bluecalm

European Team Championship 2010. Your partner is one of the best card players in the world who is partnering you for 10+years and plays methods of your choice: [hv=pc=n&s=s982ht73d986cak86&e=saq7haj9dqt3cjt97&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=p1nppp]266|200[/hv] Play: Jc, 6c, 5c, Qc Ad, 3d, 6d, 4d 2c, 7c, 8c, 3c Ac, 4c, 4s, 9c Kc, 5h, 2d, Tc 8d, 7d, Jd, Qd You have ♠AQ7 ♥AJ9 ♦T left. Your play ? Assume you play UDCA with rev Smith (if applicable) and nat lav (if applicable). What would partner's carding mean for you ? What would you play ? (This time it's really tricky because bidding square is center of the table, not the green square ! S is dummy N is declarer and we were first leader).

I wonder when he is going to realize puppet stayman after strong 2NT sucks. Meck will take even more tricks then :)

Thanks. Lead is A♥.

[hv=pc=n&n=sjth62dkq932caq52&e=sk5hj7543d654c874&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1np3nppp]266|200[/hv] NT is 14+-17 (so partner could easily hope we can one of the aces in case he has AKTx). Partner led A♥ What card do you play ? The problem in case someone doesn't see it is that partner might be afraid we have Qxx if we play low and underlead in 2nd trick as he has no side entry. He may also try to find our side entry in case he started with AKTx. How do you solve it in your partnership ? What would you play from: a) 75 b) 754 c) 7543 d) 75432 e) J75 f) J754 g) Q7 h) Q75 i) Q754 j) Q7543

2NT as ♥ + minor seems reasonable to me. Showing hearts is important and maybe we will be saved if partner has misfit ♥. Actually after thinking about it I like it even more than minors.

We should have separate thread with specific examples. Would be very educational to have discussion on those things.

It seems that your mind is fixed on the idea that we are always on the bottom of the diagram :) Here we are no the right and dummy is at the top. Also bidding is not the centre of the table. The green square is :)

So what do you do ? :) Bidding 1NT - 3NT :)

We are E and dummy is North. According to common convention the player on E is on the right and player on N is at the top. The lead is from player in "W" position which is on the left side of the diagram and declarer is S which is on the bottom. Only the players on N and E positions are visible.

It's nice diagram with letters describing directions. What else can I do to make readable ? :) It's MP's and I am asking about general principle more than actual hand.

Yeah, probably. Unfortunately vugraph archives has only so much of Meckwell hands and we will not know unless they play more :-)

I like minors because I like bids which tells partner exactly what suit we have and I hate bids which are 2suiters without known suits (because it more difficult to compete if they bid 3♠ and partner tells more about his distribution to them if he does compete because he needs 2 fits instead of one).

Playing against standard count is always difficult for me because I have no idea if they would play a 9 or an 8 from 9854. Anyway I suppose they would have ruffed a club if it's possible so I assume the opening leader has AK short probably. I have easy 10 tricks if trumps are 3-2. If they are 4-1 I may need A♥ as entry to my club tricks. I am not good at analyzing this kind of hands. Playing low trump from dummy looks good. If I win this I will think what next.

We are different in a sense that I consider being on 5level in game hand as major disaster. It's not that all responder needs is ♦ control. He may have significant extras but not slam force by any means. Now as partner invited a slam by cuebidding first he would like to cooperate but unfortunately we have no idea what was the reason for opener bidding 4♠. If one of the hands is limited then it's not that big of a problem because we know to what opener invited a slam. If our hand is inv+ then we have no idea if opener has major powerhouse or just light slam invite which he considered obligatory to cue bid with because we might have been very strong for 3♥.

Because it's useful to have natural 4th suit ? By "natural" I mean a hand which doesn't have 4th suit stopper. For example: AKxx xx xxx AKxx 1H - 1S 2C - ??? You want to bid 2♦ here. You also want to bid it with Axx/Kxx of diamonds to make partner bid NT. Also 2♠ is natural here, even if game forcing. Sometimes you don't get dealt 5+spades. Some hands where Meckwell bid 2D: ['VERSACE Al', 'RODWELL Er', 'LAURIA Lor', 'MECKSTROTH'] ('4.AK843.543.AT92', 'AQ875.9.AT82.K85') p 1H p 1S p 2C p 2D p 2H p 3N p p p p ['Alan Sontag', 'Jeff Meckstroth', 'Peter Weichsel', 'Eric Rodwell'] ('Q.J9843.AQ9.K762', 'AKJ73.7.JT52.AT5') 1H p 1S p 2C p 2D p 2N p 3N p p p p p ['Rodwell', 'Branco', 'Meckstroth', 'Chagas'] ('A7.J8743.2.AQ987', 'KQT9543.A.A.T542') p 1H p 1S p 2C p 2D p 3C p 4C p 4D p 4H p 5D p 6C p p p p ['Rodwell', 'Versace', 'Meckstroth', 'Lauria'] ('K3.KQT73.A9.JT32', 'QT862.A5.62.AQ95') 1H p 1S p 2C p 2D p 2N p 3N p p p p p ['Meckstroth', 'Eisenberg', 'Rodwell', 'Hayden'] ('8.AJT87.K75.KQ97', 'AJ943.642.A2.AT4') p 1H p 1S p 2C p 2D p 2N p 4H p p p p As to 2♠: ['Weinstein', 'Rodwell', 'Garner', 'Meckstroth'] ('T5.AT976.AKQ7.T3', 'KQJ973.K83.4.AJ2') p 1H p 1S p 2D p 2S p 2N p 3H p 3S p 4H p 4S p p p ['Meckstroth', 'Stansby', 'Rodwell', 'Martel'] ('Q7.KQJ32.KQJT9.3', 'AJT98653.5.A.T92') 1H p 1S p 2D p 2S p 3C p 3S p 4C d p p r p 4D p 4H p 4N p 5C p 5H p 6C p 6S p p p ['Meckstroth', 'Westerhof', 'Rodwell', 'Jansen'] ('K72.A9743.AKJ6.2', 'AT9863.Q2.Q4.KQ5') p 1H p 1S p 2D p 2S p 3S p 4D p 4H p 4S p p p So it's forcing and probably 6+ spades.

