joshs

I am passing despite the colors. You really need a lot more to bid 2M when your RHO bids 1N then you do normally (especially with 3 small trumps). And in this auction, partner is marked with 4+H (I have 2 and no neg x), and our diamond holding couldn't be much worse, so our hands fit like crap. I honestly expect down 3 in 2S. OK, that will probably tie the +150 I expect for them in 1N, but just as white vs white makes me want to bid over 1N, white vs white makes them want to bid over 2S, so they will x or bid on more agressively then normal... The main upside of 2S is that they may end up in a lower scoring part score like 3D, so thats the one upside of bidding. Then again, partner with 5413 or 5512 might compete to 3S over 3D (taking me seriously) and thats going to get wacked....

This has always been a mess. A few years ago Marc Umeno Visited me in ALbuquerque and we played over the weekend at the regional. In all 3 of my partnerships in Albuquerque, I play a strong club system, but Marc and I do not. On saturday pairs we sat down against two friends of mine. Marc Opened 1C (Natural 3+, OR 17-19 balanced without a 5 card major), I alerted, RHO bid 1D without asking, I asked, got to told it was two suits of the same color, I said 1C wasn't strong, you play crash anyway?, and Chaos soon insued. All I can say is, if a bid gets alerted you really should always ask what it means. If you selectively ask, you are giving partner UI, and if you bid without asking you are not only giving UI, but you could be wrong as to what the bid meant...Everyone should be asking and bidding as if they were behind screens. At least thats the theory...

I think there was an almost identical hand in one of Mike Lawrence's books. Anyway, good job at the table!

Well in actuality partner returned a heart, which was the wrong defense. I was planning on returning the DQ and a Diamond (playing partner for the AK) so as to get another heart thru, but I didn't get the chance. But this play would have been made in part because return a trump is way too risky (not based on your good analysis). DQ when its wrong costs us a trick, a trump when its wrong might cost us multiple tricks. Partner actually had xx AJT9xx AK8x x So thanks to the D8, this defense would have set it 800. We only got it 300.... :(

I wonder what 2N-3C-3D-4M should show? I have never thought about it.....

How good a hand do you need, to compete over 2c ? In an auction where only minors have been mentioned and it comes back to you at the 2-level, it's practically forcing at MP. I wouldn't pass if my Ace of spades were replaced by the decuce for instance. Having said that, I am not suggesting that I'd bid again with this hand just because I could have made the same bid with a weaker hand. I realize you can't have a bid for every additional Ace. But may be the auction wouldn't have come back to you at the two level, if you were an Ace short. May be someone else at the table would find a bid over 2c. It looks as though your LHO has a 'tweener, not quite weak enough to bid 3c the first time, but not strong enough for an action like say double over 2h showing cards perhaps ? Given that what should your partner expect if you did double 3c ? I would never consider a second bid with a hand worth less than about a 13 count and good shape (when partner does not invite action), and a hand worth 15ish is more typical lacking the shape for a takeout x (if partner had values without much length in their suits he would have bid). I think after 2H here you have bid your wad....

Seriously, we have a huge hand for a balancing X opposite a partner who has bid 3H on their own. This is closer to a slam try than a pass. Slam try? Opposite a partner who could not act over a 1♦ opening bid? I don't think so. Quite frankly, I don't think that passing is outlandish. At IMPs, you have to bid a game. But I don't know if I am so quick to hang partner for competing at matchpoints. Passing is not even close to reasonable, sorry. Don't construct hand's or worry about why partner passed over 1D (there are many hands that good but have no good bid). You have promised about 9 points in support of hearts with your balancing x, and you have about 17. Since its about 2.5 points/trick, you are roughly 3 tricks stronger then promised. In general, partner's competative bids might be 1 trick more then there hand is worth, so you have to give a little slack, but if partner thinks he can make 8 tricks then you have reason to believe he will take closer to 11 tricks. P.S. 1D-P-P-x P-2M is about 12-14ish. Balancer bids are about 3 points lighter then a direct action promises, and responder's ranges are about 3 points higher. This hand is an easy raise of a 2H bid to game. Also, note these good hands that advancer has, almost always has only a 4 card major, or they usually would have bid already.

