shevek

No opposing bidding. What is 2♦ - 2♥ 2♠ - 2NT? 2♦ = weak 2 in a major, 2♥ = pass/correct

thx David

Just clarifying. I open 1NT and it goes, say 1NT - (2♥) - no - (no) no Declarer volunteers that 2♥ should have been alerted. Although the auction has ended, the auction PERIOD hasn't, so I can have my pass back. However, partner can't have his pass back since I've subsequently called. Is that right?

MUD was invented by Les Longhurst of Sydney in 1932. He played for Australia with Klinger in the 60s, died a few years ago aged about 97

Okay, so passing a splinter is a thinking error. That's fine. What of the player who opens 1♦ with 6 spades? Maybe he was thinking of a different hand, or his mental faculties are starting to fade. Typically it's not a misgrab of the bidding card. He places 1♦, maybe orders a cappuccino. If he's lucky he looks at his hand then the 1♦ card and says "Oops". What exactly should the director do and say? Might your approach be different if he'd pulled the 1♥ card? Now the chances of misgrab are higher, though that is irrelevant in many places. Perhaps his mind was saying "transfer". Perhaps he plays transfer openings with other partners! How deep is the director expected to delve? Nick

A guy told me that he'd read somewhere that someone (get the picture) did a study of Blue Team slams over some extended period (?) in World Championships (?) and worked out that that they'd have scored more IMPs if they'd bid no slams, even after taking a hit on the flat frigid ones. Anyone know?

A player opens 1♥, uncontested auction. Partner bids 4♦ splinter and our hero tanks for a bit. Eventually he decides his hand is not worth a slam try so he decides to "sign off". Unfortunately, a synaptic malfunction sees him signing off by placing the green card in front of him. He realises pretty soon, calls you and says something like "I had a brain snap. Obviously I never intended 4♦ to be the final contract ..." Punters hope this qualifies as inadvertant. Is it? If it isn't, what words should the director use to distinguish this action from that of the guy who unintentionally opens 1♥ with a singleton heart and six diamonds? TIA

Thanks all. Modern players seem to miss out on windfall doubles bacause they are concerned that partner will be on a different wavelength. I think (a) is even more useful for penalty these days, when they could be 11+5 HCP. (b) for tko makes sense since partner is still there to protect. On the other hand (1♠) - no - (1NT*) - no (2♠) - X seems different because you court the 3-level on a non-fit auction if X is weak tko. Can't live with treating majors and minors differently so we tend to pass reluctantly.

Say it goes (no opposing bidding) 1♠ - 2♠ 2N - 3♣ 3♦ You are opener. You are pretty sure that your 2NT is the start of a short suit trial, singleton somewhere. Partner doesn't alert. Perhaps she has forgotten, or is unsure; or you are wrong. Then 3♣ seems like a hedge. In your mind, this asks for your singleton so it looks like partner is catering for both options. Are you now supposed to alert 3♣? Of course partner now has UI but it seems like she was on the right track anyway. Assuming you alert, can partner now read your 3♦ as showing a stiff diamond? Thanks

Been asked before, maybe even by me. I forget. These days, what is (1♦) - no - (1N) - no (no) - X ? Assume IMPs if it makes a difference. Does doubler have ♠Kxxx ♥Kxxx ♦x ♣Kxxx or something like ♠Kxxx ♥Ax ♦KQJx ♣JTxx In the same vein, what is (1♦) - no - (1N) - no (2♦) - X ? Weak takeout or penalty suggestion?

[hv=pc=n&e=sq853h7dj8cjt6532&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1Hp]133|200[/hv]

