kayin801

Are we really that afraid of not being able to make 3♦ or 3♠ after bidding 3♦? Thanks, LHO, for letting us make a descriptive call! If both of those contracts fail, sucks for me! But I think one of those contracts making is the percentage play, while in NT they might take 7 tricks in the round suits.

Agree with gnasher, plus partner could have tried a minor suit bid instead of just going directly to 3S. I guess partner could have xx, Axx, AQxx, xxxx but they also might have made a limit raise with that red at IMPs? I think partner just wanted to smack them if they bid a minor, and since they bid spades he opted to just compete instead. That having been said, the above hand is consistent with their bidding so maybe we should be upgrading based on that and bidding 4.

I think the problem arises as a result of knowingly using an undiscussed bid as a destructive call and knowing it has never come up before. You've already preempted so you've limited your hand, by bidding again you've done something strange, and you know partner can't give the opponents an explanation that can help them deal with it. If you were behind screens, how would you describe this call to your screenmate? Undiscussed? Ew. Then again a preempt is also destructive in the first place. But maybe that's also part of the problem. It's kinda hard to explain why the situation doesn't sit well but it just doesn't, it's like a bridge yuck factor. Edit: Thinking about this some more, I guess I would consider doing something like this at the table, but I would never use the thought line "this is going to mess with my opponents, and it's impossible for my partner to explain!" I dunno, it's confusing.

I'm getting confused here: does XX say anything about clubs besides the fact we have a control in it, or does it say something about diamonds as well, or...? It's not clear but is it likely that we have anything in diamonds ever on this auction, therefore pass or XX just talks about clubs (2nd/1st?). Sorry, I'm just having trouble following the conversation (I'm also super jetlagged so that doesn't help)

I don't think this remotely shows spades at all, though I do think it implies a weird hand, giving the willingness of the preemptor to bid twice. If I bid this way it would be to show a diamond preempt with a preference of a club lead if they bid 4 of a major, which is what we have! And therefore it isn't psychic. Though it will work out poorly at 4NT if they decide to compete. Then again, why didn't we bid 4 diamonds at the start? I guess it could be the hand we have, or maybe x, x, Qxxxxx, AJ10xx or the like. I agree with Rainer that there's something weird as using "this bidding is undiscussed" as a cover when you are also using a bid meant to mess with your opponents, even if that explanation is as true as you can get. I don't know if it's inherently WRONG, but it's definitely sneaky and tiptoeing the line. I admit it is the correct thing to do, but I'd hope your partner has a sense of humor when the opponents get pissed at him/her for not being able to give an explanation and therefore confusing them. Person from other table is crazy. You must have really ticked her off with your earlier psyche.

It's a decent mathematical play problem if preemptor shows out on the second round of clubs. Win opening spade lead, Cash 2 rounds of clubs with honors in hand, see E show out, and test hearts. If they are 3-3, you 'know' diamonds are 3-3 (assume 3334 vs 6331) and you just need to guess the suit. If hearts are 4-2 (3424 vs 6241) now you pitch a spade, ruff, draw trumps and guess. You'll also make when preemptor is 6151. Granted you fail against 3244 vs 6421, with preemptor having the diamond Q. But yes, it still comes down to guessing the diamond Q, which ultimately seems a tossup. I think any scenario where spades are 7-2 increases our chances.

North and South, what you've just done is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever seen. At no point in your rambling, incoherent auction were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having seen it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul. I don't agree with the 1♥ call or the final pass but I can live with them. 2♥ and the second X are beyond words.

Not when declarer promises 3. We have to lead aggressively since declarer is setting up spades for 4/5 tricks pretty quickly. A diamond seems to give us the best shot of 3/4 tricks in that suit plus something outside, while a heart needs more help from partner and looks more likely to set up a slow 9th trick. We aren't going to be able to run diamonds anyway if declarer has K9x or K10x. A low diamond doesn't seem that likely to cost unless it immediately grants a 9th trick they were never getting (AKQxx, xx, Jxx, Qxx vs. xxx, AJxx, Kxx, AJx) Hmm maybe I talked myself into a heart, in which case the layout will be AQ10xx, Axx, xx, Qxx vs xxx, KJx, Jxxx, AKx FWIW I think a club is as dangerous as the other 2 for the same reasons, but I like it less because it's rarely going to set up tricks for our side.

What jjbrr said. 2♦ then 3♠ looks like a slam-going 4 card raise, though not sure how that differs for you from a direct 3♠ by agreement. I have some sympathy if a direct 3♠ bid shows 4 pieces and a slam try since there's no need this sequence to show the same thing, but I'm not real sure what 3♠ is meant to accomplish then. Maybe it's some sort of weird cuebid for clubs?

