foo

I like this advice, but would tweak it slightly replacing "you" with "your partnership". IMHO Partnership Harmony is more important than the result on any one board, so partners have to agree to play a style acceptable to both players.

1N openings are "preemptive" in the sense that they eat the entire one level. For that matter, so is a Strong Artificial 2C opening. Or a 2N= 20-21 opening (Now we lose the one and two levels. 2N has been called "the slam killer" for exactly this reason.) That does not mean any of the above are =Preempts=. For a preemptive 1N opening, you have to be playing 1N=10-13 AKA Kamikaze NT's The difference is that a Preempt is made on the =expectation= that the opps have most of the HCP. Playing disciplined Weak NTs, or any of the other examples I used, the expectation is that the side opening has the majority of the HCP.

"Standard" here in NA refers to Standard American. The default is what we teach beginners and that is Strong Jump Shifts. Also, got another use for the JS to add to your list: 6) Cliff Intermediate Jump Shifts 6+ cards in suit, good 9 to a bad 12, w/o support for Opener's suit. Some also add a Suit Quality restriction on the suit jumped into. Example good 9: xx.AKQxxx.xx.xxx => 1S-3H! Example bad 12: Kx.QJxxxx.Kx.QJx => 1S-3H! If requiring a good suit, the 2nd isn't good enough, and Qx.KJxxxx.Kx.QJx would not be either.

The point about the opening lead was that GOP knows that S's are the only unbid suit so that is the natural lead on this auction. As for KQTx.xx.Axx.KQxx , if I'm holding that hand the auction goes (1m)-1S or (1H)-X Replace the ST with a Sx and I'm probably still bidding the same way. Balancer has to have long S's and be light on HCP yet not have a WJO for their bidding to be sane.

Hi, I dont think that you can pass out, at least for me partners pass was forcing. The situation 1D - (1S) - 2H (1) - (2S) pass - ... (1) forcing for one round is similar to the situation 1D - (pass) - 2H (2) - (2S) pass --- (2) forcing for one, promising a rebid or even forcing to game And in the later situation partners pass is clearly forcing. Holding your original hand you clearly have to bid 3H. If you dont like this, you will have to dbl. With kind regards Marlowe "forcing for one round" means just that. =1= round. Without interference. 1D-(1S)-2H-(2S);pa-pa-?? is definitely passable. You did not promise a GF hand, nor D support, nor 6+H, nor any S stops. 10 HCP in xxx.HHxxx.Hx.Hxx your bid. Or worse, move an H from H's to C's. I might X on general values, but such hands do not scream we are setting 2S easily even with 22-23 HCP given that Opener did not show S length or S stops. Nor has Opener shown extra values. If Opener has a minimum w/o a fit for me and w/o S's, our best strategy may very well to pass quietly and hope we can set 2S enough by defending well. 1D-pa-2H-(2S) playing Strong Jump Shifts is a completely different story. The SJS is GF, setting a Forcing Pass among other things. 1D-pa-2H!-(2S) playing Weak Jump Shifts is of course passable.

Balancing 2S after the opponents have found a fit or if the opponents have not ended in NT after a mistfit auction is reasonably normal. This is not either situation. Spades are not a safe suit here since after 1♣-P-1♦-P;1♥-P-1N-P-P-?? there is a very good chance the opponents have 6-7 spades between them and most or all the spade honors you don't have. If the 2S bidder has KQxxxx and nothing else, they had a 2S WJO earlier in the auction. So they do not have that. If they had a full opening bid and 4+S, they could have bid 1S in the 1st round. If they had 5+S, even bad ones, and something reasonable they could have acted in the 1st or 2nd rounds. Please construct a hand that makes sense for the 2S balancer to have after this auction given Opener's hand. Take into account it has to be flawed enough to not have taken action at the one level in the previous two rounds of bidding yet be good enough to bid 2S all by itself with no encouragement from GOP. ...and even if such a hand does exist (doubtful), Opener is still looking at a flat 14 HCP including AJXx of S's when the auction says the Opening side has 20-22 HCP with the hand a misfit and an opponent who could not bid 1S over 1C or over 1H yet can balance with 2S. Probability and Bridge Logic says the 2S bidder has made a mistake. Particularly at matchpoints, you must punish such behavior. X here feels right at least 80% of the time. PS: If is not clear the Opening side can make 1N, and especially if it is clear They are not likely to make 1N, why isn't Balancer just passing and making the Opening lead that will get a plus rather than risking a bid?

