joshs

In this auction, over 3S there are not a lot of way of supporting hearts. There is 4H and there is 5H. If clubs was not already an agreed suit, partner could have bid 4S (a slam try somewhere) and then 5H, but in this auction I think that sequence is a grand slam try in clubs with controls in both majors. Maybe that should not be the meaning for that sequence, but I expect thats how most people would play it. In general, jumps to 5M have the following meanings in priority order: a. Quantatitve (better than 4M and worse than 6M) b. Asking for a control in the opps suit or the unaccounted for suit c. Asking for good trumps If A is a possible meaning, then A is the meaning. If not, move to B...

Playing with a good player in a regional swiss, whose bidding style is very different from my own, you hold: [hv=d=n&v=n&s=skqxxxhtxxdaxcajx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Partner opens 2C You resist the temptation to respond 7N, and bid 2S showing a good suit and a reasonable hand. Partner bids 3C Resisting the temptation to bid 7C, since you want to get to 7N, you try 4C Partner bids 4H You bid 4N (rkc) Partner bids 5S (2 and the club Q) What do you think partner has? Are you sure? What do you bid next?

I had no idea that there once was such restrictions. There are some restrictions about playing multiple systems in some events but there are not about multiple NT ranges, at least not these days. In my most regular partnership I play 4 different ranges: 10-13 1/2 NV 13-15 1/2 VUL 12-15 3/4 NV 15-17 3/4 VUL If you open 10 count's in 1/2 you really should open sounder in 3/4. Many strong club players play 14-16 1-3, and 15-17 in 4'th. For constructive bidding, they are better off playing 15-17 in 3'rd (partner has at most a 10 count, so the 12-14's don't want to be in game unless a good fit emerges). But most keep their 14-16 range in 3'rd seat anyway for pre-emptive reasons even if its slightly sub-optimal for constructive auctions.

In the US, 1M-4M is an alert if it can be based on a non-traditional hand type. The traditional hand type (since the forcing raise was invented) is a semi-pre-empt, typically 5 card support and less than 10 HCP (sometimes 4 card support and extra shape like a void or a side 6 card suit). In general when bids can be (systematically) made on hands that are very different in shape or in high cards than the usual meaning for the bid, its an alert. Now, you do need to know what the usual meaning is to have any hope working out if your agreement is alertable...

Well its not a great hand. Its aceless. The Qx is not worth close to 2 points (I think only about 1). But the QJxxx suit is a plus. In my evaluation methods, this hand is worth 12. K&R gives it 11.75. I would certainly open it. Now change the hand to Qx Kxx QJxx KQxx and that hand I can see passing, especially if you wanted a swing since its at least a half point weaker (no 5 card suit).

