mikestar

The general rule in Standard American Bidding (dataing back to Culbertson's time) is that double or higher jumps in a new suit are preemptive unless the partnership defines them otherwise. Using 3♠ here to distinguish 4 and 5 card jump responses has merit and may be more valuable than a preempt, but it also may not be. After all, you might have a weak hand with long spades, partner might have a minimum double and opener might have a rock. Robson Segal classify (1♦)-X-(P) as a potentially contested auction where we must be prepared for enemy competition. The definition of an uncontested auction is: 1) Both opponents have passed after the opening bid, or 2) One opponent has passed after the opening bid and the other has made a limit bid. So if you have an auction of, say 1♦-(P)-1♠-(P) it is fairly safe to define the bidding from this point in terms of construcive efficiency rather than preparing for competition. In the aution at hand, it is necessary to prepare for competition and preempts make sense--this doesn't necessarily mean 3S should be preemptive, you have to consider the tradeoffs, but that playing it preemptive makes sense, while playing 1♦-(P)-1♠-(P)-4♣ as preemptive does not make sense.

Takeout per Robson Segal guideline: all doubles are for takeout until we have found our fit. However, this takeout double will be passed more often than not--LOTT suggests you need an expectation of 20 total trumps to take it out (unless you are strong enough that slam is likely.)

An easy pass for me. 11 HCP but subtract at least a point for the sfiff which is always a liability in NT--here it makes it much harder to run partner's diamonds than if you had xx. So with at best a bad 10, pass is obvious--game is unlikely and partner's diamonds will pull more weight if they are trumps. Wouldn't surprise me if pass was the only plus score.

May you spend eternity holding AKQJT AKQJT AKQ void opposite a partner who masterminds like you did. The gain on the one hand cannot possibly begin to cover the losses caused by partner losing trust--if it doesn't break the partnership outright, the losses in IMPs or matchpoints will run into the hundreds at least, maybe more--an action like this can damage confidence for years. And there is no guarantee you even gain on the hand. Once while playing Precison, my partner intentionally passed my forcing 1♣ with xxx xx x xxxxxxx--a matermind far more likely to work than passing 2♣. We made 1♣ and we had no game, but 1♣= (I was void and the clubs split badly) was a cold bottom when the whole field was in 2♠+1/3♠= for +140. This dropped us from first overall in a regional MP event to fourth.

Actually, 1NT game forcing is GCC legal now, provided the continations do not constitute a relay system. (It wasn't GCC leagl when the Key Lime Precision 1NT response was devised.) #3 under Responses and Rebids on the GCC: CONVENTIONAL RESPONSES WHICH GUARANTEE GAME FORCING OR BETTER VALUES. May NOT be part of a relay system. What is still illegal is geiven under #2 (emphasis added): ONE NOTRUMP response to a major suit opening bid forcing one round; cannot guarantee game invitational or better values.

Overbidding 5 tricks at uinfavorable at IMPs? East should hang for this. West's redouble is a felony--OK on values if East were biddding rationally, but better support is needed--with only 8 trumps, the double could be a stack. Double is only a misdemenor--wrong under normal conditions, but South has a surprise trump trick and some defense. Assuming of course that they play this double as penalty (it would be takeout for me). It is a resonble gamble given they are desparate to get a good score and may cause declarer to misguess a finesse. North's pass is a mere infraction--values are borderline. I would have doubled for takeout (then South has an easy leave in) and would still double if we played this for penalties, but pass is merely conservative rather than horrible.

Double. WTP--it is correct regardless of NT range, but safer if we play weak NT.

Prefer weak 2♦ vs. anything (unless 2♦ is absolutely necessary to plug a hole in an otherwise good system. Note that the Precision 2♦ is not needed--the 1/4 of 1% of the time you are 4-4-1-4 you just open 1♥). Garazzo refused to play multi as he was unwilling to give up the "best preempt in the game": the raise of a weak 2♠ to 3♠.

