shevek

Yes! Beat me to it.

Too many trumps ... While it looks right right to pitch a club, on the actual you have to ruff in, to shorten your trumps. [hv=pc=n&s=s6hat875dj62ck865&w=sk532h3dkt73cj943&n=sqjt874h6dq4cqt72&e=sa9hkqj942da985ca&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=2s4hppp]399|300[/hv] If declarer is 2-6-4-1 as in this layout, ruffing in does not give declarer a useful pitch. You make your three natural trump tricks plus a diamond at the end. If you pitch a club instead, declarer ruffs two clubs then plays ♦A-another, to win the last two tricks with ♥J-9 for +420. If declarer is 2-6-3-2, you are safe whether you ruff in or not, assuming partner has the ♦Q.

[hv=pc=n&s=s6hat875dj62ck865&w=sk532h3dkt73cj943&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=2s4hppp]266|200[/hv] Matchpoints. You can double 4♥ if you wish. You lead ♠6 - 2 - 10 - A. You duck declarer's ♥K, then win ♥A next time as partner pitches ♠4. Figuring that shows good clubs, you switch to ♣5 - 9 - 10 - A. Declarer now leads ♠9. And you?

The full hand: [hv=pc=n&s=sajt75ha732dtcat2&w=sqhq4daq983cqj964&n=s9832ht986d642c85&e=sk64hkj5dkj75ck73&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1s2dp3nppp]399|300[/hv] So has to be a major ace, either will do. ♠A looks better, since you can switch if it looks bad. Easy if partner is allowed to bid 3♠ with that, not my style.

The full hand: [hv=pc=n&s=sa8h642dqjt3ca962&w=sj6hajt3dak98ct83&n=sk5hkq875d764ckq7&e=sqt97432h9d52cj54&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1d1h3s]399|300[/hv] So 4♥ is worst, -500, and 3NT gets a lucky +600. Pass is 100. Some partners will find 3NT if you double. Pd should have a good hand to bid 1♥ over 1♦ at IMPs so it looks right to act. Hope you guessed right.

[hv=pc=n&s=sa8h642dqjt3ca962&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1d1h3s]133|200|[/hv] 3♠ pre-emptive. Your guess Butler IMPs

[hv=pc=n&s=sajt75ha732dtcat2&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1s2dp3nppp]133|200[/hv] Your lead Butler IMPs

Well, I've never played a method with multi-strength bids. So when playing Multi 2♦ for instance, I am keen on the "weak only" style, so not including big balanced, etc. How does responder cater for 1♣ as 8-11 bal, or 17+ any? Seems fraught with danger plus loss of space, whether they bid or not. The main thrust with FP is describing with the 45% 8-12 hands. How you handle 0-7 & 13+ is collateral. Need to move those 8-11 bal hands somewhere useful. Unfortunately, having 2 bids for strongish hands takes away that option.

I've played 13+ pass, various 0-7 ferts, others 8-12 for many years, off and on. See other thread for our preferred current method. Haven't play or looked at fertless weak opening methods. Seems to me that magic diamond pass = 0-11 bal or 0-7 unb has little value. Having a bid (or pass) that shows 0-7 is a great boon to responder, who can cool his heels. Why is it good to open 1♥ with a 3532 8-count but not 3442 say. Meaningless distinction. The 8-12 openings need to be descriptive and constructive. 1♥ - 2♥/3♥ is a good sequence, whether the hand is ours or theirs, bal or not. Another way to make a fertless method is something we might call light opening Blue Club or similar. 1♣ = 13+ any, 1♦/♥/♠ = 8-12 & 4+ suits. 1NT as you wish ... If you convert that to a fert system by swapping pass & 1♣, do you gain or lose anything? So pass = 13+, 1♣ = 0-7 any. Well, 1♣ fert does no good and could very occasionally come unstuck. Starting strong hands a step lower has real value. For instance you can split the negative, so pass ; 1♣ = 0-6, 1♦ = 6-10, others 11+ GF. This rates to gain, especially if you play symmetric relay.

