chasetb

[hv=pc=n&s=sak32hq84dajcj852&n=s6hkt72dkt53caq96&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=p1d1s3nppp]266|200[/hv] Rotated to make South declarer. Trick 1 - Q♠ - 6, 4, 2 Trick 2 - 10♠ Plan the play from there. First, what do you discard from dummy? I'll give you one hint:

First time playing this 1♦ option. What is the best bid, and what should be the difference between Pass/4♥/4NT/5♣? [hv=pc=n&n=s92h2dak2cakt8765&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1d(10-15%2C%202%2B%20unless%206%2B%20!C)1h1s(5%2B%20!S)3hd('Cards'%20with%20defense)p4dp]133|200[/hv]

Starting with a 3rd seat opener, I think my DD bidding would go: 1♣ - 2♥ [Reverse Flannery, 5+ Spades, 4+ Hearts, <10 HCP] 2NT [Ask] - 3♠ [6-4] 4♣ - 4♥ 4NT - 5♦ 6♣ [2nd round ctrl?] - 7♠ 6♣ can't be 'to play' because Opener would have bid 3♦ or 4♣ rather than 2NT, so partner has interest in a Major.

Opener has a nice hand, and should make at least one slam try. However, Opener's hand is still (semi-)balanced, so I think cuebidding is the incorrect thing to do (Stephen Tu nails it on the head as to why I dislike it). If you play that [3M+1] is a shortness ask, then that is perfect to use. Otherwise, I am assuming that Last Train (4♥) is on, and I would bid that. Opener should clearly make a move with 7 controls in 3 suits, and slam would still be reached.

I have heard that 4333 is a pancake, because it's as flat a distribution as you can get. I have also heard the three that you mentioned - the rattlesnake, swan, and death. I also thought Roman was specifically a 5440 hand (since Rattlesnake hands are 4441).

#1 & 2 - I open 1♦, because I have no interest in partner leading a Club, and because I can rebid 2♣ and show my 9 cards in the minors. Mind you, I would rather have 5 diamonds and 4 clubs, but KJxx is better than xxxxx if we don't know what partner's hand is. #3 - I guessed -150 (N-S), and then looked at the spoiler. Yikes! #4 - A modified Work count, more in line with the Four Aces evaluation (essentially 4.5/3.0/1.75/0.75)

I voted for sometimes raising the minor suit (with a minimum), and sometimes making a Splinter bid (with a non-minimum). I hate bids by both players, but West made the most egregious mistake. Signing off with 15 HCP (a King more than minimum), as well as 5 controls, is outrageous!

Before I get to my analysis, I will say that 7♥ is near impossible to get to, because once you bid (and rebid) the Clubs, you aren't finding Hearts. Also, once you find out partner is 4441, you should estimate that your Club suit is only 67.8% likely to come in (3-2 break). Since partner has the 10, it ends up being 71.4%, but I don't expect partner to have the Ten or the Jack (which makes it 96%). In the first auction, I am assuming they are using 2/1. West should splinter with 3♠ over 2NT, but this leaves East with a decision - bid 3NT with a singleton Club (and only Qxxx in the splintered suit), or bid on, hoping that you have a fit in Diamonds or a great Club suit? The second auction looks like Precision, and there are two reasons why 6♣ was bid: (1)Laziness -> NO EXCUSE (2)System notes -> Read on Many Precision pairs have the agreement that once one person has shown a 3-suited hand, that Mulberry (or 4♣/4♦/RKC) applies. If they have that agreement, then there's almost no way to Voidwood or cue for Clubs. However, in my Precision notes, I have this listed as an exception, since Responder in theory denied a 4-card Major. Therefore, 4♣ is a slam try for Clubs (by Opener, 4♦ is RKC whereas 4NT is a slow down), 4♦ is a slam try for Diamonds, and 4M is a self-splinter with a very nice Club suit. Yes, West will know that they have a Heart fit, but will (s)he be able to let partner in on the act?

Since I picked up a computer bridge program, I have been playing/learning Polish Club (wj05). This sequence came up: 1♣-1♥;1♠-2♣;3♥-6NT. Partner had ♠Kx ♥KTxx ♦Axxx ♣Qxx, and while 6NT fortunately made, 6♦ was the best contract (4-4 fit because I was 5341 shape). I don't have the option to change Magister, but with only 4 Hearts and 12 HCP should the robot have even used it here rather than 2NT or 3NT? If the robot uses 2NT, does 3♦ show 18+ points, 5-4 either way in Spades and Diamonds? Thanks for the help.

