foo

Fred has stated that he & Brad no longer use this as an invitational sequence unless they have a 4-card major too. Without one they either pass 1NT or blast game with a traditional invitational hand, due to the information passed. This is really interesting, wow, a huge gold nugget of info stuck in the middle of nowhere....more please. The following pretty much sums up world class expert opinion on the subject. Grant Baze: "I agree with Bobby Goldman that any convention that negates the raise of 1N to 2N as natural is terrible. If responder is forced to go through Stayman to raise 1N to 2N, the defenders have too much information, and will defend much more accurately than after 1N-2N;3N (or pass of 2N). Furthermore these natural NT raises are much more frequent than any hand types that use 1N-2N as artificial. Finally, the natural raises that end in 3N are the bread and butter of winning bridge, while any advantage from using the raise to 2N as any kind of transfer is minimal and extremely infrequent."

Playing 1N= 12-14, you pickup in 2nd seat: Ax.AKx.9xxx.K87x You open 1N and a normal auction ensues: 1N-2C;2D-3N The DQ is led and Dummy comes down (S hand repeated): JTxx.xxx.AK8x.AJ Ax.AKx.9xxx.K87x Your move.

Interesting comment. Why or how do you find that "In a system with 11-20 openings, standard J2N sucks so much it's scary."?

I like those definitions.

Dead in the Black. 1000% Right. Could not say it better myself. Etc. mikeh and I may disagree on how to best handle this specific board, but the quoted statement should be taken as seriously as you are capable of doing so. One theme I expect all readers would find common to the more thoughtful posts in these forums, regardless of whether they present the same POV or not, is that the processes of bidding, defense, and play are =dynamic= ones where best performance is obtained by constantly thinking and re-evaluating what you know and can deduce from the information provided so far.

*Foo resists the urge to be dragged into a black hole of infinite fascination w/ fascination w/...* "MMuusstt... bbrreeaakk... FREE!"

♠T985♥Q8♦AJT4♣AT4 ♠♥AK3♦KQ753♣KQ876 E Deals. (2S)-?? 3s= Western Cue 3n= To Play 4m= H+m 3- losers 4h= To Play 4s= ?? 4n= D+C 3- losers I can see sense in playing 4S= D+C w/ 3 H's 3- losers 4N= D+C w/o 3 H's 3- losers Let's say you play this gadget. Now what? (2S)-4S!-pa-?? 4n= 1430 in H's (or should it be To Play? Pick your poison.) 5m= To Play 5h= To Play 5s= Slam Force in D's or C's. Pick one or bid 5N. So, using these agreements: (2S)-4S!-pa (almost certainly)-5S!;-pa-5N-pa-6D OR (if 4S!-4N is 1430 in H's) (2S)-4S!-pa-4N;pa-5H-pa-7D because Advancer, looking at the CA & DA, knows Overcaller has the HA+HK Interesting.

I think one of the few things Josh and I agree on in this thread is that X by Responder is essentially Cooperative. If truth be told, the higher the auction the more Coopoerative the X by Responder is. Regardless of what it is actually called. "A rose by any other name...(is still a rose)" "If it looks like a nag and acts like a neg, you can call it a thoroughbred all you want. It is still a nag."

"Very difficult problems, I would hate to face all this problems at the table in the same tournament." Agreed. 1 2N showing the minors. 2. *shudder* 4H! showing S+m. With my luck, 3N is Our last making spot... 3. Ick. All my values are trapped ahead of Opener. Pass or X depending on table feel. 4. I have no bid to safely describe my hand. Pass. 5. As Luis said: "6 hearts, if doubled I will run to 6s. Pd will lead a heart if they bid 7. So cute, so cute :-)."

Here's where I agree with Mikeh in the specific while disagreeing with him in the general and at the same time agree with the OP's pard in the general while disagreeing with that player in the specific... :( (I hope The Reader's head hurts less than mine when purusing this...) IMHO the OP's pard made a decent argument on general principle (and it is that principle that made me change my mind from Opening 1H to Opening 2C as the least of evils here). OTOH, I completely agree with mikeh that the examples he used to try and make his point are unconvincing. And I agree with mikeh as to why. EDIT: mikeh is a lawyer? That is... ...fascinating.