=If= I am bidding, I'm doing it to jam the auction and "get in their face" and I know it. So =if= if bid in Their 2/1 auction with this cheese whiz (it is not good enough to be real cheese...) I'm bidding a Sandwich NT showing 55 in the unbids to rob Them of as much space as possible in one bid. ...and whether it works or not, I am not claiming this was Bridge. This is operating and masterminding, pure and simple. ...if it =doesn't= work out well, I don't even try to defend myself during the post. I just buy alcohol and/or buy dinner and/or whatever until pard accepts my apology.

...and on the other side of the "puddle"... Without discussion, Standard here in NA is that 1S-3H is a Strong Jump Shift and 1S-4H! is a Splinter. Without discussion, standard 2/1 GF here in NA is that 1S-3H is a Weak Jump Shift and 1S-4H is a Splinter. IIRC, in BWS 1S-3H is a WJS and 1S-4H is a Splinter.

I actually do not think there is a UI problem here. Responder has a legitimate problem that will often cause a break in Tempo: "It's Our hand. We've bid every other strain and the misfit light is clearly out. What kind of hand can LHO have that can legitimately Balance with 2S but could not bid 1S earlier? What are Our Agreements under this unusual circumstance? How do I maximize the chances for Us to get a good score?" Etc, etc. I think the only potentially fast call for Responder is X w/ spade shortness, and that is only if they are sure that X here is for T/O rather than Business. I also think that X'ing for penalties by either Opener or Responder when it is so easy to calculate that We have at least 1/2 the deck and most likely 21-22 HCP in a misfit auction is not a something that should =ever= be barred by Law 16A concerns. Especially when staring at AJXx of Their trump suit in addition to everything else already noted. I agree with others that the "Matchpoint X" for penalty is 100% clear here.

I agree with you (1N= 12-14 occurs greater than 2x more frequently than 1N= 15-17), but I do not think this as big an advantage as many Weak NT pairs try to claim it is, especially when playing against decent opposition who know better than to just casually jump into a Weak NT auction. The partscores They miss will be to a large degree balanced out by the times We play 1N when We should be playing in 2ofasuit. OTOH, the ability when playing 1N= 12-14 for 1m-1M;2M to show precisely 15-17 Support points and for 1m-1M;3M to show precisely 18-19 Support points is IME a serious advantage that doesn't get the recognition it deserves...

r1a) Even playing traditional Walsh style, being able to put Their strong hand on Opening Lead or being able to have the hand with the greater number of Asymmetric Guards Declare is a good thing. r1b) Shape information and the degree of fit or misfit is important enough, particularly in contested or potentially contested auctions, that I play "Invitational+ Walsh" instead of "GF Walsh". It should be noted that when I can I play 1N= 12-14, so a traditionally invitational Responder w/ ~10-11 HCP often turns out to be GF anyway... r2) IMHO, playing any form of Flannery in order to handle 45?? hands of less than Reverse strength is a "cure" worse than the disease... :) r3) I never said Support X's and XX's were perfect. In fact, I don't think I've ever said any bidding treatment is perfect. There's just no such thing. In fact, I thought I was explicit in my opinion that using X and XX to show 4+ cards in the unbid Major when no one has laid claim to it yet is IMHO more important than showing the degree of support for GOP's minor: 1C-pa-1D-1S;X => 4 H's 1D-pa-2C-2M;X => 4 cards in OM 1M-pa-2C-2D;X => 4 cards in OM

