Kalvan14

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=s985ht852daj6ca98]133|100|Scoring: MP (1S)-X-(P)-2H-(2S)-P-(P)-?[/hv] Partner guarantees 4 hearts, or a very strong hand. Edited: from IMP to MP

2♥ - a minimum, but some tolerance for clubs

A Lightner double at the level of 4♥? Curioser and curioser

I'd interpret N's double as showing 4 spades, and a longer minor, and proposing a sacrifice. I plainly cannot believe the double is for penalty: there are no indications that hearts are breaking badly (and in any case pard is before the hnd with long hearts), and there are not enought points for N to make a penalty double out of brute strength (I'd say he might have 10 HCP top). The question is why he choose not to overcall earlier: maybe he has a 4-7 and was walking the dog? In such a case, I'd like to see if he holds 4♠ doubled.

I prefer to play 3♠ as an unbalanced hand, strong but not necessarily with running spades (and this time the running suit is 7 cards!): therefore I'll tell a white lie, and rebid 3N on the given hand.

I fail to understand why you have this bizarre fixation with using the expression "Fast Arrival". No one is criticizing your methods. Rather, we are suggesting that if you value the ability to communicate with other bridge players, you should make an effort to use standard vocabularly. Even if you don't want to use standard vocabulary, you should make a sincere effort to avoid misusing it. It's quite simple: because I learn abt FA more than 20 years ago from Hardy's book on 2/1. There was no intention of offending, at least on my side.

This discussion (which I was ready to style childish and boring) would have been over a lot of time ago. This is my last post on the subject: I play FA as defined by hardy in the 1982 edition If Hardy later changed his mind, fine and good; but I am not obliged to buy (or even to read) all the various versions of a bridge book. In any case, even if Hardy - or Culbertson - were to raise from the grave and tell me that the principle of FA is just to show a minimum, i could not care less. I've never said that this is a "standard". Thank you vry much and Merry Xmas

Dear Robert, as usual you lost another good opportunity to be silent. I went and check Two over One Game Force, by Max Hardy, 2nd printing, August 1982. On page 45 (Chapter 3 - para. 2/1 Response) Max says: Quote "If responder jumps to game in opener's major suit after his initial 2/1 response in an auction where opener's values are still unknown, he again uses the principle of Fast Arrival, but this time his purpose is to convey that a complete picture of his hand has been given. The message sent by responder in this auction is that all of his values are in the 2 suits he has bid, his hand is a minimum for a GF auction and that he has no high card or shortness control in either of the 2 suits he has not bid" Unquote Being charitable (it is Christmas, and so on) I will assume that you just jumped on the 1st definition of FA you found (page 18 - unfortunately it refers to opener, and not to responder), and which (luckily) suited your argument, without checking other parts of the book (strange, since there is an analytical index at the end of the book, and you can easily check all references to a given topic). Now let me see if you are an adult, or a spoiled teen-ager. Have a happy 2006 PS: both the quote and the wishes for 2006 are addressed to hrotgar too

Nel dubbio, sono anch'io d'accordo con il passo su 6♦. Sono scarsamente convinto che 4NT sia richiesta di KC (qual'e' l'atout concordato?). Secondo me, 4NT mostra un valore a picche, ed il massimo per la mano, con nessun valore a fiori. Un po' sullo stile del 4NT D/I di napoletana memoria (sono tanti anni che non gioco piu' il napoletano. Ho il dubbio che 4NT garantisse il controllo nei colori non dichiarati - e cioe' a fiori - oltre a 2 KC).

Pass is out of question; and putting away my lovely 8-high flush in spades would be a sin ;) . 1♠, and over the dreaded 2♥ [which might never come], 2♠. I have the promised values, and the spades suit is not worse than Jxxxx or Qxxxx. 1♦ is masterminding, IMHO: going along that path, let's agree that all openings in a major guarantee 2 high honors (and then let's play canape).

