wyman

On 1: would KQJx Qxx QJxxxx void gf? [note I'm just illustrating the "can he have 0?" point] If not, I definitely want to be in grand if he has the Q. Lots of chances. On 2: I have no idea. So I didn't keycard; I just cuebid 4S. Gun to my head w no other info I'll bid it I guess but if I had info I might bid vs a good team and settle for 6 vs a bad team. But the bigger point here is maybe not to KC if it doesn't tell you what to do next. On 2, what if p shows 2+Q and you guys are off DAK? Unlucky I guess but I think KC is wrong on 2.

I was given the following hand today: Qxxxx AKx A9x A8 and the auction: 1D (2H) 2S (P) 3C (P) ? and I bid 4D (considered 4N quant and 3H). But part of this is that I wasn't sure how continuations over 3H should go. 1D (2H) 2S (P) 3C (P) 3H (P) ? What does partner bid with: xx xx KQJxx KQJx x Qxx KQJxx KJxx [what about ♥Jxx? or JTx?] x xxx KQJxx KQJx At another table, my hand bid 3H, and bid 6D over 4C, since my hand took from 4C the inference that partner had a stiff spade. I wasn't sure if I would take that inference. If partner bids 3S over 3H: 1D (2H) 2S (P) 3C (P) 3H (P) 3S (P) ? Is he showing 2 spades? Any two or just Hx? Or nothing about spades but half a heart stopper? I know that somewhere along the line "standard" stops really being a thing. But what's the expert standard treatment here?

I would bid 4S even now that I know the result :)

There is a camp where every bid is natural. There is another camp where 4C is ace-asking in every situation. On the forums, though, I'd be incredibly surprised to find more than a few folks who play 4C as natural in this auction. As always, I'm completely ready to be shown that I'm wrong, and if I am, then I apologize for generalizing, and authoritatively at that. In any case, even if we play 4m as a cue here, I think there are styles in which cuebidding is more-or-less mandatory and styles in which it's not. And if partner has a hand that's minimum for the auction thus far, he may have chosen not to cuebid. I don't tend to rebid 3M light, so I can't imagine going down in 6 unless partner has the hand I posted above, basically KJ AQJTxx QJ QJ and any other small card. That's a small target, and honestly, I can imagine rebidding 2H with it. But people are allowed, certainly, to make their own agreements. For OP, if he's not sure that in _his_ partnership, 4m would confirm spades, I think the problem is massively easier. And if they are rebidding 3H on random 14 counts with AQJT98 of hearts, then the problem is considerably more difficult. A lot depends on style. The point I'd make to OP is that you should know: - how light you're allowed to be to jump rebid 3M - whether 3S here is forcing (hint: it is) - whether 4m by responder after 1H-1S; 3H is a cue or natural - whether 4m by opener after 1H-1S; 3H-3S is a cue or natural - whether 4m by either, if it's a cue, can show a poorly placed Kx or shortness - whether 4m by opener, if it's a cue, is mandatory. I think everyone's answers ITT will be influenced by their answers to the above questions (except the one about 1H-1S; 3H-4m, which I included as part of a more general point). And I think that for a given set of answers to the above questions, you'd be able to reason out your best course of action over 4S. My thesis advisor's thesis advisor told him "for every problem to which you don't know the answer, there's a simpler problem to which you don't know the answer." Often times reducing your problem to a much simpler problem will be incredibly enlightening.

4m definitely sets spades here. He can't jump rebid hearts and then start showing a second suit at the 4 level.

I try to cuebid as much as possible. I would KC on this auction. What's the best hand partner could hold that doesn't have a club card? KJx AQJT9x QJ QJ That's a 17 count... sort of. I dunno. Looks pretty awful. That's 7 losers... The possibility of any of the following -- him having the club ace or club K w ace onside or stiff/void in clubs or they dont lead a club or you keycarding talks them out of a club lead -- just massive. I'd keycard, and if it blew up in my face, well, partner would understand and likely be embarrassed of the trash he bid 3H on.

I always GS with this hand.

Agree 100% (assuming he is going to play a bunch). But that one's not on my list because, hey, I did that this year! :) [but I ran pretty good -- i was not 90% to make it to the final day a priori lol, and I only played 2] I'll obviously be rooting for you to have a ton of success this year. See you in a few weeks I hope...