I've never been comfortable with that style, whereby a single raise of a likely 4-card major denies 4 trumps. In the early days of Moscito, this was making a necessity of convention. In 1985, 1♠ showed 4+♠s and denied 4♥s. In response, 1NT was 11+ relay. Thus a responding hand like ♠Jxx ♥Qx ♦Axxx ♣Qxxx raised to 2♠ quite happily, since 1NT was out and he knew the opponents had 8+♥s. In those days 1♥ & 1♠ were 4-card suits 53% of the time. That example was clear enough but Paul Marston also did it on less suitable hands, reaping a benefit when the opponents stepped in, and also when they were afraid to ... However, auto 3-card raises rate to lose long term in a 2-handed game and opponents are starting to judge these auctions better. Whatever the reason, Marston started to move some of the 4-carders out of 1M. These days, 11-12 flat opens 1NT, 4-6 hands with long minor show the minor first & there is no denied major. (4-5 hands show long hearts, 5-4 hands show long spades) With these changes, the chance of 1♥ (=♠s) being a 4-carder are around 40%. That makes a 3-card raise more attractive. Certainly taking out 11-12 flat avoids some silly -300s. However, it still feels wrong at times to routinely bid beyond the TNT. 4333s with 4 trumps should pretend they have 3. I also tend to stay low on hands with 4+ in the other major. So ♠Qxx ♥KTxx ♦Qx ♣JTxx feels like a 1NT response to 1♥ (=♠s) (Or in our case, 1♦ = ♠s, not ♥s) Of course you don't want to stretch this too far. If a raise shows 3 or 4, neither will be able to diagnose a 9-card fit and push to the 3-level. I like a bit of flexibility. For us, a jump major raise shows a shapely raise to 2M. That's any hand with 5 trumps, or 4 chunky ones, or 4 and a bit of shape. (That might simply mean a doubleton in opener's denied major. Yes, we still play that way) It's true that Standard & Precision have an advantage whenever they have a 5-3 major fit but the gain is small. With methods that open 4-card majors, the gain is in finding the 4-4 fit faster, hitting the 3-level quickly with the 4-5 fit, plus messing with the opponents' TNT assumptions.

Gladiatorish, has merit. Problem hands with standard methods include responder's unbalanced invite with a 5cM. We sometimes end up transferring then 2NT, passed out for -50 when RHO meanly leads our singleton.

Maybe others felt 1-3-8-1 was too extreme. Nearly always 7 cards. If 8, then 8221. I believe most still play 4♦ as "show a singleton" but pass/correct 4♦ has merit.

Say we want to play a strong club system in America, in which 1♣ = 15+ 1♦ = 4+♠s 1♥ = 4+♥s, denies 4♠s 1♠ = 5+♠s 1NT = 11-14 no major 2♣/♦ = natural, no major as suggested by some. Of course you can't relay over 1♦/♥/♠ but that's another issue. Now throw a small number of the shapely hands with 7 diamonds in 1♦. This is bad because you will have to rip partner's raise but playable. Maybe add a specific hand with 3 spades, say 3-1-5+4. Will this pass as a catch all? At the table, you will carefully explain it as "10-14, often with 4 spades, denies 4 hearts"

We've all had this. Local duplicate, 3 cards to go, someone notices a defender with 4 cards. 67B1 says "the director establishes which trick is defective" This can be a nightmare. Maybe declarer has been running dummy's suit and one defender has been a bit off the pace. You can't tell them to play it out first, have to go back trick by trick. However this entails turning over quitted tricks, maybe heaps of them. Even then, there may be no way to decide which trick is the dud. Any tips to handle this? So you eventually work out which trick is problem, then have to tell the defender he has revoked. That seems a bit mean.

[hv=pc=n&w=skqt865h9da53c974&e=sa73ht86dkj974ct6]266|100[/hv] Well I bid 4♠ which is almost irresistible. The diamond finesse lost but spades were 3-1 so it was all good. Agreed that partner c/should have bid 4♠ first time to avoid the last guess but that's not the point. There are hands - with more defence - where East has no idea what makes and needs to consult. If that's a style with merit, East has to pass 3♥ with ♠Axx ♥KJTx ♦xxx ♣xxx PS "TNT" from Payne & Amsbury's 1981 TNT & competitive bidding.