Bidding over the FERT of course needs to be constructive. What does that have to do with penalizing them or not? The main question is: Can you make up for the loss in bidding space in some other way? If you think about it, its actually theorectically impossible to make up for the loss of a 1C,1D and 1H bid with only 1 call x. So you will do worse then average in constructive bidding here. So how do you make up for the loss of space? There are only 2 ways. 1. Taking more tricks when you play the hand 2. Gain when the Fert bidding side declares the hand, especially if you can x them effectively, or when they play in a silly strain when your side has no game. In particular, if you can force them out of 1H and reveal what they have while providing valuable information to partner about your hand, even if they escape from an eventualy penalty x, you will play the hand close to double dummy (see advantage 1). So from my forcing pass experience (and analysis) x of the FERT should be ART, and equavalent to a penalty x of a weak NT (typically any shape 15+, but 15's with very short hearts should do something else, and 14's with primary hearts should x tactfully just to make them reveal their hands) and should establish a forcing pass. I play the 1N overcall as a sound takeout x of hearts, and otherwise things are pretty natural. After, 1H-P-P or 1H-P-A Non-Forcing bid x's are takeout and NT is natural. Occasionally you end up defending 1H-x when both sides are guessing, but mostly the x gives significant compensation to your side....

After the following auction, both white: 1H(partner)-2H(Michaels)-x(suggests defending)-P P-2S-x-All Pass You hold KJ7x xx Q9 AK98x You lead the CA, and dummy comes down with: 9x KQxx JT QTxxx Partner plays the lowest club spot and declarer follows. After thinking about it, you play another high club, and partner pitches and encouraging low heart,, you play a heart to the Q and ace, and partner returns a low trump (ok partner screwed up and didn't play a trump, but he should have) and declarer plays low and you win with the J. How do you defend? (How likely is it for partner to have a second spade that beats the 9, vs having the AK of diamonds, and are there any other cases that matter?) Note: Partner is marked with 2641 shape.

Based on personal experience, but no decent statistical study: Fert=Loss When Red, FERT=Big Loss At Red, I know higher ferts (1S>1H>1D>1C) have a bigger loss expectation then lower FERTs. When White the trend hasn't been obvious to me. The main point of the FERT (against decent defensive methods) is to fill a hole in the bidding structure. BTW, I feel strongly the the best defense against a FERT at IMPS or when they are red at MPs, especially against a higher FERT, is to try to penalize them as much as possible.

I like natural slam tries in general. Show your shape, and let partner decide if he likes his values. So if you are used to that, thats a great use for the 5D call....

4S (Q bid, unless playing kickback, then keycard) 4N (keycard, unless playing kickback, then Qbid) 5C Natural Slam try, usually 5=7 5D well it sounds like he has 2 spades losers, but everything else in the deck 5H I am trying to work this one out.... In my partner ship rules with John, when trumps are firmly established: Qbids are co-operate, and the raise is a demand bid. I am trying to decide if that makes sense here: This would imply: 5H I got the entrie deck but have 2 spade losers 5D No spade control AND need some other help. In otherwise, I am risking going down. Since, risking going down sounds like bad strategy, I don't very much like this. Maybe more to the point: 5D as the demand bid 5H as I have first or second round in spades, 1'st in diamonds, extras, but still need some help in my suits (after all partner might have 2 small hearts in this auction). Perhaps x AKJxxx A AQJxx I guess with john I would just Q bid spades with this hand and then diamonds and let partner decide what to do, although the 5D call is pretty unlikely. OK, any of these methods will work....

Hmm, there were 2 non alerts, since 1C was bid on 2, and the x of 1D did not have 4-4 in the majors.... In the real world, partner is 3163 or 3172 (both opps are 4-4 in the majors) or possibly has 1 less major suit card and one more card in the minors if the x was a 5-4 in the majors hand. Further partner, by bidding twice with no encouragement has shown a good hand. 3D is really clear here since your clubs are pulling there weight....

I'd be willing to bet that neither of the 2♦ or 3♦ bidders are getting to 3N. At least the 2♦ bidders will keep their plus. I think if you are trying to make a good argument for 3♦, look at 4=2=2=5 hands with a diamond honor like: ♠Kxxx ♥AQ ♦Ax ♣Jxxxx. Its this class of hands that I'm most worried about, not the ones where we have an undisclosed source of club tricks. Would you really rebid 1S playing walsh with that hand? I would have bid 1N without even thinking. The clubs are like a 4 bagger.... Fair enough. Make the clubs a little stronger and the spades a little weaker then. I hope you see my point. OK I will give you: Qxxx Ax Ax KJxxx Where its close between 1S and 1N. (If 1D actually showed diamonds, 1N is much more encoraging since it promised a semi-fit) Maybe add the Club T, where you don't mind a preference to 2C on Kx Xxx Kxxxx xx yeah yeah, I know, you play xyz with walsh, where after telling partner (and the opps) that you have have an unbalanced hand with clubs, you can't actually play in clubs. :rolleyes: OK, I admit, hearts are 4-4 in this auction, so 1N isn't that bad a spot.... Seriously, its possible partner has Hx in diamonds. But you KNOW partner has a real club suit and 4S and there are only 4 cards unaccounted for and you also know the opps aren't bidding hearts, so partner almost certainly has 2/3 of them or substantional extras, so that doesn't leave a lot of room for 2 diamonds....

