BillPatch

3♥ is automatic.

Charles Goren's Point Count Bidding was published in 1946. He preached using Work's point count A=4, K=3, etc for NT and shortness points (Void=3, singleton=2, doubleton=1) added for suit contracts. Within 6 years this replaced honor tricks as the standard method for contract bridge. 14 total points, or 13 with 2 quick tricks, constituted a mandatory opening bid. The most common minimum opening bid was a 4-4-3-2, the most common distribution, with 12 hcp, 1 point for distribution, and 2 quick tricks. This has been the standard for the u.s. bridge world ever since. While as many as 15% of tournament bridge players may have at one time adopted the one or more point higher point count method of one immediate predecessor of 2 over 1, the Roth-Stone system, at one time, and as many as 15% have experimented with a one point lower limit, usually with the Precision Club, 12HCP and 2 QT has remained the norm ever since. I remember taking home the ACBL Yellow Card Booklet shortly after it came out in 1987. I also played with one in 1996. It was featured in an indi- vidual in a tournament in Cleveland in 2002. I have a copy of Ned Downey and Ellen Pomer. Standard Bidding with SAYC, copyright 2005. I also have reviewed the latest copy of the SAYC booklet at ACBL.com. The 13 HCP requirement for an opening bid was not in any of these. Downey and Pomer agree with me that 12 hcp is the norm, recommending the use of Marty Bergen's rule of 20. My peers who play in the ACBL would laugh at the 13 HCP requirement. Thus, I assume that you are the recipient of s defective Yellow Card, unfit for American consumption. I am sorry the ACBL dumped it on your country. Please accept my apology. SAYC and most 2 over 1 styles have the same opening standards. For furthur details on SAYC, I recommend the Downey and Pomer book, from the Master Point Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. (I don't think any Canadians are involved in the defctive yellow card dumping.) The latest yellow card booklet without the offensive defect is available on the ACBL site for free download.

For the record, Jim; which stupid game try did you make?

The yellow card booklet defines the cue bid of RHO's suit as a "general purpose game force", this cue bid is not so defined. I think I would need the game try more often than the game force. (For the example hand I also prefer a pass.)

If I had agreed ♥ with a 3♥ rebid, I would think my 4♥ a game suggestion. I assume you meant that after the original auction 4♥ would be defined as you stated.

I would open 1♣ and then reverse, forcing through to 4♥unless partner had other ideas. There is too great a chance for a ♣slam or other better ♣contract to emphasize ♥.

My preferences for an opening would be 1♠, 4♠, and then 2. 3♠ is my fourth choice. 2♠ is presumably the field bid. I also like the ♦K lead.

As your stats seem signicantly different than rhm's I assume you used different assumptions about the 2NT opener. Your parameters were?

I also fail to see the endplay that will make 3♥.

So much for my book learning.

I am sorry. Not opening light in first seat does not improve my result. I would open third seat and rebid my ♥. With 2 honor tricks and an 8 card fit guaranteed my responder would rebid 3♥. With a 5 loser hand I must be game at 4♥. My sequence (opponents passing) pass 1♥ 1♠ 2♥ 3♥ 4♥ pass

I agree with this scheme, with one small addition. Opener, with a maximum non-pre-accept with a good spade fit, will cue bid a red suit, ostentively agreeing clubs, and later convert back to spades. (I cannot remember where I learned this, but it is not a original thought.)

I am glad someone else agrees.It seems like a minimum 2♠ overcall, not enough to accept a simple raise. Even with that raise, a sac over 4♥ looks too expensive to propose. Closer to pass than a higher ♠ bid. Of course, with the actual advancer, high spade contracts are good. Switch advancer and responder's hands, and 2♠doubled goes down more than game, but avoids a telephone number.

The title of the poll is "to open a game". Opening a game is a reasonable option. OP chose the wrong game. If the question were what to bid in 4th seat 1♦ might have been considered more favorably. If we assume OP had a particular bridge reason to bid game based on game conditions(score, opponents, etc.)that favors 3NT. Of course, if the gambling NT is not on the convention card, it would no longer be a relavant option.

Yellow Card has 25-27, and since they shut down their board I suspect some of them migrated here. I have heard it is still played on BBO.