[hv=pc=n&w=sa85hkjdkqt52ckj2&e=sq9haq652d87cq986]266|100[/hv] With 1♣ 16+ and East a passed hand, we bid: 1♣ - 1♠ (hearts, 8-10) 1N - 2♦ (clubs, 5+ hearts) 2♥ - 3♣ (2-5-2-4) 1N & 2♥ were shape asks. After a non-productive tank I bid 4♥. Didn't fancy 3NT from my side. As it happens, a spade lead shoots 3NT/W while 4♥ is cold. Over 3♣, I have 3♦ to ask for SPs, 3♥ for kontrols. 3♠ undefined .... I tend to give partner a typical minimum with points in the long suits. No fun of course when the hand is Kx, xxxxx, Ax, Qxxx. What are the principles here, other that the Hamman rule? It retrospect, 2NT natural over 2♦ is better but maybe describer will bid 3NT with any 2-5-2-4. Is that right??

this is more or less what we play in America ....ACBL & EBU Scamp.zipAmScamp summary.zip

Say it's IMPs, nil vul It goes 2♠ - (3♥) - 3♠ 2♠ classical weak. Double is penalties. What is 3♠? Is it a) "Pass whatever you have. I think the TNT is about 17. I know what to do if they bid 4♥." OR b) "Bid 4♠ with a max. What else do you expect me to do with an invite?" OR c) "I don't mind if you save over 4♥ with high ODR."

Hearts are trumps. A Diamond is led, declarer has one. Declarer pitches a spade on the first diamond then trumps the next one. Plays on ... 1 or 2?

Yes, hands like this - plus the prospect of -1100 vs -430 - persuaded us that switching to strong club at vul vs not is correct. However, we don't do that. We are already treading a fine line with adminstrators & don't want to irritate opponents by poking a different system card under their noses every fourth board. Pushing the fert high causes equal hassles for both sides and frees space for 7-12 hands. 1♣ with hearts allows 2 relays for accurate invites, hence the wider range is fine. 1♥ as bal no major allows 1♥ - 1♠ - 1NT as minimum, etc.

When in America, we play 1NT as 12-14 balanced, 5cM ok. 1♣ = 15+ any. Full relay allowed over both these. We to give up on Garbage Stayman 1NT - 2♣R 2♦ = no major 2♥ = 4 or 5♥s 2♠ = 4 spades 2N = 5♠s, min so passable 3♣ = 5♥s, max, then 2-5-3-3 / 3-5-2-3 / 3-5-3-2 3♦+ = 5♠s, max resolving so 3♦ = 5-2-3-3, 3♥ = 5-3-2-3, 3♠/NT = 5-3-3-2 2♦ - 2♥R 2♠ = 5♦s, then 2-3-5-3 / 3-2-5-3 / 3-3-5-2 / 2-2-5-4 2N = 5♣s, then 2-3-3-5 / 3-2-3-5 / 3-3-2-5 / 2-2-4-5 3♣ = 2-3-4-4 3♦ = 3-2-4-4 3♥ = 3-3-4-3 3♠ = 3-3-3-4 2♥ - 2♠R 2N = 5♥s min, then 2-5-3-3 / 3-5-2-3 / 3-5-3-2 3♣ = ♥s & ♠s, then 4-4-2-3 4-4-3-2 3♦ = ♥s & ♦s, then 2-4-4-3 / 3-4-4-2 3♥ = 2-4-3-4 3♠ = 3-4-2-4 3N = 3-4-3-3 2♠ - 3♣R (2NT is natural invite) 3♦ = ♠s & ♦s, then 4-2-4-3 / 4-3-4-2 3♥ = 4-2-3-4 3♠ = 4-3-2-4 3N = 4-3-3-3 After shape out, Step is SP(3-2-1) ask, starting at 7. Step +1 for kontrols(2-1) starting at 3. Then DCB

Actual method is pass = 13+ any, 1♣ = hearts, 7-12 1♦ = spades, 7-12 1♥ = 7-12 bal, no major 1♠ = 0-7 any 1NT = diamonds, 7-12 2♣ = clubs, 7-12 thought that info might be distracting

[hv=pc=n&w=skjt84hak97da95c6&e=sa96hj8653d8c9843&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=1c3dppp]266|200|[/hv] 1♣ = 13+ any If East doubles, is that GF in your style? West has an interesting hand. 3♠ might find partner with 1-5-2-5 on a very bad day. Double is very unlikely to fetch 5♣. After X - 4♣, West would still like to reach the right major game. How about 4♥ = 4-5 majors, 4♦ = this, 5-4 the other way. This assumes a strong 1-suited hand would bid 4♥ directly.