shevek

That seems okay and easy enough to remember. DONT!

This is the auction: 1♣ - (1♠) - ? (Assume 1♠ natural) Our method is suit transfers here, so X = tko, not 1-suited 1NT = natural, non-forcing(!) a bit unusual 2♣ = 5+ ♦s, could be weakish, or GF 2-suiter 2♦ = 5+ ♥s 2♥ = GF no major, no stopper 2♠ = 5+ ♣s 2NT = balanced GF Hoping you can live with that. What should responder's 3-level bids be?

Multi 2♦ psyches are amusing. This one is well-known: 2♦ - (no) - 2♥/♠ - (no) No Opener is supposed to pass when responder's pass/correct hits his suit. It can be fun to be contrary, passing in your non-fit. Here is a distantly recalled example: [hv=pc=n&s=sak84htdkt742caj5&w=st6hkq9642dj6c972&n=sq9532ha73dq5cq43&e=sj7hj85da983ckt86&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=2d(weak%202M)p2s(p%2Fc)ppp]399|300[/hv] A modest 4 IMP gain. Pity they weren't vulnerable. Can't crime NS at all. I would smoothly pass as South, thinking I knew the layout.

[hv=pc=n&s=sak532ht92daq54c8&w=s8hj853dt62cakq62&n=sqj76h64dk873c954&e=st94hakq7dj9cjt73&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=pp1h1s4h]399|300[/hv] IMPs Under pressure, I failed the test by passing as North for -620. Would you? Nice auction by EW. Auctions at other tables allowed North in. Such as (1♣) - 1♠ - (X) - 3♠. Opening 1♥ is clearly right. Even so, (1♥) - 1♠ - (2♠) - 3♠, etc. Or North doubled a 3♠ splinter for the same +620. There's a lot to be said for the direct approach by our opponents. A few E-Ws found the save in 5♣ after a fit-showing 3♣ by West.

In our opinion, QP ask and DCB are nearly essential after a strong club and unlimited positive. Otherwise, relayer is often guessing about combined strength. No point in going to the trouble of getting pattern & strength, then giving up on locating honours. We play 16+ 1♣. QPs start at 5, kontrols at 2. Occasionally responder will give a positive with 4 QPs. We don't cater for that. We zoom a bit but it's complicated and maybe not worth it. Playing symmetric, 95%+ hands come out by 3♥. QP ask, then DCB has worked well for us. Our rules (not standard) - Stopping shows 0, or 2 with the ace (so 0 or 4+ QPs) - Switch to +ve cueing with singletons (Ignore stiff queens, count stiff K as 1 QP) - 2nd pass locates lower honours, so KJ, KQ, QJ. (But not AJ, so relayer won't confuse that with KQ) - If 0/2 shown, 2nd pass confirms 0 (unless can't be the case) then stop shows 2 only, next step = 3 (AKJ, AKQ, AQJ) - etc The 4D mild slam try has been good too (see earlier post) Our 11-15 openings start QPs at 6. Range is 6-10, since AAAK opens 1♣. With your 11-19 1♦, suggest you start at 7.

West opens 1♥ when South is dealer, not condoned. South meanly opens 1♣ and West bids 1♥. Does this have "the same or similar meaning"? Given an agreed normal range of a 1♥ overcall of 9-16, is that similar enough? (Of course, West would be fine to overcall 2♥ if South opens 1♠)

David, This is a bit tangential .... Our focus is on finding the right game with a 7-card major fit, or 8-card minor fit. I recall an Acolish idea I heard from you: 1♥ - 2♦ 2♥ - 3NT, shows 2 ♥s, to cater for opener having a 5-carder. With a stiff heart, responder bids another suit then 3NT to play regardless. This looks okay, though opener can't raise responder's second suit to the 4-level. We have similar chain breaks in relay auctions, when asker thinks that finding shape may not be enough to decide strain. Say responder shows a positive with a 6-card major. A break to 3NT is a choice of games, typically xx or stiff honour. This doesn't help much with your issue of a strong relayer seeking trump quality but helps a strong responder with the same doubts. Plus often 3NT is better with xx opposite Kxxxxx, or similar. Need a different approach with 5-carders. Comes up often when describer is balanced. After 1♣ - 2♣ (8+ balanced) we can stop in 2NT if no fit and a 24-count. Is that sensible? Opener can break with a 4-carder or a hand like this: ♠K65 ♥AJ965 ♦75 ♣AK8 Easy to see relay finding partner with 4-2-3-4 or similar. We have ways for responder to show some texture. As you know, the other tweak we have is a tweak of your 4♦ trump ask. This shows a hand needing "good" trumps in a suit the asker is about to disclose. For 4+ suits, "good" = 2 of top 3, (or maybe 3 of 5). For shorter suits, "good" = 1 of top 3. Had this recently: [hv=pc=n&w=sak76hkQ52da763cq&e=sha94dt84ckjt8532&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1cp2sp2np3np4dp4sp5cp6cppp]266|200[/hv] 3NT = 0-3-3-7 4♦ = bid 4♥ with any minimum, or max with no heart honour. 4♠ = max (base +2 SPs &/or +1 kontrols) ♥ honour 5♣ = raise with "good" trumps 6♣ = Hope KJT is enough.

