bglover

I must admit, Erick, I do not get your comment/question at all. I am trying to find the 8 card fit FIRST with a 13-14 point hand... that'd kind of the point. The advantage to a 1nt opening (assuming 15-17) is that you get the size shape information into the open first for partner THEN you try to locate the fit.

As an addendum to all of this.... When it appeared that Inquiry may not make it last nite, I asked amongst my peers for volunteers to help me answer questions when the game began. I had no trouble getting people to say they would help. I had so many volunteers that I actually had to say to people "no thanks, I don't need you now." They all knew what the purpose was-- to help beginners improve. They had no qualms about helping. At the actual game, after it started, more experts showed up and were willing to help. I noticed at least a half dozen additional experts watching and I am sure "willing to help" had anyone asked them. Yet, as previously stated, there was 1...1 question. We are out there people... find us... watch us... I, for one, will gladly answer ur questions (in private) if you are kibbing me (be polite an don't ask me in the middle of a hand im declaring). I know there are others...Maybe they could post their names here.

I cannot say I entirely agree with the Hog's comments. All major bidding systems are geared towards locating 8 card major fits. So, with 13 or 14 HCP and 4423 shape what else can you open playing SAYC or 2/1 GF besides 1C? (Assuming we are not playing weak NT here). You can't open 1NT so you must open 1C. Now, after 1D you respond in your majors up the line and find your 4-4 fit if there is one. The least evil result is that a 1NT contract is wrong sided a good portion of the time. Actually, I agree with his sentiments when opener is holding a good hand. I always jump to 2n with that hand and expect partner to use checkback after to see if we have a major fit. If partner uses checkback we still locate our fit. Now, as a matter of course, assuming a decent 4 card major, I will open 1M in 3d or 4th seat frequently as well. Just because opener is balanced doesn't mean responder is... I don't see a need to rush to bid 1NT on 4432 shape; I think it's more important to find that 8 card fit.

I have been a bridge teacher/mentor for many years now, but generally I have not taught beginning bridge. Rather, by the time my students get to me they have taken a beginning course somewhere or read some books and are committed to improving their games. I have had rather good luck with many of my students/mentees (if thats a word). Many have moved on to far exceed my capabilities as a player and quite a few have won significant tournaments. I don't think I am being too full of myself to say that I helped them on to the path to better bridge. Which brings me to people on BBO. I have, both formally and informally, offered to help lower level players improve their games. There are a few people I mentor individiually, and they are genuinely interested and trying to improve. However, my regular partner and I will frequently open a table and ask for beginner or intermediate players who would like help with their games to sit in. Altho filling those seats are never a problem, the players never ask questions and rarely want our comments. Last nite I (and inquiry and cascade) volunteered to help run a beginnner/intermediate game. The participants were told they could ask us questions privately if they felt they needed help. Together, the three of us fielded a grand total of 1 question. I hope all people reading this, no matter what the level of skill, will think about it. If you are an advanced player, perhaps you can consider ways you can make yourself more accessible to lesser players in an effort to help them. Perhaps consider becoming a member of Fifth Chair. If you are a beginner, do not be afraid to avail yourself of the resources here on BBO. In addition to Fred's fine facilities (including a wonderful library), there are people here who are willing to help if you approach them and ask. Don't be afraid to ask for help. There are people willing to give it... but, don't wait for them to come to you either.

I am sure Dwayne (Darrin!) looked at the hands before he was sure there was a hint of cheating. Look, it's easy to cheat... there's no way to prevent it but there's always a way to stop it. If someone only makes these miracle plays at crucial times and they are entirely out of the blue, then there is reason to be suspicious. To say there isn't at least some suspicion in that case (and only that kind of case) is certainly not out of line here. There are probably more than a couple of people who have done this in tourneys on a regular basis. No matter what Hrothgar or The Hog feel about it, I can respectfully say that I think they are wrong... I don't want to play bridge (or any other game) with the deck stacked against me. I have never been sure that I have been cheated... but I suspect I have, and I will keep an eye on those whom I suspect have acted badly.... and if I continue to see bad actions I will report them and the reasons why I am suspicious.

FWIW I use all those products... I have never had an infection in all the years I've used Zone alarm and AVG (grisofts antivirus program). I have used Norton and McAfee antivirus programs in the past and have found that AVG catches more than either of them AND IT IS FREE. Matter of fact, caught an email bug this morning.

I fully realize that sometimes good players make good plays and get accused of cheating... I myself have had this happen to me 3 times at tourneys (club level and above)... and I have had people even today doubt my honesty by making a good play. However, when someone makes a play that is 100% anti percentage yet is the ONLY play that works that is when i become suspicious. I have seen people take 12% lines when there is a 60% line available, and the 12% line is the only one that works. Well, it is possible (even probable) that the person is./was an idiot for taking the 12% line and dumb-lucked into it.... but if I saw this person do the same thing again I would not sit with him a third time. The point I'm making is there is a difference between an esoteric play that the masses may not recognize and plays that are flat out anti percentage, not supported anyway by the bidding or play to that point that I have seen some players make. If I see those players do the same continually I will assume they are cheating... There are some people (well, one) I have seen do this a couple times... won't play with that person from now on. Either he's a total fool and is fixing me with bad plays all the time or he's cheating... either way, I am not interested in pursuing any more games.

