bid_em_up

Odd. I've seen this one a lot (at least on BBO).

In 20 years, you might understand why it would be correct to defend with this hand. Check back with me then. ....bullshit edited.....so I didn't originally express what I was attempting to say properly, big deal..... I have not "changed" my mind, evidently I just didnt express it well enough to begin with for certain people to take it on face value, and instead, and start taking issue with what "exactly" what was said. I have already admitted that I did not express the reasons clearly enough. There is no need to continue to berate it or attempt to ridicule it. Could this be cause I am usually hurriedly posting from work? Could it be cause I had 3 hours sleep that nite? Sure. Is it because I am a fool like you seem to think? You're entitled to your opinion. Next time you make a mistake, I will be equally happy to ridicule you as well. X is still better in my opinion. I will not change my mind on this. Not next week, not next year and not 20 years from now. As far as defending with the given hand goes, I already am certain of the "right" side. Again, check back with me in 20 years. Maybe you will understand it then as well.

I think given the scenario, the 2 is best. Partner can look at dummy, his hand, and know from the bidding how likely it is that you have an honor (slim to none). But it may be more helpful for partner to know your exact count, where the two will either be from 3 or a stiff. While the two would normally imply an honor, I think here it will be clear enough to partner that it is impossible for you to actually have one. Lead the two.

Those West Coast players are smart.... :)

This is unfairly critical of mikeh on several levels. No, it is not. Why the hell do you people insist on reading something into a post that isnt there? Mike himself said: Since mike was insisting that I don't call him a 'liar', I was simply making a joke regarding can I call him a "flawed character" instead. I would be fairly certain that mike is neither a liar, nor is he actually a flawed character. It is something said in jest. Please try buying a sense of humor and then reading this stuff in context, next time please. Geez. EDIT: Note, I do not consider the refusal to play with B/I players to be a "character flaw". Each person may choose to play or not to play with whomever they wish for whatever reason(s) they may have. Mike said, "call it a character flaw if you will", I don't think either of us believes that it actually is one. It is simply a form of expression. I can fully understand and appreciate not desiring to "waste" time when you only have a limited amount of time for personal "enjoyment" playing and thought I stated that clearly.

How about I just say you are mistaken in your beliefs then? LOL :) Really, I have seen many WC players make simpler errors than this. As a lawyer, I would infer that you probably already know the saying "Never say never". Stranger things have happened at the bridge table, and I don't like giving partners opportunities to make a mistake/error/ignorance when I don't have to. X yields practically a zero percent chance for partner to make a mistake. 1N, while there should be zero percent (in theory), that is not always going to be the case. 1) ok, fine. I made an assumption that you would. My bad. If it is of any significance to you, I think you would make a better "pro" than many of the ones out there already. 2) Although the sentiment is understandable (I often feel the same way), the actual "refusal" to do so by you somewhat surprises me. Especially given your willingness to help here. But then again, time is often a limited quantity, and I can understand only wanting to spend it enjoyably. So can I say, you are a "flawed character" and get away with it? :) 3) Somewhere in the midst of all of this, it got inferred that I meant that partners would make an error/mistake of this sort. I may have unintentionally even implied it myself. Then it got derailed from there. My original intent was only that X is somewhat more flexible than 1N. 1N here will tend to deny 4 hearts. So if you have a 4-4 heart fit, you will not be able to find it (partner cannot bid 2S as stayman without compensating extras which he is unlikely to have, cannot transfer to hearts as 2D would be natural, and he should not bid 2h with only 4). So 1N gives up any chance of finding a heart fit, along with any chance of penalizing 1S if it happens to be right. So, imo, you lose at least two options with 1N, that are still available with double which tilts the bid in favor of double for me. I prefer to keep all my options available whenever possible. But again, this is jmoo.

deleted. Ok, I worked it out. :)

As asked above, What happens in part 2, when East wins the 1st trump, and plays the diamond 9 (not a 2nd heart)? (And I am not disagreeing with anyone....just asking if it makes a difference)

I think he means if spades were 3-2, as the lines of play given were based 1) if LHO showed out on 2nd round of spades 2) if RHO showed out on 2nd round of spades and 3) if 3-2 (spades)

In 20 years, you might understand why it would be correct to defend with this hand. Check back with me then.

I swear to you that NONE of the partners I play with would intend 2♣ as stayman if I reopened 1N... nor would any of them take 2♦ as a transfer. I feel sorry for you if your partners would... they are, in bridge terms, weak. And correct bidding should not, usually, be based on the fear that partner will get a basic sequence wrong. BTW, unless you know me and my partners, don't tell me I'm lying ;) I would reopen with double...but, as with Frances, I don't feel too strongly about this issue. So, you never play with any clients mike? Never play with any intermediates? Beginners? Like I said....its all well and dandy for each and everyone of you to make statements like "My partners would never do this". I still say you are lying if you mean ALL of your partners. All of your personal/regular pro partners may be a different story. And btw, not everone is as privileged or lucky as you, Phil, et al. to be able to always play with W/C partners who never make a mistake, even simple ones. :)

I would spend more time practising vs. live opps than I would practising against the computer. Depending on what PC software you are using, the bidding methods employed by the software often have no semblance to "real" life table play. As your instructor said, "Practice doesn't make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect. All other practice only makes permanent." Playing with a bad PC program simply makes permanent the bad things the software does. Now, your software may be one that is decent, I do not know. But there are some pretty bad ones out there also.