Josh, I never said we should guess. I have in fact said we should do everything we can not to guess. In particular, I've said we should never be the one taking what is likely to be the last guess before it goes allpass or X-allpass or pa-pa-X-allpass. Every time we have to take the last guess, either We have made a mistake or They have outplayed Us. Not changing my tune one note. "Not suitable to defend" means exactly that: not a defensive hand. Neither hands with convertable values nor offensively oriented hands are defensive hands. Since that was evidently not clear enough from my phrasing, I apologize for the lack of clarity and will be more explicit in the future. The Big Difference between the auction 1m-(4om) and 1m-(4M) or 1M-(4OM) is that in the first auction all of 3N and 4M are possible contracts and an Opening bid opposite an Opening bid rates to make 3N or 4M. Not so a 5 level contract which requires ~ a K more in playing strength to take 11 tricks. Sometimes We will not be able to make 5 on such hands, but will be able to "X Them into oblivion." Sometimes We will not be able to work it out and just have to Defend. Nor did Steve's quick blurb get into issues involving the vulnerability ratio. Even if the auction is 1m-(4om) and Responder has an Opening bid, there are circumstances where it is not clear that Responder should X for possible T/O. For instance, if We are at Favorable and I as Responder in this situation have just about any 4333 with 3 likely defensive tricks and not enough extras to make slam reasonably likely... ...I'm going to be searching for ways for Us to Defend with a Red Card on the table first and foremost. That's even more true when I have to decide whether or not to ask GOP to bid when there is a possibility or a certainty that I'm forcing Us to the 5 level by doing so. In these situations, Responder's ODR calculation is critical. A pass by Responder in these situations should say "GOP, my estimate is that We are more likely to score well if We Defend rather than Declare." Etc, etc. That knowledge allows Opener to make better decisions. If We at any point get reduced to taking blind guesses in these situations, We have most likely already lost the board.

Yes Richard; I know that your preferred approach to The Game is to put the Opponents to The Guess at every possible opportunity. I submit that History shows that the more constructive the auction, the less this approach is effective. Slam auctions are the most constructive in Bridge. I also submit that the better the opposition, the less "guessing" is involved and the more often They are going to get it right. If We have ~ same number of such decisions and We get less of them right than They do, we Lose. If in addition We play methods that require Us to guess more often than Their methods make Them, the problem becomes worse.

This risk is unavoidable. Your partner opens 1NT, you have AT9 KQx KQJx JTx. Do you not bid 4NT? Should partner not accept with KQJx AJT9 Ax Qxx? It simply can't be avoided from time to time. Even in the rare cases when it happens, as here, they still have to make the right lead. Or are you suggesting that on the above hand you start bidding your suits left and right without the promised length, as you are suggesting in the current thread? Sometimes the risk is unavoidable. System Theorists bust their chops to try and minimize the occurance of those occasions. However, often the risk is avoidable. When it is and we do not avoid that risk, we are not playing bridge as well as we could. Sooner or later, those that gamble most will lose to those that gamble least. Especially in the slam zone. AT9.KQx.KQJx.JTx GOP opens 1N= 15-17. Response? Let's start with Baby Bridge. 16+15= 31, 16+17= 33. We are clearly in the slam invite zone. Playing Standard methods with a pickup or indifferent partner, we are getting to a bad slam when Opener has KQJx.AJTx.Ax.Qxx Our methods give us no choice but to play the odds and roll the dice. Expert pairs competing or hoping to compete at the highest levels improve upon Standard methods here by using something like the suggestions of Jeff Reubens or Eric Kokish for this situation so that they will avoid a bad slam and bid a good slam. Those methods are inappropriate for a B/I forum. But many of my fellow posters appear to be of a caliber that they know very well that such methods exist. ...and if they were in a partnership using them and they were =not= used; thereby hitting a bad slam that could have been avoided; I am =sure= the postmortum would be "interesting".

pclayton has a point. I neglected to include the possibility that We could have a Game in the possibilities of my post. I stand by my fundamental point that what is best to do with this hand depends entirely on what hands GOP is likely to have opened 2S with here. EDIT: Oh, and a Phantom Save in 4S when We are unfavorable does not rate to get Us a good score even if We are not X'ed. Regardless of the form of scoring. Responder has a heavy responsibility on this board.

