benlessard

Normally finessing against West is better. - QTxxxxx x QTxxxx xx QTxxx xxx QTxx is pretty much equal to QTxx xxx QTxxx xx QTxxxx x QTxxxxx - except the void hand (when East show up you put the K and finesse the other way) T Qxxxxx Tx Qxxxx Txx Qxxx Is nearly equal to Txxx Qxx Txxxx Qx Txxxxx Q Stiff T finessing W make 11 tricks while stiff Q make 12/13 tricks. But there is also QT-xxxxx QTx-xxxx where F vs E make 12 and F vs West make 13. All this point toward finessing against West. However because of the lead, East is more likely to have spades honnors but West has showned QJT of H. My estimate is that we can put one more vacant spot to East, so If your aiming at 6NT finessing against East is probably slightly better, but since with QTx-xxxx and QT-xxxxx you can hope to make 7 you should finesse agaisnt West. Note that there is further complication if a stiff Q/T pop up at the first round of D. PS im just comparing hte finesse probability and do not take into account cashing clubs first.

I much prefer the setup where 2H is non forcing and 2D is at least INV, but if you play 2H forcing then 3C is 100% GF.

Hanoi5 doesnt have time to be captain, so ill be a non playing captain for team 6. Those who are interested to play should send me an email to benoitlessard@hotmail.com with 1- their bbo forum name and their "to play on BBO" login (if different from the forum login) 2- When are they usually available and their timezone. 3- Their partner name and thier BBO login + their email (especially if they are not BBO forum regular) To catch up the delay im opening a spot for 2 new players. Hopefully we can play 5 match in about 2.5 months

For me its one of the best pilot episode since Breaking Bad. Im going to watch the 5 first episodes pretty soon and comments on it but you can safely watch the pilot episode and you will have no regrets.

Leading from an empty suit isnt that frequent in my book. So I much prefer plain parity leads vs suits contract (low odds, highest you can afford even).

The 1st double is normal. I think the 2nd double is slightly too greedy (2 trumps tricks but not much else). I expect 2S undoubled to be the normal spot since north doesnt have enough to make a 2nd double.

I would have bid 5NT, PAS directly. Im vul and they are not so Im not going to help them find a cheap sure save. If they save its going to be a guess.

Playing Namyats im happy to open 4S. If not however I prefer 3S to 4S at this vul/nV. 4Sx can easily go for -800, also partner will often raise to 6S and we will have no play. I really hate pass,1S,2S

These 68% slam are not rare but not that frequent, since they are never bid at the other tables people dont really care about them. I strongly agree with others that 2Nt jacoby isnt a good convention especially in the original form.

In the French style 2nt rebid is min or very strong (very strong here is not possible), 3nt directly show two spades stopper and 15-17, its not perfect but its hard to find a good use for a direct 3Nt. Its strongly suggest a stiff or xx in partner suit. Here however its not perfect since that partner might have a stiff D and 5C/6C is there. However bidding 2NT with extras values and simply bidding 3NT the next round lead to some share of problems too. Anyway using 4Nt as keycard for minors is really bad in the long run and its something you should get rid of. 4D is 100% keycard for me since I much rather keycard low than care about cuebidding. On this hand i would simply bid 6C suggesting that 6C in 5-3 (even 52) will play better than 4-4 in D. (I might pitch slow loser in D on a good H) Playing my system I open 1D since ill be able to show 5C and stop at 2C, but otherwise I prefer 1C opening. Even 1C--1H--1S wich is something I never do might make some sense here.

Justin I am curious about your full runout for weak Nt. Also does opening 1Nt weak with with a 5M change anything ?

Agree with Justin, what I hate most is when they play natural over my strong club. I think that from 1H to 2S (remove 1Nt) natural is probably the best method. X, 1D & 1Nt for 2 suiters should be enough.

I agree that pass NF is superior, and also about 2M to play but why arent you playing like this over a weak NT ? I strongly believe that its the best runout for both range. It avoid transfers wich is a big plus (rightsiding do not compensate for giving them more chance to penalized you on borderline values) and is quicker to preempt them (its more preemptive to be direct for one-suiter and delayed for 2-suiters than the opposite). Also scrambling with 3 suiters or quasi 3 suiters is often done best by XX rather than by bidding a suit. With a (54)(31) you start by XX allowing you to play in 2m undoubled rather than bidding 2H as H+S.

