grrigg

Canape means that you are allowed to have a longer minor than a major. Opening one major promises a 5-card suit with a possibility of a longer minor. The opening bid doesnt promise another suit, but you might have it. Is there really a system that makes 1M a two suited opening? 2M as major + minor actually shows two suits, not as possibility (you could also just decide to open 2M as weak 2 on 5-5) but as a guarantee. I think there is a clear difference.

Actually if your suit is AKJ10xxxx (10 included) then you have 60% chance of picking up the suit opposite a singleton. There are 80 singleton deals: 5 possible singletons x 16 layouts of the other 4 cards. You pick up all layouts where partner's singleton is the Queen (if 10 isnt there then you would lose on two 4-0 breaks). For the other 4 singletons it doesnt matter what they are. You pick up all 2-2 breaks = 6 deals from 16 and any queen singleton which is 2 more deals. So the suit runs on 8/16 deals where its a non-Queen singleton. So the total number of deals with running suit is 4x8+16=48. Finally 48/80=6/10=60%. Voila.

Trys: Regardless of your opening style passing over 2♦ is 100% wrong. If you think that partner has a minimum of 13HCP then you hold at least 24 points together. And you have a fit. But why should partner have the bare minimum?? He could have more, potentially much more. The worst thing that happens is you bid a slim game and 13 opposite 11 games do make quite often. People often bid games with less. You are aiming at an incredibly narrow target. You might hit it, but the chances are super slim.

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sxhxxdakj10xxxxcxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP Red v White. The bidding goes Pass to you. Its your call![/hv]

About 7♦: Generally speaking I really prefer bids that can win in 2 ways, either it was actually right or the opponents pull and end up too high. A bid like 7♦ has only one way to win and most likely they need a making slam in order for it to be right. Thats a pretty narrow target.

In this situation I would bid 3♦ as the least of evils. Many (most) play some sort of catch-all either rebidding 2M or 2NT but in this case partner might think 2♠ promises 6 and 2NT shows both other suit stoppers. I'd bid your shape and hope for the best. Btw, whats wrong with 1♠? :huh:

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=saqjxxxxhjxxdjxcx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] The bidding is starting with partner 2♥-(3♣)-4♥-(5♣) all pass (or so I wish B) ) 1. Do you agree with 4♥? 2. What do you lead against 5♣?

This hand was actually from Polish Team Quarterfinals and I saw it on Vugraph. In both rooms they doubled. Partner of the doubler had Qxx xxxxx Qxx xx. At one table he bid 4♥ and they everntually ended up in 4♠X down 3 for -500. In the other room he passed(!), 4♦X down 3 for +500.

OK, here's what I should have said: Every once in a while there comes up a hand which, playing standard, makes me want to strangle myself. With a barbed rope. After walking on hot coals for about an hour. Which is why with my regular partners I play ____ and this feeling never occurs. Fill in the blank.

When 80-90% (or some high and impressive number, dont sue me over this) of the mutual funds underperform S&P 500 an index that is easily available for anyone to buy I have a very hard time believing rich conspiracy theories.

I probably misstated what I wanted to see. Its logical that you need to discuss things in order of frequency, so defensive carding is the most important thing. Many things involving style (is this a weak 2, is this an opening bid?) also rate to come out ahead of any convention that isnt on the convention card. However that isnt what I intended to ask for. I just wanted people to list 1 thing that they really like and that improves a lot on standard bidding/carding agreements. Disregarding the frequency of occurence (well not totally, but any named convention has a decent chance of not coming up at all in 26 boards).

Imagine playing with an expert partner for the first time and quickly filling out a convention card just before the game. What would be the one thing you would like to add to the info listed there? It doesnt have to be the most frequent sequence just one place where you would like to add/improve. For example, almost everyone agrees to play inverted minors and thank god that they do not come up a lot. I am not sure if there is any "standard" way to bid after 1m-2m. Is it forcing to 2NT or 3m, can you have a 4 card major for 2m raise, stoppers up the line or not, what is 1m-2m-2NT and 1m-2m-3NT? None of this is evident without some discussion. Another place where you might want to add agreements is 1m-1M-2M. People are aware that 3-card raises are possible, but usually there is no agreement on how to find out about that. I could list more, but I hope you get the point. Again, it doesnt have to be the most frequent of sequences, just list your favorite tweak/addition.