♠KQJT9x♥QJ♦xxx♣Ax "Partner opens 2S, showing a weak hand with 5♠ and a 4+m. RHO passes. What do you try now?" It is far from clear that We should want to buy this hand. Just how "weak" is 2S? Obviously GOP's S suit is poor, Axxxx at best, so they must have outside values. In addition we "know" GOP has 3-H. My job with this hand is to jam the auction to the maximum safe level in one bid and then shut up. My hand has 6-7 losers as things stand, so it is imperative that I count likely cover cards in GOP's hand as well as likely values between Us vs. Them. Since we are at Unfavorable: If They do not rate to have a game, bid 3S or even pass (!) depending on how many cover cards GOP is likely to hold. -200 vs air is a bad score no matter what the form of scoring. If They rate to have a game and not a slam, We can't risk going more than -2 X'ed; and even a reasonably large risk of -2 X'ed is to be avoided. If They rate to have a slam, then We can't risk going more than -3 X'ed. Just blindly bidding 4S on this board rates to be a disaster for Us. Sorry the answer isn't simple, but it really does depend on what GOP is likely to hold.

Since we can't bring Suitplay or any other aid to the table (and you should not be using such things when playing online either), let's talk about how to work these out ATT AJ9xx xxxx Play for 4 tricks. There are 4 cards out, which means there are 2^4= 16 possible layouts to deal with: KQTx:- 1 x -> AJ9, cover, repeat theme -:KQTx 1 (this one we can't do anything about, so we ignore it) HTx:H 2 play A and then play x -> J9 OR x -> AJ9, cover, repeat theme H:HTx 2 (another one we can't do anything about) HT:Hx 2 x -> AJ9, play J, play A Hx:HT 2 x -> AJ9, play J or 9, play A KQ:Tx 1 x -> AJ9, cover, play anything to crash H+T Tx:KQ 1 x -> AJ9, cover, play A What becomes clear is that the line of play that covers the most layouts is x -> AJ9, cover, repeat theme T8x AQ9xx Play for max tricks, only 1 entry in dummy. 32 possible layouts: KJxxx:- 1 -:KJxxx 1 KJxx:x 3 x:KJxx 3 Kxxx:J 1 J:Kxxx 1 Jxxx:K 1 K:Jxxx 1 KJx:xx 3 xx:KJx 3 Kxx:Jx 3 Jx:Kxx 3 Jxx:Kx 3 Kx:Jxx 3 KJ:xxx 1 xxx:KJ 1 Using the method shown for the 1st problem, find the line of play that leads to Max tricks for as many of these 32 layouts as possible assuming you can only get to T8x once to take any finesses. Answer posted later if necessary. :P

Open this 1H ...and add Drury to your bidding arsenal as soon as you are able to handle it. The problem with preempting on 6421's is that they are ridiculously easy to find Game with. Often on far less than traditional values. w/ xx.AQxxxx.xxxx.A, you do not intend to let Them play the hand below the 5 level.

...and you a misapplying or inappropriately generalizing a few things. Wrong. I never said anything about guessing and if this situation was about guessing I'd tell people to roll some form of weighted dice rather than try and use logic and visualization to decide what best to do. I was using the "slogan" correctly. A guess is just that, akin to rolling dice or flipping a coin or whatever. It is a =random= action. Random actions do not good bridge make. First, you blatently ignored my post. I said X shows =convertable values=, not offensive values. Of course it would be wonderful if we have offensive values, but that is not often the case. ...and here we have an inappropriate overgeneralization on your part of an expert's advice. 1= the auctions are nowhere near the same. Steve is talking about an auction where the Majors are both unbid. Big Difference. 2= Every hand Steve posted had 7+ cards in the unbids and =at worst= xxx in the opponent's suit. In all examples except one there were 2- cards in the opponent's suit. IOW, every example Steve posted had =convertable values= and a reasonably non defensive ODR. Yes, there are good hands that should pass rather than X or bid here. I've noticed a trend in these forums. People seem to think that preempts can always be punished or bid around. Time to make the perhaps ugly truth explicit. PREEMPTS WORK. That's why people use them. For all the Science and bravado I see being brought to bear with the intent of negating their effectiveness, sometimes you willl have no choice but to defend or guess when They preempt. Don't be conned into playing bad bridge just "because you don't want to be stolen from". Bid as accurately as you can and play the odds as best you can. And accept that if They get you on this board, you are going to be given the chance to return the favor at some point in the future.

Great. Now we are using NS,TWW stories to justify lazy or bad bidding because we got lucky and did not get the punishment we deserved. People do not ask us how to be lucky, and even if they did we could not tell them. People ask us how to bid and play as accurately and well as possible. Slam exploration is qualitatively different from game exploration mostly because you are not supposed to be "shooting the moon" or "blasting". Give me a flat 18 HCP including the 3-4 A's opposite a 2N rebid here and then I might trot out 4N Qualitative. Because then I can be sure of the auction. Missing 2 A's and 2 K's, it is not enough to know partner is at the top of their range. I need to know that they have specific values for slam to be odds on. Or even safe. Superior slam bidding in uncontested auctions is not supposed to be an exercise in any form of gambling. I'm stunned and aghast that players of supposedly superior caliber are suggesting tossing away accuracy in the exact type of auction that requires the most accuracy in all of bridge bidding.

