Yzerman

Well in a few million words you worked out the solution. There are only a few hands that you CAN come up with 800 and you described the two of them. So you just need to find a defense that caters to both. Indeed partners hand was; AQxxxxx x Qx Axx The key is; a) You cant uppercut from your side when p has stiff Q B) You cant promote from his side when p has stiff Q Doubleton Q is not a problem, only stiff Q and Bens defense as described catered to both stiff Q and double Q. On this hand you could have cashed hearts then play spades and hope to overruff dummy but this does not work when partner has 7 spades and stiff Q. As challenging a problem this is from your perspective, imagine the pressure (and the anxiety from not getting his immediate H ruff) that partner is feeling!

1. P-(2S)-X-(P)-2N Lebensohl 2. P-(2S)-P-(P)-2N Minors (can be C+H or D+H if hand is very shapely) 3. P-(2S)-P-(P)-X-(P)-2N Natural 4. 1N-(P)-2C-(2H)-P-(P)-2N Natural 5. (given in another thread 1N-(P)-P-(2S)-P-(P)-2N Natural 6. 1N-(P)-2C-(P)-2H-(2S)-2N Scrambling "ish" 7. P-(1H)-P-(2H)-P-(P)-2N Minors 8. P-(1S)-P-(2S)-2N (Minors or weak 2 two suiter, H+C D+C) 9. (1S)-P-(2C)-2N 2C = game force 10. (1C)-P-(1S)-X-(2S)-2N Good-Bad relay 11. (1S)-P-(2S)-X-(P)-2N Good-bad relay 12. P-(1S)-P-(2S)-X-(P)-2N Minors

Here is a very neat defensive problem that occured in a sectional about a year ago. I really wish I could post these as two separate topics because it requires both defenders to make nice plays. MP N/S Vul Dlr S Your hand is the bottom hand and the dummy is shown on your right. You are vul, opps are not. Auction N.....E.....S......W ..............1H....2D 2S...4D...4H....5D X (all pass) ..............xx ..............xx ..............xxxx ..............KQ10xx Kx AKxxxxx Jx xx Partner leads a middle heart. Plan the defense!

Who to blame? These are difficult hands and bridge is a partnership game and the PARTNERSHIP is to blame. Problem (a) - Tough hand. These types of hands are a matter of getting the best minus score. Only comments on this hand is that after a 2/1 in the club suit, you are living on the edge by bidding 2H and cooperating with 3C. This hand type, you need to create plan for your bidding and stick with it, having bid 2C as game force you did not bid 2C with the intention of playing 3NT so I would avoid NT at all cost. Having said that, the South hand should also try and avoid NT as well, tricks will be more difficult to come on this misfit in NT than in a suit contract. Hence blame about equal - the judgement used both in BIDDING and ALLOWING TO PLAY 3N are questionable calls so blame is relatively equal. Problem (B) - Once again I think blame is about equal. The 2D bid sets the table for the future fiasco. If I am not able to bid 2S with this hand to show longer spades and a shorter suit (typically a minor) than I am "system fixed" and would question bidding 2D. Having said that, it is obvious from N perspective that suits are D + S, and despite having fitting cards I think there the risk of bidding and it being wrong heavily outweighs the reward for bidding.

I personally dont think that lebensohl applies in balancing seat. You have forgone your opportunity to bid at your first available opportunity hence all bids are natural and non-forcing constructive (there are some NT openers that partner may bid 3N with). Double should be takeout and everything else natural. ** I qualify this with the NT opener is allowed to make a takeout double of the opps suit if he has the right texture. **

Most people know me would probably guess my favorite convention. Weak NT As a novice player I never fully understood the utility of weak NT however having played them pretty much exclusively for 2 years now, I believe they are superior. I will leave out all the details unless/until someone would like to debate or discuss the subject.

I would pass. Partner is very likely to have 2 diamonds on the bidding and opted for 1NT instead of a takeout double. If this gets passed around to partner, he would double with the appropriate hand (for takeout). 2D should NEVER be for penalty in this auction for making low level penalty doubles of minors is a losing option (although you should agree upon these types of auctions).