It is so easy to cheat online... It only takes 1 friendly kibbitzer and some messenger program running... We all know its easy but without ratings there has never been an incentive on BBO to actually cheat... there was no benefit to it. Since the implementation of tourneys, it seems to me there has been more whispering about so-and-so must have cheated to make that contract. I personally have witnessed contracts that were made by taking virtually impossible lines at least twice, and I am sure everyone else has witnessed one or two as well. Do other people feel that cheating is becoming more prevalent since the implementation of tourneys or am I alone in this? If the perception isn't only mine, then what can we do to police people who continually make the "miracle" plays at the crucial times that win those tourneys/matches? Or should we just accept that it's an online hazard, that we can't do much about it and simply note "Appears so and so is cheating" to ourselves and avoid those people? We are all competitive people, because bridge requires a competitive nature to become good at it. This sort of thing is certainly not unheard of in the annals of the game. I would like to believe all of us are above this sort of thing, but I am beginning to wonder...

"And I don't think 2D is non-forcing in this sequence. It is natural, forcing, but may not be a genuine suit, just a stop (just like 2S, in fact!)." This gets back to agreements. Some players (me included) play that, once opener rebids his suit showing a minimum, any subsequent bid by responder is non forcing IF it doesn't reverse his original suit or is a jump of some sort. Not everyone plays this way, I know, but it is certainly not an uncommon treatment. I would play 2D as passable here with known partners, and assume it was forcing playing with a pick up partner.

The question is, does responder have enough to force game? 2S creates a game force, showing a little more than this hand has. So, Luis' answer is not as offbase as Ben makes it out to be, but it does show more than a 12 count. 2D is problematic because it may lead to 3N without either hand having a stopper... 2H is out on strength issues as well as length issues. (Too strong and not long enough which is why I cant bid 3H either). Therefore, thru a process of elmination I will bid 2S as the least of evils... partner cannot have 4 since he would have bid them, and with any luck he either raises hts or bids NT and then I am happy. It's an imperfect bid whatever I choose.

He he i wrote that early in morning... i may have screwed the hand up... I did state the vul tho.

Guess this is my week for visiting old topics... Playing last night with a top player, this again came up. I had the following hand: KJxx Qxx Q10xx Kx I passed it (we are playing 2/1, so can't open it). Bidding as follows: (we vul opps not) N (me) E S(pd) W p 1H p 2h X p 3d 3hh p p 4d 4h p p X all pass 4H is off 2 for +300.... but we make 3N. Partner had a 14 count with 5D (ajxxx) and jx of hts (2254 distribution). By passing at his 1st oppotunity (instead of 2d overcall to start), it is very hard for us to catch up and we got a fairly bad result. Comments?

For anyone else who is having the same problem: Apparently the program has a problem when your temporary folder in IE contains any file names with a blank. The solution is to clear your cache of all temporary files. Then you can go back to opening files directly from myhands. To clear your cache, do the following: Click on "Tools, Internet Options." Then, click "Delete files" under the temporary files box (in General). When the delete box pops up, also click the "delete offline content" box and hit ok... this will fix it.

Revisiting this very old topic... While looking for something, I came across the OK bridge notes on SAYC. The authors note that most versions of SAYC allow a player to pass a rebid at the 2 level after a 2/1 response, even if a new suit was bid. Apparently there are versions out there that play it like I do... i.e., that a 2/1 bid does not necessitate another bid in a misfit. That was certainly the "old" way to play Standard American and it has survived even with the advent of SAYC. Any interested parties can find the statement in the notes to OKB SAYC.

Well... I tried the reinstall idea and that didn't work Here is what the path shows in Exploerer, maybe there is a problem?: c:Bridge Base OnlineNetBridgeVu.exe %1 Appaers correct from what you've written but i am not sure obviously. Thx for your help so far.

Well, when you click on movie, you get the option to "open" or "download" the file. I used to be able to just click open and see the hands. Now, all I see when I clici "open" is a blank table, no cards, no players, no bids (but I do see the empty bidding box). This just started two or 3 days ago..

This is for my own information, as I saw this a few months ago... You are in six off an ace and entries are not a problem. Dummy has kj10xx of the suit you are missing the ace and u have a stiff... You have in your hand a suit that contains AQ (remember, entries not a problem). You have 11 tricks. Is it better to play for the 12th trick by leading low to kj and playing the J? If it loses to the ace, the king will provide your 12th trick... and if it loses you still can hook the queen in your hand later... At the table i was observing.. the declarer led low to the king, losing to the ace and then tried the finesse into the queen and lost that also... I realize its easy looking at all the cards to fault declarer for playing the king, but I am not entirely sure that the right play isn't the jack anyway. Playing the king is a straight 50 50 shot but when it wins it obviates the need for the 2d finesse. But playing the jack gives you an extra chance, as you were always being forced to take the second hook when RHO is holding the ace of the suit, but you get the discard in those cases where LHO held the queen. I admit I am lousy with combined chances, so I would like to know if its mathematically correct to play the jack...It seems to me that maybe it is....