I wrote a series of articles on Hand Evaluation that were published in the Albuquerque bridge magazine over the last few years, and my friend Boye Brogeland translated them into Norwegian for Norway's Birdge Magazine. Here is article 1. If there is interest, I can post more articles. Hand Evaluation, part 1 By Josh Sher In this series, I want to discuss hand evaluation. We start this series with the question: what constitutes an opening hand? Today we discuss the Work count and the Bergen count and discuss the limitations of each. The traditional method for evaluating an opening hand is the 4321-point count (Work count) that you are all familiar with. This method works pretty well with balanced hands but has a number of shortcomings. 1. The Work point count undervalues the importance of shape A hand like Aqxxx KJxxx xx x is MUCH better than a balanced hand such as Aqxx KJxx xxx xx. Why is this? In short suits, only high cards are likely to take tricks, but in long suits the 4’th, 5’th and later cards might take tricks merely because all the other cards in that suit have already been played! Further, if one of your long suits is trumps than the opponents high cards in your short suits become worth less since you can trump them. As an example: North: Aqxxx KJxxx xx x South: Kxxx Ax xxx xxxx 4S is a very good contract here on 17 HCP. In a later article, I will discuss how to bid these hands to game. 2. The Work point count does not reflect the importance of having honors in combination. In particular, unsupported Q’s and J’s are overvalued. Consider the following card combination: Kxx vs Qxx. Here you probably make only 1 trick unless one opponent has a singleton or doubleton ace, and you guess which opponent has it. Change the combination to: KQx vs xxx Here you have a 50% chance of scoring 2 tricks by leading twice toward the KQx. 3. The Work point count does not differentiate between honors in long suits and honors in short suits North: xxx xx Axx Akxxx (Hand A ) South :QJxx AQ Kxxx Qxx Here 3NT by south is quite good! On the likely heart lead 3NT makes if clubs are 3-2 (68%). And even if they don’t lead a heart, 3NT is still decent. But move North’s AK of clubs into the majors and game is quite poor: North: Akx xx Axx xxxxx (Hand B ) South: QJxx AQ Kxxx Qxx On a heart lead, playing on clubs is no longer an option. The best chance to make 3NT is to play for 3-3 diamonds (36%). Even worse: North: Axx Kx Axx xxxxx (Hand C ) South: QJxx AQ Kxxx Qxx Here on heart leads it would require luck to even take 7 tricks! The point here is that hand A is better than hand B which is better than hand C. Hand A is worth an opening bid, hands B and C are not. The reason A is a better hand is that it has its strength concentrated in its long suit. This makes it easy to set up and run the long suit. Hand C, on the other hand, has values in a short suit that are more likely to be wasted. 4. The Work point count undervalues Aces and undervalues spot cards especially tens. With Aces you have fast tricks and sure entries that do not require setting up. You also have control of a suit, which makes it easier to hold up until one opponent is out of that suit. Further, holding aces makes it easier to endplay an opponent or squeeze an opponent since you can determine when they win their tricks. Tens are quite valuable when combined with other honors. Consider: AJx vs xxx. Here declarer will take 2 tricks when both the K and Q are onside, which is 25% of the time. Strengthen the suit by adding a ten: AJT vs xxx. Now declarer will take 2 tricks when either the K or the Q is onside, which is 75% of the time. This ten is worth a half a trick on average, the same value as an unsupported K! Having discussed the problems with the Work point count, I now want to briefly discuss the Bergen count. The Bergen count is a slight improvement on the Work count since it takes shape into account. The Bergen rule is: take HCP and add the length of your two longest suits. If the total is 20 or more open the hand. For instance: Aqxxx KJxxx xx x. Here we have 10 HCP. The Longest suit has length 5 and so does the second longest. The Bergen rule gets: 10+5+5=20. Thus its worth an opening bid. Change the hand to: Aqxx KJxx xxx xx and the Bergen count is:10+4+4=18. Not even close to an opening bid! While the Bergen rule solves problem 1 from before, it still does not solve the other 3 problems. For instance, Qxxxx Jxxxx Kx A is also worth 20 according to the Bergen count, but it’s a much worse hand than Aqxxx KJxxx xx x and should not be opened. Further, we saw the 3 examples before: xxx xx Axx Akxxx (hand A ) Akx xx Axx xxxxx (hand B ) Axx Kx Axx xxxxx (hand C ) We saw before that hand A was better than hand B that was in turn better than hand C. But the Bergen rule says all 3 hands were worth 19 in the Bergen count. In the next article, I will discuss a modified point count method that is an improvement on both the Work and the Bergen count. I will argue that hands like AKQxxx xxx xxx x and xxx xxx Axx AKxxx are worth an opening bid, but a 13 HCP hand like KJxx QJ KQx Jxxx is not good enough to open!

Yeah I am just talking about how things are usually done. I am with kokish on virtually unlimited overcalls, and very sound 2m overcalls...

1m-Dbl- 3M and 4M are some of the most frequently misused bids in the world. They are suppossed to be based on a 6 card suit and playing strength. They are frequently made on 5-5 hands instead which works fine, as long as partner did not have a x then bid a new suit sort of hand. But can be disasters if the xer had the strong hand. If you hold KQx Ax xx AKQxxx and the auction goes 1D-x(you)-P-4H You are suppossed to pass. This works fine when partner has xxxx KQJxxx Qxx - (A typical 4H bid). This does not work so well when partner has x KQxxx Ax xxxxx when you missed your slam or Ax QJxxx x xxxxx when 4H might well go down while 5C is gin and 6C is on a hook. Since there is space available to explore the correct strain over 3M, the 3M bid really should be allowed to include the lightest of the 5-5 hands in addition to 6 card suits (e.g. the Ax QJxxx x xxxxx hand) while the stronger 5-5 hand should start with a Q-bid. The jump all the way to 4 bid has to be the most specific hand type, since it used up all that space. That bid has to be reserved for a, at least decent, 6 card suit. At least thats my opinion....