Always a minor. I guess you are referring to 1H - 1NT - 2C - 2D ? Then I am pretty sure it's natural. We play that 2NT is forcing if there is not 3rd or 4th suit below 2NT, so: 1H - 1S 2C - 2NT = invite 1D - 1S 2C - 2NT = invite 1H - 1S 2D - 2NT = forcing 1H - 1S 2H - 2NT = forcing 1D - 1S 2D - 2NT = invite etc.

it depends on the system. In precision 1♥ opener is 5-3-3-2, 11-14pc once every 3.8 or 26%. In "standard" it's once in 4.47 or 22%. Nowhere close to what you are saying. If we remove 5H-4S shapes (and 5-3-3-2, 15-16pc) it will be even higher (because with those it doesn't matter what's our agreement). Oh, I see. I forgot that it's a problem at all because in Poland everybody plays that 2NT is GF here which solves a lot of those problems. Also I like playing that 2♠ here is GF and natural 5+spades (Meckwell treatment) but it's probably only good in precision. So I usually have 3 games forcing bids here: 2♠, 2NT and 3♣. It was easy for me to forget that not being able to force to game comfortably could be a problem here ;) With this I agree. I wouldn't want to give up natural 1NT ever in this sequence but if I am to do it for some reason then some kind of structure as you present seems to be very good.

On side note, Italians pairs solved this with Gazilli and top precision pairs solved this with opening 1NT on 15-16hcp and 5M-3-3-2. I much prefer both of those. What is the reason you want different solution to this problem ? I can understand the desire to play in 4-3♠ at matchpoints but even if it's better than 1NT it won't make up for 4-3 minor fits instead of 1NT (plus if you really want to you can raise to 2♠ with 3♠ - 5♥ - (3-2) and 11-14hcp anyway).

And what did 3♥ mean ? Usually you have some kind of system to distinguish between GF and invitations. Cuebid is automatic if I showed an invitation. If I showed inv+ or GF+ then it matter of agreements. I prefer playing that cuebid is not obligatory here but I have too little experience with wide range openers to be confident about this situation.

What about lead from Qxxx ? (then declarer has AKx)

[hv=pc=n&s=sat5hq83dk5ckj982&w=skqj863ha754d964c&n=s94ht6dajt73c6543&e=s72hkj92dq82caqt7]399|300[/hv] I would think playing high spade here should show A/K ♦ according to general principle that we give s/p in the remaining suits (not led suit and not trumps) and lavi to more important suit (ie. suit of probable/obvious shift) should be always real signal.

And what if he doesn't have either but has trump tricks ? Not at all likely on this layout because we have ATx of spades but I am thinking about general principles. The problem seems too easy judging from the answers. Nunes played the heart back and as partner had Axxxx♦ and Tx♥ it wasn't successful play.

I did quick simul: 4-2-(4-3), 4-1-4-4, 4-2-(5-2) shapes for responder, 3-5-(2-3) for opener. 2♠ makes 0.6 tricks more on average (while still making 10% less often). To calculate EV of one vs the other I would have to through all the frequencies and see. I am not going to work anymore on this. I think there might be something to what you are saying at matchpoints. It's interesting and increase variance which is also good.

I am not saying gambling 3NT is frequent. So what ? When you have gambling 3NT opener your choices are either 1m or 3m so they will get their chance too when you have 4♠ opener and you open it with 3NT (or 4D or w/e) then they get free heart showing bid. They can even agree that dbl is weakish 2suiter at least 5-5 and get a free competition chance which they wouldn't get if you just open 4♠. You just play them all as natural and dbl as t/o to one major. This way you get a chance to bid your suit at 4level which you normally don't get. Direct double is also better becaue it's less risky (cause they rarely want to play 3NT and you won't watch them taking overtricks in 4M doubled as it sometimes the case after 4M opener). I think it's useful. My point is that: Playing gambling 3NT > playing nothing Playing 3NT as M preempt < playing nothing Playing 3NT as ace askign > playing nothing obviously Now the question is if gambling is better than ace asking. I have completely no idea. The hands are not frequent enough for me to bother with this question. I just don't want to play conventions which improve my opponents chances over natural simple bidding. Which one of the useful one my partner picks is fine by me.