foo

3S is fine.

K764.K965.AJ7.T5 1= Is not a SA opening bid. =Especially= since it is both weak and you have to Open the "prepared minor". Even the Rule of 20 folks would pass this: 11+8= 19 2= Unless you are playing that abomination known as "the Short Club", the SA opening with =4432 is 1D. Absent further agreement a SA 1m opening promises 3+ cards.

Richard (and any other Theory fans who care to comment) I'd be interested in hearing reactions to my thoughts regarding the best use of the 2N jump overcall and the cue bid overcall? Do people feel that two suiters containing the 2 highest ranked unbid suits are significantly easier to bid naturally in contested auctions than the other kinds of two suiters?

You are asking a tough question because the answer is highly dependent on what makes the partnership most happy. I've played with people who insist on "classic" preempts in all seats and all vulnerability ratios. I've also played with the "get in Their face whenever you can." wide ranging style players (although I've never played with someone as extreme as MartY Bergen and Larry Cohen were in the 1980's...). Sorry not to give you a simple answer. With the sample Responding hand, I'd get Us to 3N or 5C opposite any 3C preempt in any seat except when playing the widest ranging preempt style opposite a 3rd seet 3C opening. That's why those players have to open a Gambling 3N or 4C opposite me in 3rd seat with the given Preempting hand.

IMHO common sense dictates that if it goes (1C)-1S-(1N)-pa; and GOP makes =any= bid of a new strain it has to be taken as highly encouraging. After all, GOP must have enough extras to think that they can afford another bid opposite you when you could be utterly broke. An example of this would be (1C)-1S-(1N)-pa;pa-2D... Therefore when GOP thinks they can not only afford to bid a new strain in this auction but to jump shift opposite you when you could be broke, this =has= to be forcing. I'd say this is a shapely hand that would be strong enough to make a GF cue bid under other circumstances or with a different shape. I'll also suggest a slight change to your comment about Standard methods here are and note that (1foo)-2N is usually played as showing the 2 lowest unbid and (1m)-2m usually shows the Majors. From a Theory POV, it could be argued that naturally bidding two suiters containing the two =highest= ranking unbid suits is easier than bidding any other two suiter naturally. Thus the optimal use of the Unusual NT and the cue bid might be: (1C)-2N!= H+D .......2C!= S+D .......bid S+H naturally (1D)-2N!= H+C .......2D!= S+C .......bid S+H naturally (1H)-2N!= D+C .......2H!= S+C .......bid S+D naturally (1S)-2N!= D+C .......2S!= H+C .......bid H+D naturally ...but for some reason, I don't think I know of any pairs that use the above.

IMHO you deserve to be complimented for asking questions like this. It shows you care about becoming a better player more than you do about your ego. Everything you do ATT should be for a reason. Do you like doing things for no purpose or repeating yourself in other parts of your life? Of course not. So every call or play you make should be for a purpose; and either make progress towards some goal or help partner get Us to some goal. Every call and every play. Where bidding is concerned, that means saying what you can afford to say that will help partner the most with each call and not repeating yourself once you have said it. The other thing about bidding is that is =communication=. Everyone in a conversation has to be speaking the same language in order for the conversation to be productive. So first and formost you and partner have to make sure you are speaking the same language. Once you have agreed on what a bid or set of bids mean, the next step is for you to be very careful about using them as accurate to the agreements you have made as possible. So playing SA of 2/1 GF if it goes 1m-1M;3m-3N ...and you opened 1m with a medium strength hand with a long minor in it... You've described your hand and have nothing new to say and therefore should pass.