I agree with Richard in that you cant play bridge as a game of "absolutes", you must be flexible. These are not easy auctions, however the best approach is to envision a few auctions that COULD actually happen and how you would handle your rebids. There are many factors; position in which to open, if open 1M how comfortable would you be if partner took preference to your major, what methods are available. Remember when you are dealt a freak hand, there is a high probability that others at the table have a shape hand hence these auctions tend to become competitive and this must enter the equation. Another general theory is; "Aggresive bidders will succeed more often than timid bidders". So applying that principle I would tend to overbid (e.g. open minor) these hands upon a marginal decision.

A lot of discussion has come up recently regarding this auction. I believe the majority of the world does not play this game forcing, but to my surprise some VERY good players have cited that they play this. My preference is that this auction is NOT game forcing but promises a second bid. The main reason in which this should not be forcing to game is that (a) you have no 1NT forcing option available after 1D openers, and (;) OBVIOUS reasons, you have club suit and nothing in the majors (or little in the majors). Here is a real hand from a regional a few years ago in which our team lost a KO event; Your hand: Ax xx Qx K10xxxxx Our teammate, both VERY established players (not that this is measure of skill, they both have > 5000 MP, hence they have much experience), decided that this hand was not worthy of a 2C response (the club suit was lacking in intermediates) and bid 1NT (citing that 2C is "game force unless suit rebid" BUT did not like the suit quality for 2C-3C). Auction proceeded 1D-1N-3N (you can also argue 2N instead of 3N); Other hand; Kxx Axx AKJx Axx Needless to say, 3N is not a very effective contract at imps. But this hand would be an absolute nightmare if you play 2C as game forcing. How about some arguments (a) for and (:) against this.

I am of the school that you describe offensive hands with shape before hands loaded with hcp with special attention given to minor suit reverses. You can group these hands into three categories; (a) weak distributional minor hands, (B) intermediate distributional minor hands, and © strong distributional minor hands. Cases (a) and (B) take care of themselves, however the argument in this discussion relates to auction ©. ** Here is an example of reversing (1C-2D) with Intermediate minor suit hand and the consequences; First of all there is the argument for when responder has a good hand. You pick up the following hand (this is just one example in a field of thousands ming you); Axx Axxx QJx Kxx Lets say your partner opens 1C and you respond 1H, now and partner rebids 2D. Now given that you are playing lebensohl you have two options available (you can make argument for both); 3C - Describes a known 8+ card fit and forward going 2N - Asking further description The hand that you had posed earlier; A xx Aktxx qjxxx I am not sure you can EVER recover in this auction now regardless of how the auction proceeds for the pattern has been totally misdescribed and you will undoubtedly land in a bad slam. Another example is when partner has a BAD hand and you open the above hand 1C. After 1C-1H-2D-2N (leb) you have the choice of losing options; a) Bid 3D and force auction to 4C B) Bid 3C and TOTALLY destroy the description of this hand and play a 52 or 62 club fit when 53 diamond fit available. The moral of the story is that in the long run when you make phony 1C-2D reverse with the intermediate hand you are asking for trouble. Sure there will be some hands that is effective for, however the majority of the hands partner will not be very happy with the bidding. ** Frequency is your favor when you open 1D-2C, you will MORE OFTEN get to a reasonable contract than bidding 1C-2D. So how to best bid intermediate hands? This is a matter of partnership agreements and style. My general approach (which is consistent with the majority) is to bid the intermediate hand equivalent to the weak hand (i.e. 1D-2C). - If partner cant bid over 2C and you have the intermediate hand, trust me that you are in a nice place. - If partner makes a simple preference to 2D you have a very natural bid of 3C in which implies extra values (you would not dare bid 3C with the weak 5/5 hand). - If partner can manage to do is bid 3C or 3D becomes a problem. You must have faith in your partner that he/she will NOT overbid "soft" major cards and will overbid fitting minor cards when a fit is established. This once again boils down to JUDGEMENT and trust in partner. If partner bids 3C or 3D then its best to give up on NT a possible contract however you have very natural invites now (3C-4C and 3D-4D).

