vuroth

My first mistake was counting points and not winners. I started out wondering if we could make 6. Partner needs K♦, and ace, AND something more - Q♦ or K♠ - to make it a fair gamble. I decided that the hand I needed for slam would have opened 1♦, and not 3♦. So far, so good. Somehow, I never really considered 3NT, and went straight for 5♦. I knew my hearts could prove to be 2 quick losers, but I think I was also worried about transportation. Ax in diamonds isn't all that hard to get frozen out with. Lucky for me, 5♦ made, but it didn't look like a very good contract at all. My hand isn't rich enough in cashable winners for the 5 level. In the end, I either need to gamble that my low diamond will be an entry to runnable diamonds in notrump, or pass and play what should be a safe 3♦ contract.

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=saqt32hkjda5ckq83]133|100|Scoring: IMP 3♦ (P) ???[/hv] I thought about this bid for a long time, but did I miss the point completely?

[hv=d=e&v=b&s=sat2hjdaqt76ct743]133|100|Scoring: IMP Bidding: (P) P (3♥) ???[/hv] At the table, I had no idea whether I was worth a takeout double or not. I doubled, but in retrospect I think I was better passing. How close is this hand to a takeout double? Alternately, how close is it to a pass? What should I be thinking when bidding this hand? V

My 9 of hearts just looks too useful to not play. It might only draw the 10, but it might also draw out a higher honour. If partner isn't looking for help promoting his/her trump honours, then there's nothing I can offer the defense at all on this hand. V

All I can think to say is that we really want declarer to believe we have the king of spades. As a bonus to not leading clubs, declarer may decide that West has 5 clubs and try to keep him off the lead. Not sure that applies in this case, though. If I'd thought this long at my usual table, my opponents would have gotten up to make nachos by now. :lol:

I'm actually a bit more concerned with making sure we get our setting trick than trying to embellish the story I've already told. Hearts and spades are suicide leads. Clubs is indicated from the opening, and tells nothing. Sure, I could lead a diamond, too, and probably still get my 5 tricks, but I don't see a whole lot more info for declarer if I lead a club and partner exits a diamond (which, given the board, he's almost sure to do....) EDIT - ok, the only thing I see is that parnter not leading a spade back may make it look more like he has the king. Actually, if partner felt we had both a spade and diamond honour, spades would be a MUCH better lead considering the bidding. Ok, I see it now. That's a lot deeper than I usually think at the table, though. V

Is partner's second double purely takeout (showing, I guess, 3 spades?)? I would have thought that this shape would have been guessable after 1♣ X 1♠. My guess would have been that the second double showed strength.... V

If it's a help suit game try, I think I would be passing. "Once we lose 2 I have great diamonds" might not be what partner wants to hear....

Even without showing south's diamonds, we were a safe bet, from the explanation of the bidding, that south had at least 5 diamond winners. Add in the 3 aces, and south is only 1 trick away, at best. (A king or a 6th diamond, and there's no defense). The bad news is that the spade finesse is on for south (either that, or south has the king of spades, and the contract is safe). The only thing I can see is to play either the Q or K of hearts on the heart trick. This may give the illusion that the heart honours are split, prompting south to repeat the heart finesse, rather than the spade finesse. So king of hearts, return a club to partner's jack. Hopefully, we'll take 3 club tricks and 2 heart tricks.

Apologies for going slighly off-topic, but isn't a major suit lead a better idea than 4th best here? We only have 1 entry, and partner seems destined to have more entries and a decent number of major suit cards. I think at the table I would have led 8♠, hoping to hit partner's best suit. As for the puzzle, once dummy hits the table, pushing a heart through dummy looks like our best chance. V

I'm totally comfortable passing as North. After 2♦, I agree that south can throw in a balancing 2♥. If south passes (fearing, maybe, that the bidding might continue???), would north really be crazy to compete to 2♥?

I was pondering a trump lead. North is 5/4 or better in the majors, and south has at least 4 trumps. If south is evisioning a crossruff, though, I may have an overruff coming. A♦

I think that jillybean's partner bid 1♠. I agree that 1♠ is very likely 5, but I'm still not comfortable with distorting my hand in anticipation of problems partner MIGHT have. I'm happy to bid 2♣, and take my lumps if the field is in ♠. No system handles every hand well, and as a beginner/novice, I'd rather start with clear, accurate communiation. Down the road, if my established partner and I are willing to live with the consequences of bidding 2♠ over 1♠, then so be it. V

...with the caveat that I thought about it for longer than I would have at the table. Also, these things tend to be easier when presented as a problem than when they come up in play. V

That's the winner, for my money.

Maybe this is too beginnerish, but... 1. Panic passes - I have no idea what's going on, so I'll pass. 2. Not counting tricks/points. 3. Not thinking about bidding while playing declarer/defense 4. Always finessing (see 2) 5. Not considering transportationg/blocking

Does 2♦ still show 10 HCP in competition? For some reason, I had it in my head that it was a free bid, and only showed 8+....

One problem that I have with kibitzing top players is figuring out which ones play a system I'm trying to learn. (In my case, SAYC.) As for playing up - I'm guessing that's really, really, really tough to do. I can only agree, though, that it sounds like the way to go. V

On the first hand, you haven't promised partner anything, so his double should (imo) be based on his own hand alone. Why pull the double when you have exactly what you told him you have? On the second, all I can think is that 2NT was meant to be a strong (>17 point) hand. (Please, please tell me it wasn't unusual 2NT....) I think the rule of thumb is that undiscussed bids are natural, and a natural 2NT has to be strong (doesn't it?). Knowing partner is strong and doubling, I'd be passing as fast as I could and hoping to collect a big score on defense. If, on the other hand, you interpreted his 2NT as unusual, then I would think that you would have to interpret the double as asking you to pick a minor, because with an unusual 2NT hand, partner can't possibly want to play defense. 0.02 V, novice

Interesting perspective, hélène. I had thought that by reading a lot and playing very little, I wasn't helping myself much. Maybe it's not so bad....

I

I'll confess, the solution was the VERY last thing I looked at. :)

Thanks for the clarification. Cheers!

Sorry, but 1c-1h-1nt-2d is absolutely non-forcing in SAYC without NMF agreed. The standard rule is "new suits by responder forcing, except not simple new suit rebids after opener rebid 1nt". Agreed, and I'm glad someone pointed it out. An interesting thread, and probably one that rates as high intermediate. Not that all B/Is can't or shouldn't play FSF and NMF, but I'm sure many leave at least one of them off the scoresheet. The moral of the story seems to be that there's more than one way to force to game, and having a clear distinction between SJS and other GF methods make sense. In a B/I pickup match, I think 2♥ rates to be a clear winner. In an established B/I partnership, I think I'd want to discuss this kind of hand with partner - vis a vis 1♥ vs 2♥. V

I find that, as a novice, getting lost or confused in the bidding can lead to my brain shutting down, as if for overload. I think it's important to keep thinking even when you know the bidding has gotten tough. Whether you made the right choice over 3♦ or not, your choice over 5♦ was probably the one you should really be looking to learn from. Unless it was matchpoints, or the bidding doesn't mean what I think it means, the minor suit game held much more appeal than the major suit try after 5♦. 0.02 V