If you want to improve your overall level of skill, don't bother with books on squeezes and unlikely (in some cases =very= unlikely) card play situations until you are very advanced. Get books like _Dormer on Deduction_ and _Counting at Bridge_ and =work= on the topics in them (or the more advanced versions of those kinds of books by authors like Reese, Kelsey, Pottage, Seres, etc). The better and more consistently you can count and and the better you can think in a Bridge context (visualization, logic, etc) the better you will be at all of bidding, declaring, and defending. You can win events without knowing how to throw any kind of squeeze and certainly without even knowing what a Stepping Stone Squeeze or a Winkle Squeeze is. That's to a great extent because mistakes or weaknessses in the other skills I've alluded to are going to cost you more often and more drastically than not being able to solve the "puzzle positions" will. "Before Enlightenment, chop wood. Haul water. After Enlightenment, chop wood. Haul water." Get your fundamental skills razor sharp if you want to be a very good player. (...and once you do, the ability to solve the "puzzles" starts to come as a bonus.)

What he said. =Especially= the last sentence.

I have already said that my original posts were not as clear as they should have been and apologized for it as well as hopefully clarified my original statement. That is not retreating from my position. That is apologizing for presenting my position in a muddled way. If you actually need or want some sort of a "retreat", or some sort of groveling, in order to make yourself feel better in some way; I am afraid you are going to have to look elsewhere for such ego gratification. It is, of course, impossible for two bids to both be "catchalls": either all things that do not have an assigned place go into one bucket or there are still multiple buckets to choose from. 2 bids, two buckets. 1 bid for everything left over, a catchall. The intent was to point out that in SA there are many hands that must choose between these two buckets that are not even close to perfect for either one. The use of the word "catchall" when talking about two different bids was not precise enough on my part, and for that imprecision in use of language I also apologize. As for you "being done here": Not unless you want to be. I fully intend to answer your questions / address your issues with regards to 1foo-2bar;2N being able to show either a minimum or a maximum hand; the "split range" as commonly called. And any other SA 2/1 issues you care to raise. However, there is no point in taking any chances of muddying the discussion by pursuing multiple discussion topics in parallel when dealing with someone who is evidently looking for an excuse to be hostile. Therefore I am not doing so with you. Once you and I are done with this specific point on SA, then if you wish I will handle the next one on your list and I will continue to deal with them in order one at a time until you are satisfied that I have addressed all of your concerns in these matters. I want you to be very sure that I have not and will not in any way "retreat" from you or your posts.

"Retreat" is not a correct interpetation of either my mood, actions, or intent. "Clarify" or "try to make sure I'm speaking and being heard accurately" is correct. You started railing about 1foo;2bar;2foo promising a good suit as a bad way to bid. You then accused me of being a proponent of that position. It is not a position I ever stated. Please stop putting words in my mouth or twisting my statements. (or gloating that I was not explicit enough for you.) I in fact happen to agree with you that SA has serious problems if a 1foo-2bar;2foo must promise a good suit. (Perversely there is less problem using this agreement playing 2/1 GF than there is playing SA, but that is a different discussion) However, I strongly disagree with your notion that there is a "default" or "catchall" auction of 1foo;2bar;2foo playing SA. There is no "catchall" 2/1 sequence in SA. That is an agreement usually found in some variations of 2/1 GF, not SA. In SA, you should always make the best bid you can from the legitimate choices available to you. In SA, after 1S-2C;?? I am not rebidding 2N with JTxxx.AKx.xxx.KQ. I am rebidding 2S. I am not rebidding 2S with xxxxx.AKx.JTx.KQ. I am rebidding 2N. Am I "happy" about either choice? No of course not. Is my choice the best I can do in describing my hand to partner? Yes. Partnerships can of course make whatever special agreements they wish, but w/o discussion and explicit agreement to the contrary, a SA pair should always be striving to describe their hands as best as they can with the bids available to them. YMMV.