As a lot of others have said, it should be a picture bid. I play it as a hand that is too good for a 4♠ preempt, so 7 cards to 3 honors or 8 cards to 2 honors in spades and enough outside values to make it too good for the preempt. With a much better hand I'd rather go slowly since we're already in a GF auction; 3♠ should show significant extras and a great spade suit, neither of which we have. Otherwise just start with 2♠ and wait and see what happens. Re 2♥: Sometimes when partner raises our hearts they have Qxxxx, AKx, xx, Axx, a modest hand where 4♥ should play very well. I know I've loaded the example by giving the hand AK of hearts and crappy spades but even with some weaker heart holdings it's not like game is hopeless.

I'd just rebid 2♠ and 3♠, I want better spades for a 4♠ rebid in this situation (put the heart Q into spades). 5♠ is horrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrible based on how I play a 4♠ rebid here, but it just seems that N and S aren't on the same wavelength as to what 4♠ showed. I also find 2♦ instead of 2♥ strange. Yes, I understand the intentions, but sometimes our best game is in a 5-3 heart fit! And it's gonna be harder to show that length after our original bid of 2♦.

I would X, there's a lot of pretty bad hands for partner that have play for a vul game and I'd rather cooperate with shortness and appropriate lengths in non-diamond suits. Especially 1st seat red there's some hands with 6 spades that partner might not wanna preempt on (style dependent). Also they frequently bid 5♦ over us here, even before partner gets his/her turn, and 5♦X is likely to be a decent spot, certainly better than 4♦ undoubled.

3♣ or 3♥. Dislike both. 3♣ doesn't really give partner anything useful to go on, and 3♥ doesn't express our heart support properly, though at least we have a ruffing value and a potentially useful long suit. I would never pass, partner could have xxx, AKQxxx, Axx, x and game is pretty good and that's not good enough for Xing and then bidding. (edit: if not clear, I agree with phil's below interpretation of 3♣ being decent hand in context with no clear direction. I would be more likely to bid that the more familiar I am with my partner)

Declarer has a rough time ruffing a heart in dummy if East covers the 2nd heart with the K after ducking a spade. Either the defense cashes out if declarer ducks or declarer is stuck in dummy without a way to hand after playing a 3rd heart. Continuing spades or diamonds leads to declarer getting stuck in hand unable to ruff in dummy or use the established ♠Q cause E gets in to cash the master trump. Good problem. I was afraid of a spade cause I thought it might just end the hand right there if declarer guessed right. Probably would have tried a diamond at the table.

Tangent then (sorry, not trying to hijack): are you more likely to make a 2 level overcall with this kind of hand if you don't preempt with these kinds of hands or is it more of a delayed 3 level jump or more of a second pass? I was more just trying to make the point that the hand is disgusting and I'd rather bid 3♦ or pass now than bid 2♦. I think I'd hope RHO has the spade K and just attack spades outright to set up an endgame where he has to ruff and lead away from his heart J. Would rather play LHO for the club A, which means we need to attack spades.

I haven't thought about the line yet, but wouldn't that give the overcaller J109x, -, K9xxxx, xxx? I can understand not wanting to open that 3♦ in 1st seat based on style but still ew ew ew

I don't understand this stuff about breaching partnership trust and discipline and whatnot. Maybe this has something to do with playing with people you don't play with that often and wanting to continue playing with them, but if Josh (sohcahtoa, reg partner of 5 years) passed 2C thinking it was the percentage move then I would be perfectly okay with that, even if he was wrong this time. Obviously it could work out poorly, partner is unlimited and has said not all that much about his hand, but crazy moves work out sometimes too. Best case it's a cool story, even if it's an anti-percentage play. Worst case, lose 10, next board. If he decided to bid 2♥ and pass was correct I wouldn't get pissed either. I admit if partner was consistently passing forcing cuebids it would be aggravating, but this seems to be the exception, not the rule? (Too much bromance? Sorry :P) Jilly: anything but X seriously understates the value of your hand and risks missing a good game. Yes, you expect partner to bid hearts but 2♦ is a huge underbid. I don't mind 2♣ here after the X, hoping partner can bid something else, or 2NT which is a lie but the club opening might not have that much to it (plus the 2NT call might dissuade a club lead)

FWIW the 1H bidder had something like Qxx, AKxxx, Jxxx, x so he could scramble 6 tricks. Then again if the defense doesn't give you anything I guess 3NT might not come in on a bad day (alternate distribution) since we might not get 2 dummy entries for getting that heart trick and we might lose 2 spades.

