain the rationale for 7♥ :)...

Seems very interesting -- can you post more details on the "Sweep Q-bids"?

Make the same bid I would have made over (3♥) - 3♠ without the X -- 3N.

4♣ -- hopefully it won't get clubbed :ph34r:...

1♣ - 2♣....................16+ any; Minors 2♦ - 3♣.................Relay; 2=2=5=4 3♦ - 4♣.................Control ask; 9 QPs 4♦ - 4♥................DCB; 0/2 ♦ AKQ cards 4♠ - 4N.........................0/2 ♣ AKQ cards 5♣ - 5♦.................0/2 ♠ AKQ cards At this point, opener can picture all of responder's 9 QPs..so 7♦...

Bridge is a game of percentages. Overcaller should rebid 2♠ with 6+ ♠ if the hand warrants it without being overly concerned about advancer's void. Once again, overcaller may bid 1♠ or 2♠ for tactical reasons and one of them may be the suit quality. Rarely, the hands will be a terrible misfit, but so what?

1D♦ (1) - 1♥ ; [1] 10 - 15, 0+ ♦ 2♥ (2) - 2N (3) ; [2] Not max raise, [3] = GF ask 3♠ (4) - 4♠ (5) ; [4] 4 ♥ with ♦ shortness, [5] RKC 4N (6) - 5♣ (7) ; [6] 1 key card, [7] Q♥ ask 6♣ (8) - 6♥ ; [8] Q♥ with K♣ cheapest K After 6♣, pard can still have AXX or AQX of ♠ and so a grand isn't 100% on. It's too bad there's no DCB in this sequence to pick up the specific black Q...

"Promises" is too strong a word. Partner can reasonably expect spade tolerance for the 1N bid -- extreme shape like this and a hand that wants to advance as well is more of an exception. Also, I don't think that the analogy about the 1♠ opening - 1N holds up too well -- the situations are very different and opposite a PH, pard can bid 1♠ (instead of say 2♠) for a variety of tactical reasons...

P /2♣ come to mind. I definitely won't bid 1N.

Pass -- why advance with such a terrible misfit when you can get out cheaply? If they reopen with a X and it gets passed around to me, I might reconsider...