sathyab

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sq76hkt8764dq3ck4&w=sah9dkt984caqt762&e=st8543hajdj75cj53&s=skj92hq532da62c98]399|300|Scoring: MP p-(1d)-1h-(1s) 2d-(3c)-3h-(p)-p (4c)-p-(4d)-X[/hv] Relatively new partnership. South didn't have a bid for a 4-card LR over partner's overcall whether or not there was intervention as we were playing 3♦ there as a mixed raise. North thought 3♥ was just competitive as he was dealt an additional heart, but South must have expected a better hand for the 3♥ bid considering his double of the eventual contract knowing that West was most likely 6-5 or 5-6 in the minors. 4♥ doubled for -100 appears to be par. 4♦ made comfortably as defense could only take two trumps and a club.

I ended up choosing 4♥. Partner had like the best hand ever for 3NT (9xxx KQxxx Qxx K) and I should have gone down, but they misdefended. However this points to a huge advantage of 4♥ over 4♠. If you bid 4♠ they know you have 7 trumps and will probably lead one most of the time and beat you easily. If you bid 4♥ they are misled about your hand and are very likely to misdefend. I think 4♥ would certainly have the greatest advantage of any contract over double-dummy in a sim. With half your HCP in the minors isn't there a case to be made for bidding 3nt with 9xxx KQxxx Qxx K rather than go thru Smolen ?

I want to go passive, but I'm worried that declarer may show up with a spade-diamond two-suiter, in which case the lead may prove expensive. A reluctant trump lead for me.

Is that likely to happen? I would think opener will pass, or penalty double your 4♦. Is 4♦ a 2 way bid? As a save over 3♠, and it may make? I dont think 3♠ is making. 4♦ might not make either, though 5♦ can make if pard has a few dimes to the King and heart/club Queen. Since we are all vulnerable I'll pass and take the +100, rather than +130 (4D making) and miss out on game or -200 or -500. We could get doubled if diamonds don't break, that's why I pointed out bidding was taking a risk. But short of that opener is not doubling, he is off AK A AK so has not much outside of spades. I don't think you have given enough weight to the chance partner has a singleton spade. And I don't think it's at all unlikely opener bids 4♠. Maybe he has six spades and one diamond, and bids 4♠ in front of his partner who could have cracked us off... They're missing too many high cards to bid 4♠ seriously, unless they thought they were saving against 5♦ or to make it harder for you find your heart fit. If it goes all pass and you find partner with 2 spades chances are you are going down when they would have. Pre-emptive raises were designed specifically for these kinds of hands in the fourth seat. Let's hope your teammates are doing unto your counterparts what your opponents are doing to you.

The problem statement didn't indicate otherwise, so I assumed signalling was "standard". But may be you're supposed to arrive at a possible lay-out for the contract through other means, such as whether he's more likely to lead his own suit from AQxx or AQxxx. A club lead from AQxxx has a lot more potential than from a holding of AQxx.

Assuming standard signals, the ♣7 is likely to be from two little or stiff, not from three small. So West has led from a five or six bagger in clubs. I am not sure that he needs to have a spade honor. Looking at a stiff spade in your, you could easily choose to lead your own suit instead. But playing him for a stiff spade honor may be the best chance to make the contract though.

Ditto. May be it should be a two-part question: if you double what's your plan over partner's 2♠ over LHO's pass; 3♠ over LHO's 3♦ ?

If you play a middle heart which happens to be the Six, how's partner supposed to read it ? Given the 4nt bid how's partner supposed to understand that you had a choice of heart spots ? Couldn't you have been dealt x 986 Kxxx KQTxx ? Funny, without that 4nt bid your side would be defending 4s, you'd then have played the ♥9 and held it to ten tricks and then be wondering why you sold out to 4s with all those minor suit cards between the two of you.

