bid_em_up

Ummm, no, you will be going down a lot more than one extra, frequently doubled, because you just created a game forcing auction, as opposed to bidding 2♦, then 3♦ over partners expected 3♣. (He should pass 3♦ on the hypothetical hand I gave after 2♦ 3♦, but cant after the game force jumpshift). I think your percentages are waaaaaayyyyyyy off. If partner cannot raise diamonds (or bid 2H over 2D), you have just found a what? A MISFIT. It is only because partner had 4 diamonds that this hand turned out successfully for you. I think its more like: If partner holds 4+diamonds: Win 10-12 15-25% Push 25-30% Lose 6-12 60-45% If partner holds 5+ hearts (I would still expect you to reach 4H at least, but unfortunately the 3D may get you too high later in the auction): Win 10-12 5-10% Push 45-55% Lose 6-10 50-35% If partner holds fewer than 4D and fewer than 5 hearts: Win 10-12 5-10% Push 15-25 Lose 6-10 70-65% And while my percentages also may be slightly off, they are certainly closer than the ones you gave. In my younger years, I would have been right beside you on the 3♦ bid. However, experience has taught me to consider the following likely scenarios: 1) Partner passes 2D. It is unlikely you had anything. 2) Partner bids 2S over 2D showing a doubleton spade. You can continue with 3D showing the 5-5 and extra values. At least now, partner is better placed in judging the final contract. 3) If partner has 10-11 hcp, and 4 diamonds, he should raise 2D to 3D. If he doesnt, find a new partner. Over 3D, you can cuebid, if you wish, or just bid 5D. Reaching the diamond game, in and of itself, should win you the majority of the imps in most cases. 6D is just plain lucky. Partner holds the perfect hand. If he has anything less, you will have nothing other than a partscore available to you. 5D will not be a good proposition on a 5-3 fit. 4) What if partner has long hearts? He will bid 2H, and I would usually bid 4H over 2H with this hand expecting to make on a winning percentage basis. This is also dependent on my mood, opps, evaluation of partners declarer skills, recent run of luck, etc. I might just raise to 3 if I wasnt real happy with other factors at the time. 5) If partner has no fit or has a fit but is weak, what is the best chance of escaping with a plus or only a small minus? Take the low road and minimize your loss if possible. Oh boy. Here come the ifs, ands, or buts. All of these are no more than excuses/rationalizations made by up and coming players that we all have used at one point in our bridge lives in a lame attempt to justify a (bad) bid that we have made. While all of these ideas have some small amount of merit and top players frequently make calls based on instinct (or visualization), they rarely take high anti-percentage actions without having a good reason to do so. 3D is a very anti-percentage call. As such, it usually wont be quite as spectacurly successful as it was in this case. Even in this case, it gained you nothing that you couldnt have achieved on a normal 2D bid (partner should raise to 3D), but it rated to cost you a bunch. This is called "losing bridge" in my book. It also irritates your partner to no end when you bid 3D on this kind of hand, especially when you appear to know that 2D is the correct call, but instead, choose to bid 3D anyway. It leaves partner continually wondering from that point on, "Well, does he have a real 3D bid? or does he have one of those 2D bids that he thinks he should bid 3D with?" and wasting valuable mental energy trying to evaluate such nonsense that is better reserved to be used on defending/play of the hand. The other downsides are that, although it was successful this time, it now makes you prone to continue to do the same thing. The next 3-4 times the bid will not be successful and partner is really steamed for the next 5 boards costing your side even more imps (or percentages, if mp). Since you need partner playing with you (and not irritated over a bid for the next 5 boards), it is better to make the correct partnership call (even if its not necessarily the winning one). After all, the game is hard enough with two opponents. Why do you want to create a third opponent in the form of your partner? (And I really dont mean for any of the above to sound as harsh as it seems to come across, but you asked for comments. Please take it as a constructive critique from someone who has been there, to someone who appears to want to learn, why not? for reasons not to bid 3D).