This might be another one of those " bad bridge vocabulary" problems like calling the lead convention where you lead 3'rd from even and low from odd 3'rd and 5'th leads. (The normal lead from 6 cards without an honor sequence playing this lead convention is 3'rd best not 5'th best). Over 1N, no one plays agressive invites and conservtive acceptences. Its a very bad treatment, for all the reasons layed out in this thread. Lets suppose you want to be in 3N on 25 HCP. If you want to be in game on 24 HCP, shift the range for the invites down by 1 point in the argument. If you think you need 26 shift them up by 1 point, that fact does effect the argument. Lets suppose you want to invite 3N and have the nice bid of 2N available to invite 3N over partner's 15-17 NT. A. Playing "Agressive invites, and conservative acceptances" you bid 2N on 8 and opener accepts only with 17. B. Playing "conservative Invites and agressive acceptances" (this is normal) you bid 2N on 9 and opener accepts with 16-17. In A, you bid 3N on 9+ and get to game on 15-9 (bad), 16-9 (good), 17-8 (good), and 17-9 (great). You play 2N on 15-8 (very bad) and 16-8 (acceptible). In B you bid 3N on 10+ and get to game on 16-9 (good), 17-9(great) You play 2N on 15-9 (acceptible) You play 1N on 15-8 (good) and 16-8 (good) and 17-8 (bad) For strategy A you get a better result on 17-8 (as richard points out, that is the least likely combination) For strategy B you get a better result on 15-8 and 15-9 and 16-8 which are all more common. So its a better than a 3-1 gain for strategy B. If my previous post was clear, the 1M-2M auctions are different because the invite can be wider ranging. That is because of the presence of counter game tries. And yes, if you throw in the fact that when partner is 8-10 or 7-10 the upper end of the range is more common than the botton end of the range, it makes inviting on 15-16 all that more useful, as long as there is room to sort out the difference between a maximum 2M bid and a good medium 2M bid.

I disagree. You will miss some games if your invitation is conservative. As is common at the table, it is better to have any agreement rather than none at all. That said, Mike & Mike, IMO you are in the minority on this one. AP I think maybe you misunderstood. Both schools will frequently bid in identical fashion: there is an overlap between light and heavy inviters: a considerable percentage of hands on which they both invite, and a considerable body on which opener will either always reject (a bare minimum) or always accept (significant extras). we have essentially 4 cases to consider: 1. inviter is heavy/ acceptor is light. Both heavy and light inviters invite, but by 'light' for acceptor, I mean that narrow set of hands which are above dead minimum but not by enough for the heavy acceptor to take to game. The light acceptor bids game, the heavy passes. On this layout, heavy invite gets to game, light plays two levels lower. 2. inviter is heavy/acceptor is heavy: both schools get to game here. 3. inviter is light/acceptor is light: neither side gets to game, the light plays a level lower 4. inviter is light/acceptor is heavy. By heavy, I again mean that group of hands on which a heavy acceptor would go and a light would pass Now the light inviter gets to game and the heavy inviter plays two levels lower. We see that in 2 of the 4 situations (categories 2 and 3), both schools reach or avoid game. The difference within those two categories is that the light invite crew is playing type 3 hands one level higher than the other school. It is here that the problem arises: since there is no bonus for almost reaching game, and sometimes, when the cards lie poorly, the light invite crew will lose to the heavy invite. We can reasonably assume that the relative frequency of categories 1 and 4 are the same. If we do so, then it is apparent that, across all 4 categories, the two approaches are equivalent except for the problem with category 3 hands. Thus, while the difference is not huge, it is clear. And since there is NO advantage accruing from light invites/heavy accepts to offset this cost, no logical player would choose that approach once they think about it. Its actually slightly more complicated than this, and does depend on the auction. For simplicity, lets assume you played 1H-2H as 8-10. the exact range doesn't matter, I just chose this range since 3 points is divisible by 3. Also lets just suppose you want to be in game with 25 points and not really with 24. Again this is all simplified, but the main idea is the the is some threshold of combined playing strength (of which HCP is only a part) at which you want to be in game. First, lets suppose your ONLY game try was 3H. Then your argument was 100% correct. If you play 1H-2H-3H as Agressive Style then you would bid 3H on 15 and only accept with 10. Thus with 15 opposite 8 you are slightly too high. With 16-8 you bid game and are also too high. With 16-9 you bid game, and its correct. if you played 1H-2H-3H as conservative style you would bid 3H on 16, partner would bid game on 9 and pass with 8. You would get too high but might miss game on 15 opposite 10. If that was all there was too it, this style trades 1 good game for twice getting too high. But now lets introduce game tries OTHER than 3H. 1H-2H-3C: Playing the agressive style you bid this on 15 and partner bids game on 10 Or if loves his hand after the club bid, bids 3H on an 8 that doesn't like clubs that much, but can bid something else with the hands in between (8's with a club fit or 9's with a marginal club fit). Its this ability to make a counter game try where agressive game tries shine. Lets forget about the exact hand and suppose after the 3C bid responder's hand is then worth 8,9,10 (but may be different than before). Now in the agressive style, opener bids 3C with 15 or 16. responder bids game with 10, bids something in the middle with 9, and signs off with 8. The 16-8 no longer gets too high. In the conservative stlye, opener bids 3C with 16. with 17 he just bids game since responder is always good enough. Since opener is so tightly defined for the game try, you get less benefit from the counter-game try. So now, in the agressive style you get too high on 15-8. But in the conservative style you are too low on 15-10. Since you are more likely to make 3H on 15-8 than go down in 4H on 15-10, this trade is a bad one, even at mps, and is very bad trade at imps. Anyway, thats why the usual style is agressive invites. When inviting in NT, there are not counter game tries available, so its a different matter.