That's exactly what I tried to do, go thru the exercise of a triple after the indicated start and concluded that it wouldn't work. If it was stated as a single-dummy problem, I have a feeling that most people would struggle with squeeze possibilities rather than playing for Kx of clubs which also needs West not to have more than two trumps, so you can cash all the club winners. May be someone can actually figure out that the squeeze won't work and try an alternative line. It'd be nice if we can present this a s a single dummy problem and get the opinion of an expert declarer like Fantoni, Rosenberg or Helgemo.

I don't think I'd have tried to squeeze anyone in anything, since I don't see how that could work (obviously, West could break any communication for a squeeze or for anything else by shifting to a heart). It's not so far-fetched to play for the layout that actually exists, with West having a 2=5=4=2 shape and all the missing honours. Would have been very pleased with myself if I actually found it at the table, though. As to "where you went wrong" - for what distribution of the outstanding cards were you playing? How did you plan to make your contract if that distribution existed? West overcalls and is likely to have the missing honors in all the side suits and you wouldn't think about squeezing anyone in anything because it wouldn't work ? Really ? Of course West could break up a squeeze with a heart shift and I'm sure you've broken up every squeeze that could ever be broken up. And you would easily come to the conclusion that playing to ruff out the Kx of clubs is the best chance for the contract ? Impressive, very impressive and so utterly believable too.

LHO has Jx of trumps, so RHO must have a trump higher than dummy's 7. So ruffing the fourth Diamond won't work. In the seven-card ending West has - Kxxx K Kx and dummy has - AQJ - QJ9x. On the penultimate trump, West part with a heart. If dummy comes down to 3-3 in rounded suits, West gives up a club on the last trump, retaining a heart guard. If dummy comes down to 2-4 in rounded suits instead, West gives up a heart on the last trump. It looks as though you're a trick short in my analysis so far. There might be other endings that I haven't considered yet.

What was the full hand ?

You have to shift to a spade to guard against declarer having the ♣K and ♥J and therefore enough tricks. If pd obliges with the ♠K you're fine. The problem is when declarer has good spades, and takes a losing club finesse, partner may not know to continue spades. You can make it clear that it's spades you want continued when he's in with the ♣K by cashing ♦K and then switching to spades. This of course risks declarer making 5♥, 2♦ and trick in each of the black suits. But if your pd has either red suit Jack and the ♣K or just the ♠K, this defense should work.

Do people play 2nt as natural here ? If not, we could start with with 2nt and bid 3♥ over partner's 3♣, showing a ♥ stopper and ♦ support.

Why does he need poor clubs, he could just be not good enough to bid on. And isn't this a HUGE problem? This. Also you are dreaming if you think partner is bidding 2M over 2D with (54)22. 2nt over 2♦ would be NF, so with decent clubs he might do that or might have passed originally intending to pass partner's double with length in clubs. 2M over 2♦ is also NF, so I don't understand the problem in doing that if you recognize that partner might have had to bid that over your double.

I'm surprised there are more votes for 2♥ than 2♦. Isn't that the bid that's a catch-all for hands that don't have any other convenient bid ? Either partner has tolerance for Diamonds or a longer major which he can bid at the 2-level. The only time 2♦ creates a problem worse than other bids is when partner has 4-4-2-3 or 4-4-1-4 with really poor clubs.

The opening lead was indeed the King. I misreported it as he Ace when I posted the hand.

Sure looks like it to me. The most important thing is knowing if we can cash another heart or not. Why would partner ever have to shift to a diamond UNLESS another heart was not cashing? Scanario 1: You gave honest count and partner figured out that a second heart would cash ? Even then there's a case to be made for a switch as cashing the second heart might set up a discard that you can't ruff out, which might matter in a slightly different setting, Scenario 2: You gave honest count, partner figured out that a second heart would not cash. Now what ? He still doesn't know if there's any safety in switching. Most likely he would continue passively and the defense may learn later that they ought to have switched. My understanding of Obvious Shift is that even in situations that call for count playing standard signals, OS'ers prefer a "compound attitude' signal instead. Count signals do conflict with Obvious Shift signals quite often. Say you lead A from AK against a major suit game and see Qxx(x) in dummy. It's standard for partner to give count in this situation, unless you're playing Obvious Shift signals. You may have noticed that I did factor that in the way I phrased the question.