For some odd reason, I can now only look at hands in myhands by downloading the actual hand to my desktop instead of merely opening it from BBO. If i do open from BBO i merely get a blank table (ie I see NSEW but no cards or names). Any help appreciated.

AND PARTNER'S HAND WAS: A10xxx Qxx kj10x x 3S goes down, 3n goes down... the only positive action was x or a (timid) pass. I was simply curious how many would bid 3s on this auction. The 3N bidders aren't "wrong" but for partner's hand to be good enough he is going to have real good spades and spades would be likely to play better then (partner known to be short in clubs... even a possible void.. ). My take on the hand was if 3S was right, partner should have x'd to start... he would need a stronger hand than he showed by merely balancing for me to want to merely compete. This, by process of elimination left double as the correct action... 3n was the distant "3d" choice bewteen 3s and x in my view, though certainly not unreasonable. If partner pulls the x, then I would bid 3n, but not until then.

All red, you pick up the following hand: Kxx xxx Axxx kjx RHO bids precision 2c (11-15 clubs and probably other major), you pass, lho passes, partner bids 2s...RHO now bids 3c what do you do now?

Well, of coures a double by opener would show extras. But, so would a 3h bid, that is all I have been saying all along. The original post said "what would a 3h bid show in SAYC?" It says, as I have said all along, "partner I have a hand worth competing further with." It may not show a monster... but it shows a better hand than I am holding here... That has been my one and only point all along. OK, obviously some people think this hand is worth competing to 3 level on vulnerable. Frankly, I cannot see why absent further action by partner... the risk/reward just is off, LHO can be holding too many possible hands where I will get doubled and go for a number (as outlined ad nauseaum above), Maybe if I am playing some other system, a 3h bid is fine.... NOT IN SAYC. I am about as bad as I can be here... My hand can improve GREATLY if partner can act. But, now I am repeating myself so...

>Another comment about raising to game (if partner freely bids 3H) on the same hand sounds like hara-kiri to me. First you make a negative double to show some values and interest in competing in the majors. Now with the same values and same shape , you raise yourself to game > Tis funny... you make my point for me while telling me in the previous paragraph I (and Ben and Richard and Luis) are wrong.... The point is to distinguish between a "bad" opening hand and a "good" opening hand. Passing this sequence when you hold the opener's cards says "P i have minimal values... I can't act." When we elect to bid at the 3 level in this sequence we are saying "Partner, I have a fair hand... make your next decision accordingly." If you want to bid again on the opener's cards based on a negative double by partner (who may well have the worst hand at the table for this sequence) you are the one ready to commit hari kari. The fact that you can't see it is beyond amazement to me, but, then like I said, suckers like you get taken for money all the time. Suggest you try money bridge for a while... I guarantee it will break you of some real bad habits fast. If you think the opener's hand should bid 3h, I know you have at least one, and if this hand is illustrative of your general ability to judge a bridge hand's assets, I would venture to say you may have others... I strongly think you are the one deluding yourself.

That's fine... if you have a special agreement by all means play it. But, I would still love to meet you and your partner for a money game if that is your agreement. You are constantly putting yourself into the position of getting doubled for 300 or 500 when the MOST the opps can make is 140? This is a great risk/reward strategy! Sure, you say 3h shows no extras... that's fine... It is still lousy strategy because you are gonna lose every time the overcaller has a big hand and you are going to only come out ahead in the situation where partner COULD HAVE ACTED had you passed.... and then you aren't really coming out ahead but only even. It is a 100 percent losing proposition at money bridge but I guess at imps, where you aren't risking anything but a bad board you don't care. Well, a bad strategy is a bad strategy no matter what the scoring method in my opinion... and I'd still love to play you for money if you promise to use that same strategy. That hand is garbage unless and until partner can act again.

I am stunned by the number of posters who believe a 3 level free bid shows no extra values here. My only comment to Free, Codo, Sartaj, etc. is I would love to play vs all of you in a game for money. That would break you of this habit real fast.

Sorry, was not my intention to offend you.. My point only was that in the example where partner opens 1C, it is better not to bid that hand as it has almost no positive value for offense or defense. You are safe playing in clubs and, absent partner bidding again (likely he will have another chance here), then he can force you to bid this bad hand with a double or some other action. Playing partner for "magic" cards (which is the examples you gave) and using that as a reason to justify manufacturing a bid is something I do not subscribe to. Once partner has shown strength (through a reopening double or some other such action) you can now better take action.. Indeed, if partner merely makes a 2c bid after opps take some action, I would not hesitate to bid 3 to let him know I have "something useful" for him. But, in my opinion, this hand needs more forward action from partner before its worthy of a bid. You, of course, are free to disagree (and you have). That I would bid it differently than you is one of style, but then I am conservative in my actions with weak hands... I don't like risking penalty doubles by encouraging partner to bid when I hold dubious values. Notice that I said that if I had a fifth club I would gladly bid 3C tho,,, this hand is flawed for that preempt (due to only 4 low clubs), but that is my style.