More like the Unlucky Expert if you do this to me as CHO. :angry: One of the few things HCP are unequivically good for is making sure we do not get to a NT slam off two A's. No method that allows for =any= risk of Us getting to a slam off the required controls can be called good or even acceptable expert level slam bidding Given the apparently high standard you expect of modern slam bidding, advice from you that has =any= chance of getting to a slam off the required controls is a bit puzzling. Darn certain that Blue Team whose slam bidding you consider mediocre would not be blasting with 4N in this auction playing these methods.

"The solution to the problem is to raise 2N to 4N: a quantitative raise: partner will bid slam with any extras and pass with a minimum." "I think with a balanced 5332 of 18hcp a 4NT bid over 2NT is absolutely clear." Gentlemen. 18+14= 32 which means it is possible for 2 A's to be out even if Opener has a maximum. Therefore Opener may accept a quantitative 4N invite with a 14 HCP maximum that puts us into a doomed 6N contract. Nor is it clear that 6N is better than 6C. 4N is a =HORRIBLE= rebid in this situation, and an excellent example of why good slam bidding requires careful auctions.

"...the Blue Team was actually not very good (by today's standards)." That is the only statement in print I've ever seen by mikeh that is 100% wrong. The Blue Team had some of the finest Bridge players to ever live on it and even more uniquely it is one of the few occasions in history where 4 of the top 10 (maybe even 4 of the top 6) players of their time were on the same team. Avarelli may be the weakest of these four, but in this group the differences are matters of such small degree that the rest of us are not capable of measuring the diffference. Belladonna was one of the greatest Theorists in the history of Bridge as well as considered the best ATT player in the world at the peak of his career.. Forquet was known as "The Rock" because in more than a decade of top flight international competition, he =never= made a 5 level decision wrong given the information available to him. Garozzo was an =amazing= single dummy and double analyst at the peak of his powers. The only ones I've ever heard of being as fast or faster with his level of accuracy are Sontag and Sion. Perhaps the best measure of just how good The Blue Team was is obtained by asking former members of The Dallas Aces. Hamman, Soloway, and Lawrence have all said that The Blue Team was exceptionally strong both as a team and as individuals. If anyone on earth would know just how well these guys play(ed) bridge, it would be The Dallas Aces. As to the other comment, NA slam bidding of the time =stank=.

There are two popular styles of 2/1 GF. In the simplest, =any= 2/1 in a lower ranking suit is 100% GF. This is the most popular form of 2/1 GF currently played. In the other, a 2/1 in a lower ranking suit is GF unless Responder rebids their suit. Either is playable. Just make sure you and CHO are speaking the same language!

Q76.AKT.54.AKQ86 1D-2C;-2N-?? No need to shoot yourself. Playing SA w/o discussion and special agreements, 3C by Responder shows an invitational hand, say ~10-11 HCP, with 6+C with this sequence. W/ a minimum opening bid of their own, Responder could just rebid 3N. W/ 18 HCP, Responder has slam aspirations and needs to set a GF for a slow exploratory auction instead of just showing their length or rebidding Game. This hand is an excellent one to introduce the idea of "The Advance Cue Bid". Rebid 3H. Opener may be confused about what your hand is at first, but there is no way you will miss game and when you bid past game, the "I've got a much better hand than you GOP and I'm looking for slam" message will be clearly sent. Most likely auction: 1D-2C;2N-3H;3N-4C-?? Opener's attention should be naturally drawn to their pointed suit holdings. With both the SA and the DA, you are heading for a slam. With neither, Opener will sign off in 4N.

Playing 2D Waiting, the only hands that do not respond 2D are those that have a specific story to tell. HCP has nothing to do with it. The logic is that Opening 2C is space consuming enough that We should strain to keep the bidding low whenever possible after Opening 2C. Therefore sequences like 2C-2M should show a hand with say at least 2/3 top honors in a 6+M and =nothing= outside. Thus making it clear that this hand is only suitable for a M or NT contract. Eric Kokish has written some thoughtful stuff on this (and for players like you Josh, I'd think playing Kokish after 2C to be a useful part of your arsenal.) ...and let me reiterate that I am =not= happy to feel like I should open N's hand 2C. It just seems the least evil.