*sigh* another person picking on Weak NT's in inappropriately... First some history. Weak NT's are more "natural" than Strong NTs! Weak NT's were the original 1N opening of Bridge. 1N literally means "I can take 1 trick more than book (7) with no trump suit if you have the hand you are expected to." Strong NTs were introduced to simplify bidding for weaker players. Here's the true Good and the Bad about playing Weak NT's... The Bad Stuff about Weak NTs: 1) The weaker your 1N opening range, the more often you will end up playing 1N instead of a more playable, and possibly taking more tricks in, partscore in a suit with a fit. 2) There are some 13- HCP minor suit oriented hands that can not be opened because of rebid problems playing Weak NTs that are normal openings in Standard. 3) The Strong NTer's have a clarity to their suit opening HCP range that Weak NTer's do not because a Strong NTer can not have a flat hand of medium strength; Strong NTer's are either minimums (the vast majority of the time) or 18-19 HCP when they open with a flat hand. The Good Stuff about Weak NTs: 1) =Disciplined= Weak 1N openings find good games on 12+12= 24 that are more difficult for Strong NTer's to find. 2) The auctions 1m-1M;2M and 1m-1M-3M are much more accurate playing Weak NTs than they are playing Strong NTs. 3) Playing Weak NTs, 1m openings are either 3a) a real m suit or 3b) 15+ HCP or 3c) both This greatly facilitates game and slam bidding, particularly m suit game and slam bidding when it is right. 4) Weak NT pairs can afford to be more disciplined about their 3rd seat openings. Notice what is =not= on either list: 1) Trying to "steal" the hand with a Weak NT. Nope. It is supposed to be a descriptive and _constructive_ bid when played correctly. Disciplined Weak NTs are not supposed to be any form of preempt! 2) "You will end up X'd, going for a number, and getting a bad score more often playing weak NTs". EMPHATICALLY Not. In fact, usually Weak NTs are usually =more= dangerous then Strong NTs to X for penalties since a) the odds that there is decent transportation between the closed hand and dummy are greater playing X'd Weak 1N contracts than X'd Strong 1N contracts. :) When you do catch a Weak NT opposite a very poor dummy, the Defending side often has a Game they just missed. A decent run out structure is nice, but frankly probability says the Strong NTer's need it even more (whether they are willing to admit it or not). I by strong preference play 1N=12-14 in all seats and all vulnerabilities. I teach Standard and 2/1, so I'm comfortable with either. Weak NTs and systems containing them are effective tools if used properly.

Greedy is right. ;-) 3H rebid is reasonable. 4H is more than a bit hungry. "State of the Match" bid? OK, E overcalled 1D in front of W, usually a very nice hand, and despite this W decided to lead the CK instead of leading E's suit. With 9 C's out, odds are the CK is not a stiff. So W has led from KQ(x*). Most likely on this board is KQxxxx:xxx or KQxxxxx:xx. That leaves (SQ; HK; DA,K,Q,J)= 15 HCP unaccounted for. Almost all, if not all, of them must be in E's hand. Particularly the HK, DA, and DK. There are 7 D's out. 4card D overcalls are not believable at a good table. If D's are 2:5 or 1:6, it seems reasonable that W would have led a D. Even if they had Hx of D's. With Stiff DA, they'd likely lead the DA and look to their pard for the switch signal. D's being -:AKQJxxx is looking very likely. However, a) this would involve some very rare shapes in the EW hands and they went awefully quietly for that. :blink: if the board looked like this, a throw-in or strip and throw-in as others have suggested would work and it does not. Therefore my guess is that W has a stiff D honor less than the DA and did not want to lead it. I'll play for D's H:AHHxxx My (perhaps twisted) suggestion Win the CA; Ruff a C with HQ, HJ, or HT; Sx to SA; Take the trump hook; Play the trump A (preserving the H8 and H6 in dummy); Ruff a C high; Play a Hx to the H6 or H8; The OP implied that E followed to 3 C's, 2 H's, and 1 S... So now play a Dx from the board towards the DT, possibly throwing =W= in. If E plays a D honor, and W does not overtake, E is endplayed. If E plays a D honor and so does W, your DT is established. ...and if W's stiff honor wins, W has a problem. *ducks under desk waiting for the "that's insane!" comments coming back*

