ulven

We have to weigh the alternative outcomes: a/ We pass and partner doesn't act and we miss a game. b/ We pass and partner doesn't act and we can't make a game, due to misfit/bad breaks (i.e we should just defend). c/ We pass, partner acts but we miss a making slam. d/ We bid and get overboard, i.e room is scarce and partner has such a good hand that he can't pass in time. We go minus at 5/6-level. e/ We bid and get to a making game/slam which we wouldn't have reached otherwise. By bidding, we're reaching for alt e (thereby avoiding outcome a & c). By passing, we avoid b & d (and risk e). How should we act then? What line of action gives us the highest 'expected value'? This depends on the strategy used in re-opening by the 1C-opener. Let's say our RHO had been dealer and opened with a 3H-preempt and it goes pass - pass to partner. We now often bid 3NT or X with various hands because we expect our partner to have certain values. Say we have 17 hcp, we count 3H-opener for say 8 and we infer that the remaining hands share the rest, giving us an expectation of about 7-8 hcp with partner. So we take action based on that. Sometimes partner has more, sometimes less. After already having opened a strong C, we can't expect to find partner with 8+ hcp, but it would be really unfortunate to find partner with a bust (although the reasoning is a little skewed because preempter could easily have 10-13 hcp in this situation). In the example given in this thread, I think it clear to re-open with 3NT, expecting 4-6 hcp with partner. This he doesn't have that all the time, but as we all know, we play/bid the percentages. So, I adopt a philosophy/approach that we don't stretch to make positive replies and we put a larger burden on opener to act again, which doesn't necessarily promise/imply extras. I think the major gain for preempts vs strong 1C is pushing the opp's overboard. When we prempt, we really want them to bid on and hope for wrong level/strain. This is more likely to happen when we stretch as responder because there's so little room left to explore and/or limit ourselves later. By my approach, I put empasize on constructive bidding to slam and risk being shut out on marginal distributional weaker hands. I do this by choice because my analysis/experience is that this is a sounder and more successful strategy. As always, you can come to a different conclusion than I've done and choose a different strategy. To assume that passing shows inexperience makes me smile. It may also be an indication of a lot a expericence.

I'm a passer. X is F to 2NT I presume. If partner X's, I'm leading a high diamond.

Yes, that's why I'd pass with the South hand too...

Point taken, Harald. KQJxx A9x x AQJx This hand is more defensive oriented than offensive oriented; it may take 11 tricks vs a perfect maximum single raise (with normally only 3-card supp) but it's WAY against the odds. We could construct reasonable 4C bids when 5S from us would be wrong, the K of diamonds being the deciding factor that prevents 5D from making (with 5S going down), but high-level decisions are problematic since we don't know how the suits break - how many defensive tricks we have in 'our' suits. A 4C-bid should have 10+ cards in both suits AND be offensive oriented. The actual hand failed on both those accounts. Move a heart to clubs (same hand but 5-2-1-5 shape) as suggested and 5S may make on a non-heart lead or 5D might make. But bidding on is normally wrong. Sure, we can't get them all right but we can play (bid) the percentages. To make 11 tricks with the hand in question vs a single raise, you'd have to strain yourself to come up with examples. That's a sure sign your choice is off course. A lot of perfectly reasonable 5S bids, will turn out wrong. But, do keep in mind, that my view of 4C is based on both the minimum and maximum [possible hands] for a single raise in competition. As stated previously, I'd bid 3S with this hand. For people with another set of agreements about 2S vs 3S, 4C may be an OK bid and 5S the wrong choice. I'm pretty sure, by experience, that those people should reconsider the their agreements/style. You can also check my March 20th post in my blog on an auction very similar to this one.

4C was a really bad bid vs a single raise with that hand.

As always, opinions differ. For me, I have a strong dislike for stretching to make positive replies after strong 1C interference. I put the burden on the strong hand to act again. This approach is by agreement. So, I'd pass the South hand, re-open with 3NT with the North hand and then remove with 4S.

I'm also an intial 3S bidder; I hate those 'preemptive' 3M-raises. Now I bid 5S and I don't think it's that close. Sure the DK is a minus but partner did bid 4C red vs white and I have 5 trumps and the K of C. If this doesn't work out, we'll all have a look at partner's hand.

Gerben, I don't have a good answer to that one. I guess it just seemed more natural, to the both of us, that a high card should suggest a high card entry. That's logic in some form, isn't it ;-) I guess it bodes well for the partnership that we reasoned the same way. I have another defensive post coming up tomorrow, btw.

http://viewsfromthebridgetable.blogspot.co...ence-logic.html Read my post from March 2nd on a very similar situation (right, Harald!). /Ulf

I'm not really trying to sell anything, just sharing. Among well known partnerships, Fredin-Lindkvist played it for the full duration of their partnership (1997-2006). If you don't like the idea, fine.