This is very much a style thing. Some players demand good suits for pre-empts (partnership confidence is important). Playing with such a player I might pass. Some players require a constructive hand with good playing strength (just less in high cards than an opening bid) for pre-empts. playing with such a player, I might try only 2H, but would probably gamble 3H anyway, and just apologize prosusly if things went wrong. Some players play that 2H is constructive but 3H isn't, well then you are back to an easy 3H bid. Personally, I think the money bid, by far, at these colors is 3H and thats not only because it eats up a lot of space, but also because it makes it more likely that LHO will x and less likely that he will overcall. If he x's you are probably on lead, which is good. If he overcalls, partner is probably on lead, and thats bad. Also over 3M the 3N bid is really wide ranging. It can be a balanced 15 count. It can be a balanced 21 count. it can be a long minor and a 14 count, or a 20 count. It covers a lot of ground, and not even the most experienced partnerships can deal with this all that effectively. There was a hand from the team trials where you had to face the following auction: (3S)-3N-(4S) Holding - KJxxx AJTxx Axx What do you bid? Fred Gitelman, for instance, got this hand very wrong (but did make up for it in the play!). And its a tough hand. So if anything, I would be more likely to make an agressive pre-empt vs experts (before they have exchanged information) than vs the average flight B player. The experts were going to get the hand right without the pre-empt much of the time, the flight B player wasn't. Hence you have more to gain pre-empting vs the expert. I don't really change my style much as a function of the opps, but if you do, you really should pre-empt more vs good players than vs bad players. There is a motto, which says "pre-empts work". don't be discouraged if you sometimes guess wrong over them, and use them yourselves as much as you can, as long as you have some reasonably safety given the vulnerability. In general, extra shape (like a side 4 card suit) should encourage you to bid more than you might normally bid. If you actually had a good suit like KQT9xxx and 7-4 shape, i would have opened 4H at these colors. With the actually hand I would open 3H, hope is causes the opponents troubles, and if not hope that partner can take a joke. P.S. This opinion is coming from a very conservative player who was reared on constructive bidding but who hates to pass when he holds a long suit...