Would you really rebid 4♥? I imagine 3♥ is enough (which S would obviously raise to game). For some reason I saw ♥8 as 2 cards sorry :mellow: So scratch what I said about opening 4♥. However 2♥ is a huge underbid and I am much much closer to bidding 4♥ than 2.

North had to bid more than 2♥, this bid can be made on any minimal hand and doesnt promise 6 hearts. I am not sure I truly want to make a move with South's hand (I guess it depends a bit on what you open). Have to bid at least 3♥, maybe 4 if you are feeling lucky. PS Deleted original reply because I thought North had 8 hearts.

OK. I accept passing with this hand, although some of the reasons given are not convincing to me. I do not expect partner to reopen over 4♠ once he passed 2♠ vul vs not. Also, given my hand and the colors I do expect 4♠ to be off a couple on average. If the double was penalty (which it is not) I do think that its a winning proposition. But moving on, I have sort of a continuation question. Let's say that I hold Kx xxx Kxxx xx or xx xxx xxxx Kxx or some similar garbage type hand and the bidding goes 2♠-pass to me. What is to prevent me from bidding 4♠? It seems that fairly often I will either buy it undoubled or force opponents to guess on the 5 level. Sometimes the person in the 4th seat will be able to double and I will go for a very large number. But, paradoxically, the fewer trumps we have (could be as few as 7 here) the less the chance that that will happen. So I'm wondering if by bidding 4♠ on such horrible hands I would come out ahead on average? I realize that its gambling/bad for partnership etc etc, so lets ignore that and just ask would such a bid come out ahead. (This did not happen on the deal and isnt the reason for the post, just in case you thought that :) )

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sakxxhaxdajcxxxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] All white at imps the bidding goes Pass-4♦ to you. Do you pass or try something? (presumably something=double but feel free to surprise me ;))

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sak10hkxdxxxckqj10x]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Red v. White, the bidding goes 2♠-Pass-4♠ to you. You are playing against people with definite frisky tendencies especially at these colors. Do you let them have or take a risk and bid something (what)?

I understand the idea, but a move of 6 percentage points is not terribly huge. Its large for one day, but not really something to base government reform on. Tto me the move was presented in the way that made me think 6 actual percent or at least something far more terrible. Tell me how this quote is not misleading: The Bond Market reacted violently to these actions today (1/24), spiking up the rate on the ten year bond by more than six percent, effectively revoking all of The Fed’s “rate action” in less than 24 hours. Mortgage costs are going to RISE, not fall!

Whenever I see someone use data in a deliberately misleading way I automatically lose respect for their positions. Both posts said that yield on 10 year bonds spiked by 6% in 1 day. To me this would mean say movement from 3% to 9%, indeed an enormous and unprecedented event. In reality the move was from 3.281% to 3.426%. Something quite different eh? If you look at 6 month chart of TNX you will see that moves of similar (slightly smaller) magnitude both up and down have happened before and not too infrequently. The story about the rogue trader is interesting but I have serious doubts about its imagined impact. Seven billion dollars is, of course, a lot of money but to the overall markets its a drop in a bucket. It will be interesting to hear the details of how he got away with that stuff or perhaps he is a scapegoat.

If you insist that the opener is unbalanced isnt he constrained to have 5-4-3-1. 6-3-3-1 or 6-3-2-2 with 3 card support (suits listed in order of length not suit order)? The only 2 other reasonable shapes I see are 5-5-3-0 and 6-4-3-0 in which case partner is likely to bid the second suit instead of supporting. Since the shapes are so limited patterning out by bidding second suit (5-4-3-1) or rebidding original suit (6-3-3-1, 6-3-2-2) makes a lot of sense.

Hand 1. My first reaction was "easy, partner has a real diamond suit", but on second look I think it might mean that partner is interested in doubling them for penalty in at least one of the major suits. Hand 2. Pretty easy 2D for me because I think of partner double as takeoutish or competitive in nature. And I dont have anything else to bid but 2D.

Just wondering: What do you expect partner to have for the 2♥ call red v white given that the heart suit isnt that great? Also, is the opener almost certainly 5-6 (or more) in spades and diamonds?

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sxhkq10xxdqjxcakxx]133|100|[/hv] West deals and opens 2♠ and it goes Pass, Pass to you. Would you overcall 3♥ or double? Does it matter to you whether its IMPs or matchpoints? Is it even close in your mind or is one action a runaway winner?