There are two ways of coming in into the auction: 3D: diamonds are pretty good and the hand includes all usueful values. Being a passed hand, I might choose this bid [as unpassed hand, I believe something better is required, either in values or in diamonds]. Does 3D guarantees a tolerance at least for spades? IMHO, it should [but it might be a partnership agreement]: in such a case, I recommend pass after 3S. Pard knows where mine main strength is, and has choosen to sign off. The obvious alternative is a negative double [it'd be my bid as unpassed hand]. If pard bids a red suit, I can now show delayed support in spades. Over 3S, I do believe the best bid is pass. The above is certainly ok if LHO 3♣ is pre-emptive. If 3♣ were invitational, there would be something funny here: RHO opens the bidding, pard overcalls with 1♠ (not with 2♠, mind) and LHO has invitational values. I doubt that pard, in this case, can have more than 7-8 HCP. His hand might be AKJxx xxxx xxx x or AKJxx xxx xxxx x or equivalent. 3♦ (clearly passable coming from a passed hand) is our best spot to compete.

Xmas is the season of giving, but greed is in season all the year round. No reasons not to hog this hand too: 3NT, which I rate the most likely contract to succeed. My holdings in the minor suits are good enough, and in any case oppos have still to decide which minor to lead. IMHO, I'd would not be surprised by a spade lead, though. It would be quite a classic, and (in other cases ;) ) pretty effective

I passed, didn't I? Out of the joke, pard is consistent, at least. And he has this weakness for high-level pre-empts. I can live with it. Mind, we are talking about a possible slam. If he passes (or maybe bids 3♣), slam would be out of the question, and I'd be playing 3N

If the bidding starts (2♦)-X-(3♦) as posted by Wackojack, I would bid 4♦ [and, over the obvious 4♠, 5♣]. I don't expect that pard will bid 6♣, and I am a bit surprised by his T/O double. Unfortunately, 2♦ is one of the most obnoxious pre-empts

Justin said everything. It was folly not to bid after 1♠-X-2♠ (and the hand justifies a 3♥ bid, even playing Lebensohl). If the waiter passed for me over 2♠ :lol: now I would bid at least 4♥

This is all fine and dandy... I'll simply make the observation that the expression "Fast Arrival" is already quite well defined. Using this expression in a new and different manner really isn't conducive to effective communication. Get over it. You are wrong You have confused "Fast Arrival" and "Picture Jumps" Learn... I beg to differ: I never played a FA which just gives an indication of minimum values. An picture bidding is a bit different, and with a wider scope. Frankly, guys, I could not care less: I may (or may not) have misquoted Hardy, and when I have time and not better things to do I may go and check it. But - if you do not mind - I find this discussion a bit childish; and limited in scope.

It is a bit of a thin slam, coming out of a combination of "miracle" cards in N/S hands. I'd not be very concerned about missing it. Table 1: 1H--(2S)--x----p 3D--pass--3S--pass: no problem up to this point. I'd bid 4♣, at this point, rather than 4♥ (which is a bit shy). Now N should bid 5♥, if there must be a chance for slam. I'd not criticise a 4♥, mind. Table 2: 1H--(1S)--2C--pass 2H--(2S)--3D--pass 3S--pass--4H--pass 6D// The bidding at table 2 is a bit funny: it almost looks like S is starting very slow (2♥, rather than 2♦), and then starts to accellerate, ending up in 6♦! I would bid 2♦, as 1st rebid; OTOH, assuming the auction proceeds as posted, I would jump to 5♠ over 4♥. It'd confirm the spade chicane and offer a choice of slams. I am quite surprised that N accepts to play 6♦, in what should be - at best - a 4-3 fit, having a certain 6-2 fit in heart. The lack of competition is a bit surprising, in particular at table 1 (I assume that 2♠ is intermediate strength), but E has an horrible shape, and just a good fit in spades (4♠ is 3 down, btw)

Hearts are 4-2, and the ♣A is with LHO. There were a couple of 4♦, though. N has to make his decision, you're right. At IMPs, it would be a no-brainer: 2♦ stands out. At MPs, the decision should be for a pass: his 2 black Js carry far more weight in NT than in a diamonds contract (and the lure of 120 is there :lol: ).