[hv=pc=n&s=saj84h4dkq9ckqj94&n=st95hqjt65da4ct73&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=p1c(16+)p1d(0-7)1hdp1nppp]266|200[/hv] Imps.

I don't know the strength of the A/X field that was played in, but 3NT looks like it's frequently down on a heart lead. Maybe after 3 rounds of hearts and 5 rounds of clubs declarer should guess the position since S is pressed for pitches. (giving up 2 spades looks like it marks the Q with N, so S would have diamond Q?)

Suppose that declarer opts to lead the 10 first (regardless of whether it's right or wrong): In line with the last thread like this, should LHO play the 9 from H9xx as well as from 9x to protect QJx offside? Of course the defense can always take 2 tricks when LHO has H9xx and playing the 9 would cost one of those tricks double dummy but in practice will declarer ever hook again when the 9 is dropped on the first round? Or is it something along those lines? I think that last argument makes no sense because with the 9 comes up at round 1 that's then an indication that declarer should opt to go up instead? So do you have to play the 9 from QJ9x too then as LHO to protect yourself where the double finesse is ACTUALLY working? Sorry commentary is disorganized but I'm too lazy to try to summarize and actually put it together. Edit: I guess this all favors cashing the A and running the 10?

Assume N was dealer? I would bid 2♠ over 1♦ with the E hand but I know a lot of people hate that, especially in 2nd seat. I also don't hate 2♠ over 2♦, especially since S could easily have 2 kings less if partner has an inappropriate shape to bid. I don't fault pass in either case though. (Yes that's the best case scenario) W has no chance to get in, I don't think they're good enough for 2♥ over 1♥ Think it's partially unlucky, partially E has a non-aggressive style.

A) - KQ92 (1 case) B) 2 KQ9 (1 case) C) 9 KQ2 (1 case) D) KQ 92 (1 case) E) H H92 (2 cases) F) H92 H (2 cases) And all other cases are irrelevant. You'll pick up all other 2-2 breaks by leading low from dummy twice or by cashing the A and nothing you can do about KQx(x) offside. Cashing the ace loses to A, B, and C (3 cases) Running the 10 planning to finesse again loses to D and F (3 cases) Running the 10 planning to cash the A loses to E and F (4 cases) Leading low to the J loses to A and E (3 cases) Leading low to hand and covering whatever RHO plays loses to C and D (2 cases) Last one is a winner? Unless case D being a 2-2 break makes cashing the A or low to the J better enough to account for the extra case given up. (Think those two are the same). I always forget how that works.

[hv=pc=n&s=sat42hat2d72cqj72&w=sq9h87dkqjt9854c4&n=sj86hqj95d3cat985&e=sk753hk643da6ck63&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1d(2+%20diamonds)2d(%3F)3c(2H%20shows%20a%20better%20hand)4c(pick%20a%20major)d4dp4hd5dppdppp]399|300[/hv] Opponent's bidding went off the rails, but that happens sometimes and when it does you wanna take full advantage. Whether or not the X of 4♥ was lead directing (S thought it was just "double auctions off the rails"), N lead the heart Q (hooray!) Upside-down everything. Trick 1: Heart Q holding Trick 2: Low heart to 10 Trick 3: Low diamond spot to A Trick 4: Low diamond to K, N pitches a low club Trick 5: Club lead towards dummy, N tanks and eventually ducks Final result: N/S +100 instead of +300 Obviously N can rise with the club A, but they were worried declarer had 3 clubs to the Q and S had the spade Q and 4 diamonds (go for the throat!). Can S make N's life any easier, or should N have definitely figured it out?

I've found that reviewing what system you have is always a good idea so that you don't have bidding misunderstandings, but trying to add or fix too much prior to the event is a bad idea. My partner and I are two of those system fans you mention, and we play something fairly intricate, so before we go to play at a tournament we print out/review our system notes and just randomly quiz each other or bring up obscure situations, not because we're looking for fixes or changes or holes, but so that we can remember and get ourselves into the right frame of mind (and this is what I believe to be the biggest thing, just being on the same wavelength). In fact, even if something is sort of bad, we will sometimes leave it just because we don't want to change it at that juncture. This has helped us avoid much by way of bidding misunderstandings except in really weird situations. If this is an established partnership then I'd hope that carding agreements are set at this point, but definitely play a bunch of hands leading up to your event just so, again, you can get in the right frame of mind. Playing with different partners requires a different touch so you need to be able to decide what plays will let you best communicate with this particular partner.