Don't know about you, But I'd usually rather be a H slam w/ my 6:3 fit over being in a S slam w/ my 4:4 fit... In any event, 2C-2D;2H-3H;3S-4S;-etc gets you to the appropriate slam whether Responder has QJxx.Qxx.xxx.xxx or QJxx.Qxx.xxx.Axx The 2nd hand is easy whether the opening is 1H or 2C. The 1st hand may very well pass a 1H opening. after all, Opener is more likely to have a 5H332 minimum, not the OP's rock crusher. Thus not only do we miss a game after 1H-allpass, we risk missing a _slam_ if Responder has a reasonably likely hand that probably should pass 1H. Opening 1H is looking more dangerous...

bid_em_up is well named. He's considering whether 3N or 5D is better whan the OP's question was whether to bid a game or pass... :D ♠Q9x♥Kxxx♦Jx♣A987 Pard RHO you LHO ..1♦...2♣...dbl...3♣ ..3♦..pass..?? Your Negative X showed ~10 HCP. That's what you have. GOP heard you. 3D is not forcing. Pass. Q9x opposite a minimum opener with 3-S should make you uncomfortable with the play in 3N. a flat 10 count opposite a minimum opener should make you uncomfortable with 5D chances of making. Pass.

I've got 10 HCP and 4 card support for partner. That's not only Inv values, it's the definition of a Limit Raise for partner. Since GOP opened 1m, if I had S's stopped I'd bid 2N. I don't have S's stopped, so I'm making the other bid that shows my hand: 2S If GOP then shows a minimum via 2N or 3C, I pass.

Two things we tell novices about whether or not to open 2C with shapely hands: "If your hand is so good that you would be sick to your stomach with the thought that you had just missed a Game if CHO passes your Opening 1bid, you should open 2C." and "Two suited hands should avoid opening 2C as much as possible." So, ♠AKxx♥AKJxxx♦Ax♣x Are you very afraid We will miss a Game if it goes 1H-allpass? 8/12 of the controls, 4 losers, ~8.5 expected tricks in hand. The average 19 HCP hand has about 6.6 controls. This foot is more like a ~22-23 count in terms of playing strength. We need one good card from CHO to make game. What are the chances of CHO passing 1H when holding that one good card? With only the CA, DK, and CK out, there's a good chance CHO has only one of those and that it is a K rather than the A. OTOH, all 4 Q's and 3 of the J's are out. CHO's fair share of those 7 cards is 2 1/3 of them. If CHO has an A or a K and 2 other cards, even 2 J's, they usually are not passing an 1H. What are the chances CHO does not have any A's or K's? What are the chances they pass 1H then? What are the chances we miss a game if they do? 10 cards are out. CHO's fair share is 3 1/3 cards. But only 3/10 are controls. It's ~2:1 odds that CHO will not be holding any A's or K's. With a likely stiff in H's and a reasonable chance of 3-S, many pard's with less than 3 Q's are going to pass 1H. Qxx.x.Qxxx.Qxxxx is about the worst most CHO's could have and not pass 1H. Can we make Game if CHO has worse than this hand and passes: say xxx.x.Qxxx.QJxxx ?? Let's pretend you decide to open 2C for a moment and see what a planned 2C auction looks like. I'll Assume 2D Waiting and no other gadgets. 2C-2D;2H-2S you have no problems. 2C-2D;2H-3H Again, you have no problems. 2C-2D;2H-2N;3S Hmmm 2C-2D;2H-3m;3S Hmmm Those last two are the most likely auctions and make it impossible to describe our hand below 3N. That is usually considered non optimal. Pick your poison based on what kind of partner you have, which problem you'd rather have, and which potentially bad result is going to hurt your partnership the least. I expect my pards with 5- HCP not including any A's or K's to pass 1H in tempo. I can make 4H or 4S with an aweful lot of hands that I expect CHO to pass 1H with. Therefore I am opening 2C.