Pard migh very well have a yarborogh with 3 hearts. I would not like to hang him for that. I suppose that it is a matter of partnership agreement, but, IMHO, a cue-bid followed by a raise at 3-level is stronger (in terms of HCP) than an immediate support jump at 3♥ (the reasons being that if my hand is distributionally strong I am interested to shut-out oppos, while if i am honor-rich I am not concerned that they might interfere, or exchange infos). Besides this, there is a (remote) chance that pard might rebid anything but 2♥ after my cue-bid. 2♦, no doubt abt it.

I might agree, if FA is what appears to be understood by a lot of people on this board (i.e., a min 2/1 - without any clear understanding or limitation in terms of controls, distribution and so on). The FA I have been playing for the last 15 years or so is something quite different, and focusses on concentration of values, and lack of side controls - either by honors or by shornesses (and, accordingly, it does not happen all that often). Frankly, I do not like the serious NT very much: a proper use of Q-bids (and IMHO the Italian style is still the best, even after so many years) can do very well without the serious 3N. Again, it may be a matter of style, and habits.

I choose to rebid 4♠, but then you know already I am not shy. 4♠ made easily, but pard had the "right" minimum: Axxxx Axx xx Axx: I would assume he'd pass a limit 3♠ without other indications. Still, having to toss a coin is not the best of possible worlds: IMO, the important features of this hand are the stiff club and the very good support in spades. A cue-bid should not be game forcing: it can be limit or better, and used in conjunction with a 2N showing support, and GF values in a balanced hand (I'd be the first to be surprised if a natural 2N is necessary here). The situation where pard opens in a major, and RHO overcalls is quite common, and it should be one of the first things a partnership agrees upon (I was playing with a pick-up partner, obviously). OTOH, SAYC should include better tools (which do not need to be very sofisticated to be effective)

I was anticipating a much wider consensus on this hand. IMHO, the keys of this hand are LHO double (I'd be allowed to assume it is for the majors), and pard's lack of redouble (which does not limit his hand, but excludes a balanced or 3-suiter hand stronger than 9 HCP). I consider this hand a borderline reverse (5 losers, good concentration of honors in my suits and good controls), and I'd certainly rebid 2♥ in an uncontested auction. This time I choose to rebid 1NT: it is a distortion in shape, agreed, but I've a couple or three HCP in my pocket to compensate it. It is an eminently practical bid: it leaves everything open for pard to rebid, and might be a nice trap too for opponents if they try to compete at 2-level. At the table, 1N bought the contract (and playing MP, I agree with his decision not to rebid 2♦). Pard had a minimum hand (JTxx, xxx, KJxx, Jx), but it brought the card I needed. With a lil help from defense, I gathered 9 trick (which was a shared top). 8 tricks are there, in any case, and would have scored better than an average plus. The best oppos fit was obviously in spades (4-4), but was effectively sterilised during 1st round of bidding.

It depends on the actual hands, and the vulnerability. There is no fixed rule. In general, spades 1-suiter are strongish in the slow-shows fashion; but there is not a similar guarantee for other 1-suiters

This post is in the SAYC forum: 1N is 15-17

I've to say that after an agonizing moment, I chickened out and passed. [hv=d=w&v=e&n=s6h632da4cqj97653&w=saqj84h9854dk752c&e=st753hqj7dj9863c2&s=sk92haktdqtcakt84]399|300|Scoring: MP (1S)-5C-All P[/hv] As the cards lie, 6N is there. Or 6C. OTOH, pard might not have an A, or the stiff spade. It would be funny if he had A♠, btw How would you understand 5N by S? Might it be understood as a sign-off?