1♥ 2♣(1) 2♥(2) 4♣(3) 4♠(4) 5♣(5) 5♦(6) 5NT(7) 6♣(8) 6♦(9) 7♦(10) 7♥(11) P (1) 5+C, guarantees rebid but not GF (2) Does not promise extra length or strength (suit quality not quite good enough for 3♥) (3) Good clubs and heart support--suggests better than minimum game values, denies a splinter. (4) Kickback (5) (0 or) 3 Keycards (6) Q♥? (7) Yes, and K♣, no K♦ (8) K♠? (Spiral asks take precedence over alternative contracts below 6 of our suit) (9) No (10) Q♦? (6♠ asks for Q♣; 6♥, 6NT and 7♣ to play) (11) No

What is our NT range? Playing 15-17, I prefer pass as we can be in deep doodoo if partner has the quite frequent balanced minimum. Yet I hate this, we could have a game if partner is unbalanced, even if fairly minimum. Playing 12-14 or similar, competing is much more attractive: if partner is balanced he'll have 15+, so I will double (=clubs with diamond support). On some of pard's strong balanced hands, he will pass, but this may work in spite of my void. If he is unbalanced, we will have too good of a minor fit for him to be tempted to leave the double in. A major point in favor of double--it is the only way to show both minors--on some hands where partner has heart strength but not enough length to pass he may be able to diagnose that 3NT fetches and bid it; if he has no strenght in hearts, we may well make 5m, especially if we have a double fit.

I can pass these in tempo quite easily--worth them prempting it is very likely that partner has at least six spades. This makes my psade void worse than worhtless. And though QJx of their suit is a good stopper, it certainly isn't worth a full 3 points in trick taking power. So I have 10 HCP, 3 of which aren't pulling full weight and no really usable shape due to the spade void. It is not even a temptation unless we are playing Roth Stone. This leaves it under strenght for a takeout double requiring a bid at the four level as well. The double has no alternate way to win if it doesn't lead to a making contract, as partner will not be able to leave it in on a misfit--his hearts will be to short and weak.

Point well taken, but OS in its full complexity is simpler than any non-beginner bidding system. It is well within the scope of a regular partnership, it simply needs to be studied and practiced.

On the question of doubles, Ben follows Robson-Segal: "all doubles are for takeout until we find our fit." (With the implied "all doubles after we find our fit are for penalty.") This allows the partnership a very flexible way of handling intervention, while minimizing the number of special cases. For the hand in question, opener doubles. If next hand passes, partner bids 2N lebensohl; if next hand redoubles, partner bid 3D (here it must be garbage stayman and it is well to show the diamonds. Worst that happens is they get us for 200 when they are cold for 4S.

I could go either way on 3C--your ODR is a quite low, but the enemy probably has a heart fit, I'd prefer to take away the extra level. Having premepted with a low ODR, pass of partner's penalty double is a no brainer and taking it out with these cards is expressing the view that partner doesn't know what he is doing. As this isn't a pure, you absolutely must pass penalty double, there are hands where I would overrule--shapely, very high ODR hadns that weren't quite good enough for 4C/5C intially--inlcuding but not limited to any hand with a heart void.eart.

I would take away offenders good result--had 2D been alerted, it is at least possible that opponents would bid more rationally. Non offenders keep the table result. 3S bidder knew the enemy had the majors when he made this bid--which given that knowlege is of dubious rationality. To me, if it was done by a good player I would suspect a double shot attempt.

1) A fine system. 2) It eliminates the sometimes horrible 1H-1N auctions when opener has 4 spades but not enough strength for 2S--no need to figure out what the heck to do with 4-5-2-2. You can sometimes play in 1NT. No real weakness except that a new/inexperienced partnership may have memory problems. 3) No need for Flannery whatever--the Flannery hands open 1H and have no rebid problems. 4) There are several ways of playing it. My favorite is to have 1N show 5+ spades and bid 1S on 0-4 spades. Over 1N, opener can raise spades freely on three. Over 1S, all rebids are the same as over 1N forcing, but 1S shows four spades and not enough values for 2S. 5) Don't know any off the top of my head but it would suprise me if there weren't. 6) Unfortunately for us in ACBL land, this is no longer GCC legal (it once was). For high level events it is Mid Chart legal. On the context of Precison, I've had good luck using similar response to 1D: 1H=relay (ususally weak), 1S=hearts, 1N=spades. This was never GCC legal.

