pooltuna

MP 3♥ IMPS 2♥

actually the %age play looks to be to duck unless RHO plays something higher

at MP I am inclined to X to show a maximum and a willingness to defend. Much harder problem at IMPS I would probably pass and defend undoubled.

That is what I did when I didn't pay attention can't be much of a misplay at IMPS

A♠ and ruff a ♠. It would be really nice if LHO showed out on the second one because you were going to finesse anyway now you have a better reason to finesse as you know the drop was never going to work.

What is difference imp and mp? this is tournament at pairs at pairs usually means MP i.e. if you are making 5♣= and everyone else is making 3NT +1 you get a cold 0 the same result you get if 5♣ goes down and everyone else makes a + score while in IMPs if you are in 5♣= and everyone else is in 3NT+1 you lose 1 IMP but if 5C goes down 1 while 3NT= then you lose 10 IMPS NV and 12 IMPS V

3NT is your only shot now and all other choices rate to be bad

unless 3♣ is forcing and since it is MP South probably should pass. Between the other 2 choices I would choose 3♦ as the probable ♥ wastage rates to be really bad for 5♣ while 3NT rates to have more play (still anti%age IMO)

:) ARCH EDIT: initially didn't realize I was responding in B/I

I still finesse

this feels like a WTP 2NT

3♦ unless you have agreed to not open all hands holding only an AK; A combination :)

it is common to also chat to the table "0314? pard" or "1430? pard" or to check partners profile for something akin to 0314 or 1430

direct ~16-18 balancing ~14-16

Gut reaction is not to take 2 ♦ finesses because of losing squeeze chances for ♠/♥. So I play A♦ and if neither opp plays K or J I lead a ♠ to dummy and lead towards the Q9♦.

I don't recall the details of the earlier post. How were you able to divine RHO is 3415 rather than 3514, 3613,3316 or 3217? Presumably his inability to take a preemptive call in the auction as well as that LHO might have led a stiff ♣ or ♥ played into the decision. Or maybe I haven't had enough coffee yet this morning.

Since I could have stood playing in 3 suits I would have started with an X rather than 1♦. Over 3♣ I would X. After all this is BBF and all Xs are for takeout right?:)

agree and South cannot tell if a trump promotion is needed or possible. Basically in this position the needed clarity to show something other than attitude is missing. If someone thinks a trump promotion is ludicrous, consider this trump suit[hv=n=sjt9&w=sakq7654&e=s&s=s832]399|300|[/hv]

You'll be shocked how many people don't know that J2NT is part of SAYC. Also there are countless players on BBO who say they play SAYC when they mean 5 card majors/transfers/and 2/1 isn't GF. I rarely assume that anyone who doesn't list J2N plays it unless they are North American and list 2/1 and a few associated conventions. The problem with using J2NT is not the call itself but the different varieties of followups which have come into existence

Why does it look quite light for a reverse? I don't get it, I view it as a totally normal reverse with this shape. Yes it's not SIXTEEN HIGH CARDS but with various shapes there are different strengths for reversing. This is not only 15 high cards, it's a very good 15. so your auction goes 1♣-1♠; 2♥-2NT (not necessarily the actual hand) now do you bid 3♠? and hope partner has the actual hand instead of JTxx Axx xxxx xx (or do you expect him to pass 2♥)

not sure if you have the methods available but I would use what I have to show the hands as follows 1) preemptive raise 2) constructive raise 3) limit raise 4) simple raise 5) constructive raise 6) limit raise 7) game force

2♠ was forcing 3♠ was a splinter 4♠ should be exclusion?

Instead of reading Watson for the fourth time, try different authors. Root, Kantar, Mollo/Gardner, Hayden Truscott all have good play of the hand books. Different examples and different writing styles can help a concept sink in. Do all the quiz problems, make an effort to solve them, try not to flip to the answer until you are really stuck. This is an approach have used for other games. One book 20 times or 20 books once. For bridge, I have opted for the one book 20 times route. If you treat every hand in Watson like it is a problem and try to solve it before you read the solution, reading it once should have been enough. Now switch to declarer problems where you need to make inferences from bidding or leads. Mike Lawrence wrote one of these a long while back. Also probably need to start the Kelsey/Mollo defensive problem books. Defensive problems generally require a reasonable knowledge of declarer play as you often need to understand declarer's objective before you can thwart it. ARCH is a good acronym for both declarer and defensive play except in defense th H is "how can I beat this contract" (obviously MPs impacts this")

well any 12 card suit a priori is 55% to make slam at worst so that is acceptable :D

I would think 7♦ would be much, much more likely than 4♥. IMO It is really kind of hard to comment on the auction since you have no clue on the agreements