As in the thread I started, we use first step = SP, 2nd = kontrols. Don't play end signal and the RKCs associated with that. Not because it's no good, rather because I was concerned that one of us would forget and pass RKC. Plus a bit messy. Anyway, we use a safer 4D, based on an idea devised by David Morgan. After shape - but not strength - is out, 4D non-step says "I am about to make a slam invite in some suit, needing extras including good trumps" Extras being defined as Base+2 SP &/or Base+1 kontrols. Good suits were Hx(x) or HHxx(x) where H = A/K/Q. This has worked very well. 4♥ would show min, or max with bad hearts, etc. Sort of natural DCB. 4NT = resurrection strength. If 4D non-step is available AFTER an SP ask, it says "raise my next bid with good trumps"

Stephen, notes said that 2nd pass picked up KJ, KQ, QJ but specifically not AJ. Jacks are such big cards in trumps. I was amused by a recent hand where they had the kitchen sink but ♠Kxx opposite ♠Qxxxx. Everyone except us steamed happily into 6♠

In our relay method, asker has the choice of control asks after shape is out. For us, first step = Slam Points (A=3, K=2, Q=1) second step = kontrols (A=2, K=1) Sometimes asker makes what turns out to be the wrong ask. Le's say you ask for Slam Points to check out 6♥ where you find out that opponents have 6 SPs, including ♥A. You have a stiff club opposite either ♣Axx or ♣KQx. Do you ou think "Damn. I should have asked for controls"? Maybe but your SP ask allowed you to pick up the esssential ♠Q. There is no time to do another lap to clarify the clubs. Do you think "A method that equates A with KQ is no good" and sign off in 5♥? Or do you shrug and bid 6♥ anyway? After all, 9C2 = 36, while 9C1 = 9. Does that really make ♣Axx four times as likely?

Does fast arrival apply in all game force auctions? Only those with a fit, or when you are about to show a fit? Or never? Say 1♣ = 16+ 1♣ - (3♠) - X - (no) ? Responder's double is takeout, clearly GF. Can be Thrnt, if you play that. I'm giving opener a 1-suiter with six ♦s. Which hands bid 4♦? Which hands bid 5♦? Is at sensible for 5♦ to show extras, hoping responder can take a punt? Let's say you bid 4♦ on a range of hands. What do responder's bids mean? 4♥ - offer to play with five ♥s? 4♠ - good diamond raise? Does it imply a spade control? 4NT - is this natural? (A good 3-4-1-5 or similar) 5♣ - natural I guess

2♥ as hearts & another is a poor method. Some pairs are seduced by a desire to have all 6 2-suiters covered. By the same token, 2NT = minors is a big loser, compromising 20-21 balanced and wrong-siding. Better is to have 2♦ as always weak. Gives responder more options, some sneaky. Also avoids wrong-siding and pre-empting that happen when 20-21 is thrown in. 2♥ with spades as well is poor. Too much for responder to cater for. These hands can usually wait then Michaels, or stretch a Rule of 20 opening. An opponent had this problem recently: 2♥ - ? ♠ KTxx ♥ Ax ♦Qxxxx ♣Ax He should have passed but dreamed of 4♠ or at least more matchpoints if opener had majors. So he tried 2♠ p/c, turning a plus into a minus when opener had clubs.

4♦ singleton ask is cute. Why shouldn't partner have a stiff minor? There is a case for 4♦ being pass/correct. After all, what is responder supposed to do with ♠KQJxx ♥AKxxx ♦x ♣xx ?

To me, there is a world of difference between (1♠) - no - (1NT) - no - (2♠) - ? and (1♣) - no - (1NT) - no - (2♣) - ? In the first, a 1-4-4-4 9-count would be unwise to double 2♠, even if it is takeout by agreement. However, a 4-4-4-1 9-count would be loathe to sell out to 2♣ in the second auction. Here, the 2♣ rebid will nearly always have hit a fit, plus responder has denied a major.

What do all these final actions mean? Assume opponents are playing SAYC, better minor. Is rank of the suits a swing factor? (1♣) - no - (1NT) - no - (no) - X (1♣) - no - (1NT) - no - (no) - 2♣ Would it change if opponents were playing a 2+ 1♣? (1♦) - no - (1NT) - no - (no) - X (1♦) - no - (1NT) - no - (no) - 2♦ (1♥) - no - (1NT) - no - (no) - X (1♠) - no - (1NT) - no - (no) - X (1♣) - no - (1NT) - no - (2♣) - X (1♦) - no - (1NT) - no - (2♦) - X (1♥) - no - (1NT) - no - (2♥) - X (1♠) - no - (1NT) - no - (2♠) - X