At any form of scoring, playing 3N on xxx Ax AKQx Kxxx opposite x Kxx xxx AQxxxx is not good. Many players have 3NTitis at mps, but you still need to get to the correct strain. The opps are going to find a spade lead most of the time even if you don't describe your hand. With xxx Ax AKQx Kxxx xx Kxx xx AQxxxx 3N is a perfectly reasonable spot at mps, at least if you didn't describe your hands. You can only make 11 tricks in clubs, and while a spade lead might beat 3N, the suit might be 4-4, and on a good day they will not lead a spade. After all they have 8 spades and 8 hearts and 7 diamonds.... The normal auction with these hands is 1N-3N. You have no singleton and don't have slam values, so why look for another strain? Maybe the problem is language. I use the term "slam try" to mean that the player who made the bid was trying for slam. The bid may result on his partner being interested in slam even without that being the intention. I know some fine players who don't even play the sequence x-fer to a minor then a singleton as game forcing. For instance: Qxx Axx AKxx Kxx x xxx xxx AQxxxx The auction goes: 1N-2S(clubs)-2N(If you have an INV hand I think we might have 9 fast tricks in 3N)-3S(I have a singleton spade)-4C(well in that case 3N is a bad spot)-P down 1 in 4C Switch opener's Qxx to a differ suit and 3N would be a great spot. This was an unlucky mesh. Should responder have just bid 3N without showing the singleton? Well then opener might have: Qxx Ax AKxx Kxxx and you make 4C or xxx Ax AKQx Kxxx and you make 5C Note: of course, that responder was just planning on playing 3C if opener didn't pre-accept. Essentially the idea is that ALL bids below 3N are tries for 3N (except for maybe 3S when hearts is an agreed suit), not tries for slam. Whether you think its worth it to be able to stop in 4m when you realize that 3N is bad can be a matter for partnership agreement, there isn't universal agreement about this. I do think being able to stop in 4m is a minority agreement these days.

1. Extra shape, no game interest 2. Natural, Game interest. This is an unusual bid since you didn't xx, so I definitely do not expect a 5332 hand. This is probably a 6322 type hand with scattered values. 3. 2S natural, game try, usually a 4 card suit or Hxx. Implied suit bid? Its one thing to play "implied" cue-bids in michaels sequences where the opps have shown a 5 card suit without bidding it, but here the opps have not even shown a 4 card suit. In general I don't think that the opps showing a 4 card suit is enough to prevent us from playing in that strain, and here they only showed 3+ spades.... 4. A game INV or better hand with interest in defending. Sets up a forcing pass at the 3 level. 5. Usually a hand that would want to compete over certain of the opps bids, so typically a singelton in the suit they got to but only 5 hearts. 6.Penalty based on a good holding (usually 4 cards) in that suit. Note: There is theoretical merit to playing xx then x as a 4 trump penalty x, and P then x to be promising only a 3 trump penalty x. There are many possibly ideas, here. I am just presenting standard agreements. 7. Game Try, natural, usually a 4 card suit or Hxx.

As Arend has pointed out above, 3♠ does not necessarily show (serious) slam interest, but could merely be a try for 3NT (I can have solid clubs with 3-3 garbage in the reds and ♠x -- if p holds ♠AKx 3NT is the best spot). By bidding 4♣ he merely says that 3NT is not a good idea at all because he doesn't have a ♠ stopper. As a side effect this boosts South's hand into slam territory! But partner doesn't (and cannot) know this in this auction. That's why I think South should still have absolute captaincy at this point, and the reason why 4♣ as unambiguous KCB is a Bad Thing in this sequence. He's the one who is accepting/declining an invite and setting strain based on his hand. In my eyes he is simply answering a question at this point: Are you maximum and do you have 3+ hearts. Answering that question doesn't make him captain in that auction. --Sigi IMHO I strongly disagree, the 3s splinter is a slam try. Your 3club bid set the trump suit. Of course you may decline and bid 3nt or cuebid or assume captaincy with rkc. For me anyone bidding 4d would be rkc, 4nt by anyone would be to play. The only exception would be 4d...4s....4nt now would be trump queen ask and not natural and to play. Well I would partially disagree here, at least in terms of the statement that 3S was a slam try. Holding, x Kxx xxx AQxxxx, playing 4 suit x-fers I will x-fer to clubs, and then bid 3S showing shortness. At this point I am merely trying to get to the correct game. I wasn't making a slam try. But having said that, partner can have hands that are good enough to produce slam any time I have game values and a singleton. If we end up playing in clubs, we are for the most part playing with a 34 HCP deck (KQJ of spades discounted) so we can easily make a slam with 6 points less than the normal 32-33, if those points happen to not include the wasted KQJ of spades. Basically any time an unbalanced hand expects to make X tricks in a suit contract opposite a balanced hand (Here the expectation is 10 tricks in clubs) that actual play strength can easily be +/- 2 tricks based on a. degree of fit in trumps b. the amount of wastage opposite the singleton Give opener: xxx Ax AKQx Kxxx and slam is laydown on only 25 HCP