This is a really nice list, Chris. Your NABC goals are really lofty, and I like that. Achieving either of those would mark a really stellar year. A top 10 finish in an NABC+ pairs or teams, for example, is a life goal for me, not a 2014 one [although obviously once I achieve it, my life goal will update to winning something :)]. One of my 2013 goals was to play more bridge, and I failed miserably. However, there's a silver lining. I was 2/2 of making the final day of NABC+ events I entered: the open LMs (which was 3 days!) and the national Swiss (2 days), both in Atlanta. I played with one of my favorite people, let alone partners, and your comment about letting good partners know that they are valued hit very close to home for me. These were my first Q's in NABC+ events, so this feels like a very successful year for me, despite the fact that I hardly played at all. In fact, the only tournament I went to all year was Atlanta -- no regionals or sectionals. Pathetic. I got married, and the officiant was another of my favorite people (and bridge partners). That alone makes 2013 a huge success. I'll bump my 2013 goal, then, to 2014. I'm gonna play a lot more bridge this year, and that's starting with the (last 4 days of the) Las Vegas regional at the end of January (!!). I hope to make it to Dallas and Las Vegas as well. We'll see what life brings. And a continuing bridge (/life) goal is to become a zen-master at the table. I'm generally a person who wears his emotions on his sleeve, so I'm trying to achieve that state where nothing bothers me; I forget which eastern philosopher made the comparison to life being like a spinning disk -- if you're at the edge of the disk, things are chaotic, and you are being whipped around, but if you can find your way to the center of the disk, you can stand still, calm, and just watch the world rotate around you. That's what I want (in all aspects of life, but also at the bridge table. Maybe I need to move to California...). This is a nice thread. Thanks for starting it. edit: also I want to suck less, but I like my goals to be attainable...

I disagree. I think it's far better to design based around opponents having their bids. The way I figure it, vs teams who are dbling 2C in a situation where responder will want to XX for penalties (and where it will be massively profitable vs our game to do so), we are already winning the match on expectation, so I'd rather figure out the best way to get to the right spot with the lead coming from the correct side vs teams that actually have their bid. I think you win more matches that way. Now we can start talking about meta game: well, if they know that I know that they know that responder cant XX for business, then they can dbl our stayman with a wider range. But I'm not convinced at all that it's necessarily profitable to do so.

Yeah 2C & 2H are natural for us (most?) there, so 2N is really the only option available to us.

What am I, chopped liver? :)

Pass now. Incidentally -- and this may be a style thing -- I would have bid 2N at my first call; if 4H were next, I would not want to bid diamonds, nor would I want partner to lead a spade.

4D for me.

a helluva lot better if you dbl to tell him to lead his short major :)

dbl should win unless pard has a heart void or declarer has Jxxx (and even then sometimes we will be fine).

Hands this strong have to start with a dbl imo. If partner passes over 1S but checks out 2Cx (which should almost never happen), he has like 6 clubs to the QJ, and we've found a great spot, especially at these colors.

Interesting, I'll reevaluate. I consider myself pretty aggressive, despite our aggressive opening style. I wouldn't have considered making a LR with this, but with so many of you making one, I will reexamine.

That doesn't describe my hand better than "I have a constructive raise with either three or four cards" imo

If you've decided to roll 3-card and 4-card constructive raises into 2H, then I'd bid 2H with this hand. It is becoming more fashionable to roll 4+ card limit raises into the 1M-2N structure, freeing up 3M as a 4-card constructive (i.e., "mixed") raise. But you should play within the confines of your system. If you have a way to show a 4-card constructive raise (2H), and your hand is a 4-card constructive raise, then your problem is solved. If the issue is whether your hand is constructive or worth a limit raise, then my opinion is that you'd be really, really stretching to call this a LR.

Yes, this is what I play as well. My point was that his description of his system was insufficient, so I'm wondering what bids he has available.

I feel like "2/1 but not Bergen raises" isn't sufficient. How do you make a mixed raise? How do you make a 4cd limit raise? In any case, this is a mixed raise for me, so I make my systemic mixed raise.

looks like a fine spot to me. rub of the green?

There are other possibilities. Sometimes I'll fire a robodoop up from my desk, and before it starts, I'll get distracted by something at work. And then I'll come back 30 minutes in and speedball the rest of the tourney. More often than not, this happens midway thru since I can unreg if someone grabs me before we start, but it happens. I agree that TPTB should monitor this type of behavior. Although I definitely do some weird things in robodoops and occasionally have some very good results, so I hope I don't get flagged! :P

@ Broze/Quiddity: I try (and often fail) not to say too much in threads I start. But I guess I'm wondering, if you think I'm worth 6H -- which I'm not necessarily disagreeing with -- what do you think is the minimum I can have for 5N? @ Everyone: I didn't specify, but partner has a pulse. He's not bidding 5H missing 3 aces, and we don't play denial cuebids. Partner is a very strong player, but suffice it to say that we didn't discuss this auction before the session.