I wanted to start a new thread completely isolating this topic for discussion for this has been touched upon in other threads. A few comments and questions I pose for this discussion. First of all here is the scenario - You are playing with a NEW partner and have agreed upon 2/1 as system. 1) What is the standard approach for openers rebid after a forcing NT? 2) What is the standard approach for responders rebid after an initial 1NT bid? My understanding of the "standard"; 1a) Openers rebid of 2m after 1NT require => 3 cards (ONLY exception is 4522 if not playing Flannery). Both 2c and 2d rebid MAY ONLY CONTAIN 3 of that specific suit. 1b) Opener rebid of 2M is minimum with => 6 cards AND does NOT deny 4 card minor holding HOWEVER the major suit is playable opposite a singleton and in comparison the repeat of the major is more important than introducing the minor. 1c) Opener rebid of 2N promises 18-19 balanced and in the case of opening 1S this denies 4 hearts but may contain 5242 or 5224 if the minor is of poor quality. 1d) Opener rebid of 2x THEN 2NT describes 15+ to 17. 1e) Opener rebid of 3N promise minimum of AKQxxx in spade suit and 7 1/2 tricks if minimal hcp (6 spades, side ace and side king) and in general a balanced hand. 1f) Jump shifts are FORCING TO GAME with the ability to escape into 4m ONLY under dire circumstances. * Jump shifts are not only a descritption of hcp and playing strength, JUMP SHIFTS ALSO PROMISE VERY GOOD SUITS. 1g) Rebids of 3M describe an invitational hand (obviously) and in general require some "help" in the spade suit and denies a good 4+ card side suit. 1h) Rebids of 4x (not 4c or 4d) are self sufficient splinters in which hand can play opposite a void in the major but flawed for a 2C opener. 1i) Rebids of 4M are 4-4/12 loser hands with lots of offensive potential and are lacking in side suit controls (hence the responder can bid on with a sufficient combination of aces and/or kings). ****************************************** 2a) Under NO circumstance is responder to PASS 2m rebid by opener with 2 of the major and 4 of the minor. 2b) 2N rebid after any rebid by opener is invitational hand of some sort (may contain in certain hands 3 of the major - most likely 3 small). 2c) Direct raise of 2m to 3m require decent values and 5 pieces IF only 2 of major and under may contain 4 GOOD pieces IF <= 1 of major. 2d) PASS is only allowed under extreme circumstances. Since opener can still have a VERY good hand, pass would be defines as a minimum hand (~7/8 hcp with minor fit, 5 pieces if 2 of major or 4 pieces if <= 1 or major). IF GOOD HOLDING IN THAT MINOR (AQJXX or AQxxx with side card then rebid is MANDATORY whether it is 2M or 3m). 3e) 3N - After 2x response by opener, 3N would describe a hand not good enough for 2/1 but too good for invite. 3f) 3M - After 2x response by opener, 3M is 3 card limit raise (obviously). 3g) 4M - He,He ... I would assume this is mixed 4 or 5 card trump raise (not good enough for limit raise but too good to NOT bid game, typically would have a defensive value). This is unlikely bid, but I think worthy of discussion as to what people would assume standard. 3h) After jump shift by opener; i) Direct 4 level bids are weakest bids can make (direct minor suit raise or jump to 4M). ii) 3NT = descriptive, slam improbable. iii) Introduce new suit is either (a) suit or (B) advance cue-bid in support of one of partners suit. The meaning of the bid will be further defined after next bid. iii) 4NT would be BW for that minor. iv) 3M then 4NT would be BW for the major. * Now this is what I would personally consider the standard. After some feedback regarding standard I will post some of my personal preferences on treatment. I would additionally find it valuable if other people could post some of their preferences or arguments to my understanding of "standard".