Victory for a cheap rkc bid and spiral scan! Warms my heart.

Thats a sequence where Walsh players have accidents with, if they haven't discussed it Some play it as 4 card raise, and therefore a strong hand. Others (like myself) prefer to use this bid to show 8-10 HCP, strong 3 card support, and the inability to bid NT. Probably a hand like xxx Axx KQxxx xx. Its otherwise an unbiddable hand. How do you work out the huge difference in what that bid could mean? How do you handle this with a pick up partner? Do you really stop to discuss, or do you hold your breath, bid and hope you're on the same page? The most practical answer is, without discussion you don't bid 2H with EITHER hand. Bid 1N on the hand that I wanted to bid 2H with (even though you just wrongsided NT), and bid 3H or 4H with the good hand and 4 hearts. If partner tried this bid with me, I would treat it as the weak hand for the following reasons: a. the bid "sounds" weak b. he is expected to know there is some ambiguity, so would try not to give me a problem if there is a good alternative. The strong hands have lots of good alternatives (3H, 4H, 4'th suit forcing, splinters, etc.). The weak hand doesn't. There is another similar auction. Playing Flannary, partner opens 1H, you bid 1S and partner bids 2S. Is this: a. A reverse: 4 spades and a hand too good for flannary? b. did he forget about flannary? c. is this a normal single raise with exactly 3 trumps? The correct answer is suppossed to be c. Hopefully, partner is on the same wavelength. :P

Well its partially a function of you ranges. I don't think you should bid 3D on both: Kx xxx Kxxxx Qxx and Kx xxx Kxxxx KQx Having a good 8 to bad 12 range for the bid is a bit much. If your opening bids were sound enough that you could force on all 12's and 2D showed 4, then this hand is probaby worth 3D. Note: Until you know where partner's shortage is the club Q likely isn't worth much...

Close between pass and x. I would probably pass hoping for a better chance to describe my hand later.

Well I know the hand and the winning decision, but I am a simple sole and am just bidding 5D....

This is a VERY difficult hand. First there are different styles here about the x of 4S. Some (like myself) play it as mostly takeout (so 1-1.5 spades on average), others play it as more flexible (2 spades on average), a minority play it as penalty (at this level thats probably only 2.5 spades on average). What you do with the other hand depends on the style of your x's. Playing my way (takeout) I would bid 5D over it, but it is somewhat close (I wouldn't ever bid a 4 card suit at the 5 level over a takeout x). As the style tends toward the flexible to penalty treatments, you are more likely to pass with the south hand, which is, after all, balanced. What to do with both of these hands is a frequent topic of discussion in the Master Solver Club writeups in the bridge world, and their are all sorts of opinions... This hand is made even more difficult by the fact that south is a passed hand, so north is taking a big risk with the takeout x. He does, after all have, at least 2 probable tricks in hearts, so its unlikely that there will be too many overtricks. But when you x with the north hand, you would not be totally suprised by 4S-x making 4 or even making 5 if the 3'rd hand 4S pre-empt was heavy, as it sometimes is. I was at the other table, and had a different set of complications. At our table it went, P-P-3S-? Now we were playing a strong club, so partner was about 1-1.15 points more limited than at the other table. Partner rarely will have an 11 HCP hand and will open some good unbalnaced 10 counts. On the other hand, 3S is much less likely to be a strong hand than 4S (but might still have 11-12 HCP opposite a passed hand) is, so my partner is really likely to have around 8 HCP, although thats not guaranteed. I didn't want to risk a takeout x here and have partner pass, and my club suit was kind of weak, so I made a [VERY] whimpy pass. In retrospect, I think I should have bid 4C which keeps the auction alive, but its very close. Partner had the best hand possible. As it happened while trying to set 3S we let them make 4 (I played partner for the stiff club A, but lazily led a card that would confuse him if he had more than 1 club...)