I don't think its anything close to the list you gave. Pass is "I am not sure if we will get a better score defending or bidding on". It doesn't show a particular feature, and the class of hands that take these actions changes depending on the Vul. X and bidding on are both strong opinions in the direct seat in front of an unlimited partner. Pass is the most common bid here. You will pass with any of the above: 1. A min and a stiff or 3 small in the opps suit (maybe 2 small also in this auction) [You don't have enough offense to go to the 5 level, but your defense is poor] Perhaps 3 bare aces and 3 small in the opps suit should x instead of passing at equal vul. 2. Enough to make 5M, but enough defense that you think xing them might be worth more than the value of the game (so extras but 2 cards in the opps suit, or extras and an honor in the opps suit without that much extra shape). This is a High card pass. If partner tries for slam you will accept. But if partner x's you will sit. 3. Some extra offense, but some extra defense also, and you are just not sure if you can make 5M. An example here might be extra shape, but a wasted honor in the opps suit and minimal high cards (Say Ax KQxxxx Kxxx x) Note: Kings and Q's in the opps suit are the most defense cards here. Aces are slightly defensive (no promotional value) but will often be worth a trick on offense. Jack's are defensive, but doesn't constitute much wastage, so you will often have enough offense in the other suits to contemplate bidding on.

I'd be willing to bet that neither of the 2♦ or 3♦ bidders are getting to 3N. At least the 2♦ bidders will keep their plus. I think if you are trying to make a good argument for 3♦, look at 4=2=2=5 hands with a diamond honor like: ♠Kxxx ♥AQ ♦Ax ♣Jxxxx. Its this class of hands that I'm most worried about, not the ones where we have an undisclosed source of club tricks. Would you really rebid 1S playing walsh with that hand? I would have bid 1N without even thinking. The clubs are like a 4 bagger....

I think that paradox should be treated as separate and distinct from Pass-or-Correct. “Pass-or-Correct” describes the meaning of a specific bid. For example, many people play that a 2H response to a multi 2D opening is pass-or-correct. “Paradox” a response structure that incorporated multiple bids (using pass or correct principles). For example, a paradox structure over a multi-2D opening means that both a 2H and 2S response are “Pass-or-Correct” bids. As to the age of so-called paradox structures: My impression is that they seem to be getting more popular. I agree that this type of treatment has been arround for quite some time. However, I think that they are becoming more popular. In years past, I recall seeing lots of response structures over multi 2D openings and the like that used 2H as pass or correct and 2S as some kind of artificial advance. The standard assumption was that players should respond 2H holding better Hearts than Spades in order to gauruntee that one stays at the two level. Now-a-days, there seems to be a lot more emphasis on minimizing the length of the auction and its become a lot more popular to use both 2H and 2S as pass or correct. Actually paradox responses, as you describe them, has almost compeltely disappeared in high level play over the last ten years as far as I can tell. Practically everyone plays 2H as pass or correct over the mini-multi. Most people play 2S as either: a. wants to play 3/4 hearts but only 2S (no implication of INV values) b. a game invite or better opposite hearts, but drop dead opposite spades c. less common is the meckwell scheme which I outlined earlier (to play opposite spades, and to play in hearts OR in clubs opposite hearts). Being able to get to 3C is a good idea, when partner's weak 2's canm be 5 card suits or very bad 6 card suits.... Some play 2S as an ART inquery, but thats not common, and much more usually associated with a semi-forced 2H bid than a p/c 2H bid, and these are not popular over the mini-multi. Playing Any of the above the correct bid with any of the following: 1. 1246 and not game INV strength 2. xx Qxx xxxx xxxx 3. xx Qxxx xxxx xxx and so on, is 2H p/c Yes you prefer hearts to spades, but on 1 you don't want to go to the 3 level in hearts, and in 2/3 you do not want to help your opponent figure out how to play the hearts when partner has spades. The space you use up with 2S vs 2H is hardly worth giving up a trick. I hope this helps.