I clicked on the system. Here are some thughts. You suggest 1♥-2♥ is "bad" because it shows an 8-card fit and limited values. Okay but the precise nature of the opening gives responder extra options, largely unavailable to Standard bidders. For instance, passing 1♥ on a featureless 8-count, when opponents are likely to misjudge their assets. Also raising on a doubleton to the likely 5-2 fit on some hands, knowing that a limited opener won't get carried away. Likewise, mixing heavy and light raises, forcing the opponents to guess. Your big clubs seems to be 15-17 bal or 17+ unbal. This is unusual. For most methods, the unbalanced hands can be the weaker ones because playing strength can compensate for a lack of court cards. Common these days is 14-16 NT, so 1♣ is 17+ bal or 16+ unbal. If you "progress" to relay, you will find 5-card majors don't sit well with a strong club system. That's why Blue Club & Moscito are steps up from Danielson's Precision.

Is that right? The prior claim is now void, so surely I can start finessing. It's the defenders who should avoid playing on. Also, my particular defenders may put up sub-standard defence, even if they have seen my cards. Some years ago, an opponent played 6♠, finding QJxx behind AKT9x in a 5-4 fit. He cashed ♠A and conceded one off. My partner said "play on". (We didn't know any better) Declarer stumbled into the trump endplay for +1430.

New Laws I make one of my usual shoddy claims, tabling my cards, saying "They're all good" West suggests that play should continue. We all shrug and agree. Can I pick up my cards? 68D does not say.

Thanks for that. I guess opening most balanced 11-counts woudn't change it much. Choosing 14-16 for 1NT means opening 11-13 bal and accepting the transfer with tha, rebidding 1NT with 17-19.

I'm sure many have worked this out. Please save me the grind ... This is the (common enough) system 1NT = 14-16, includes ALL 5332 (okay to ignore the 2254 hands for odds) 1D = 4+ unbalanced. Uusually 5+, could be 4+1-4-4. Or is that a 1C opening? 1C = 4+ clubs unbalanced, or 11-13/17-19 balanced, no 5cM, so 3-3-5-2 etc What are the odds of various expected lengths for the 1C opening? I'm assuming that 2 or 3 card suits are common enough to make (1C) 2C better as natural, rather than Michaels. Is that the common view? Switching sides, how do you defend against this? Common is double as "I would have doubled a natural 1C or 1D opening" Or should X & 1D both be artificial, Aspro-style? Going further, what do advancer's club bids mean? Such as (1C*) 1H (no) 2C Is this some sort of cue, usually a decent heart raise? Or is natural & forcing? If so, any new suit by advancer is presumably forcing. Does the lack of a clear cuebid make the case for transfer advances? TIA

Yes, silly me. Dummy did not change the played card. Doh!

[hv=pc=n&s=sh86da986543ca854&w=skqj53h32dk7ckqjt&n=s6haqt975dqtc7632&e=sat98742hkj4dj2c9&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=3s4d6s7ddppp]399|300[/hv] From "Swings and Arrows" The Hog plays 7♦x on ♣K lead. He wins and leads ♥6, which West ruffs with ♦7-♥5-♥4. East asks "Having no hearts?" and the trick is replayed: ♥6-2-5-4. Declarer ends up with 13 tricks because West has to under-ruff the third heart. Law 62C.2 says "After a non-offender so withdraws a card, the player of the offending side next in rotation may withdraw his played card, which becomes a penalty card if the player is a defender ..." I assumed this applies to subsequent tricks, that East was allowed to to win ♥J then be obliged to return ♥4. Am I wrong here? I am guessing this is one of the Laws that was changed. When?

Thanks for that. Way in the past I learned that a vulnerable 2♥/♠ with seven was acceptable only with 7222 and soft values. Something like KQTxxxx ♥Qx ♦xx ♣xx I may have to adjust that thinking.

[hv=pc=n&s=s8hajt942dt74cj83&w=s7h873dkqj985cq94&n=skqj3hkq6dacak762&e=sat96542h5d632ct5&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=3spp]399|300[/hv] Butler IMPs. 1 table of 9 reached 6♥. That was against us because I passed as East. What do you think of that? This allowed South to open 2♥. North applied Blackwood over 3♦. 1430 At other tables, East usually opened 3♠, passed around to North, who usually bid 3NT. South either passed this, or transferred to 4♥ and played there. Would you have done better as N-S?

Here's a common one. The players concerned are among the better ones at our club but that is not saying much. There is an auction involving a break in tempo. Say South gives UI and North acts. EW call you when North acts and you direct the auction to proceed, saying "Call me back if you think you may have been damaged" So they bid and play out the hand in North's contract of 4S for 2 off. You look at the hand record and see that EW could have made 4H and - in your opinion - North does not have a clear bid of 4S. At the end of the play, you walk casually past the table but they have simply entered the score and gone onto the next board. Do you do anything? One view is that players who know enough to call the director over a BIT should be able to work out who could make what. And if they can't, they can ask you to work it out. Is that right, or should the director be more proactive?