nick_s

I'm kinda surprised no one has suggested opening this hand. I wouldn't, but I think it's a close call. 2♣ is to play. With a pickup partner I'd leave it in. I wish I had the kind of partnership agreements that jtfanclub and pclayton talk about.

One more small point in favor of a diamond lead rather than a spade (I agree with all of Phil's comments). It's entirely possible that pard has a five card diamond suit, but very unlikely that he has a 5 card spade suit.

Like most other people, I'd lead a spade. I'm not worried about giving up a trick when playing against 'random club players' because I think we're getting a bad score if the slam makes. There's always a significant number of pairs that miss slams - no matter how obvious they are. So not giving up an overtrick is much less important than beating the slam. Playing MPs in a quality field is different. Now a neutral lead is more attractive. I think I'd still lead a spade though.

Agree with Ken about 4♥ instead of 4♦. But having bid 4♦, East still has another chance. Pard has made two slam tries, and you can hardly be better. The only concern is that there are 2 spade losers. After 4♥, I would bid 4NT. Getting to 7♣, is another matter. I don't know how you tell pard about the 5th club and the extra diamond honor.

I'd like to open 2♠, but I don't have any regular (or irregular) partnerships that I'd do it with. You need to have discussed the strength of pre-empts in this situation with your partner so pard doesn't go overboard when you open 2♠ here. See Partnership Bidding at Bridge by Robson/Segal Chapter 3 for a good discussion.

A small club

No one mentioned the Losing Trick Count - yet another evaluation method that works well with 9 card fits. Depending upon which method you use, you have 7.5 or 8 losers. According to the LTC, 8 losers is worth a game invitation, with 7 losers you can bid game yourself.

I'd accept the invitation. My high cards are all working, even though the distribution is crap. Excuse me while I attempt to hijack the thread... In a recent ACBL bulletin, Frank Stewart says he likes to play a style where you stretch to invite game, but don't stretch to accept the invitation. Is this a common agreement in the expert community? Nick

Pass. Partner is marked with at most 16 HCP. It is highly likely you are outgunned. The best that can happen is that you steal a part score. The worst that can happen is that you push the opponents into a making game. Remember that opener is sometimes forced to open one of a minor with a 20+ count if the hand is unsuitable for 2NT or 2♣. There's a good chance that this is one of those times. If you were thinking about overcalling 2♥, this is not the hand for it. When balancing, a jump overcall is commonly played as an opening strength hand with a good 6 card suit.

5♣

Yes, life is dangerous. You may die. I just hope you do not ban it for all of us. You can have your choice options. Well, I was speaking for myself here. You had two questions and one poll. I might think differently if I was a bridge professional and my livelihood depended upon it... but I'd like to think I'd refuse.

Well there's "safe" and there's "safe". The FDA is not exactly batting 1000.

Well, I'm neither a 2/1 guru, nor an expert, but here's my 2 cents anyway. There are tons of interesting issues lurking here that I'd like to see explored by the resident experts. First off: figuring out whether you want to be in 7 ♣/♦/NT as opposed to 6 ♣/♦/NT is dependent on knowing whether you have the Q♣. Determining possession of a minor suit queen is a relatively hard thing for anyone to do. I'd be strongly tempted to open 1♦ instead of 1♣, and claim that I had a heart mixed up with my diamonds. There's a huge disparity in the strength of the minor suits. I would have responded 2♦ instead of 1♦. However I do understand that strong jump shifts have rather gone out of fashion these days. I'd have minor reservations about the quality of the diamond suit, but this isn't as important when the jump shift is based on support for partner's suit. I would rebid 1NT instead of 1♠, even though I don't have a heart stop. I expect partner to prefer responding in a major suit to diamonds with a weak hand. If partner is stronger, we can always find the major fit later in the auction.

I agree. You are too strong for 3NT. Partner is still unlimited and slam is possible in any strain but diamonds.

I think kgr is suggesting that you use Q♠ as the squeeze card instead of a club in this end position: Dummy Q ♠ x ♥ 10 ♦ Declarer J ♠ K10 ♥

Edited because I got this wrong at the first attempt. If the contract was 4♣, you have a nice loser-on-loser play available: after the initial duck, and trump return, play A♠, Q♠ ditching a heart. The other heart will go on the J♠. Edited again: The stuff about how to play if in 4♣ is a load of crap. Must engage brain before posting... The hidden solution is wrong too: just take a diamond finesse if the spade king doesn't come down.

Thanks for all the great suggestions! I /do/ understand that there's no such thing as a definitive "expert standard". The very idea is ridiculous when you think about it. That would imply that everything has been completely worked out and all experts agree that there's no room for improvement. Absurd. It's pretty clear that I need to learn 2/1, and I had been wondering whether Lawrence or Hardy was the way to go. The emphasis on the LOTT is new to me. I had heard of it before, but at the time nobody paid it much attention. Now it seems that the pendulum has swung from one extreme to the other and we've reached a new equilibrium. It's no magic bullet, but it does have its uses. Nick

Hi, I'm returning to the game after a 25-year hiatus. I'm also now playing in the US as opposed to the UK. Much has changed and I have much to learn and relearn. In another thread it was suggested that "The Bidding Dictionary" does not define the current "expert standard" for bidding (if it ever did). Doubtless the same could be said about many other works. I'd like a few suggestions for reading material to get caught up on the current state of the art. Right now I'm reading "Partnership Bidding at Bridge - Robson/Segal", and back issues of "The Bridge World". Many thanks Nick

Hi. FWIW, I too bid 3D. (wtp?) Could you elaborate on the statement above please. I agree with everything else you said, but didn't understand this part. An aside: being old-fashioned, I still use strong jump shifts. This hand does not qualify for that either. The suit is not good enough.

I was taught that Michaels (or UNT) was either weak (< 12) or strong (16+). With an intermediate hand, bid the suits one at a time. Partner will assume you have the weak type, and won't get over-excited with eg. a 10 count. Here you have the strong type, so let partner know by making a game try. I'd raise 2♠ to 3♠.

This is seriously flawed. I see what you mean. Thanks for pointing that out. This method was introduced to me about 3 months ago and seemed to be working fairly well. From now on, I'll be taking this one with a grain of salt too.

If you're playing fit-jumps, then you should have bid 3♥ on the round before. If you're not, then you get problems like this one :) . I suppose I bid 2♥ forcing now, planning to follow with 3♠ over partner's 2♠.

The formula I use these days is: length of 2 longest suits + HCP + defensive tricks. If this is 21.5 or more I open NV. If this is 22 or more, I open Vul. I used to use LTC <= 7 and 1.5 defensive tricks and HCP >= 10, but I found this tended to overvalue 3-suited hands. Yes I open, but I'm not happy about it. I'll stretch further to open 1M than 1m, but this one is ok. The best opening for the hand is of course 1 (weak) NT.

Let's try to make sure we beat this rather than looking for a big penalty. I'll guess that declarer has 8 hearts to the KJT and AS. Together with QD in dummy that makes 9 tricks if he picks up my QH. He only has 1 possible entry to dummy (QD), so I don't want to lead a club or spade to allow him to make a possible KC or QS. I'm leading a small diamond after winning the Ace. If this gives declarer a discard and an entry, it's still not the 10th trick.

Transportation: entries