I think OS is an excellent method for an established partnership. I think that many are reluctant to teach it to inexperienced players. SP is less often falsecarded but this doesn't always help declarer--he often knows what suit you should shift to even before he sees the signal. I think that SP gives declarer more reliable information than other signals, but less new information. Also, SP can be falsecarded sometimes--any signal can be faked with impunity when you are certain that partner can never get the lead or that his lead is irrelevant (his entry is the setting trick, for example).

(1) In my Precision experience, its OK to pass a relatively flat 6-7 or very bad 8--with shape, you should always bid with 8+ playing value assuming a fit will be found. These are still more conservative than 2/1 standards. Many modern Precisionistas lower this to a good 6, but 2/1ers now seem to settle for a bad 4 or a good 3. 2) This is a perversion of another rule--opener can't have a hand that can guarantee game opposite a minimum response with no fit. Clearly after 1M-2M there is a fit. 3) This never was true among good Precison players. Goren's book featured splinters, 3N as a major raise and strong support sequences after a jump shift or 2N--the direct raise to 4M was premptive. It is true that later in the auction reponder can sign off on slightly stonger hands because there is a larger set of game hands where slam is impossible or too unlikely to look for than when opener is less limited. On your example hands, 1 would open 1S with the first and pass 1S with the second. No danger whatever it will be passed out, then opener can jump in spades at his next trun to show his extreme power. I'm fine with 1S or 2S on the third hand depending on your agreements, I'm not OK with pass.

It's not just the games--losing the partscore battle is fairly cheap at imps, but is also very frequent if you don't get into the auction agressively. And thouhg the degree of trump fit is ususual, this is hardly a lucky layout--two six loser hands opposite each other and game is touch and go when LTC says slam. Of course there is wast in three suits.

East should open this hand: 1s is best if you play light openings, otherwise 2S. But if your partnership agreements preclude both openings, then West must overcall notwithstanding the poor suit. This is key: West should know his partnerships opening bid standards and if East was likely to have had to pass a shapely hand with 8-10 HCP he must bid this hand; if East would open most or all hands of this type, it is safe to pass.

Depending on your patnership agreements any number of spades less than 4 might be right. Certainly 1S is reasonable. No gold star though--the opponents gave you a gift. Depending on their agreed minimum strength for a two level overcall, either North should raise 2H directly to 4H or South should accept the invitation. No non-beginners should miss this game. I suspect that the player who criticized you was the one who made the mistake. If his partner had, no doubt the so-called expert who have attacked him.

I rather prefer pass, but certainly 1H is quite reasonable. I might consider 1D with a stronger hand and weaker hearts, but not on these cards--pass is certainly less of a distortion than 1D, even if yuou deem this a clearcut opener. I hate 1S on Flannery shape hands--its not the 4-3 fits, its the choice between the 4-2 fit and getting too high after you rebid 2H and partner takes preference.

Give me the same playing stenght and a two-suiter and the one bid stands out. With the actual one-suiter, 2C should be OK in spite of less than usual defensive values. This is rather parallel to Precision 1C--the minimum two-suiters get killed by premption, the minimum one suiters and balanced hands usually come out OK. Also the one suiter is much more likely to get passed out than a two suiter of similar playing strength.

Double is perfect. It should be takeout as we have not found our fit but they have found theirs. Partner will bid his better minor and we will get to the right spot. I don't like 2N even if we are sure it's good/bad--partner will bid 3C whenever he would have passed a natural weak 3C bid, even with five or six diamonds. He has to bid this way as I mgiht be bidding 2N with good club support and nothing in diamonds.

For opening in 4th seat, I use PP as follows: With 16, I open no matter how horrible my hand is. With 15, I open unless the hand is seriously flawed. With 14, I open if the hand is very good. With 13, I only open if it is flawless. This hand is not flawless, with no aces and that doubtful QC. I'd pass. I suspect that this was only 55% because Ben had company passing it out. I once passed out void KQxxx KJxx KQxx (the x's were all quite small--add a couple of 9's and even I wouldn't take so extreme a position) for a cold top--could have been a cold bottom fairly easily, but they figured to have at least nine spades and nearly half the points.