In actuality, these exist that eliminate the need for any hot water tank whatsoever. (Other than to flow the water through, its not used to actually heat the water). They are point of access devices (shower, hot water faucet, etc.) which heat the water instantly for an always on, never ending supply of hot water. For one example, see: http://www.instanthotshowers.com/

1985 in Athens GA (where REM is from)....I doubt they actually had an opening act. Or...they were the opening act for someone else. I saw the 1986 Pink Floyd tour also (ok, it was actually 1987 by the time it came to the Orange Bowl in Miami). Pouring down rain, and our seats were on the opposite end of the field from the stage, Top deck, top row. As far as you could get from the stage and still be in the stadium. Thankfully, lots of people hadnt shown up due to the rain and we managed to scarf some seats under the deck. Bad Company/Kansas in the late 70's. Kansas was the opening act. The Boss. Twice. Journey. AC/DC Billy Joel Elton John Oddly enough, one of the best concerts I ever saw was when a couple of friends of mine decided we were going to take road trip from Atlanta to Athens GA to see some band that I had never heard of. It turned out to be The Psychadelic Furs. Some others I cant remember for various reasons. :P

Yes.

What would an initial 4D show? Is it stronger or weaker than 3D in your agreements?

<sarcasm on> Great!! Yippee!! Hurray!! Break out the band!!! You found partner with one of the few possible hands that allows you to make 6♦ and you managed to bid it. Good for you. </sarcasm off> Unlike codo, I dont think 3♥ is a splinter agreeing diamonds (Most will treat it as a good heart suit, invitational, I believe), but certainly this hand will/should raise 2♦ to 3♦, which makes getting to at least the diamond game a cinch and it isnt unreasonable to get to the slam. The problem is when you bid 3♦ (which should be a game forcing bid) and partner holds x Qxxx xx KQxxxx or similar (which he will the majority of the time). Now where do you go? Additionally, the diamond game on a 5-3 fit will not be a good proposition. Unfortunately, I suspect that Warren would also prefer to be precisely right whenever he could be, instead of being wrong the majority of the time, which the 3♦ bid will be. Rex's position of making the technically correct bid will be the winning position to take over the long run. I would expect 3♦ to be a losing call over the long run. Somebody with a simulator should be able to determine this (I would guess that its only successful in 15-30% of the hands, if that high). Or Bruce Willis. Yippie Kai Yea, MF!! Cowboy, I think maybe you should listen to Rex some more. :P

Going down does that, too. Looking at both hands, it looks like game is only about 50%. You have two ♥ and one ♣ loser, so you have to pick up the ♠ by guessing whether to finesse or try to drop a singleton K. Look at the hands again. You have 2 heart losers, and either a successful club finesse or spade finesse wins 4♠. (That in itself is about 75%). The additional chances of dropping the club Q on the first round, although small, increase this somewhat. I bid 4S all day long, regardless of vulnerability. No, I am not happy about it, I would prefer to have a side stiff, but it works over the long run and gives partner the message that I have long(ish) spades and little else. It also shuts the opponents out immediately, applying maximum pressure. What do you do when you bid 2S (3H) p p 3S (4x) p 4H ? Now you are doomed to bidding 4S anyway, and will definetely get doubled. Bidding 4S directly will usually prevent the double, at least. I also open 1N on the other hand all day. Whats the point of not accurately describing your hand in one bid? 5-3-3-2 is balanced. The spade suit is terrible. You dont want a spade lead if you end up on defense.

Are we looking at the same hand? This hand is only worth a reverse if a fit can be found and the other hand does not have wasted club values. How likely is that? (It is also the same reason not to bid 3♦ over 1N, its not quite strong enough to do so opposite the expected wasted club values in partners hand).

bidding the hand this way, implies you are at least 5-6+ (5 spades, 6+ diamonds), thats whats wrong with it.