Thats a sequence where Walsh players have accidents with, if they haven't discussed it Some play it as 4 card raise, and therefore a strong hand. Others (like myself) prefer to use this bid to show 8-10 HCP, strong 3 card support, and the inability to bid NT. Probably a hand like xxx Axx KQxxx xx. Its otherwise an unbiddable hand.

Get them to unblock there good spades for fear of an endplay. :blink:

In general, a 2N rebid bid isn't "checkback" it shows a balanced 18-19 HCP hand without 4 card support. Partner can pass this if responded with less than 7 points. The 2 level rebids are more wide ranging than higher bids. This is because you have more room to sort things out. If the auction goes 1C-1S-2S you have room to invite game (3S or 2N or a new suit) or explore a different strain. If the auction goes 1C-1S-3S you have to decide immediately if you belong in game, hence the 3S bid has to have a tighter range than the 2S bid. There are some differences of opinion on the exact range showed by these bids. I have always played the "more conservative" style: 2S 12-16 In Support 3S 17-19 in Support 4S 20-22 in Support Note its not really more conservative, since its easier to bid slam over a 3S rebid than a 4S rebid since you have more room. Some play these ranges as 1 point lighter than this, or make 3S "tighter" and play it as 17-18 Finally, since reverses (a bid at the 2 level, of a new suit that is higher ranking than your first suit - in this case 2D or 2H) are forcing and show about 17+ points, most people play the a jump in such a suit is a splinter showing enough "support points" to raise partner to the relevent level. Example: 1C-1S-3D shows a singleton or void in Diamonds and 17-19 in support (but obvious less in high card points) Or 1C-1S-4D shows a singleton or void in D and 20-22 in support. Another treatment people sometimes play is to give each of these splinters "2 ranges", e.g. 1C-1S-3D can be 17-19 OR (and this is rare) 23-24. The hands: 1. 3S balanced 19 with 4 card support (if you play that 19 must bid 4S than this is a 4S bid) 2.2N 3. 2N 4. 3S 5. 4S (this is probably too good for just 3S ) 6. 3S 7. 4S having a strong 5 card suit makes this hand worth more than 19 8. 4S this hand is even better than the last one 9. 4D (or playing with the 2 range splinters 3D and then bid again) 10.4D A Classic 4D bid 12. 3S 13. 4D or 4S some people don't like splintering with a stiff ace but I prefer 4D. 14. 4D, you really need to give partner room to Q-bid in hearts. 15. there is a special rebid for this hand. 4C shows a very strong 6+ card suit, 4 card support, but less HCP than a 4 level splinter shows. 16. Tough hand! This would fit into my 3D and bid again category. 3D then 4D is a good desciption 17. 3D

This contradicts what Fred said in another thread that splintering absolutely surrenders captaincy (if I'm remembering correctly). I ought to have been more precise. I completely agree that the splinter operates, at that stage, as a denial of captaincy. If Fred uses the term 'syrrender' of captaincy in that sense, there is no contradiction. What I am really stressing is that in my view there will be many, many situations in which neither partner is captain: that captaincy has not been assumed. Thus the splinter denies interest in being captain, at that stage of the auction, but does not insist that partner assume captaincy. That is what I meant by suggesting that a common bid by the non-splinter hand is a cue: which may result (immediately or later) in the splinter hand assuming captaincy. If Fred said that all splinters forever forsake captaincy for the balance of the auction, then I respectfully disagree. Also, bear in mind that not all splinter auctions are identical. Most would play that a splinter response to a 1 major opening, as an example, is tightly defined, and thus in those sequences, it is highly unlikely that responder will ever be in a position to assert captaincy, and (for reasons similar to my rule that a 1N opening bid may never keycard) it may be playable to state that the splinter hand can never thereafter take control: I have not previously considered this issue and am not stating a position on it. But we are engaged in a different sequence here, and I see no particular reason for responder's splinter to prevent responder from taking control. After all, opener might have been bidding 3N, and when he did not, responder's hand can become massively re-evaluated and thus the nature of the auction has changed (compared to 3N over the splinter). I think you understand the concept. A transfer of captaincy is you figuratively handing over the reins. If partner takes the reins, he is allowed to hold onto them as long as he wants. If partner says "I don't want the reins" he has passed captaincy back to you. Sometime he takes the reins, but then invites you back in again (think about the grand slam tries in rkc. With 4N opener temporarily assumes the reins, with 5N he later passes them back since you are allowed to bid 7 at any time after the 5N bid. If instead of 5N he bids 6 of your suit, you are not allowed to bid 7. Although, There is a bit of leway here for you to bid 6N in some auctions where you can have substantionally extra high cards and have some information about partner's hand)