Of course it is. Pull up the myhands records for one of the players involved and then locate the board, assuming of course you remember at least one of the 8 players names. :) http://online.bridgebase.com/myhands/index.php

Good for you. I wish I could say the same and that it would always be the case.

Why? Pard can bid 2♦ over either x or 1N. See above. Dream on :) In theory, yes. In practice, no. Watch how pard's Txxx becomes a stop when LHO leads an honor from AQJ9x. Or pard has Qxx. If you swear to me, that you will never have a partner that will take 2D over 1N as a transfer to hearts, I will tell you that you are lying. If you swear to me, that you will never have a partner that will take 2C over 1N as stayman, I will tell you that you are lying. If you tell me it isn't possible that partner has a hand such as: J10xxx Kx xx Kxxx I will tell you that you are lying. (He probably doesn't, and I may be dreaming, but....if you don't allow for it, you will never defend this hand when he does.) I also don't think partner will be bidding 1N on Qxx alone, as he will then have a four card suit somewhere. :) All I am saying is X is more flexible than 1N. Feel free to do as you wish.

No, 2♣ and 2♦ should be natural over this 1NT bid. If partner want's to Stayman he can bid 2♠. Sure, a broke hand is going to force the bidding to the 3 level. Right. You may have this agreement if you choose, but I think most people would interpret 2C as stayman, and 2D as transfer in this situation. I agree that it would be better for all bids to be natural in this sequence though.

True, but then again partner is equally likely to have a weak hand (or even a bust) with 5-7 diamonds. Doubling may allow you to play 2 diamonds, whereas 1N will force you to be at 3D to play in that strain. Double may also get you to 2C if this is the right spot as well. If partner manages to bid 1N, it should play equally as well from his side (and gives you a chance to raise to 2N/3N, whether you should or not is debatable). Or....you may get to defend 1S x'd as well. :) Overall, I think double is the most flexible option and prefer it strongly over 1N. jmoo.

1. Win the ♥ 2. ♣ Q...covered... assume we win in dummy 3. trump, won by the A. What do you do if East now plays the diamond 9? If west plays small? If west overtakes with the 10? (You may have explained this already, I don't remember now...) :)

What part of this: If a diamond was correct, we wouldn't be seeing this question here. B) is everyone failing to understand?!?! I will lead a club, only because a diamond is so clearly right, that the only reason the question is even posted here is that somebody led a diamond, it turned out to be wrong, and some other lead was "right". At least that was my take on it, anyway.

Now i discard club on ♥Q, and i'll manage to ruff diamond in dummy "P.S. I also think that covering the club at trick two gives you more problems than you give it credit for...." No, i'll just play for now trumps from dummy and cash ♣J later going back to similar studied position. So you discard a club on the heart Q. That is three tricks lost. East now continues with another heart, promoting the setting trick (in trumps) for the defense. Care to try something else?

If West plays small on ♦9 i'll duck, if he covers, i'll come on trumps in hand, playing diamond again, if West plays the deuce i'll duck, if he plays high i'll take and make a natural diamond trick. So you duck the diamond 9 with West playing the duece of diamonds. Thats two tricks lost. Now East continues the heart Q. Now what? P.S. I also think that covering the club at trick two gives you more problems than you give it credit for....

I think you lose your bet. in 2.1) You have lost the spade A. You are ruffing 2 hearts high (or so you stated), You are losing a heart as you pitch a club. At this point you are down to Kx in spades, having lost 2 tricks already. East now continues another heart. West can ruff (or overruff you if you choose to ruff at all) and then lead either minor suit on which East uppercuts you with the 10 of trumps to promote Wests last trump. So this line fails as it is stated. It does appear to work as suggested by jtfanclub, however. Maybe that is what you meant to say....but you missed the part about cashing the spade K earlier. As he also implied, you are making an assumption that East will continue a heart at the point he is in with the spade Ace, and he may not...... (Note, this is the only case that matters, as you *had* to play a trump from dummy....what happens when East plays the spade 10 is not relevant as it is a double dummy problem, Case 2.2 is meaningless.) I'm not claiming that there is not a 100% line for declarer to succeed or the defense will always prevail. Only that your stated lines are flawed. :D Hope you didn't bet the farm on this one. :(

I think a diamond is the worst possible lead you can make, for several reasons. Even if you establish the suit, you have no entry to cash it. Partner is marked for some HCP on the auction, we should try to find his suit. If a diamond was correct, we wouldn't be seeing this question here. :D My gut feeling is to lead a club, even given the fact that a diamond looks "normal". jmoo.

Of course, this option already exists in another form as well. Don't click on cards until the auction is completely over. ;) Seriously, I've had it happen to me as well, and led the wrong card due to the same reason. I stopped clicking on cards until the auction is finished, and the hand has rearranged itself. Problem solved.

comments on bidding please It was awful. It was brilliant. It was horrendous. Goren could've bid that hand equally as well, even from the grave. My blind grandma bids better than that. Could you please pick that hand up and put down the one you held during the auction? ;) :D (please take it as the joke it is intended to be...it was just the first thing that went through my mind upon seeing the thread title, without even seeing the actual "problem", so has no real bearing on what may have actually occured at the table)