I have, I own it even, lol. One of the greatest lyrical songs of all time, imo. Manfred Manns version also drops two of Springsteens original verses: "Oh, some hazard from Harvard was skunked on beer, playin' backyard bombardier Yes, and Scotland Yard was trying hard, they sent some dude with a calling card, he said, "Do what you like, but don't do it here" Well, I jumped up, turned around, spit in the air, fell on the ground and asked him which was the way back home He said, "Take a right at the light, keep goin' straight until night, and then, boy, you're on your own" And now in Zanzibar, a shootin' star was ridin' in a side car, hummin' a lunar tune Yes, and the avatar said, "Blow the bar but first remove the cookie jar, we're gonna teach those boys to laugh too soon" And some kidnapped handicap was complainin' that he caught the clap from some mousetrap he bought last night Well, I unsnapped his skull cap and between his ears I saw a gap but figured he'd be all right" I can never help but wonder, WHAT. THE. HELL. WAS. HE. ON. when he wrote this?? LOL. Manfred Mann also covered another Springsteen song ("For You") on the "Lies(Through the 80's)" album. Much better than Springsteens version. Other great covers: Take Another Piece of My Heart - Melissa Etheridge (orig. Janis Joplin). If you havent heard this, find it, preferably the live version. Its awesome. Forget the Beatles version of Roll Over Beethoven. Give me Electric Light Orchestra's any day. Guns and Roses version of Knocking On Heavens Door. Johnny Cash's version of NIN's, Hurt. (Liked his cover of Personal Jesus also). But I dont really consider either of these to be classics.

Duck the first diamond. If West has led from a five card suit, East must return something that is likely to help you. If East does manage to lead a second diamond, win the Ace, and lead the heart 9.

3♦ looks about right. Surely the 3N bidders dont believe they are actually getting a spade lead?

I guess I must be too old fashioned. Dont the auctions 2♣-2♦-2♠-3♠ promising at a mininum an outside Ace or King with ♠ support, and its corrollary auction, 2♣-2♦-2♠-4♠ showing spade support, scattered values without an outside Ace or King, still apply? Seems to me the auction should go exactly as the first, since thats what you have. Heckuva lot easier to do if this hand doesnt get opened 2♣. You really have nothing to fear about it going 1♠ all pass, and the opps will not be able to outbid the spade suit (at least not until they reach the 5 level). Yes, you have 20 hcp (if you count the heart Q as part of your opener), yes you only have 4 losers, but somebody is still holding the other half of the deck and they are going to be short in spades as well (in most cases) and will reopen (if it goes 1S-p-p). Reserving the 2♣ opener for stronger hands, as opposed to hands with lots of playing tricks in them, will make staying out of slam on these hands much easier to do.

Personally, I think the worst call was 2♣. After that it becomes almost impossible to stop in 3N. But it was also an individual and partner probably wanted to convey the fact that he has what he thinks is a big hand immediately. Note, it is only a big hand if some fit can be found, which is another reason not to open 2♣ allowing for more room to explore a fit. And if partner cannot scrape up a response to 1♦, game is unlikely (Yes, there could be hands where partner has the magic fit containing the spade A and nothing else and a diamond fit and it goes 1♦ all pass, however, I will take my chances that partner isnt holding that hand the majority of the time). I, for one, am of the opinion that with positive values and a 6 card suit, you show it immediately over the 2♣ bid, so the 2♥ bid is ok by me. If you dont show it now, the auction will usually become too jammed to get across later in the auction. Now for the next bad bid by opener, 3♦. He is really showing a one suited hand and a much better suit. Something along the lines of AKJ10xx. This diamond suit is dependent on a trump fit. Along with the others, I think that a 2N rebid would be more appropriate after the 2♥ positive response. Even after this start, I think you will have a hard time staying out of either 5/6♦, as responder will now probably introduce their diamond suit (showing the hand pattern), and now the 2♣ opener will not be able to contain themselves as they will immediately jump to 4N over a 3♦ bid by responder. It is only if responder chooses to rebid 3♥ over 2N that you will be able to play in 3N. I think a better auction would be 1♦-1♥-3♣-3♦-3N.