Using Advanced bots in ACBL SYC game - the two of us that opened 1♠ never has partner go to game! Everyone who opened the normal 1♣ got to 4♠ after partner bid Hearts then Spades if opener doesn't double a Club bid. https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?lin=st||pn|chasetb,~Mwest,~Mnorth,~Meast|md|3SAKJ2HJT4D65CAT54,SQ83H8DAKQT94CQ62,S97654HKQ9732DCK7,STHA65DJ8732CJ983|sv|e|rh||ah|Board%209|mb|P|mb|P|mb|1S|an|Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20!S;%2011-21%20HCP;%2012-22%20total%20points|mb|2D|an|Two-level%20overcall%20--%205+%20!D;%2010+%20HCP;%2011-18%20total%20points|mb|2S|an|Free%20major%20raise%20--%203+%20!S;%206-10%20total%20points|mb|4D|an|5+%20!D;%204-9%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|HK|pc|HA|pc|H4|pc|H8|pc|D3|pc|D6|pc|DT|pc|S4|pc|D4|pc|H2|pc|D8|pc|D5|pc|ST|pc|SA|pc|S3|pc|S5|pc|HJ|pc|D9|pc|H9|pc|H5|pc|S8|pc|S7|pc|DJ|pc|S2|pc|H6|pc|HT|pc|DQ|pc|HQ|pc|SQ|pc|S9|pc|D7|pc|SK|pc|C9|pc|C4|pc|CQ|pc|CK|pc|C7|pc|C8|pc|CT|pc|C2|pc|CA|pc|C6|pc|H7|pc|C3|pc|SJ|pc|DK|pc|S6|pc|CJ|pc|DA|pc|H3|pc|D2|pc|C5|

Sorry for bringing this thread back to life, but in the Kokish-Kraft Weak NT system, here's what he wrote up: DBL -> D, but unsuitable for 3D overcall or 2NT 2NT -> 16-19 (3C=Stayman; 3R=transfers; 3S=D) 2M --> NAT, constructive 3C* -> 5+H/5+S, strong 3M --> NAT, strong 3NT -> Strong BAL or based on long-suit: (advance as in other unclear 3NT situations) PRE -> Likely to be an 8-card suit as opener ALWAYS has 4/5C 4D --> PRE Personally, I like DBL to be either 13-15 balanced or 20+ any. I also like to better define the jump to 3M to be like 14-17 HCP, 6+ suit. I have thought about using 3♣ as a good overcall in Diamonds, and 3♦ as the weaker version, but have only very rarely played against Polish or Precision pairs so it has never come up. Also, I think I would prefer using 4♣ as both Majors and 4♦ as Leaping Michaels as we have L.M. in our system notes. The reason I replied was I had an auction last night that went (2♦) - 2NT - (P) and 4th hand was pretty weak with 6 Diamonds. 3rd hand made a sneaky Pass - it turns out that 2NT goes down 2, both 3♦ and 3♠ (by them) make, and 4♦ gets doubled VUL. I know that it's only one hand, but it makes me wonder if 3♣ should be like Gladiator, and be a Puppet to 3♦.

https://tinyurl.com/sg89hfy While it turns out that my 2NT wasn't the best rebid, there's no way that GIB should be raising to 3NT with that hand.

I also disagree in that I think both hands are easy - I have 3-card support with a singleton so I am raising to 2♠. I wish I could pass, but then I wouldn't have a partner to play with! On a side note, I also thought about opening 1♥ on both hands, rebidding 2♦ if partner bids 1NT or 2♣. I do play 5-card Majors, but I much prefer AKQJ over 65432. If partner asks, we 'accidentally' put our ♦2 in with our hearts!

4S makes, and we have a 10-card fit, but not a single GIB bid it! https://tinyurl.com/y3d28m5x

First off, here's a good summary by Karen Walker on Soloway Jump Shifts. In that link is a much longer and in-depth article, I will link that here. I wouldn't jump-shift here for several reasons: our spades aren't quite good enough (I want the 10 or the King if it's only a 6-card suit), we may belong in Hearts (or Diamonds, or even NT on a misfit where we don't have slam), our hand isn't strong enough, and any of the information we need, we could just as easily get via 1♠.

That sounds like an early version of Schenken's Big Club Standard, but then grafted with Precision and then tweaked. It's likely a unique system, but I'm not a fan of it for a lot of reasons. 1.) Your 1♣ is too narrow, both in HCP and the range of hands that qualify. 2.) The 2♦ bid would be fine if you upped the 1♣ range, but constructive bidding isn't good as it stands. 3.) While you gain in the opponents not interfering over 1♣ when you have a 5-card Major, you lose what is Precision's biggest gain - having 1M be limited like it is! 4.) I don't like the 1NT being 10-12, because you lose out on immediately showing the balanced 15s (and really good 14s). The 1♦ bid is overloaded. 5.) If 2♣ is like the old version of Precision, it's not good. Having said all of that, the system could easily be playable by just one change. Change the range of 1♣ to be [16 HCP - almost GF], allowing 5M hands if [20 HCP - almost GF], and making 2♦ as forcing to 3NT or the 4-level. I would also recommend your 2♣ to promise 6.

