Little Kid

Without any additional clues, I would usually lead the Q in a suit contract and a small one in NT.

This was only the fourth time playing together so we didn't have any agreements about 4♥ therefore it was not alerted as it had no conventional meaning. I assumed (and would expect anyone else to do so too) that it is preemptive with quite a large range under these conditions. The only reason I mentioned optimistic is because in my view it is on the lighter end of a 4♥ bid. But with a passed partner, 3hcps and a 6-5 I'd have probably ended up bidding 4♥ too. The opponents are certainly cold for game or slam and I wouldn't want to pussyfoot around with 2♦ (which would have been Michaels) in order to let them find their best contract. Irrespective of my personal opinion on whether 4♥ is an overbid or not, I think there is still a world of difference between a potential overbid and a calling it a psyche. I was kind of annoyed about it yesterday but over it by now. I'll take the advice of trying out other tourneys. BBO is still awesome :rolleyes:

Partner opens 1♠ in first seat, which is quite nice as you hold: [hv=d=n&v=b&s=skj62h6d843ca7654]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] This hand seemed too good for a preemptive raise to 3♠, even vul. Since we played no gadgets other than a general 2/1 structure and Jacoby 2NT I decided to go via 1NT and most likely show a 3-card limit raise next. Thoughts?

So I just entered one of the Free BBO Tournaments we didn't even mange to bid the second hand :) Hand 1: Pass from me and LHO opens 1♦. Nobody vul partner preempts 4♥ on: ♠T9xxx ♥QJ9xxx ♦x ♣x We end up getting a good board after we go down doubled for a few in 5♥ while they had a slam on. After two passes on the next hand the tournament director, xxxx, shows up and suddenly adjusts the hand we had just started bidding to Ave-. I have to ask about 4 times before I finally get a response saying that psyches are not allowed. I continued to ask politely what psyche she meant as we hadn't even bid the hand she adjusted. She says she will check again and then gives us another Ave-, this time for board 1. I was sure there must have been a misunderstanding so I enquire again about what has happened, at this point my partner doesn't want to continue until that hand has been cleared up. As it turns out, we got the board adjusted because my partner psyched because he didn't have a lot of hcps for his 4♥ bid... I have no objections to directors disallowing psyches, but claiming this is one of them is just silly. I tried to reason with her, explaining that it was just a preemptive bid (albeit optimistic) but she remained adamant about it being a psyche and not allowed. We withdrew from the tournament at this stage. That concludes my BBO Free Tournaments thus far in 2010 :( (Prior to posting this I asked the director if she minded I asked about this incident on the BBO forum and she replied she had no objection)

[hv=v=b&n=sjt32hqt4d9cq7653&w=sq7hk9dk652ckt842&e=sa6ha8532dt843cj9&s=sk9854hj76daqj7ca]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

I would suggest looking at someone's profile instead of their listed skill level, it is usually a better indicator of what they play and how well. If they list conventions like Gerber, Jacoby transfers, Splinter, Stayman and Blackwood; chances are they don't know many other conventions and are not very strong. A regular intermediate player would probably list some of the following in their profile: 2/1-SAYC, NT defence, carding and leads, nmf/2wcb, 1403/0314, Jacoby 2NT, drury/rev. drury, 4-way xfer... If I see these conventions I'd assume the player opposite me also plays Michaels. If you host a table try locking seats so that you can 1) find compatible players and 2) avoid some people joining who only play until they get one bad result and then leave. Oh an Pass of 2♠ is pretty insane :D

[hv=d=e&v=b&s=sk9854hj76daqj7ca]133|100|Scoring: IMP (Pass)- 1♠ - (Pass) - 2♠ (Pass)-Pass-(2NT*)-Pass (3♦) - ? *2NT: minors [/hv] What do you bid: a ) strong opponents in a big tournament b ) randoms on BBO

It seems like most people play 2♦ as 5+♦ and by default 2NT therefore denying 5♦, which is fair enough. I haven't read the Hardy book that has been referred to so I may have missed some obvious reasons for this. But is there any merit to playing 2♦ as 5+♦ but allowing balanced 5332 hands to rebid 2NT? Possible arguments for: 1) Take some pressure off the 2♦ bid, which can still be a fairly large set of hands at this point. Makes auctions after 2♦ somewhat easier for partner knowing that these (fairly common) balanced hands are excluded. 2) Most auctions will lead to 3NT anyway, by rebidding 2NT on these hands you get there faster and provide the defence with less information. 3) You still have the option to get to 6♣/♦ if partner bids 3m next or even after a quantitative 4NT. 4) 2NT describes these kinds of hands pretty accurately with regards to both shape and strength (aside from the 5th ♦). Can simplify bidding for partner. 5) Partner might get too enthusiastic about playing in ♦s with a fit if you bid 2♦ here, even though these balanced hands could well play better in NT despite the fit. 6) If you play inverted minors and partner didn't bid it with a GF hand and 4♦s chances are he can still support ♦s after 2NT. He probably didn't bid it because he has a source of ♣ tricks and wants to show that before showing the fit. This he can also still do over 2NT. Arguments against: 1) Evaluation of slam prospects in ♦ could be significantly affected by finding out about 5th ♦. 2) You will usually get to 3NT when it is the right contract. 3) You take up more room and may end up in 3NT when it is wrong because you don't have room to bid out your shape. Meh, writing this I actually kind of managed to convince myself to just bid 2♦ with these hands :)

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=s3hkq52dat875ca52&s=saq8h643dkj9ckq93]133|200|Scoring: MP 1♦-(Pass)-3NT Lead: ♠2 (3rd, 5th)[/hv] East rises with the ♠K and now it is up to you.