After the first thread and a result of 27-0 stating the X is terrible, no strike that, its HORRENDOUS, no strike that as well, mere words simply cant begin to describe how bad the X is, and I think more than enough people here are at a level high enough to be correct. Heck, even the ones that arent still got it right!!! And you never see this board agree unanimously on anything. <_< I said previously, I dont agree with the 4H bid but although it is an aggressive preempt, it certainly doesnt drastically misdescribe the hand. I think winston had the right idea. If this is what your partner truly believes, and wants continue to argue in the face of an overwhelming majority that the X is plain and absolutely wrong, 100%, no questions asked, you really should be asking yourself if it is worthwhile to continue this partnership. If its not, dont waste any more energy on resolving this issue, because he is never going to believe you anyway.

Since the bidding is weak and dummy is not likely to have 5 hearts (no checkback) and either opponent could be pushing for game, I would prefer to make a lead that is passive. A heart lead is apt to give very little away but a lead in any other suit could be disastrous. While I think any heart is liable to work out ok, the 10 is probably the best one to lead. If I lead a low one, partner might actually think I like hearts. Its not even close to leading anything else. (And I dont consider a diamond lead to be passive given this auction).

Give me a hand where you can see that partner can't be strong with 5-5? Hum.. 17-18 hcp with 1534 and strong diamonds? Say x AKxxx AKQ Qxxx I suspect you mean AKxxx x AKQ Qxxx (partner opened 1♥, you bid 1♠ & 3♦). But seriously, if you have this hand, you would/should bid 2♦ as 4th suit forcing, which kinda removes it from any discussion. Got another example? No, this was an example of a hand where you would supposedly "know" that partner doesn't have a GF 5-5 ♠+♦ hand. I'm not sure why partner can't have something along the lines of AKJxx x J109xx Ax though. Andy The point was that in the given auction responder cannot hold the hand you initially gave. It is responder who bid 1♠ and 3♦. Therefore you couldnt hold x AKxxx AKQ Qxxx (you are describing openers hand). In a Walsh style, a 4 card spade suit would be bid before a 5+ card minor suit. With game forcing values, any 5-5 hand would next bid 2♦ (4SF) thereby creating a forcing auction and then describe from there. The auction listed, 1H-1S-2C-3D, to the best of my recollection is, specifically reserved for 4-6+ hands w/o game forcing values.

So: LHO opp opens 2♣, and partner calls a natural 2♥. You want me to alert this too, I suppose, as being very weak? I wasnt even going to bother to answer this since it appears to be just another attempt at misdirecting the subject, but.... Let me put it this way. If your partnership routinely (as in almost always) raises an overcall of 1♥ to 2♥ on this hand type, or if your partnership routinely (again, almost always) overcalls a strong 2♣ on x Jxxxxx xx Kxxx (or whatever other weak hand you choose) then yes, I believe you should be alerting the bids. You know partner is liable or prone to be weak in these situations, it is an undisclosed partnership understanding. The opponents are not aware of any such understanding. Partner could well hold x AKxxxx xx Kxxx over the 2♣ opener and fully have his bid, even if only lead directional. As such, your partnership tendencies to raise or overcall on nothing in these situations are alertable. Note the difference between routinely (almost always), or occasionally or whenever you feel like it, or every now and then. If partner has no reason to believe (or suspect) on this board that your raise will be anything other than a standard 2♥ raise, then no, its not alertable.....but from what has been written in this thread, I would find it hard to believe that your partner is not aware of your tendency to do this. You have attempted to defend the 2♥ bid just a little too strongly to convince me that is an action you have not taken before, or one that you do not routinely make. But, I could be mistaken.

AWful raise = A raise that is Lacking in its requirements to be consistent with LOTT.