If I decide to X, then the auction 1D-(1S)-X-(2S);-pa-pa-?? gives me the opportunity to clarify the strength range of my hand. With a minimum Negative X, I pass. With maximum Negative X, I make a bid. xx.KQJxxx.Qxx.xx is clearly in the top half of the hands I might X with, so I'm bidding 3H. If I decide to bid 2H, then the auction 1D-(1S)-2H-(2S);pa-pa-?? gives me the opportunity to clarify the strength of my hand... xx.KQJxxx.Qxx.xx is clearly in the bottom half of the hands I might bid 2H with, so I'm passing. With good hands, and certainly with an Opening bid facing an Opening bid (12 HCP with KQJxxx of H's is definitely an Opening bid), I'm doing something along the lines of bidding 3H (usually considered Forcing here), or cue bidding 3S, or even bidding 3N (if I have S's stopped.) depending on my hand. Regardless, "CHO" should have minimal problems with regards to what to do next.

How do you bid this hand playing 2/1?, 1D-(1S)-?? holding 42.KQJ982.Q43.T9 It's close between X then bid H's to show a minimum with long H's or a direct 2H bid showing 10+ playing points (8 HCP + H suit that will play for 1 loser opposite Hx + nice intermediates in H's and C's). To me, the location of Qxx makes all the difference. Qxx in GOP's suit means that it is odds on that We have at least a fit and the Q is working. Qxx in the om means the Q has a non ignorable chance of being waste paper. 2H in the 1st case. X intending to rebid H's in the 2nd case.

You would splinter agreeing hearts with this lousy suit not fearing to find partner with Kx, Axxx, AQx, Axx :) The hands, N Opens: ♠K6♥KQJ8♦A82♣AT62 ♠AQJ97♥T754♦♣KQ83 1N-2C;2H-2S;3N-4D; and now Opener pauses for thought: "GOP has 5♠, 4♥, a GF hand and is cuebidding ♦'s when I'm looking at the DA. The expected cue bid would be in a Major. Playing Standard, we cue bid A's before K's and without any A's GOP can't be strong enough to be making this obvious slam try. What's going on? GOP must have 1-D in a slam try hand. If GOP has 1 A, we belong in 6. If GOP has 2 A's, I should investigate 7. 4N." When GOP shows 1 A, 6H will be the contract. If Opener does not have the DA, then they will have the HA instead. Giving Opener solid trumps opposite a 54?? GF hand evidently making a slam try by cuebidding the DA. Opener's reaction holding that control rich 17 HCP hand is going to be to either cue bid that HA or bid 1430. Either way you will get to 6H. The direct 4D splinter: 1N-2C;2H-4D is more risky, but not completely outrageous given that the hands where things will work out are far more likely than problem hands like the Kx.Axxx.AQx.Axx noted. Bottom line is that I'd choose the sequence most likely to get Us to slam when we have the values and controls in whatever partnership I was playing that board in at the time and only worry about issues like value location if I was in a partenership that rated to be able to handle the more subtle auctions and their inferences.

IMHO Frances makes a very good point: the utility of Support X and XX's depends on the auction. I'll also note in passing that my system of choice is basically KS, think of it as 2/1 GF w/ 1N= 12-14 and a few tweaks, and Support X's and XX's have always worked very well for me. 1C-pa-1D-1H;?? Since you can show 4+S at the one level, Support X's win. 1C-pa-1D-1S;?? Which is more important to you: a ) the ability to show 4+H in a hand not strong enough to Reverse? b ) the ablity to differentiate 3card and 4card support for GOP's minor? 1m-pa-1H-1S;?? Same question, but now the Reverse suit is D's and the possible fit is in H's. Clearly it could be argued that being able to show a Major or Major suit support is more important than doing the same thing with a minor suit. 1m-pa-1M-2om;?? Which is more important: a ) showing the unbid Major in a hand not strong enough to Reverse? b ) differentiating 3card and 4card support for GOP's Major? Two old sayings are "Support with support" and "Misfits defend. GF misfits play 3N". They both argue that Support X's are the better idea here. 1m-pa-1H-1S;?? If 1m was "1D", you have no problems showing 4+C here. IF 1m was "1C", the same logic about misfits and supporting GOP's Major apply. Support X's win here. So for auctions that begin 1m, Support X's and XX's are better except when there's an unbid Major to show when Opener's hand is not strong enough to Reverse. What about auctions that begin 1M? 1H-pa-1S-2m?? I think it is fairly clear that what GOP needs to know ASAP is how good your spade support is... 1M-pa-2m-... Hold It. Are They =really= diving into Our 2/1 auction? Regardless of whether you play 2/1 GF or not, the odds are that They Have Made A Mistake and the issue is not supporting GOP or showing an unbid suit. The issue is most likely figuring out whether playing the hand or hitting them rate to get Us a better score. In sum, Support X's and XX's have been shown to have high utility in most auctions. That's why they are so popular :-)