In reference to the problem of opening 1NT with a 5 card major, I have found a fairly effective approach that works (for me). The approach is very simple, apply the following "test" to your major suit; * Upon a 1NT forcing auction, would you feel comfortable playing 2 of that major IF partner takes a preference to your major holding two small (xx). That is the generalized approach that I take. There are some additional personal limits that I abide by but they are perhaps a little extreme and I do not offer this as advice but rather my "theory". My minimum requirements for 1M are A10xxx, K108xx, Q109xx. Now obviously that rule is very "fuzzy" depending on hand pattern, type, and texture but balanced hands in general follow that logic. In reference to your original question regarding of whether 1M-2m-2M promises a 6th trump. First of all, I admit that I not a well read bridge player, in fact I have NEVER read a bridge book in my life so I cant reference Hardy, Lawerance or others. But lets assume that you are in a NEW partnership and this is an UNDISCUSSED topic and you encounter this auction (this is NOT a problem in an established partnership, you WILL have this auction ironed out). What would the concensus among "experts" agree that the standard is? Given answer to previous question what would you rebid? I am not sure if there is a correct answer, however in general I think you can apply the following logic; * USE GOOD JUDGEMENT * If the hand looks like NT, then bid NT. If the hand looks suit oriented default on bidding NT at your first available opportunity. That would be my approach in a NEW partnership with no agreements. Now I will lend some more of my personal preferences to 2/1 bidding in general (in the event that any cares!). Some of the rules apply to the responder to make my life easier as opener. Here are my preferences in 2/1 auctions; a) Rebid NT when the hand looks NT "ish" or when there is an OBVIOUS advantage to playing NT from your side of table. B) Application of picture bidding (1M-2m-2M-4M). Promise GOOD minor, GOOD trumps and no controls in unbids. Hence by negative inference 1M-2m-2M-3M is NOT the above. c) Upon 1M-2m-2M auctions, responder is NEVER, EVER to raise the major on xxx. Hence by negative inference 1M-2m-2M-"anything but 3M" DENIES HONOR-XX IN MAJOR (honor including the 10). d) Given rule ©, I now like to use 2NT as a fact finding or temperizing bid asking for further description of the openers hand. When the above logic is applied, then you have a lot of positive and negative bidding inferences (and facts) to base the remainder of what will hopefully be a constructive auction. * BUT ONCE AGAIN, SYSTEMS, AND AGREEMENTS ARE ONLY AS GOOD AS THE BIDDING JUDGEMENT APPLIED IN GENERAL. *

The following hand was played on BBO with 4 players as a host of kibitzers watched. All parties, players and kibitzers, I have much respect for and all very capable. The following deal was topic of much discussion. Please read and make arguments for or against my analysis. Dealer North Vul N/S ................North ................J6 ................876 ................A98 ................AQJ85 West.......................East Q92.........................1073 A4...........................KJ10952 QJ32........................10 10943......................K72 ................South ................AK754 ................Q3 ................K7654 ................6 N E S W 1C 2H 2S P 3S P P P Opening lead is the HA from West. West won the first trick and continued hearts to East King. East plays the J of hearts and now hand gets interesting. South made a very nice play (and the only play to give him play for 9 tricks) and ruffed with the SK. Now I will describe to you the remainder of play at table before presenting my analysis. Actual Play West discard club. South play a spade to the Jack in dummy winning then spade to the Ace. Declarer plays a diamond to dummy and a diamond off, and West ruffs this trick (immaterial play). West then play another heart and East scores the SQ and a natural diamond trick for down 1 (1S, 2H, 1D, 1D ruff). My argument My argument is that hand can be made double dummy IF West discards a minor suit card at trick 3 (at table East discard club). Hence, the ONLY winning defense (in my analysis) in which there is NO double dummy play to make contract is that East must underruff the SK. The following are the double dummy play line for a club discard (diamond discard is obviously a losing play); Upon a low club discard by West, declarer plays as he did, a spade toward dummy. West can win this trick or duck, lets assume he wins the trick. And West must exit. (a) Upon a spade exit, declarer cashes CA and takes ruffing finesse against the K (East best to cover this). (B) Upon a diamond exit (this is best defense), win the diamond in hand cross to dummy with trump and then take your ruffing finesse for the same end position. © Upon a club exit, now unblock the trump Jack and take your ruffing finesse. Each of these play lines upon a club discard @ trick 2 the club suit will come in for 4 tricks. All of these play lines can be generalized as a Dummy Reversal. Now, this is where I would like to see if anyone can find double dummy play to make this hand upon an underruff @ trick 3. The key to this hand (imho) is the blockage in the diamond suit as the suit can be played for 1 loser but declarer must tap his hand twice to see the long diamond and does not have enough trump (3 rounds to exhaust defenders trump, one tap @ trick 3, and one tap to return to hand after picking up the diamond suit). Lets look @ the minor suits in isolation after an underruff (declarer MUST play spade to the Jack at trick 4) and assume he wins this trick (best defense) and plays a club (best defense), @ this point in the hand is the crucial point in which declarer must decide whether to play on diamonds or clubs, here is the position; ................North ................J ................ ................A98 ................QJ85 West.......................East 9.............................107 ...............................1095 QJ32........................10 943..........................K7 ................South ................A75 ................ ................K7654 ................ Once again, this is the position @ trick 5. Defense has already scored 3 tricks (two hearts and the SQ). Additionally, this is best defense (imho) to this point. Your play is to play off dummy (North) and play to make! I would appreciate ANY feedback. Regards, Mike