Thanks for that. We used to play Strong Pass at all vuls for simplicity, out of a sense of "fairness". Opponents were always likely to have a few cock-ups with their hastily composed defences, so we felt it was only fair to give them a few free swings in return. Note that we are required to provide a choice of good(!) simple defences, which we have done. We were often forced to switch methods within a tournament, depending on stage, match length, our current place in the field. Given that, switching within a match is less of a chore. Our 1♠ fert has been a consistent winner at all vulnerabilities. However there have been instances when we "should" have gone for -1100 vs 460 say, saved by inadequate defensive methods. We believe that 1♠ is the right fert, much more obstructive than 1♥, + it frees 1♥. This is the structure: 1♣ = 4+♥s, (7)8-12 1♦ = 4+♠s, not 4♥s, 7-12 1♥ = 7-12 balanced-ish, no 4cM, 7-12 1♠ = 0-7 any 1NT = 5+♦s, no 4cM, 7-12 2♣ = 5+♣, no 4cM, 7-12 We are convinced this is the goods. There are 2 relays over 1♣ & 1♦ for accurate invites. 1♥ allows 1♥ - 1♠ - 1NT = 7-9, so everything fits. 1♠ is very obstructive. Vs a 1♥ fert, a decent simple defence is X as 16+ with a 1♠ negative, others 11-15. Not so easy over a 1♠ fert! Having said that, we are now playing strong club when vulnerable. Opening 1♠ vul rates to lose. Penalties, wrong partscore, 1♠ passed out for -300 etc. Others 7-12 openings are also likely generate a few big negatives. This change is simple for us and for opponents. Easy for them to see what they are up against. This is important. With so few pairs playing HUM methods, our (ageing!) opponents get grumpy at the imposte, even more so when the match finishes late and they lose. To maintain the right to play strong pass, we have an obligation to make the experience tolerable for them, maybe even interesting.

I asked about this before. Anyway We play forcing pass with relays in long teams matches. In the method, pass is 13+, 1♠ is 0-7, other openings show 7-12, all artificial. Not negotiable. When we switch we play strong club. When should we switch? It's clear to play the club system at red vs green. 1♠ fert vul vs not is on a hiding to nothing, the 7-12 openings might also come a cropper. What's more, pass with 13+ vul vs not is a welcome mat to preemptive intervention and likely to suffer. Conversely, the pass system rates to gain at green vs red. Relative safety plus the ability to steal and preempt. Also a green vs red strong pass is likely to escape intervention. The simple thing to do is to play the pass system not vul, the club system if vul. Is that right? On the other hand, one aim of the method is to put pressure on the opponents over a series of boards, so we like to obstruct where possible. At the moment we play the pass system at all vul. Position at the table is also crucial. In 2nd seat after a pass on our right, the chance is higher that the hand belongs to us, in which case the constructive club system seems the way to go. at all accept favourable. This is whet we currently do Dealer green vs red - FP nil vul - FP all vul - FP ? red vs green - strong club in 2nd seat green vs red - FP nil vul - strong club ? all vul - strong club (seems right) red vs green - strong club Does this spread look right?

Many imponderables in the heart finesse. For first estimate, give West a 4-card heart suit. Then ♥J from ♥JTxx may be seen as a more attractive lead than ♥KJTx. Hard to judge since West might lead low from ♥JT32, though not JT82. The main point is that ♥JTxx is 3 times as common as KJTx. (since 7C2 = 21) Admittedly, this discrepancy decreases when we give West longer hearts. So the heart hook is less than 50%. How much less? There are better ways to spend my time! Say you finesse ♥Q and have to ruff East's king. ♠A now is 26% to drop the stiff king, so playing a club looks better. However, as Aardv and others noted, you risk ruffs. East might have a stiff diamond, or maybe ♣H-x and ♠K. The bigger risk is East having a doubleton small diamond. Then you are likely doomed.

[hv=pc=n&s=saqt9865hdkqtcqt9&n=sj43haq6dj6543cj4&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=pp4sppp]266|200[/hv] West leads ♥J, playing "standard" leads. Do you call for ♥Q? It's IMPs. Is it closer than 13%?

Good question Muiderberg 2M not vul is more like a weak 2 with a cursory 4-card minor on the side. AJTxx, xx, Jxxx, xx is fine. Now responder wants double of 3♣ to be penalty. It might be different vul, when the TNT rates to be higher but can't chop and change like that. Or when their bid is 3♦ and a P/C double sends you to 4♣. If the overcall is 3♥, normal is 4♣ p/c. So I vote for all penalty. The other issue with double as p/c is finding partner with Jxxx and forced to pass opposite your 2 small, when you were hoping for KJTxx. If this means defending 3♣x with 5-3-5-0 opposite 1-4-4-4, so be it. Ugly post mortem coming up.

