BillPatch

If opener rebids 2♥ over a forcing NT, a raise to 3 is very good.

In second seat your preempts should be their most disciplined. There is way too much playing strength for a 3♠ preempt. I would like to bid 1♠ with that 2nd seat hand. Better than 3♠ is 1♣, 4♠, pass, or 2♠. Even 2♣ is less of a misdescription, but the directors might disapprove it as an illegal psych. Responder's pass is logical if he believes he is playing with a light preemptor. Since that was wrong, he deserves 10% of the blame.

I have not had a sheltered life. If our agreement is that our undiscussed bids are natural, a fine old default agreement adopted in Bridge World Standard, 4♥ is a suggestion of a final contract. Double shows a notrump hand, possibly without a ♥ stopper.

My partnership would also miss this 52% MP game, as I perceive the hand a maximum single raise, and not a Drury raise. Opener is too strong not to go on opposite a Drury. It would only be a bad miss V at IMPS, so I guess I will loosen up my Drury definition in IMP play.

David Bird. Winning Duplicate Tactics. Toronto, Master Point Press, 2014, p. 35. I think the book actually came out to the nationally on Amazon and B&N in February 2015. My favorite book on matchpoints. Good review in ACBL Bulletin, which gave it an A. Tactics using Standard bidding and play conventions, aimed at the intermediate average BBO or duplicate player, but contains useful data for superior players. This book is much better edited than the two opening lead books.

The results of the poll are close. All afternoon they have been 42 for pass, 40 for 4♠, and 0 for uncertain.

It is "automatic WTP" but still "not pleasant."

Ran 10 sample hands through Jack. It doesn't understand the 4♠ bid, usually overbidding by 2 tricks, even though its hands in this sample had no duplication in red suits. Despite partner's overbidding, and one phantom save, the overcall led after 10 hands 34-17 in IMPS. The law of total tricks works for the saints.

An authority who I respect has recommended that we should estimate partner has an odd 5-6 hcp when we chose our bid over a preempt. With only 1-2 hcp more(although 3 controls) gszes is raising. Tomfoolery!

Seeing that the "law" no longer is leading in the poll reminds me that the title of this thread biases the polling. The Good Book says that God ordains the law and the Devil is the chief of the lawbreakers. The tile has it backwards.

Yes, a reasonable Center Hand Opponent might turn unreasonable in the post mortem, after he overestimates the value of his royalty in the red suits, and sees that I have overcalled at the 4 level with this poor six loser hand. Will the rest of our team speak to me after this round is over?

By the way, I have not yet decided what to do in case I run into an opponent playing old-fashioned Acol. Will decide using the time allotted to "skip bid warning." I hope I can do it in tempo.

I am aware that historically Acol in its glorious period in its heyday back in the 40's used the double jump raise in the major to show a full opening bid with four card support. Before 1960, Terence Reese switched to the preemptive usage, and my understanding is that the other Acol authorities concurred; the full opening bid in support being shown by temporizing in a new suit without a jump, then jumping to game. I play in the US, primarily, but I grew up on the American side of Niagara Falls and sometimes played in Ontario, so my personal experience with Acol players is limited. I am aware that Acol is a natural system, more natural than Goren, which is more natural than modern Standard American and 2 over one game forcing systems.

I will accept E's invitation to 4♠, assuming that they are bidding a natural system where the jump to 4♥ shows the preemptive hand. Might pass if they were playing an artificial system where responder would promise the equivalent of an opening bid. I expect opponents will often keep on bidding, but I respect the law of total tricks, but would like better spots where both opponents know each other is strong, and bidding might help them with their slam bidding and play.

6NT is not a bad contract. It will win on over 90% of the time that opening leader does not lead a club. Assuming a Bird-Anthias leader, the opponents will usually not lead the club unless leader has the AK of ♣, never from K led suit, only from the A led suit if J ♣ not held and 0 or 1 outside of the other J's are held, about 1 of 4 hands where neither A or K of clubs are held. Yes, 6♦ is the optimal contract at IMPs, and probably would have been at matchpoints. Note that 3 NT is a bad contract, the opponents have length in clubs, and it will in many auctions be the unbid or 4th suit. On actual hand 3NT would go down.

If you had agreed on that convention North had a Darkner double. "Partner, bid the usual(often unbid)suit." But we all know that such doubles only occur in Bridge World.

Based on the simulation I posted on the other thread with this title:♠Q=10, ♠2=7.2, ♥5=7, ♣10=5, ♦10=2. At IMPs: ♠Q=10, ♠2=8, ♣10=6, ♥5=5, ♦10=2

I don't know what to lead, (or get experience in online MPs), but the TO double in this auction is peculiar. By the way, I just received bronze life master(ACBL).

Am I missing tourney listings? All duplicate pairs I have seen on BBO seem to be for IMP games. I do tend to look at ACBL listings most frequently. How frequent and where are MP events?

I am interested in simulating this problem. Any preferences from the forum what systemic inferences they would prefer I make, examples 2/1, SA, precision or acol? Should opener's rebid show extras?

Updated to show Older commentary on same hand I simulated today on other thread.

I ran a Double Dummy simulation of 2001 sample size. Opening bidder(declarer) was given a balanced 15-17HCP with at least 4 diamonds. Responder was given at least 4 clubs, less than 6 diamonds, and spades and hearts with less than 4 cards. The results: S Q 3.21 average defensive tricks 21.29% sets contract S 2 3.05 tricks 18.49% sets H 5 3.05 tricks 16.59% sets C 10 3.02 tricks 16.79% sets D 10 2.96 tricks 15.59% sets As I forecast Q♠ was best. I was surprised that a low heart tied low spade in second place by the matchpoint measure--average defensive tricks. A smaller surprise was that the club placed highly at setting the contract, above a low H.

Finally back with better stats due to larger sample size: 2001. Now using DealMasterPro to generate deals, using Lead Captain as before to run Bo Hoagland's DDA. Much better automation with DealMasterPro. S 2,3 17.94% set 3.52 average defensive tricks D 2,3 17.69 3.52 tricks S 7 17.59 3.51 tricks D 7 16.89 3.49 tricks D A 15.79 3.45 tricks H A 13.89 3.30 tricks S J 13.79 3.33 tricks H 2 9.95 3.21 tricks C 2,3 9.60 3.21 tricks C Q 8.15 3.12 tricks Now low spade and low diamond are the two best leads, the low spade continuing to be slightly preferable at IMPs, where setting the contract percentage is our proxy. As the original problem was IMPS, still a victory for the unbid major! (Significant at the .05 level at IMPS) The two Aces fall behind the low pointed suit leads. Note: continued to allow opening NT on all 5422 hands. Sample of 325 with purely balanced NT openers showed similar results.

Note that the major authority on negative doubles, Marty Bergen, teaches(and writes) that the 2♦ rebid promises a reverse(one round force).

One question. What does ACBL 2/1 mean? What los gringos de Norte America play? A specific system endorsed by ACBL(I own the book, Rodwell was co-author)? We gringos want to know. OK,I am as bad at counting questions as counting cards!