brianshark

It's IMPs. I'm taking the monkey... I mean money. (Dbl)

I'll play to set up clubs, running my trumps when I've used up my ♠ entry should put pressure on opponents who may discard badly to give me that extra chance that the 50-50-ish shot at LHO having the heart Q doesn't give me.

It's one of my biggest pet peeves in bridge... people who don't know how to pass 4NT. It really really irks me.

Neither undo is valid.

1) 3♦ would certainly tempt me. It would depend on my partnership style. But more often than not I'd probably be pre-empting with it. 2) I hate pre-empting on hands like this. I'd open 1♦ or pass depending on conditions.

The girl is either genuinely just passing throguh looking for a catch-up, or she still has lingering feelings and is curious about whether they might make another go of things. If it's the latter, then she will be worrying every bit as much as he is and he needs to 'man up' and be the one to make the decision, for both of their peace of mind. My advice to your friend is: 1. Accept that they won't get back together, that the relationship ran it's course and they are both better off moving on. 2. If, at any point in the meeting, she asks (most likely indirectly) whether they might possibly get back together, then he should answer a clear no. Example: Her: "I wonder what it would be like if we both got into <Ivy League College>... we might still be together now." Him: "Yeah, it's funny the way things work out, but maybe it was for the best."

Hmm... I bid 3NT thinking it will show a stopper much more confidently than 2NT would hoping that it might discourage pard pulling more than 2NT would.

3NT looks like the most reasonable place to play.

We would give out a LOT more if LHO found a killing singleton diamond lead from a weak hand. As it is, the lead is a stupid one when partner asks about that suit. And it is correct he be reprimanded by a TD about it. What part we should play is up for question. I voted a quiet word to the director at the very least to let them know this is going on in case it is repeated later in the session. And yes, had RHO talked an ethical partner out of leading a bum suit and into leading his actual suit then that would be worse. Much harder to do anything about in isolation though because it crosses the line into cheating.

I'm voting for a heavy 3♦. I just can't stand 5♦ vul which could easily drift off a few and could be doubled. Partner can see the colours so hopefully he'll not be shy to do something on a scattering of values, especially of LHO passes quickly. It helps if your overcalls are sound when vul.

Spades is highly likely to be our best suit so I'm leading one of those.

I don't play much smith echos so I'm no expert, but here's my opinion on your questions: 1. Without agreement, play it safe and assume that the smith always applies to the opening suit. If the first suit doesn't matter any more because the layout of it is known then you shouldn't play smith, play count or suit pref or something. 2. Disliking the led suit must imply you like the obvious switch. If the obvious switch is more detrimental than a continuation, maybe you're better encouraging in the led suit? 3. If both leader and partner of leader can smith then maybe p will duck to give you a chance to make opening lead. Maybe he ducks just to keep opponent guessing about location of values in case a second round of suit is dangerous. Maybe there are tactical reasons you aren't aware of. Either way, I wouldn't put much significance into it. Definitely don't agree a meaning about winning 1st vs 2nd because that may hamper partner's ability to defend correctly. 4. It depends on the entire hand, but if you want partner to continue the suit even if it gives up a trick to declarer's queen, then encourage in the suit. If you don't want partner to continue because you want the next lead from your side to finesse declarer then discourage on opening lead but give a positive smith signal to tell him to keep his suit and look for your entry. Or perhaps if you get to discourage in the suit (because you didn't need to play 3rd hand high), then you shouldn't play smith anymore and should instead suit pref or count or something. 5. I don't understand this question. 6. If I want switch and then I lead this suit, then I'll discourage with 2 (or 7) and then make my normal 4th highest (or 3rd/5th) return unless I must return a big card for want of outside entries to repeat the finesse.

Right you are. 4♥ it is.

FWIW, I would have bid 2♦ on the previous round. As it is, I'm leaning towards 4♥ but I'm scared pard might be forced in ♠s if the opps find that lead (or switch). I agree with Josh about the fact that your spades are crap that pard can't properly evaluate his hand. But also, if we jump to game quickly, opps might lead a minor which will probably work out nicely for us. I also gave a jump to 3N some thought. It's more of a gamble so maybe I shouldn't, but I like the idea of keeping opps in the dark about my hand. While a spade lead through responder's suit occurs now and then, rarely will they lead into it. Hearts could easily run and if pard has only 5 ♥s then chances are good he has 4 ♣s. Mark me down for a 3NT gamble.

Can you tell us the system the opps are playing?

I think pard is more likely to have JTxx Qxxxx xx xx. I think I'll pass.

I voted pre-emptive but wasn't too sure. The fact that the BBO forums have almost unanimously declared it pre-emptive but a significant majority of random BBO MBC users use it as slam try is an amazing discrepancy.

Yes definitely. Plenty of minimum holdings for p will make game so whatever long/short/help suit game try is, use it.

The first hand is the closest to being worth a 2NT opening. And I think I would, just to show the playing strength. The second is not as strong a hand as hand 1 but certainly wants to declare so I might chance 2NT anyway. The 3rd hand just isn't good enough for 2NT and is fairly lead-neutral so I open that 1♣.

My leads: xX xXx xXxx(+) hXx hxxX(+) Btw, I'm not exactly sure what I should be playing 2nd after I lead 2nd highest from bad suits. Any suggestions? (UDCA signals)

The singleton lead only works if pd has the ♣A because otherwise pd is never getting in. And if pd has the ♣A then the ruff can wait because opening leader has the trump ace for control. If either player is more likely to see the eventual danger of being squeezed in the red suits, it's opening leader. So perhaps it should be him leading one of them rather than partner switching to them?

Yes, someone please explain the need for a big club as opposed to 4th highest.

♠10 for me.

In my opinion, having a 6th team makes it so much more enjoyable for competitors and spectators alike. The time I played in the junior camrose (with only 5 teams), there was just way too much sitting out. It's an awful awful format. As for who the 6th team should be... my order of preference would be: 1. A foreign team (eg. French) 2. A second England team 3. The holders 4. Winners of JC I don't see what the problem is if it's mostly England that gets the 6th team because they have a much larger pool of stronger players. Much like the US get to field 2 teams for a world championship.

If there's a slam, I think it's likely to be in clubs more often than NT. So I might lean towards 4♣ rather than 4NT. But I'm definitely not converting 6♣ to 6NT regardless of what I bid first. (eg. x,Qxx,Kx,AKQxxxx)