Is there merit in this? How many do it? (minor transfers) If 2NT = 20-21(22) and 5-card major ok, how about 3♣ = Puppet (or your favourite version thereof) 3♦/♥ = transfers, then 4m & 4NT natural 3♠ = clubs (right-siding a plus) 4♣ = diamonds (ditto) 4♦/♥ = Texas (then 4NT - RKC) 4♠ = minors (OK, 3♠ minors clearly better but something had to give) There are similarities with method over 1NT (2♠ = clubs) which has to be good. Can bid 3♠ with 4-5 minors say, then 4♦ natural, 4M self-splinters. In Puppet, assume 2NT - 3♣ - 3♦ - 4♦ = 4-4 majors.

The idea is that partner is likely to have the entries to untangle all your spade tricks. There are at least 2 ways to gain: 1) Declarer may hook into your ♠ Q (Give Partner ♠Axxxx and declarer ♠KJT say) 2) Partner may be able to attack spades from his side: Dummy: ♠ATx Partner: ♠J9xxx Declarer: ♠Kxx Or similar. Here ♠Q lead gives them 3 stoppers, while ♠6 allows partner to set them up for 3 rricks.

[hv=pc=n&w=sq6ht863dt532cj86&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=1sppdp1np2nppp]133|200[/hv] Discuss the merits of leading ♠6

Partner opens 2♠ Muiderberg. 5♠s+ a minor, 6-10 pts, usually 5-5. 2♠ - (no) - 3♠ - (3NT) Your 3♠ is "to play" This comes back to you and you double. Does this say "They are in trouble, make your usual lead, presumably a spade." Or does it say "I have a decent hand but my spades are crap. You might try your minor." So something like ♠xxxx ♥Axx ♦Kxx ♣Kxx.

[hv=pc=n&s=sqjha984da984ct73&w=sk6hk72dj62ckqj62&n=s97432hjt53dt753c&e=sat85hq6dkqca9854&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=p1c(announced%20as%202%2B)p2cpp2h2np3nppp]399|300[/hv] Australia, no screens. EW play Standard, short club. This is a new partnership. All 4 are average club players. Before acting, South asks about 2♣ and is told "6-10" EW have a rudimentary system card but this is not listed. At the end of the play, after the director is called by South, West offers: "We are a new partnership. I usually play Acol. I thought that after a short club, my 2♣ showed 10+ points, forcing." They (maintain they) did not agree to play inverted minor raises. How do you rule?

Uncontested auction: 1♥ - 2♥ - 4♠ Responder is taken aback. Perhaps the quizzical look (or even a comment) alerts opener to the fact that he pulled the wrong card. He calls you "straight away", maybe having got the hint from partner. 25A does not specifically mention 16B. Does it apply automatically?

[hv=pc=n&s=skq7hk74dkt65cqt6&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=p3hppdp]133|200[/hv]

Playing Standard, 15-17 NT & better minor, I believe the chance of a 1♣ opener having 4+ clubs is about 85%. Right? What is the figure when responder has four clubs? So the auction goes: 1♣ - (pass or bid) - ? Responder has four trumps, no major to show and is thinking of raising to 2♣ or 3♣. What is the chance of an 8+ card fit?

Bidding practice on BBO has real merit. Hire some robots for a month, control the inputs. It's all good. Half an hour free? Bid 10 hands.

Liam, We have had bad experience with these action-style doubles. Worst was when we each had honour-third and doubled their 5-2 fit on balance of power & knowledge that they were in a 7-card fit. The hand was something like this: [hv=pc=n&s=sk982ha32dkq6cqj7&w=sqt3hq9dajtcak982&n=saj64hk75d973ct53&e=s75hjt864d8542c64&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1ndr2hdppp]399|300[/hv] 1NT was 15-17, double by West penalties. XX claimed ownership and South's double was action-style, honour third. "Half a double" South led ♦K and we were feeling uneasy. Our 3-3 trump fit meant -670 when we had +140/120 available. Nick

Assume 2♦ is 6-card major, 6-10 points, no strong option. 2♦ (2♥/♠) X 2♦ (3♣/♦) X 2♦ (3♥/♠) X What are these doubles and why? TIA