I'm not a fan of off-shape doubles either. I have never gotten taken after 2M and I can't remember any huge misfits. It's a winner in my view, imps or mp's.

Maybe you should try the CJO. See my blog for details. More on the subject to come (probably later this week). /Ulf

I just started a blog: http://viewsfromthebridgetable.blogspot.com/ Lots of posting now. Can I keep it going? Regards, Ulf

Yes, pls :-)

1) Double. If this makes, I've been there before. Only alternative is pass which I wouldn't critizise. Reason for doubling is that partner may have bits and pieces or a non-spade singleton which he will lead and 5S will be at least two down. RHO bid 4S under pressure and may have a variety of hands (maybe king of H). I get good odds for double although the warranty is limited :) 2) Pass. Sit for double, raise 5S. 3) 6D. Sure this may be wrong. But partner has shown a strong hand with long diamonds and I have a lot of help. An ace, a king, three trumps and shortness in clubs. Just an example Ax/Kx/AKQxxxx/xx. Main problem is if partners diamonds aren't solid as our LHO may have void or if other void, lead to ruff and club A. (Why didn't he open 5C if prepared to solo-bid??)

You believe you have a great chance of stealing a game when the opponents has overcalled a suit or bid one after a T/O X by just ignoring the interference and bid 3NT regardless of holding in enemy suit? Maybe you're right. Maybe you and your friend with similar view(s) are in the wrong forum? My guess is that you just enjoy provoking people. The alternative is so much less flatterning...

In Scandinavia standard expert practise is using low cards as encouraging and high cards as suit preference, odd normally for high, even normally for lowest. As always, some reverse this meaning.

Yes, I think that's the most common approach as well when opps has shown no suits or two suits. But, when the opps has shown one suit, as in my example, then I'm more trying to identify a combined stopper in enemy suit than worrying about the other two suits. So, my question was aimed at this specific goal. How to solve this without the luxury of an enemy-X of a cue?

What is the common view on the following situation? Say for example the bidding goes like this: 1C - (X) - XX - (1H); 2C - (p) - 3C - (p); 3D - (p) - 3H or 3S Would 3H ask for stopper in H and 3S show stopper and imply semi-stopper in H (because the "full" stopper ask was by-passed)? OR Would 3H show semi-stopper and ask for help and 3S deny anything in H and only solicit 3NT with full stopper? OR Is it auction-specific? I.e. we belong in one group in this example, but we can construct another auction where we believe the other approach should be used. We got this wrong in a new partnership (different auction; system specific) as our view differed. Our auction: 1S - 2C 2NT - 3C 3D - 3S 3NT 1S 11-14 5+ 2C natural (almost FG) 2NT max (FG) 6+sp (may bid 3S also) I figured 3S denied anything in H and 3NT now was something like Ax, while partner had Qx and figured I had help since no 3H call. The diffence here being that partner already implied honor in H by choosing 2NT instead of 2/3S. Any views on this subject?

Over the years, I haven't had much problem with this auction (as far as I can remember) then I got 2 problems on just this theme last week !!! 1) all NV/imps Jxxxx/AJxxx/T/Tx p - p - 3C - 3NT; p - ?? 2) all V/imps AT8xx/QJxx/x/Kxx 3D - 3NT - p - ? On both occasions we belonged in 4M, which leads me to believe that it's more important to cater for the possibility to find a M-fit than to invite slam. Overcalling 3NT isn't only wide-range hcp-wise but also shape-wise. Next up is devising some mechanism...

Yes, we all know that 'some Swede'.

Always a diplomat, Roland! (aren't you semi-swede?) regards

That's a BS example. They´re in gameforcing auction and 4C would be forcing and responder wouldn't raise unless 2 aces. If you can't understand/accept my logic explanation, and want to play "games", then go ahead and amuse yourself. I'm not accepting the double in your terms. I'm playing with someone who's doubled and now it's up to me to solve the situation. Don't whine - reason! N.B. As one of the few persons here who´s played on Roland's team IRL, maybe my mental capabilities and/or judgement can be questioned... ;-)

When I saw the lead I thought a heart lead was clear. Why?? Because partner should be played for a major-ace as most think. and unsolicited slam-jumps are always (usually) made with internally solid suits and distribution. Looking a heart Q we "know" that West has spades as sidesuit. Lead a heart as the spade Ace will never get away. I've applied similar reasoning in other situations as well. /ulven

Just a point about light overcalls when vul: I played against Lauria-Versace 2 weeks ago in Milano. Versace overcalled 3D in 2nd position (i.e. unpassed partner) over a weak 2sp red against white (teams) on Kxx/x/QJTxxxx/QJ !! Lauria had -/ATxxxx/AKx/T8xx and bid 4NT good raise over 4sp to his right and then passed 5D. Just a spot-on +600...