Stephen, I never meant to say nor advocate that Opener's rebid of their suit promises 6+ cards or a good suit in SA. What I've been trying to say is that in SA you should use the more descriptive of the sequences 1foo-2bar;2foo vs 1foo-2bar;2N when those are your legitimate choices. I've also said that there is no default catchall 2/1 sequence for Opener playing SA. 1foo-2bar;2foo is a standard catchall sequence playing some styles of 2/1 GF, not SA. I think I know where the communication disconnect may have started. My original statement in this thread was "The difference being the length and quality of the S suit: 1S-2H;2S implies 6+S or a hand where a significant number of my tricks are in S's (Hhhxx for instance)" I later used the extreme example of "not being able to tell whether Opener has xxxxx or AKQJxx if a minimum Opener always rebids their suit." The first statement could have been written more clearly on my part. Bad Ron, no biscuit. The extremity of the examples I used to keep my point clear probably strengthened the misimpression. Let me be explicit here: There is no catchall 2/1 sequence in SA. In SA all rebids below Game by Opener are 100% forcing. In SA Opener's "high reverse" or bidding past 2N requires 15+ and creates a GF. In SA 1foo-2bar;2foo does not promise a good or long suit. In SA 2/1 auctions, minimum Openers have the choice of 1foo-2bar;2foo and 1foo-2bar;2N. In SA, minimum Openers should use whichever of those 2 sequences is more descriptive of their hand (Actually we really want to rebid whichever maximizes the play odds on the hand; but this requires a level of Declarer play and visualization that most novices and intermediates do not usually have. So at first we tell them to make the most descriptive bid, and then as they develop we get into Asymmetric Guards and putting the stronger defender on opening lead and ... etc) It would be nice if all 2suit rebids showed nice or long suits. It would be nice if all 2N rebids showed flat hands w/ all the unbid suits stopped. ITRW, things are frequently not that simple. It is common to have to use judgement as to which SA sequence is more descriptive, or the least lie, of your hand.

17 HCP + 2 length points = 19 playing points. This a GF hand opposite =any= Response. Pard's 1N bid in competition shows ~ the top half of your minimum responding range. Say ~8-10 instead of ~6-10. Not only should you GF, but you rate to take 11 tricks most of the time.

Mixing a minor card in with your 4 Major cards and opening 1M showing a 5cM... Ditto the similar mistake leading to you Preempting in a suit that is not as long as you thought... Opening 1N instead of 1M when you don't really have a balanced hand... ...but you think you do. Double counting cards like Ace's leading to you bidding way more than you have. =Not= counting cards like Ace's leading to you bidding way less than you have... You think We are playing Weak Jump Shifts. We actually are playing Strong (or Intermediate) Jump Shifts... etc. I could go on and on...

I'll bid 3♥...then3NT or 4♥ Assuming that there are no typos in your post... ...you do know that Responder can pass 1H-(1S)-1N;3H-?? 1H-(1S)-1N;3H is Invitational opposite an ~8-9 point Responder. Meaning ~16 points. Since with your ~19 point "foot" you never want Responder to pass below game, you have to make a rebid that is GF or find a sequence that is GF. K9xxxx is just not a good enough trump suit to leap to 4M with. Just rebidding 3N is awefully unilateral. Cue-bids are 100% forcing and make it easy to establish a GF.

Let's really get into the details. Qxxxx.Kx.AKJxx.x 1S-2H;-?? Here are the systemic SA choices: a= rebid 3D GF. If you believe the above hand is worth 15+ playing points in this auction, then the systemic bid is 3D. =I'd= probably bid 3D with this hand ATT, but my card play is supposed to be better than most novices and intermediates... ;) I'd also know I'm taking a small gamble treating my hand in this auction as worth 15+, and if it worked out badly I pre-accept the blame in the postmortem. b= rebid 2S Qxxxx is not much of a suit, but at least I'm emphasizing a desire to play in a suit rather than NT; which addresses your issues about the C singleton. c= rebid 2N. You do have D's stopped, you definitely want any S or H lead to come up to you rather than through you, and if pard has a GF hand they are very likely to have C values. OTOH, there is the stiff C. Qxxxx.x.AKJxx.Kx IS-2H-?? Same choices as before. The Good: Now we "know" that Responder has our singleton suit stopped. The Bad: x in H's is a much poorer holding than Kx in H's for this auction. I feel much less comfortable rebidding a GF 3D now. 2S or 2N? Which do you and your partner consider the least evil? In actual play ATT I'd probably rebid 2N under this circumstance nearly 100% of the time. AKJxx.x.Qxxxx.Kx Same auction. Same choices. I'm still not rebidding 3D. OTOH, a 2S rebid is very easy to justify. I'm happy to play 4S in a 52 "fit" with Hhhxx as a trump suit ("H" is A, K, or Q; "h" is A, K, Q, J, or T). AJxxx.x.KQxxx.Kx Same auction. Same choices. Which do you prefer, 2S or 2N? Which helps GOP the most? IMHO 2N does. In sum, playing SA, unlike in 2/1 GF, is there is no "default catchall rebid" for Opener after a 2/1. If I gave such an impression, I apologize. That certainly was not my intent. In SA, You have both a rebid of your suit and 2N available as non GF rebids to describe your hand to GOP in 2/1 auctions. Why not choose between them whichever best describes your hand to GOP?