"Keep it Simple Stupid". Drury has the dual purposes of a) helping our Game and Slam bidding (people often forget this is the most important reason for Drury) and b ) keeping us below the 2 level until Opener has guaranteed their strength. AQ643.AT5.73.853 has no such problem. I bid 1S. What can go wrong? a) PD passes with 3+♠ and a minimum (~12-14) or subminimum (~11-). While there are some hands where we may miss a Game, they are unlikely ones. b ) PD raises to 2S (I play this as promising 4+♠ or 3+♠ and a side stiff/void). We invite via 1H-1S;2S-3H;-?? We have "told our story" and PD has all the information needed to Do The Right Thing. c) PD rebids 1N= flat minimum w/o 4 ♠'s and likely w/o 3 ♠'s either. Our hand just went down in value. 2H is perhaps an underbid but 3H is definitely an overbid here. d) PD rebids a m ( 1H-1S;2m-?? ). Again, our hand just went down in value. 2H is probably enough. e) PD rebids 2H (!!). Our hand improves even further than it did after the 1H opening. The known 9+ card fit plus the presumption of either A) a double fit in ♠+♥ or :rolleyes: ♠ shortness (and therefore likely ♣ length) means this hand is definitely worth an invite via 3H. 1H-1S;2D-3H;?? tells PD everything they need to know: I have 4+♠ worth mentioning in a hand with H support and Invitational values. In stark contrast, if I bid Drury or even 3 card Drury I'm going to have a hard time telling PD "where I live" so they can make an informed decision regarding how well our hands fit together. For example, Kxx.KQxxx.Axxx.x is a nice minimum opening bid that after 1H-Dr;?? probably signs off in 2H. Responder will have to "take a position" to take a second bid here. Assuming reasonable partnership discipline you are very likely to have just missed the good 4H contract. After 1H-1S;2D-3H it's easy for PD to visualize the play and put us in game (and just as importantly, the =correct= game) with the right hands. 1S. The KISS bid.

Why is this a 4SF thread at all? QJ87.Q.AKQ64.AJ8 Ummm, why didn't Opener show his magnificent 5 loser hand that upgrades to a very likely 4 loser hand where all 19 HCP are working in the first place? 1D-1H;2S-?? ...and Opener has told his story. Even without the 1H response, this hand has something like 6.5 expected tricks in hand before the auction starts and ~8.5 expected tricks opposite any response. In addition, a 1H response upgrades the HQ from a likely useless card to a likely useful card. Seems like Responder holding A6.AKJ92.J9.KT75 Has a much easier time driving the partnership to slam after 1D-1H;2S-?? ...and if Responder drives the partnership to slam, Opener should know enough to consider the HQ a very important undisclosed extra value and visualize 13 tricks. Maybe I'm a simpleton.

1st thing: 4HCP 1N openings are too wide ranging. play 13-15 or 14-16, but not 13-16. 2nd thing: If you aren't playing Drury in 4th seat, start. No more need to open 5M332's 1N. ITRW the shapes for a 1N opening tend to be all 4333 all 4432 all 5m332 =2452, =2425, or =2245 w/o a rebiddable m suit nor strong enough to reverse. That's 25 shapes (4+12+6+3) having 5M332 (6 more shapes) increases the number of possible shapes beyond reasonable. Reason for both pieces of advice? To narrow down the number of hands Responder has to take into account when deciding what to do. That being said, you have 21-24 HCP between you, your shape says that if Opener has a long suit it is most likely C's, and getting frisky with a Stiff A rarely works out well IME. I'd pass. On a bad day we only make 1N or go down in 1N when 2M or 3m makes. On a good day 1N makes overtricks or is the only making contract.