Basically the question is: do you bid 2♦ to show 5+♦ or 2NT to show a minimum balanced hand, neither of which would promise more than a minimum. I guess I could have made that clearer in the OP :D

2♣ is 100% GF and a 2NT rebid would be 12-14 or 18/19 balanced.

[hv=d=s&s=sq95hakdk7542cq62]133|100|1♦ - 2♣ ? [/hv] 1♦ is 4+ and 2♣ GF, what is your rebid playing standard 2/1?

1♣-(Pass)-1♥-(1♠) 2♥-(Pass)-3♣ Would you expect 3♣ to be forcing? Do you think it should be forcing? For the purpose of this discussion 2♥ can be 3card support.

I voted for the second although I've seen the first usage a lot too. You are playing for a position with a "finessable" honour, which is either onside or offside. Isn't it logical to refer to the card(s) of importance when you are describing a technique? AQ xx Kx xx 1) I finessed the Queen but it was offside. 2) I finessed the King but it was offside.

Too bad North gets squeezed in the run of the ♦s. Otherwise both West and East need to unblock on the ♣K, now that would be cool!

[hv=d=e&v=e&s=s2hk5daqj87542c82]133|100|Scoring: MP (Pass) - ?[/hv]

Thanks, I will have a look at these! :D

I'm looking for software that can calculate the probabilities of hands based on shape and strength variables. Preferably one with specific lengths in a specific suit length and overall shapes as possible inputs. Any help would be greatly appreciated! :blink:

How about cash AK clubs, then squeeze?

Say you are declaring some random NT contract and you are running your long ♦ suit. You are quite a fast player and these opponents seem to be following your tempo. You see that your LHO already has his next small ♠ discard ready in his hand. You have Kx and Qxx left in ♠, in which you know for sure LHO has the Ace in addition to a bunch of ♥ winners because of his 1♥ opening. Would you ever make a random switch to a ♣ now for the sole purpose of hoping he revokes and gives you a penalty card (letting you cash ♠K)? I would imagine most would consider it inappropriate at a club game but what about high level tournaments? It probably shouldn't work against good opponents but would you consider it unethical to try it? I know I have no objection if an opponent tries it against me, I have nobody to blame but myself if it works. I could definitely understand it if top players are expected to do everything they can to bring in the results they are hired for. At the European Youth Pairs Championships last month the opponents tried this twice in total against us. The first time I was really confused about how my opponent had played the hand and it is only the next day I realised what he had tried to do. Would you do it in that kind of setting? Just so everyone knows, I'm not trying to settle any dispute or anything, just curious :rolleyes:

Well played.

Sign me up for 1NT.

I would be pretty annoyed if opponents were bidding like this and can fully understand being outraged about it. Although I don't play at anywhere near this level of bridge, I would not be able to just let it slide past if I were at the table in a big tournament. Since I don't know the person in question nor his history with bridge ethics I can't factor that into how I feel about the situation. Nonetheless, I would give him the benefit of the doubt and assume it was a desparate punt that hit the jackpot. If you are playing bridge at that kind of level, surely you would opt for the "I picked the wrong bid" excuse rather than risk an appeal if you really were cheating. Having read what people said of what happened at the table I find it hard to imagine how they could have cheated anyway (granted I might be pretty gullible when it comes to cheating). Finally if you are going to cheat and you are a reasonably intelligent person, wouldn't you at least try to do it in a much more subtle way than this kind of flamboyant bidding?

means that opener can't have a singleton, I would bid on any hand where I had a five-card sut, unless it was a scattered 9-10 count in a 5332 shape. On this auction it means there is no singleton, although after 1♣-1♥-1NT I suppose 3-1-4-5 is still possible. Would that affect your decision after starting with 1♣?

I'm having some trouble judging when to remove 1N to 2M at MPs after the auction 1x-1M-1NT. I thought on really minimal hands you should pull because you don't have the controls and entries to set up your long suit anyway, making 1NT a a long shot. On slightly stronger hands gambling 1NT seems ok as you can eventually set up your suit on hcp strength and maybe outscore 2M at MPs. If you have a singleton always pull 1N. With 5422 sit for it at the top of your range and correct with anything less than 10 or so. That is what I've been doing so far but I always seems to get it wrong :) Any suggestions? Your agreements: - 1NT rebids shows BAL hands, can have 4♠ after 1x-1♥-1NT. - Opener can raise 1M on 3card support with a singleton or void somewhere. The auction is always 1♦-1♥-1NT, what would you do with: a) ♠ 832 ♥ T8732 ♦ A3 ♣ J73 B ) ♠ 542 ♥ AQJT3 ♦ 84 ♣ 832 c) ♠ Q3 ♥ J9854 ♦ J76 ♣ Q95 d) ♠ QT9 ♥ QJ542 ♦ J54 ♣ K32 e) ♠ KT93 ♥ T9642 ♦ Q3 ♣ Q7 f) ♠ 8743 ♥ Q9653 ♦ K4 ♣ Ax