benlessard

For me its the opposite, after a direct 4S partner will be tempted to sac more often in 5S than after 1S followed by 4S. 1S-(X)-1NT-(4H) 4S-(5H)-?? vs 4S-(X)-P-(5H) p-(P)-?? Not only the 2nd auction got more odds of buying the hand in 4S it also have better odds for a correct 5S contract.

I prefer heavy 1NT overcall and to reopen light with shortness. In MP I would never pass with south hand. Its just a style that served well and i wouldnt change it. Obviously many prefer to have lighter 1nt overcall and sounder balancing X. EX this hand where i tought X was totally routine but 97% prefered pass http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/bidding-problem-5148/

want to add that so far its working perfectly and my partner like it.

Its exactly why there should be have been "partnerships only" rooms 10 years ago. Why would serious players who want to practice for a serious event would want to play vs bots or vs people who are ignoring alerts ? Some people play bridge and do not know how to keep score its ok, some people never made a defensive signals in defense its ok too, some only know their national bidding system and never heard of strong clubs or transfers over 1C again ive got no problem with those players. But a serious competitive player would want to play against his peers from time to time dont you think ? Do you think a chess expert prefer to play vs a social player or versus another expert ? Do you think a heavyweight boxer like to fight vs a 150-155 lb boxer ? Its basic common sense for sports and games matchmaking if you dont have a rating system at least help the players in their matchmaking. If they want to play vs a random or weak opponents they can still do it... Why not give the choice to the players ?

Just login in and playing vs randoms is often impossible. After 2 or 3 alerts many just quit, the best we can hope to get is a tough but rude player from a specific contry. His patient partner (PP) will see bids that are incomprehensible and some serious handhogging. If PP make a slight defensive mistake he will hear about it, how can you make 2 or 3 stupid bids in a row and complain that your partner made a misdefense ? This is because they think they bid well. Its a country that I would very much to visit one day but I wish I could auto-block their players on bbo. Booting them out of the table is even starting to become one of my guilty pleasure. If you dont want to make a partnership only room make a vip/patron section, many will be happy to pay a fee per year just to play vs a more serious opposition. BBo make money, serious players play vs serious players, social player do not suffer 3 or 4 alerts in a row or get their ass kicked by stronger players all the time. Win-win-win.

Its a borderline slam. 3-3 in clubs is 35% - 3% for 4-0 trumps = 32% S 2-2 and clubs 4-2 is 40x50% = 20% there are some additionnal chances if clubs are 5-1 with a stiff K/Q. Its could be a cool hand for my pet system. 1H-1S 2NT-3D (exactly 4522 18-22, S rkc) 3H-3S (14-QS?) 4D-6S (yes+Kh no Kc) However I think its likely that over 2NT ill jump to 4S giving up on slam. For slam to be really good opener need the Kc isntead of the Qs its a bit much to ask such a perfecto.

What i suggest is to have a default set of 24 board that we can all try without making scripts.

Yesterday ive played vs a top pair from Canada who are playing PC and he told me that he has been playing PC for more than 15 years and artificial methods do not work so well vs a PC and he prefer natural methods. I know that he often play natural and 1NT raptor. I do not know if passing and bidding later is considered not natural for him however. My Russian partner who played PC for 15 years in Russia told me about the same thing. I agree that my examples are quite different than in the OP but I just wanted to show the importance of that modern trend for bridge "if they could still have game they need to bid constructively so they wont annoy us as much as if we show them that we are GF" Im a strong believer in that principle so that why I like my 1S-1NT to be 5+ and not 11+. I also like 1S-2C to be GF or S raise and 1S-2S to be 4-7. After my 1C (15+) none of our responses under 2S guarantee pts, they only promise some lenght. Its quite unusual but its tough to defend. Ive played 1C-1D as 0-8/ or 0-4 with semi positive or better. Ive also play 1D semi-positive, a bid for weak and the rest is GF. I am now strongly convinced weak or GF/ semi pos is the way to go you lose the forcing pass but you just gain more in overall comp bidding. Also in practice 1C--(P)--2D--(2S) (2D =6H w or gf) ive never saw a pair that was willing to play direct 2S is diruptive delayed 2S is real overcall. Same over a weak NT & transfers. 1NT--(P)--2D--(2S) did you ever meet a pair that played 2S disruptive and pass and 2S good hand ? So even if pass and bid worked (wich im not convinced) most players wont do it anyway. So that why 1S-1NT 5+ will stop a lot of weak two's overcall while 1S-1NT (gf or limit+) will invite them. I agree with Awm that opps should lower their overcall range. So instead of 10-18 for a 2 level overcall something like 8-16 and the X of the relay should be 17+ or normal meaning but in practice many wont think about it.