FTR, there are some minimum responding hands with 3 card support that I still think are not worth a direct raise of 1H: 4333's with only two honors unless those two honors are both A's. Control poor 6-7 counts, especially in flat hands. etc basically, a minimum raise should promise 2 cover cards and no more than 9 losers the vast majority of the time.

I'm certainly not arguing with the definitions of what a minimum hand is or what the books say about showing support. That ♠T8543♥652♦73♣AK6 is clearly a minimum H raise in SA is not in question. The issue is whether it is weak enough to set up a Preference Auction despite its 3card support or whether it is good enough for a direct raise. jdonn has come up with some decent examples for his point that are not so unusual as to be unrealistic. Call me convinced. 1H-2H is the better auction. I'm still concerned that there is a non-ignorable chance that We will get too high, but C'est La Vie.

♠T8543♥652♦73♣AK6 1H-?? In both SA and 2/1 GF, both of 1H-1N;2m-2H 1H-1S;2m-2H Are Preference Auctions showing a minimum that should almost always be passed. *glances upward* 2 cover cards, 9 losers, all my HCP in a likely to be undevelopable short suit... yep looks like a good hand for a Preference Auction to me. Now, which contract is going to play better? 2S in your 54 fit or possibly 53 fit with a shortness in Dummy, OR 2H with your xxx in support in a flat hand? 2S If it goes 1H-2H;Game Try, how do you feel? Sick to your stomach. You bid 1S rather than a 2H raise because a= you are trying to improve the final contract b= you want this auction to end in 2M and no where else.

But the game isn't only maths. 22 hcp might be enough for 2NT because you know LHO's shape and strenght. Besides, if his hand is weak, his long suit might not run due to lack of entries. Playing for specific hands is usually not the way to a good score. Playing the odds is. Flat hands are defensively oriented. 23HCP are usually needed to make 2N or 3ofasuit. If you have 23HCP but do not have any chance of making Game, your odds on best way to get a good score is to Defend, preferably with a penalty X on the table. Only if the odds are that We have a Game should we be considering ignoring the fact that our hand is defensively oriented and taking a bid; thereby risking our likely plus if we defend in the hopes of a greater plus if we make Game. As I said, it is about playing the odds. Not specific hands.

Neither of those hands is a typical 12 count. Qxx.Qxx.KJxx.KJx is garbage that isn't even worth an Opening bid in most systems. There are 9 counts that are better than this 12 count. xxx.Axx.AKJTx.xx has trick taking strength more akin to a typical ~15-16 count than a typical 12 count. Of course you want to pass with the 1st and compete with the 2nd.

Interesting Theory question on Balancing in the situation I posted: I wonder if it would be worth it to routinely in that situation: pass w/ flat 13- HCP X w/ flat 14-15 HCP bid w/ flat 16+ HCP You give up the T/O X, but weakish 4441's are defensively oriented anyway. Expectation is that you are setting Them and you have told pard what your hand is very precisely so that you could for instance use your 2N structure to find playable spots or probe for Game when Responder has the appropriate hand. Hmmm...