ATB I would raise directly to 6 ♠over the 4NT. 2 first round controls and 5 card support should be sufficient for slam opposite a long ♠ hand that was too strong to risk a strong jump overcall, even if the K♥ is wasted. Should I have considered that partner was making an advance save, on what appears to be a partscore hand from his side? Note that if third hand had the spade length instead of me 4♠would go for a number. Why did partner attempt to preempt a preempt? If the other cards were to split more evenly, down 1 in the ♠ game throws away a partscore. While partner's 4♠preempt may have worked this time, I am not impressed.

I agree that passing 1♣is ridiculous, but the superlatives are an overbid. Compared to the 3♦rebid, a pass of 1♣is quite sane. For the Rueful Rabbit, momma poppa bridge is quite an improvement. By the way, my to-do list includes adjusting Jack 5.0 to avoid these ridiculous passes. It still is way better than Bridge Baron or GIB and I suspect many readers of these boards.

Well, well. Partnership desk paired you up with the Rueful Rabbit again. Still, in Holy Week it is improper to preach hellfire and damnation(unforgivable sin) just because partner plays like a novice. Repent. SJ Simon and Augie Boehm have written on how to play with inferior players. I have nothing to add there. "What's the problem?" Assuming instead we picked up the same hand with a good partner. The problem with the opening 1♣ and then showing 2NT is that it is an underbid. If we had Q10x AQX KJx AQ10x, the same hand without the long suit, we would have a maximum 2NT rebid. The two long cards in the good club suit rate an upgrade to a maximum 2NT opener. After North uses Jacoby and rebids 3NT over this. 2NT pass 3♦pass 3♥pass 3NT pass ? , Marty Bergen recommends playing in the 7 card fit heart game, because South does not have an entrey to the suppose K fifth heart suit. 4♥ is a better contract than 3NT, but i expect it gets 0 mp for down 2 doubled. If one instead shows the weaker 1♣then 2NT North should pass unless a signoff is avaiable(Wolff signoff in BWS and most 2 over 1), others may use transfers to sign off.

I disagree. A direct 3NT over the 2♠ overcall shows "to play,""Leave me alone." Forcing first(with 3♣)suggests doubt, that I want partner's aid to choose the contract. GIB bid this auction well.

I disagree that responder should force to slam after jacoby. If opener denies support, according to my simulation slam is only 43%. well shy of 50% required at IMPS. Responder has 16 HCP and value of about 17, only about 32 opposite a 15 point minimum NT opener. EDIT-If opener convert to spades, slam shoulb be acceptable.

It should be noted that in SAYC, a major focus of this forum, a direct 3m is natural, invitational and non-forcing. To force in a minor requires using stayman first befor rebidding 3m on the 2nd round.

With the posted overcalling hand I expect partner to reraise 3♥, which I will pass for no cigar.

I raise 2♥. I am too weak for 2♦ cue bid raise. Subtracting 2 points for ♠Q, 1 point for ♦K, and 1 point for terrible trumps gives me a 8 point hand. Partner does not have a biddible spade suit(his overcall shows about 10+ hcp or good distribution and with both majors he has either a TO double or a Michaels bid.) Since partner probably has 3 or less, we have 5 or less and the oppenents have a spade fit, and our spades unlikely only good, except possibly on defense. Partner is also relatively short in ♦ as opener and advancer are long Assuming that partner will reraise to 3♥ preemptive, on any 6 card ♥suit not suitable for a game try or with a singleton ♠. I intend to defend against opponent ♠ contracts, even at two level, if possible, based on the law of total tricks. Of course I will accept a game try from partner.

On the first hand 3♣ was poor. Your hand was minimum, shape was minimum, heart values duplicated known sortness in partner's hand. Partner's overcall was worse. Weak 5 card suit 2 level overcalls are asking for the axe, It also failed to direct the proper lead. On the second hand double by partner would have been poor. Your K♥ was likely finessable. If the opponents bid poorly you are already headed for a top. If the contract was normal a double would likey trade an average mius to a bottem. Also, partner is on lead, a double (Lightner) suggests an unusual lead, which he doesn't want.

I thought we should have choices including BWS2001 choices.