I disagree 100% Im wondering what kind of non-GF relays did you play to reach a conclusion so far opposite of mine. IMo if they have a chance to make a game they need to bid constructively and not disruptively the same way they need to bid with values over a weak NT or over a Polish club & even over a 14-16 NT. Afer (1Y)--P--(1Rel)--you simply cannot bid 2 something with a range of 6-17 pts. Passing and bidding doesnt work as well as you think even if its often the proper strategy. in less than one year ive seen this exact same auction close to 12 times at least 3 of them our opps missed a game and once he went for -500 against a -110. South open with a strong club 15+ 1C--(P)--1H--(P) 1S-- all pass. 1C is 15+ 1H is S weak or GF (0-5 or 9+). 1S is showing at least 3S 15-20 (2S would show 19-21 with 4S). They could make 3NT+1 once and 3nt equal twice. The 3 times East had 14-17 pts with 3or4 spades, he know responder is weak (0-5) but opener hand is over him so he cannot really overcall 1NT. West was never close to get into the auction. This is over 1C and the bidding died at the one level ! after a 1M opening passing and planning to bid later with a good hand is even worse since you will often be over 2M. Im not a big believer in natural 1NT overcall, so for me being VS artificial openings its the perfect opportunity to use a direct 1NT for disruptive stuff (1m)--1NT as any 5-5, this got a nice frequency and is annoying to defend against. This mean we have to pass and X for the strong nt hand and I can tell you that its not always working. Ive also tried. (1S)--2Y = something like a decent weak 2 to a 14 pts overcall. With a stronger overcall 15-19 we overcalled an artificial 1NT. My idea was that with a strong hand its possible advancer would have a fit but was not able to raise you anyway. EX with standard method (1S)--2C--(2S)--?? here i was hoping that if overcaller is pretty strong (15-18) advancer may not be able to raise to 3C with a club fit anyway so i felt that 1NT with a strong unknown 2 level overcall might work. If the overcaller is short in S he could X 2S anyway and if advancer was short in S he could compete knowing overcaller was 15-18 and had a long suit somewhere. It did good in MP but not so well in Imps. When we bid 2Y it was of course a good winner, the frequency is high and the annoyance effect is pretty good. However the problems are of course for the 1NT... wrongside NT contract, possible that your suit get buried and opps can play NFB over it. Anyway my point is that Ive often pass with a good hand hoping to bid later more than many players and its not such a great idea, im not syaing its bad but its not a perfect solution. So that why bids that warn the opps that they are not likely to have game on their side are costing something. With my system and playing vs Vgood players this discussion happened. Me--"we play weak NT and strong club at 15+ but our other opening are not limited" Them--"what your NT range?" -- 12-14 all seat all vul -- so with 15 bal you open 1C ? -- Yes They start to discuss between each other... Normally we play suction but 15+ is not so strong ...it may easily be our hand... bla bla bla --- ok lets play Mathe and bid constructively. At least 3 top levels partnerships had similar discussions. I just think they made the right move there is a point where you simply cannot bid disruptively, its when your side still have some chance to have game. This IMO explain the success of 14-16 NT range its simply an annoying range to play against, you cannot really play full disruptive against this range and you shoudl still think making a game your side is possible. Going from 15-17 to 14-16 simply stop a lot of weaks 2s overcall even if its just one point. Same idea for Polish clubs vs strong clubs, opening 1C with just strong hands is an invitation to be annoyed and basically tell the opps that they dont need to bother about games bid on pure power. I admit that many are simply trying too hard to bids and I miss the good penalties vs those maniacs. But overall having a weak NT hand under your forcing 1C opening is a decent plus to stop overcalls. Yes the forcing pass is very useful but stopping the weak's two overcall is better. IMO This is not really a big issue you can just bid 3M (or another bid) as a "Im bidding 4S bid but im temporizing just in case that you have the exception hand". LHO didnt overcall over 1S and RHO didnt X 2H so they are not going to compete and temporizing with a fake bid cost little.

The problem with 4D is that it hide your source of tricks and consumed a lot of bidding space. When you have 2 option and you feel one is slightly better than the other but consumed a lot more space go with the more economical even if its imperfect. Playing standard methods I think 2H is clearcut. Also this is a very good slam BTW even after a club lead its over 70% and im also far from convinced that the club lead is automatic after the splinter (but probably automatic after a 2H bid). So this is a slam you really want to be in. I think north hand is powerful and can probably RKC over 4D unless you play very agressive splinters . For slam aces go up in values so any with 3 aces is not minimum. This hand is not minimum got nothing wasted in D and got a 6th spades. 3 plusses is good enough to RKC. I dont blame 4H last train or cue that much however.

I think its sometimes right to lead low when you know declarer got 2 stoppers, obv its not the case here.

The good thing of early GF is that it setup FP the bad thing is that opps can now bid with a weak 2 instead of having a real 2 level overcall. I believe stopping them from overcalling is better than being in a better shape to deal over their overcalls.

We will play at least 3 hours from 13H to 16h00. If you only want to play 90 minutes or 2H its ok. We can play junior style if you mostly want to practice your bidding (claim early, claim often, no overtricks, dummy can claim, quite quick on ddefense and as a declarer). our system is a strong clubs with a lot of transfers. PM me

I think that if you know declarer doenst have 4S than the first spades shouldnt be a count card. Declarer rarely tackle a 2-3 suit unless its late in the hand wich mean that you should have others info anyway. Im a strong proponent of SP first count later/never.

