trevahound

And if you're not playing WJS's I still don't understand the problem.

Yes.

I probably don't qualify as expert-class, but I'm done. I need very little in partner's hand to beat this, and the insurance is only cheap if they're making. Not sure what the long term point of making them guess is if I am going to guess again right after they guessed. Maybe I might have started with 1♠ and reluctantly taken a few pushes?

Doubler has made a mistake, in partner's opinion. I pass and await partner's hitting their next call. With me having a full opener, I suspect they're in big trouble. I took 1700 out of opps before in this situation. In some local partnerships we play this XX conventionally instead of naturally, and there it is a transfer to 2s, occasionally to play there, but usually a lead directing (asking for a spade lead if RHO declares) heart raise.

I agree with Mike H. I want to get clubs in here. My partners don't pass my 2nt rebids with even a faint summer breeze, but we have good methods (transfers) here to sort out responder's hand types.

When you're next in Seattle, drop in at the best local club game, the Tuesday night (7pm) Mercercrest game, where Multi is legal (along with other normal conventions that should be GCC but are not).

3nt for me, but I have a death wish and understanding teammates. I shouldn't be down more than 5, vuln and doubled, if I've stepped in it. A worthy sac vs their 140, I think. I'd certainly pass if I was sane, or felt we were much stronger than they were. I'd pass before I'd double (really dislike double here). Having a predisposition to balancing allows partner to not stretch so much to come in in the direct seat. Partner could easily have some assorted 12-15 count here. Good thing not many IMPs swing on this decision, eh?

Partner is an unpassed hand. I have two diamonds. Opener has 3+ presumably. That means my partner will occasionally have as many as 8 diamonds, certainly 7 are possible. Is it really anyone's opinion that when I've shown a roughly 5-5 shape, an unpassed partner can not ever play in anything but one of my suits at any level after any number of rebids? Sometimes we seem to like to savor our own farts (myself included). Why I even recall making a unusual NT overcall for the minors and my unpassed partner bidding her 8 card Major.

1) Definitely not. Law 16 B 1 a. Information from partner's alert or failure to alert is completely unauthorized. In ACBL land, Michaels isn't an alert, however, so there'd by no UI from the lack of alert. I don't see where this takes place, but if in the ACBL there is no UI created. Body language or mannerisms might make UI available, though (and usually do). 2.& 3. Not likely. I would assume 3d is bid your better M, partner (especially if overcaller can be 5-4 or 6-5, for example). 4d sounds like diamonds to me, and I certainly think the idea that it's diamonds is at least a LA. I would expect if S rescued this without extraordinary shape the result would be rolled back to 4dx anyway. Stuff happens. Roll your dice, move your mice, and do what the little card you draw tells you to do. In this case, it says take a great big minus number. Hopefully you've now discussed what you play for 1m - 2m more than previously. Brian Zaugg, Seattle

A system with only two messages doesn't work, in my opinion, when 3(+) messages are needed. Messages needed in carding include: - please continue this suit, partner - I have nothing in this suit, partner - PLEASE stop playing this suit, partner - I have no preference what you shift to; try not to give away anything out of your hand - please shift to the lower ranking side suit - please shift to the higher ranking side suit - please shift to a trump (to cut down ruffs or for other reasons) - I have an even (or odd) number of this suit, partner There are refinements on most of the above, as well. Many in my local peer group are insane with suit preference signals. I am a believer in the value of "give partner the info they need most", and it's my job to know what that info is most of the time. I would prefer my opponents to play a system that stresses suit preference at the expense of attitude and count.

This is not what you asked, but I really like playing waiting bids over jump shifts. This gives definition to all responder's non-waiting bids, and in most cases provides opener maximum room to complete (or at least further) their description. What now? 4♠.

With all my regular partners, our meta agreement in similar auctions is: Double is t/o if they've raised artificially showing up to constructive raise values through the 3M (lighter bergen and similar). Double is lead directing if they've raised artificially promising LR or better values (less likely we're being stolen from). Double is t/o if their artificial raise is a fit drury raise (have to be able to compete when they have a fit at the 2 level -- there are thieves in this world. Cheers, Brian

Law 63 A 3. The claim establishes the revoke.

In the Seattle area (and other cosmopolitan tech areas), bridge skews younger than in most of the USA. One thing I would like is much more freedom to experiment than the ACBL allows (and tied with that much more full disclosure than the ACBL requires). Basically all teaching for the general player is wildly conservative, in my opinion. By no means do I think this is a majority reason for the average age being what it is, but I think it matters in a small way. The ACBL alert charts and convention charts are non-functional, even if one takes the time to try to understand them and to discuss them with experienced folks.