I can at least see some degree of rationale to this part of your logic, even though I dont necessarily agree with it. Unfortunately, I cant see any degree of rationale with this part of the logic. It is only a LAWful raise under the assumption that your side is holding approximately 1/2 the HCP or compensating distribitution. Given that partner has done nothing more than make a simple overcall, you have absolutely no reason to believe this to be true. Just because you have an eight card fit, in and of itself, does not mean that it is a LAWful raise, instead it is a simply an AWful raise. :P (that gives me an idea for the changing a letter in a word thread, hehe). Again, even if he competes with 6 hearts, it will be under the expectation of you actually having your bid and competing with what he believes to be approximately 1/2 the HCP. Why encourage him to do otherwise? Not as furious as I would have been over the 2♥ raise, unless partner is also aware of your tendencies to raise on this type of hand. And since I havent seen it mentioned elsewhere, if partner is aware of this tendency, I certainly hope you are alerting the 2♥ raise. Why not? Heck even though you both misbid (imo), you still ended in a reasonable contract. If you're going to bid aggressively like this, you really should be able to back up your bidding with your declarer play, and going down in 4♥ certainly doesnt help you in your quest to win, now does it?

Give me a hand where you can see that partner can't be strong with 5-5? Hum.. 17-18 hcp with 1534 and strong diamonds? Say x AKxxx AKQ Qxxx I suspect you mean AKxxx x AKQ Qxxx (partner opened 1♥, you bid 1♠ & 3♦). But seriously, if you have this hand, you would/should bid 2♦ as 4th suit forcing, which kinda removes it from any discussion. Got another example?

Worse yet, try catching a cold and finding a OTC medicine that wont get you barred. (Or so I have heard).

Jesus vs. Satan Jesus and Satan were having an ongoing argument about who was better on his computer. They had been going at it for days, and God was tired of hearing all of the bickering. Finally God said, "Cool it. I am going to set up a test that will run two hours and I will judge who does the better job." So down Satan and Jesus sat at the keyboards and typed away. They moused. They did spreadsheets. They wrote reports. They sent faxes. They sent e-mail. They sent out e-mail with attachments. They downloaded. They did some genealogy reports. They made cards. They did every known job. About ten minutes before their time was up, lightning flashed across the sky, thunder rolled, the rain poured, and, of course, the electricity went off. Satan stared at his blank screen and screamed every curse word known in the underworld. Jesus just sighed. The electricity finally flickered back on, and each of them rebooted their computers. Satan started searching frantically, screaming "It's gone! It's all gone! I lost everything when the power went out!" Meanwhile, Jesus quietly started printing out all of his files from the past two hours. Satan observed this and became very irate: "Wait! He must have cheated. How did he do that?" God shrugged and said, "Everybody knows, Jesus saves."

Let me ask you a few questions as well as provide my own thoughts. Why is it a red herring? The original poster asked who was more to blame. I think by opening this hand the normal auction to 4♠ gets fouled. He didnt state it specifically, but if I had to bet, he could go and check the boards and would find that none of the pairs playing spades got a 1♣ opener in front of them. How much simpler would the auction be if South passes? Opening this hand 1♣ simply screws the auction up as it usually will. I would much rather see this hand opened 3♣ if it absolutely must be opened. At least that would be a somewhat accurate description of its values and defensive potential. Why should they end in 4♠ anyway? North certainly has every right to expect that 6C is a great contract, regardless of the form of scoring. 10 card fit, solid 6 card side suit, 4 trumps, 2nd round control in diamonds. All he really needs is the heart Ace and voila!!! 6♣. Both red aces and the club Ace? Hot diggity dawg!! 7♣!! Heck, partner did open, its not too unreasonable to expect something like this x Axx Axx A10xxxx, now is it? On second thought, scratch that last question, from someone who espouses ZAR openings, I suppose it would be too much to expect. :) What do you hope to accomplish or gain when you open this hand 1♣? You have no major, heck, you dont even have SUPPORT for a major!! You aren't going to be happy when it goes 1♣ (2♥) X p. You wont be all that thrilled at having to bid 2♣ after 1C-1♥/1♠, will you? I can see absolutely no purpose for opening this piece of trash hand. Unless of course, you just like to hear yourself bid and pass simply isnt a part of your vocabulary. Sorry, but I think overall, the end result is directly caused by the opening bid. And not because of Norths subsequent bidding, although I will agree that he could do better as well.

<sarcasm on> But, but, but.....It qualifies for Rule of 20!! </sarcasm off> :)