My preferred system is 2/1 GF w/ 1N=12-14, so this is where I'm right at home B) Hand 1: If X is penalties (IMHO Negative X is better frequency wise here), you got lucky and this is the board for you. X is automatic. Not because you are sure you can set them but because you have the opportunity to tell PD, the Captain of our auction, lot's of things w/ X: a) >= 50% of my values are in their suit. b ) I do not have a maximum (so pard knows we do not have a Game if they are only invitational) c) I do not have a super accept of your suit. Responder is now much better informed to decide what to do. Hand 2: Play 1N=12-14, 1m openings by pard are a) 15+ HCPs or b ) a real D suit or c) both Even in 3rd seat. Holding T9x.KQJ9.Jxxx.Tx after pa-pa-1D-2C;X-2H-pa-?? My thoughts are a) PD probably does not have 5+D. b ) PD probably does not have 18+ HCP Therefore PD is very likely to have 15-17 HCP c) We likely have 22-24 HCP between us. We have 2N or 3ofasuit safety, but probably no Game. d) Opener does not have 4 S's. Therefore the opponents are likely bidding on shape, maybe even scrambling for a fit. With a good PD X for penalty is automatic since PD knows more about my hand than I know about theirs (especially after I X). Such a PD will know I will not have done this unless I can handle any subsequent action PD chooses. With a PD I can't trust in as much, I X for penalty at MPs and pass at IMPs.

Darn good analysis. The issue from my POV is which is more likely, hands more your 1st example or hands more like your 2nd? ATT, I'd sweat over this one. My thoughts would go something like this: balanced 14 HCP => 4.6 controls on average balanced 15 HCP => 5.0 controls on average balanced 16 HCP => 5.5 controls on average We need 7+ controls to be in Game. I have a 2 control 7 loser hand opposite a hand with 5 expected controls and 7 expected losers when we have a known fit. We may even have a 9 card fit. Therefore my hand is worth an invite at MPs and a GF Red at IMPs (you are never going to accurately describe AQT9xx.x.xxxx.xx in the room available). White at IMPs or playing BAM, I'm going to be playing a lot of possible boards in my head before I take my next call...

FrancesHinden's analysis is dead on from my POV. Nice work! B)

IMHO 2H is more of an underbid than 3H is an overbid so I would've rebid 3H as Opener. ...and shrugged philosophically if it did not work out. For all we try, bidding is not and never will be an exact science. Our saving grace on this board is that QT.A853.Q72.9632 is an invitational hand that gets much better after 1S-1N;2H-?? 3H by responder should be automatic. Now Opener has to do something noteworthy to take their hand from below the bottom of the box they have shown to the middle of the actual box their hand is now in. (This BTW, is why I think Jeff Reubens would rebid 3H as Opener in the first place) Exclusion RKC is perfect. 5C intending to drive to 6H if responder tries to sign off in 5H is not unreasonable given that Responder has shown invitational values and we have 9+H between us. Even (*shudder*) 4N 1430 is worth the risk since the odds of C waste are fairly low and the odds of PD having a S card for us are reasonable given the auction.

Pass is not a Logical Alternative in my mind. A= PD's simple rebid denies a Maximum, it does not guarantee a minimum. If he has 14-15 HCP, we probably belong in game. If our hands have nice stoppers in the side suits between us and PD has a good ♦ suit, we may have 9 tricks in 3N on even less than 24 HCP. If our hands fit well and PD has 3 ♥'s we may be able to make 4♥. Etc. B= We have an Invitational hand, not a minimum. We owe PD a 2nd bid. C= We have both ♠ stoppers and 6 ♥'s (PD only knows about 4 of them) "C" is actually a problem since you have an embarrassment of riches and not enough room to show both. I'd bid 3♥ since 4M is the preferred Game in Bridge and PD can always accept by bidding 3♠ when they don't have 2 ♥'s and need a ♠ stop from us for 3N. There is the risk that PD has a minimum w/ only 1-H (although a ♥ void is unlikely given that PD can't have many ♠ given our hand and the auction), but the odds favor PD having 2-3 ♥'s.