Lol, if your style is to open all 15-17 5M332 with 1nt than obviously the jump to 3NT is something else.

This is an awful method, Im pretty sure no serious players play like this. Either 2NT is 11-14 or 18-19 and a jump to 3NT is 15-17 (best imo). or 2NT is 11-15 and jump to 3NT is 16-17 and with 18-19 you jump to 4NT quant. Jumping to 4NT is a notorious slam killer but its still descriptive and those hand are rare anyway.

If they don't agree about the BIT and its 2-2 you need to look at the slow bidder hand its the main way to break the equality and decide if there is a BIT or not. Once the BIT is agree or decided by the director it still make sense to take into account the slow bidder hand, just to make sure that what you think is suggested by the BIT (the UI) correspond to the real hand. According to the law their is not direct link to the UI and the real hand but experienced director told me its nonsense to not take the full hand into account. Im going to post the hesitation blackwood hand on BW to see the opinion.

We could make an hesitation blackwood case. A big spades fit and GF is agree and over 3S my mind wander off about if we play non-serious 3NT (we dont) and I bid 4S slowly. My hand is the most obvious signoff ever but for no good reasons I took some time to bid it. partner bid 4NT . I respond aces and we bid and make 6. Peers will vote that passing 4S is LA. 1-Bit is agreed 2-The slow 4S suggest that I was thinking about a cue so extra strenght. 3-Opener bid 4NT with the help of the UI (passing 4S was LA) 4- There is damage It just doesnt seem to make sense for me to rollback this to 4S, I know that laws dont really care about what I hold for my slow 4S. I just think its a law loophole.

I agree that But IRL when BIT is not agree and its 2-2 director looked at the hand of the player that has done the slow bid to determine if there is a BIT or not so when the BIT is agreed surely its sensible that director also look at south hand to to double check his decision by determining what was the reason of the slow bid. You may not agree with my example so feel free to suggest another one as a club level director in can tell you that IRL for 99% of players will have extras for a seriously slow 2S in this spot, its almost never a case of close call between 2S vs 1NT or 2S vs pass. Of course there is a strong confirming bias since we don't get called when its a slow bid that dont have extras since the contract often fail or game is not reached anyway. When experienced players call me right after the auction has ended "just to protect myself.." not once have I see the slow bidder not having extras. I repeat this is club level.

Is is possible to have UI in case where responder hand didnt match the information transmitted ? For example. [hv=d=s&v=0&b=11&a=pp1sp2sp4sppp]133|100[/hv] P-1S-2S-4S (a passed hand raise to 2S slowly) A slow 2S in this spot is very likely to be borderline –Drury – normal 2S raise –or 3S (mixed raise). Opener bid an agressive 4S and dummy come down with 5 pts. All the cards are well placed and its a very lucky make. Even declarer (beginner) admit that he bid 4S because he tought that responder was close to a Drury hand. 1-Bit is agreed 2-The slow 2S suggest extra strenght or extra lenght. 3-Opener bid 4S with the help of the UI 4- There is damage 5- Over a 2S in tempo opener would make game try or pass (both LA) and they wouldnt reach game. In fact all players agree with the above. My longshot view is that since the hand didnt match the information transmitted there was no information in the first place (or the information had no value). No information = no UI = no infraction. Another longshot view is that there is no damage since 4S was a poor contract and it made because of lucky layout. But this doesnt match our current definition of damage.(damage exists when because of an infraction, an innocent side obtains a table result less favorable than would have been the expectation had the infraction not occurred.)

No gap 100% convinced about this. The very important side effect is what pass hand jump or non-jump would mean. For me its 5-5 or 6+4M or fit jumps.

1- a random balanced hand is negative in 1st and 2nd seat is expected, having a balanced hand is weaker both in offense and in defense (suits break evenly) 2- Having only 1 pts higher is more significant than i previously tought. From -28 (random) to +3 (10-11) to +100 (12-14) for 31 pts and a 97 pts are big gaps in expected score only for half a pts and a few pts on hands that are a close to average. The 97 gap is a little bit surprising I guess the the odds of making game your side combined with the lower odds of a game against you make a significant difference with every pts. short on time right now ill add other stuff later.

http://www.rpbridge.net/9x35.htm#5 Surprising stuff, its mostly all the balanced that get a weaker result in 1st seat and the 15-17 more than the weakest ones. I think i know why and I also have some conclusions about this but ill wait for others to comments first.

Pavlicek has responded to my query. http://www.rpbridge.net/9x35.htm#5 Surprising stuff, its mostly all the balanced that get a weaker result in 1st seat not just the weakest ones. raw scores 15-17 in 1st seat is worth 14pts less than in 2nd seat. 6card majors 1st seat is worth 28pts more than in 2nd seat. Note these are not multi table comparaisons just the raw scores on many deals.

Obvious pass, do we really expect partner to provide 4 tricks ? It would also be shameful that partner provide 4 tricks but we are still down because the Kh is not a trick, we lose a trump trick or a S ruff. Kof C asking for count and switching the stiff D look like good defense potential too.