[hv=d=e&v=b&n=sk7hjt42daq4cq972&e=s93h65dk9732cj863]266|200|p-p-1h-p p-1s-p-1nt p-3c-p-5c[/hv] A hand from an IMP game on BBO yesterday. Partner leads the ♥A (A from AK). How would you signal if you were 1) playing Obvious Shift 2) Not playing Obvious shift ?

Int makes it easier to handle sign-offs in other suits, but what about sign-offs in spades ? A hand like KQTxx Qxx xx xxx, over 1♦-1♠-1nt is an easy 2♠ bid if partner doesn't rebid 1nt with a stiff spade. Do you have methods to handle this hand knowing that partner can easily have a stiff spade or is that the trade-off you're willing to make ?

Most people seem to be saying that they wouldn't bid 3h with only 5 hearts even if they're decent enough to play opposite a doubleton. If you agree with that proposition, you would be bidding 3♥ with some non-invitational six-baggers and doubling with the rest of them. If you double on a hand expecting partner to bid 3♦ which you would then correct to 3♥ showing a force, isn't it possible that he has a non-descript 1♦ opener with some defensive values say a hand such as ATxx xx KJxx Axx and pass ? While it may be perfectly fine to defend with that hand when opponents are Red, what if you're Red and opponents not ? I know there's loss of bidding accuracy when opponents preempt, but to make a bid that for its further description, relies on partner continuing the auction in a certain way while not requiring it, seems troubling.

Playing MP against GIBs I held Axxx xx J9xx ATxx. And the bidding proceeded: 1nt-2d-2h-3h. On lead, I thought Josh's law applied here too mistaking this for an auction like 1nt-2d-3h. And I led a trump. Dummy had JT QT9xxx T 9xxx and declarer had xxxx AKx AKQx xx. With a Diamond lead, all the defense makes is two club tricks. With a trump lead, may be 3 club tricks. Banging either black suit Ace and cashing all the tricks in those suits is the preferred approach here :) Are you suggesting that banging down an ace is the correct thing to do here? If so I definitely disagree but I would prefer a diamond to a heart. May be you missed the :) :) B) :P ?

Playing MP against GIBs I held Axxx xx J9xx ATxx. And the bidding proceeded: 1nt-2d-2h-3h. On lead, I thought Josh's law applied here too mistaking this for an auction like 1nt-2d-3h. And I led a trump. Dummy had JT QT9xxx T 9xxx and declarer had xxxx AKx AKQx xx. With a Diamond lead, all the defense makes is two club tricks. With a trump lead, may be 3 club tricks. Banging either black suit Ace and cashing all the tricks in those suits is the preferred approach here :)

I don't know for a fact that 3♥ would be forcing either. These sequences are rarely discussed in literature, I guess they are simply left as an "exercise to the reader". If 3♥ is NF I don't see any problem is bidding it directly. Practically anything you do from here on involves a lot of guess work to land on your feet, so bidding 3♥ on a decent 5-bagger wouldn't be the worst thing you could do, if everyone plays it as NF. If you did play it as forcing , the only way to play in 3h is by going thru a double, analoguous to making a negative double over 1♠ with hearts instead of bidding 2♥. There's a greater chance of 3c X being left in than 1♠ though. But may be it's OK to play 3♥ as NF. If you want to force you have to either cue or bid 4th suit artificial and of course things can get out of hand in a hurry there as well.

I think the basic assumption in these situations has to be that both hands are balanced and looking for a playable spot at the 3-level or leave the double in when nothing else is suitable. I wouldn't pass 3c X with so much in one suit as a stiff in declarer's hand will seriously jeopardize our defensive prospects. Also if declarer has a second suit it's more likely to be hearts, so it may not be a bad idea to play in diamonds instead.