How can this possibly be considered a psyche? If I play 5 card majors, and decide sometime to open a 4 card major instead, is that a psyche? I understand (and fully support) full disclosure of agreements (implicit or explicit), but I don't support calling something a psyche that is obviously just different bridge judgement than yours. Is there any evidence at all that they have the agreement to open 1nt with singleton high honors? Is there any evidence at all that they have a habit of doing this often enough to create an implicit agreement? Slopes are not so slippery as some would wish them. A large part of bridge is judgement. I dearly wish the ACBL to allow a big red box on my woefully inadequate CC where I can check which states, "I don't always value my hand the same way you do. I don't always count my points the same way you do. I don't always follow the rule of ______ when evaluating my hand. On some hands, I'm going to be choosing amongst options that all look flawed. I falsecard on occasion -- I've been known to burn partner before. None of this is psyching. When I open 1h on a 4-1-4-4 2 count in third seat at favorable, that is a psyche (or 1nt on a 2-2-2-7 bust). "

Yeah, that makes the most sense, but I didn't think of it. How else could you show spades and clubs?

Had the auction continued with doubler rebidding 4s and advancer bidding 4nt, that would be keycard ask, correct? How is this different? How else could responder set trumps and then ask? If advancer had a just spade moose, this wouldn't be a difficult problem to foresee, and advancer can't bid it this way. This is rule c for me (what else could partner have done earlier in the auction?). But, just to torture myself I'm going to send this problem to my regular partners. :) Brian Zaugg

I really dislike minorwood (or put another way, I love opps playing minorwood). You need to be able to agree on trumps without asking. Many many hands are suitable for play in a minor, often in slam, that are unsuitable for asking for keys with. I play kickback in all my serious partnerships, with (in my opinion) less mishap than those reserving 4nt as their ask. While kickback does complicate some auctions, not having a natural 4nt is painful, for me, and having the response to the ask either be too high or make further suit asks awkward or impossible is a seriously unrated flaw in using 4nt for the ask for all suits. So, when you compare the minor flaws of kickback to the huge flaws in 4nt asking (in a serious partnership), I feel kickback is fairly easy to manage. Some auctions (few) just don't allow a key card ask; so what? We survive, and some auctions shouldn't have a keycard ask available playing 4nt asking. When beginning kickback in a partnership, I start with some basic ground rules, which I recommend. There will be undiscussed auctions and situations that come up, so it's helpful to have some basic agreements. Mine are: a) Strain before level. We're not asking for keys when we don't know what strain we're playing in. b) The agreement is never the ask, unless it's an unnecessary jump (ie where you could have bid the suit naturally and 100% forcing at a lower level). c) What didn't partner do earlier in the auction? (this sorts out most KB questions) d) (most important starter rule) -- If you think the auction has gone off the rails because of possible KB confusion, jump to the slam you were most seriously thinking about (or the cheapest if more than one). Odds are you were headed there anyway, and this is hardly likely to be a disaster. Brian Zaugg

I play this as forcing (with invites going through a 2 red rebid), but it's wildly non-standard. For me, it makes sense on it's own, plus it meshes well with my xyz type auctions where 3 level jump rebids are always GF (at the minimum).

I thought the vulnerability was UI, not AI. At least my partners think I treat it as UI. :)

My partners will have six or seven clubs for a 3 club preempt, and not a good hand for the M's (when I'm unpassed -- obviously when I'm passed all bets are off and preempts become more wide ranging). I would expect to find a 5 card club suit more often than an 8 card club suit. Also, if my partner opens 4♣, I know the following are very likely to be true: a) he doesn't like our chances in 3nt (suit usually sucks), and b) I need ~2.5 defensive tricks or so in my own hand to beat their M suit game. The most important thing is to have an idea what partner's live (1st and 2nd seats) preempts look like, and what they won't look like. For mine, this is right in the wheelhouse for 4♣, and the advance save in 5♣ looks odds on to me. I don't understand how people make decisions what to do when partner preempts when partner can have 2-3 defensive tricks (ie when partner follows the rule of 2, 3, and 4). Suit quality is important to me at the 2 level, when we might have a constructive auction, but not at the 4 level, when I'm making a deliberate decision to make everyone guess, because I believe we are likely to be seriously outgunned this hand.

Is the goal to never go set? Are our teammates of that mindset? Mine aren't. I don't understand the conservatism from the replies below above. I can understand sympathize with not raising with responder's hand (maybe the preempt has already done it's work), but not the "not preempting" with a hand so empty in the M's. With responder's hand, if they bid 4M, do we think we're beating it with any regularity? Lordy, when they have the good cards, let them guess right now.

1) If I understand correctly, partner likes spades and promises 1+ first round controls? Heck yes. 4♣ next, then 4♥ over partner's 4♦, which should get 5c from partner if he has a club card. If I was more clever, I'd avoid cueing clubs and try to look like someone with a club problem, for the lead. I'm not good enough yet to stop pushing for pushy slams. 2) I would be very unhappy if partner held this hand and didn't hit this on this auction. I would take it as more of an observation on my defensive skills than a difference in hand evaluation. :) Brian Zaugg

Hi Chris, I think it's absolutely non-forcing, unless you play conventionally that a direct 3♦ would be weakish and NF. I also don't think we lose the spade suit if I have enough to bid 3♦ the first time. Brian Zaugg

I enjoyed the story also, thank you. It reminded me of an auction where opps had a system crash and ended in 5 something rewound, non-vul (we were vul), down 2, for an absolute average, as there were a sea of +600's our way. Brian Zaugg