wyman

I erred by only giving dummy 1 outside entry. Maybe I should have given him the AK tight of hearts. I played this suit combo last night against (euphemistically) "novice" opps [i had ♣AQ dub opp xxx in dummy, and clubs were 6-2, but righty still led a diamond lol], and I played low to the Q, low to the 9, and RHO won with AJ tight. I lamented that if JLall was on my right, I would have gotten it right. But this prompted me to wonder if it's right some (admittedly very small) fraction of the time to play A from Axx just to protect when you have AJ tight.

MP The full hand is a red herring, I'm just wondering how to play the spade suit.

[hv=pc=n&s=s63hqj52dakj7caqt&n=skqt92ha3d53c8643&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1np2h(%21s)p2sp3nppp]266|200[/hv] MP T1: ♣5, 3, 9, 10 T2: ♠ 3, 4, Q, A T3: ♦ 2, J, 8, 3 T4: ♠ 6, 5, ? Righty is world class. Under what circumstances, if any, do you play the K here?

not imo

I would rip it at MP, but at IMPs, I'm scurred.

I have an idea of where you can put them...

We were considering recently followups to opps' penX of our 1N. We decided that the following was reasonable, but I'm interested in what you guys play, as well as a few questions below. 1N (X) .............XX: Scramble, usually 4333 .............2-any: DONT (4+/4+) .............Pass: forces XX, to play or any one-suited drop. * Obviously we can swap the 2-any and the pass-2any sequences, but I don't have a good sense of which would be better. * Should the DONT bids be 4+/4+ or should, e.g., a 4432 hand be rolled into the scramble? * When making a "penalty" pass, it would be great if the result was the ability to play 1Nx, rather than 1Nxx. At MP, there's little upside from the XX, and at IMPs, since it's a game, they may not sit for it when we're right. So it seems that the ability to play 1Nx is valuable, but that removes half our sequences, so I don't see a good way to do that.

I have plenty of recommendations for intermediate books, but very few for novice/beginners. I've heard that Bridge for Dummies is better than you might expect, and recently I recommended Watson's The Play of the Hand and Bill Root's How to Play a Bridge Hand to someone as play instruction. And I recommended Lawrence's Workbook on the Two Over One System as a way to learn 2/1. All bridge players at any level should read The Bridge Bum, by Alan Sontag. If that doesn't make you want to play bridge, nothing will. Low bridge content, high entertainment content. But N/B's, what are you reading and how do you like it? And I+'s, what did you read when you were an N/B that you found helpful? Remember, these books should be aimed at N/B's -- folks who may not yet know what a finesse is, so Adventures in Cardplay or Love's Bridge Squeezes Complete are really not what we're looking for.

Signalling should be moved to I/A.

thats fine. but then why bother pointing out that 4D is not a LA? Also, the rule is clear to me, and the ruling on this hand is clear as well imo (adjust to 3N making some number, weighted or not depending on jurisdiction, PP for offender who should know better). But this game is complicated enough for beginners without having (lots of lots of detailed) laws, at least one of which has a literal meaning that has "long been discredited." There should really be something done about that.

It's only illegal to select from among logical alternatives one suggested by the UI. If you rule that 4D is not a LA, then...

Hmm? In a suit declarer is running?[i think count is standard in a suit opps lead unless it's obvious the suit is running, after which SP is default]

... so no infraction?

I do the same, but mine still works fine...

Interesting, with a normal 17 count (and some good 16s) and AQ98xx, I'd be inclined to rebid 2N. And with 15-bad 16, I'd settle for a simple 2S rebid. Perhaps this style is far less standard than I think.

I guess. I just think it's unlikely that we couldn't GF, but now we think we have 5-level safety. Sure I agree with you that there are hands like this [they are not that hard to construct, even], I just think it's a small set, and there are way more where we just want to say "hey, pard, I have a really good raise to 4S. Interested?"

Sorry, will edit above. Was putting your AKxxxxx/A/Kxxx/K opp the hand in OP. I understand now what you're saying. But I think you're aiming for an awfully narrow range. I mean if you want to bid 5C with your hand with 9 clubs, go for it, and partner with a super control rich hand can raise, but I think you don't need to be able to bid 4C in an effort to get to exactly 4C, 5C, and 6C when each is the right landing spot. Systems just aren't designed to handle freak 9-baggers. And I still maintain that this hand is not a 3S rebid.

This is one reason I prefer 1S-3C to be natural and invitational. At least then I have a different lie to tell. Also where are these hands coming from? AKxxxxx, A, Axxx, K is not a 1S-3S hand. You have 4 losers, 3 aces, an 18 count, and 7 spades. <edited out misunderstanding>

I'm not relying strategically on misdefense, but it's totally valid to consider it as part of your EV. Assign probabilities to possible events. Like I assign 0% to partner holding AKQJxxx/xx/x/KQx. I think we disagree on how likely everything is to make. I'm just saying I'd bid 4S and part of the reason is that I very rarely expect partner to pull 3N.

heh, good point. I retract my ridiculousness (part B anyway). [edit: but I run good, so they will block and the HA will be with the short diamonds :P]

A few points: (1) that is not a 3S call for me. (2) I have 5 crappy diamonds, so you're right that opps could run them, but: ...(a) they might not lead them, and ...(b) they may see 9xxxx in dummy, not want to establish the 5th diamond, and shift to a club. edit: the real point is that this isnt a hand where we need to consider 3N v 4S; we would have bid 4S directly over 1N or autosplintered if we're feeling real saucy (I'm not). So it's surely right, as you suggest, to pull 3N here, since you shouldnt have put yourself in this position in the first place imo.

Or you might have 9 tricks, and on the wrong lead, you get all of them in 3N, but you can't ever get a 10th -- even in spades. So I'm saying that opener should really only be bidding 4S with a hand that he hasn't fully described. And this means that responder is allowed to raise on a hand like this.

Actually I think this is totally reasonable. I think that jump rebidding spades shows a suit that will play for roughly 1 loser opposite a stiff. Sometimes partner will raise with a stiff, sometimes even with a void. I have far less concern in 4S than in 3N with responder's hand, but this is a question of judgment, not of system. I'm happy if a slew of people think I'm wrong though. It probably means I am.

I had Lehigh +750, sick life. In a 4-man draft where everyone must pick one team of each seed, I still have Kentucky, Kansas, Marq, Wisc, and Xavier, so I'm in pretty good shape to take that down unless I run super bad. But all my brackets are terrible.

Because 9 < 10 ?