Playing 2/1, no one Vul. Here is the auction and the hand. Questions are below: [hv=pc=n&n=shkqjt32dk954caqj&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1hp1sp3hp3sp3np4dp]133|200[/hv] 1.) Do you agree with the auction to this point? 2.) With the given auction, we have no agreement. What could/should 4♦ mean, and what do you bid? 3.) The most likely alternative auction is 1♥-1♠; 2♦. What do you bid if the next bid is... (a) 3♣ (4th suit forcing) (b)3♦ (natural)?

These three hands are interesting. Ultimately, I agree that while they each are unusual, I don't think they threw the game at all. Here's my take on each one, and I will answer the questions after them. Hand 4 - Most pairs play Gerber, but I also play a system where you can't over 1NT (at least on the first round). I have also heard with 35-36 HCP and a 5-card suit, to just bid 7. They likely don't have an Ace, and if they do, opening leader might not have it. This link on Expected Controls by a balanced hand backs that up. If I could do simulations, I would expect that having 5 and 6 controls is higher than what is listed because of the strength of dummy, so no problem here. Hand 12 - Larry Cohen did an analysis of 1 million deals where the most effective opening bid was 3♣! While it was taken to an extreme on this hand, the result ultimately works out. Hand 15 - (S)he shouldn't normally finesse, but I could see it working out. 1.) I am okay with them making a report, but there wasn't match fixing based on only these 3 boards. 2.) Yes - it depends on the bridge association. It is usually unethical, and personally I wouldn't do it. 3.) No, because then it involves more than one party, and it usually targets a third group. 4.) Usually you need more than a few boards (or a few events), but in very specific instances I can see it proven based on one or two hands. For example, in a Swiss teams event I played in years ago (where we shuffled the boards every round) the first 6 boards were flat. On the final board, there was a swing that decided the result (the opponents used Capp against a Strong NT, and we didn't - it wasn't even a good Capp double). In that instance, a crazy result could be enough.

I agree with Paul - I am worried that partner is 2344, 33(43), or 3352/2353 and can't pass our double for penalty. If I had 5 Hearts instead of 4 with this point count, I would go straight to game. As is, I would bid 2♠. It is mostly forcing, and I can get a better idea. If partner passes, we are probably in the best spot, since my hand loses value if I can't take finesses.

phoenixmj, I would show this hand the as a Diamonds hand with slam interest (and we do in fact have interest). In your system (if I am guessing correctly) I would be bidding 3♦ as a Game Force with long Diamonds. In my system, I use 2NT as a transfer to Diamonds, so I would transfer and then bid 3NT, showing 13-14 HCP, 6 Diamonds, and slam interest.

Snipped just the part I want to respond to. In the book I quoted, Goren specifically counts extra points for short suits, mostly separate from the HCP count (with the exception I noted of K, Q(x), and J(x) losing a point). With the original hand, you have 13 HCP, and you get one d.p. (2 points - 1 point for the singleton King) for a total of 14 points. The very first hand in the book I mentioned is ♠ AJxxx ♥ KQx ♦ Jxxx ♣ K -> surprisingly similar to the hand in the first post. I respect that you have an opinion and won't respond to more posts in this thread, but I wanted to show that the math is correct. I also do believe that not opening that hand will put you at a large disadvantage against almost any group of bridge players. Have a good day.

I agree with this, except if an interfering 3♥ bid is natural, than 4♥ is a transfer to Spades.

At Table 1, they could be playing transfers over a double, so 1♠ - (X) - 2♥ might show a good raise of Spades. Regardless, 4♠ by South is wrong. At Table 2, 3♣ is proper if that's their Limit Raise (or better). This time, North is wrong for bidding 4♠.

So you are proud that you don't know Goren? I am a systems geek, and I can assure you 100% that he opens that hand. This is taken from pages 9 and 10 of his book Point Count Bidding in Contract Bridge ©1949, 1950, 1954, 1958. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ace = 4 / King = 3 / Queen = 2 / Jack = 1 --> K, Q(x), and J(x) should be discounted a point. Add 3 points for a void, 2 points for each singleton, and 1 point for each doubleton. 13 points is optional for opening, but if you do, have a good rebid and at least 2 Quick Tricks. If your hand contains 14 points it must be opened! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Now count your points. I count 13 HCP + 1 point for K (2-1) = 14 points!!! I would also bet money that Roth-Stone opens this hand in any seat because of how easy the bidding is, and they were arguably the most conservative of the top pairs of the 50's and 60's.

I play Precision, and there is no way I am finding 6♦. After finding out partner is a min 2236, I am playing in 3NT as South. I could even find out that partner has 4 controls, and I'm not going.