3H is right on values and H lenght, having 3S and lacking some H spots make 1H ok too. The only one I really dont like is 4H

2H/3H/3D is normal. minimum 6322 with no A vs misfit 10 count with Qx. Well done opps if they bid it, next board.

Axx AQx Q AJxxxx I dont see myself making a reverse with this, 3C is out, X show 3D, IMO 2C is way better than 2NT. Its certainly standard that 1C-1D-2C can be a bad 17, I dont see why 1C-(P)-1D-(1S)-2C is different if you are using the X to show 3D. PS If you play Walsh then over 1D you can expect some clubs tolerance and be more agressive and bid 3C (but you might still be too high for no reason when partner is 3361).

Well my purpose is not missing game when im 8-9 pts and partner got 16-17. xx ATx JTxxx Kxx At imps you cannot pass 2C with because its too dangerous too miss game if partner got 16-17 pts. Also you need to make the difference from xx AKx Jxxxx Kxx Wich will make game vs good minimum. The more I think about it the more I think playing 2S as GF is a poor method (unless you have a 2H bid that is artificial non GF)

Maybe its offbeat but I would never play 2S as totally GF here. I think 2C can be up to a bad 17. So 3C is only a courtesy raise, therefore i need a way to show a limit and for me 2S is perfect for that. Over my 2S If partner bid 3C FP is OFF otherwise its going to be ON. In the problem im glad that pass is forcing and im WTP passing here. I have a fondness to play Xed contracts when we dont have a stopper and no stiff in their suit.

Judgement in scanning methods is mostly at the end of the sequence before that its mostly mechanics, so even if its not totally impartial its going to have a lot more values than opinions.

I think I misvote but for me its 2C followed by X

Bad argument IMO When i have a good 19-21 pts I have great expectation to go plus, while when i have a weak 3s my expectation to go plus are so so. What I think is a valid alternative is just 2Nt 21-22 and 1m--1??--2NT is 18-20. IMO the 3pts range is annoying and also playing 1m rather than 2NT is sometimes painful. But comparing the 2 methods shouldnt be that hard.

The reason why this agreement is nice is that you still can preempt 5H with AKxxxxxxx knowing partner wont raise you. The same thing with (1D)--5H 5H is a two way bid it ask partner to bid 6 with A/K of H but it can also a preempt when you have both AK of H and a hand where bidding just 4H wont stop them.

Ill be too pissed at myself when the opps find their S fit. Even if i double 2S and partner pass with 5 of them they still can make it or be down only 1.

My method for unbalanced hand is 1 -asking/showing shape/relay break 2- setting up trumps & keycarding with one bid 3- scanning 4- rarely cuebidding/asking for controls I believe there is not a lot of better methods. However I have no experience with 321 pts however and not enough experience with denials cue/Zooming to have a definite opinion. An all cuebid aproach (Ken R) is also interesting (but since shape isnt knowned its a different style) The sad thing IMO is that it would take a simple sim of 100 hands with different methods to see what is clearly best and get some answers for recurrant problems. This is for knowned hands shapes all starting at the same level. Example of a hand where im lacking a specific tool. opener x AQxxx AKxx xxx xxx KJx Qxx AKQx 1H-1S(relay) 2C (D)---2S (art GF) 3D (1543) - 3H (RKC H) 4H (2+Q+K of D no K of clubs 11-14) here ill be able to scan for Q/Jacks quite easily and ill be able to find some 6C in 4-3 rather than 6H fairly often, I can make a control ask (partner has showned the K of D and a stiff S so my control ask is for clubs) however i have no way to check if partner got the stiff Spade A wich will often lead to a very bad slam (especially when i dont have the HJ). As a general I can ask about secondary honnors quite low and know wich K my partner has and stop at 4/5 but im lacking info about the location of keycards. In this specific example since i know that partner has 13 out of a maximum of 14 looking for J isnt that useful but on some other hands he could have A+KQ of H as keycards and there would still have place for 2pts outside wich often make the difference between a good 6 and a poor one. I think we should do a "challenge sim" we each clearly write our methods and bid some hands at the same "shape is knowned" starting point.

To call xxx KJx Qxx AKQx non serious vs a stiff S is a mistake. You need at least one sort of general strenght slam try (more important that 1 cuebid). I dont think you need both 3NT friv/serious and last train but you really need 1 of them. Agree 100%