Assuming Walsh, does anyone think that 3C is a reasonable call over 1S? If partner is a min, then he is most likely 4315, 4216 or 4225 (why else have the opps not been bidding hearts). on most of these hands, clubs will play better than diamonds, unless partner has a honor or 2 diamonds. If partner has moderate extras, but is 4216 with a heart stopper, 3C will excite him more than 3D would. Anyway, I know 3C is an unusual call, it just feels right to me.... Not palying walsh, you have no choice but 3D here, unless you played a cool treatment like 2D/1C was mildly invitational.

1. Something like 0337 (maybe - Qxx xxx Kxxxxxx). Was happy to play in 2H, but prefered 2S to 3C. I didn't notice the vul, so I am trying to work out what hand a. wouldn't premept b. felt they should correct spades to clubs c. wasn't worried about missing a heart game 2. Prefered Clubs to both majors. This is strange for a passed hand, so I would guess something like x x Axx Jxxxxxxx p.s. One scheme for responding to the multi: P=Diamonds 2M=P/C 2N=Inquiry 3C=Forcing with a minor 3D=forcing with a major 3H=P/C 3S=INV (or you can play it as p/c) Over 2D-2H: P=Hearts 2S=Spades and then 2N=Ogust 3C=To Play Over 2D-2S: P=Spades 2N=Hearts, Min (then 3C=to play) 3C=Hearts, Max (then 3C=to play) This lets you get out in either minor over the multi. (p.s. To get out in clubs, you bid your Better major first. If partner passes you are in a fine spot, if he bids you correct to 3C)

I am a passer. I think its clear in my light opening bid partnerships, and closer in my more standard partnerships....

Well I wasn't sold on anything. I don't think it should be GCC legal by the rules, but the director said it was. Do I think directors usually underswtand the convention charts? Well maybe not...

This is Alan Sontag's 2D opening from his matchpoint precision. I have asked for clarification about this bid in the past. I was even told that 2D showing flannary OR a precision 2D (can be 4-3 in the majors if 5 clubs) was GCC legal. I still wonder about that one....

here are obviously 2 possible lines: a. Cash trump A first and continue trumps (unless 4-0 onside), planning on hooking the club b. use the entry to take the trump hook, and then take the other hook if trumps are 2-2 B Gains when: Kx of trumps is onside And when Kxx of trumps is onside and CK is offsides A Gains when: CK is on and [spade K is off or stiff SK is on] Probabilities: B: Kx in Spades on is 20% Kxx on is 3/4 of 1/4=3/16 That AND CK off is thus 3/32 B gains 29.375% of the time A:Spade K is off or stiff K is on=50%+1/4*1/4=9/16 So that and CK on is 9/32=28.125% So it looks like B is slightly better. I probably need to think about the 4-0 breaks a little bit since you will not ALWAYS be able to repeat the club finesse as I have been assuming here, but that will only reduce the effectiveness of A a very little bit. Anyway, I probably did my math wrong, so I will leave it to the peanut gallery to do 13,000 simulations :)

This auction is the same as : 2C-2D-2S in standard. Many play 3C as a double negative here. Others play 2N as the double negative (as it was played over Strong 2's originally). Others do not have a double negative, but will improvise a 2N bid and then support spades later. For the record, I am in the 3'rd camp....

In my opinion, the first bad bid in this auction was 2S. There is lots of space between 1S and 4S and some of it should be used to describe hand type. Here Opener a. Had only Jxx in support b. Was 4333 with scattered honors c. Lived in hearts After 1C and positive, non-raises should not be thought of as denying support. You are in a game forcing auction and you should be exchanging information (source of tricks, nature of the support, and so on). Immediate raises should really strongly suggest that you belong in that strain. I think the auction should go: 1C-1S(natural)-1N(natural)-2D(natural)-2S(3 card support, balanced hand)-3D(natural)-3H(values)-3S(sets trumps) and now whether opener Qbids 4D, signs off in 4S, or bids a non-serious 3N (if you play that) the auction is under control. My choice would be: 3N(non-serious)-4C(Qbid)-4D(Qbid)-6D(choice of slams, since opener should not have enough to make a grand after this auction)-P Now its quite lucky that that Diamonds was better than spades (4 discards on the hearts), so I have sympathy for over 4D: 5H(exclusion)-5S(1/4)-6S-P Opener should never be tempted to convert to 6N in this auction. After 1N-2D he already knows there might be a problem in clubs....