I have some remarks on captaincy. Defintiion: A hand type is a loose description of shape. Hand types are: a. balanced b. 1 suited (show the suit) c. 2 suited (show the suits) d. 3 suited (show the singleton) In general, bids that describe a hand type and a reasonably well defined strength range, TEMPORARILY, surrender captaincy, unless partner chooses to make the auction co-operative, or describe his hand enough to you, so that you have more information than he does. When you open 1N and partner x-fers to hearts opener has no right to insist on playing in clubs. Responder knows a lot more about openers hand than opener does about responder's. So responder is in charge. When partner opens 1H and you splinter with 4C showing, in your agreements 12-14 HCP, a singleton in clubs, and 4 trumps. If partner signs off in 4H you can't bid on if you, in fact, have anything that resembles 12-14 HCP and a singleton club. Even thinking about bidding on is a misbid. If you splintered with 18 HCP when you only promised 12-14 with the hope that you might get to a grand slam if partner was excited by the splinter, you can now bid on toward the small slam. You gave partner a chance to assume captaincy, but when he didn't assume captaincy, you are allowed to take over again if your hand is VERY different than what you have previously described. If opener chose to Qbid rather than bid rkc or sign off, he is passing the ball back to you saying he still doesn't know what to do. Qbidding auctions can be thought of as "captaincy passing", especially below the keycard bid. In an auction under discussion in another thread : 1S-1N(forcing)-2D-2S-3C opener has shown a 17-18 HCP hand and has give absolute captaincy to partner. The only bids that pass captaincy back are various bids of the 4'th suit. After opening 1N, responder is temporarily in charge. But later in the auction, captaincy is often passed back to opener. After 1N-2D(x-fer)-2H-3C Its openers job to select the strain, and (usually) responder's job to select the level. But if opener's hand is substantionally upgraded based on responder's shape, he might on rare occasion boost the level, if responder has allready suggested playing at the 5 level (e.g. a minor has been introduced) or has expressed slam interest (a major suit bid then a splinter). The idea is as follows "wow, partner thinks we can make 11 tricks opposite my usual dreck. With this super hand, we certainly have a good chance of making 12 tricks!" There are many other bids that transfer captaincy, at least initially. Pre-empts for instance. The describe the hand type (1 suiter) and the strength range and leave partner in charge. As another example, consider the following 2 auctions: 1S-P-1N(forcing)-P 2D-P-2S-P P-3H-x This is almost universally viewed as penalty since opener has described his hand type (2 suiter) and stength range (here its slightly wide about 11-16). Contrast this with 1S-P-1N(forcing)-3H P-P-x Here the meaning is much less clear since openers hand type is not well defined. Most people play this as a good hand, but agreements vary about how offensive or defensive the x is (is it suggesting that opener pass if he has slight extra shape, or bid with slight extra shape) There are many auctions that offer only a partial description of a hand. A 1N opener, for intance is balanced, but the exact shape is really not known. The auction 1M-1N-2M shows a 6 card suit but the rest of the shape is not known. The default agreement in all these auctions is that partner's x's are penalty, that opener must respect a sign off in another suit, etc. But its possibly to allow some leway in these auctions if opener's hand is exceptional, or if you have defined these x's as takeout. If you open 1N and partner x-fers to 2H occasionally you love hearts and tell partner the good news by bidding More than 2H. This is always possible. But overruling partner about strain would be very unusual....