Jinksy

Pass, but I have no experience playing against Flannery.

The main thing I fear by bidding is find W with a shape like 2533, E with something like 4225, and pushing E into a competitive 2♥ bid that scores a trick more than spades. It doesn't seem likely enough to stop me bidding. As Phil said, this is W/W. If P's got some distribution we might profitably compete to the 3 or even 4 level.

Well sure - I didn't mean it as a *bad* thing :P [ETA I added your option to the poll, but to keep it in a sensible order it's shifted your vote into 'both acted correctly]

[hv=pc=n&s=skq943ha43d98ck72&n=sa65hkqj875dkqt2c&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=3cp4c4hppp]266|200[/hv] W is an unknown quantity. E is on the U20s, so can be trusted not to have his bid. Even after their bidding, I suspect slam is still an excellent prospect. But can we plausibly reach it? If so, who should have done more?

If you're going to bid on this hand, you'd better have a partner who knows not to raise. But Darwin sorts that out for you - after you've burned through a few of the ones who can't resist a raise, you end up with whoever remains ;)

2♣. Getting in the way as much as I dare. Against worse opps, it'd be 3♣.

As entertaining as it's been, I'm glad you did this. These forums have been all about him recently - every thread's been a pile-on, and he seems to thrive on it. He might not actually be a pedigree troll birthed from the fires of 4chan, but when we can't tell the difference, it hardly seems to matter.

[hv=pc=n&w=s8653hq652dt93cj8&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1n(12-14)p3nppp]133|200[/hv] Imps. Pick a suit (and say if you'd deviate from the normal lead).

Mod note: this thread is split from http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/74250-dont-open-4-4-4-1-hands-with-12-or-13-points/ What is the point in loudly announcing challenges when anyone points out your flaws when a) you continue to get beaten in almost every one of them, b) you quietly slink off after each defeat, and c) the one match you proudly announce the result of, by a staggering coincidence is the one one you didn't lose? (congratulations on your resounding draw, btw) If you just want to prove your 'courage', either play for money or take up boxing. If you want to give us a sense of your bridge playing ability, post all your results, and show some humility when they don't paint you as the strongest player in the village.

Sure (and no need to stand on ceremony :P) - I just meant that as 'it looks to me as though slam is odds against', though it looks as though I'm in the minority. What (still) gives me pause is that P knows we could have all sorts of hands with support and keycards, yet didn't try 4♦, which presumably we play as forcing, and costs almost nothing. To me that suggests a hand that's bidding 5♦ more as a two-way shot than with confidence that we'll be making even game - eg the hand Zelandakh gives above, or something like xx xx Jxxxxxx xx.

Not I. Presumably P's 4♦ would have been forcing, so given that he neither solicited cues nor blasted slam himself, and I have about the worst holding possible in the opps' suit, it feels too risky to push on.

Redacted peevishness.

Steve/Phil (soberer now): to clarify, are you both intending to discourage? Even assuming P might have led from AK7xx, presumably playing the 8 to encourage would say nothing about the 9 (or 10)? Or are you saying that attitude should basically be off when dummy hits (to be replaced with count if you didn't have a sequence to show?)? If the latter, it wouldn't apply to our partnership - we have quite inflexible/rudimentary signals, and P will expect you to reliably give the signal asked for unless you've specifically discussed the position as an exception (which in this case you haven't). On that assumption, what card do you play? Also, suppose you held T932, hence no risk of blocking. What card would you play then? And (going back to the original question), what minimal modification would persuade you to switch from discouraging/encouraging to the reverse?

Not sure I follow (somewhat drunk). You're saying that on the actual holding you'd play the T (discouraging), and the 8 on the second, unblocking/showing bottom of the sequence? Re unblocking on the actual hand, I feel like if P had started with AK7xx and no very likely outside entry I'd expect him to (have) lead a small club rather than an honour, so it feels like it should be a secondary concern.

Thi dispute is based in a specific hand that I'll post below, but I'm most interested in the general question of what holdings you feel are worth encouraging from in isolation. Partner leads the A of a suit and dummy puts down Qx. We play ace leads ask for reverse attitude, king for reverse count, so his lead is consistent with any plausible ace-headed holding from 3-5 cards (we rarely open 1N with 6-card minors). What is the minimum club holding/in what circumstances would you encourage given the facts about the club suit? Ie can you make a general statement about how many clubs/what sort of club suit quality you need? Or is it more contextual? And in which case can you eg describe adjusted versions of the layout given below where you'd mark the boundary - ie give two similar hands on one of which you'd encourage, on one of which you'd discourage? [hv=pc=n&s=skq974h532d8ct986&e=s86hjt8dajt764cq5&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1n(12-14%2C%20may%20be%20%5B4441%5D)p2hd(Hearts)2s(Usually%203%20spades)3dp3nppp]266|200[/hv] (ETA Assume scoring is IMPs, and discount hands where you can prove one way or the other that a switch/continuation is needed to beat/give any chance of beating the contract - I'm interested in rules of thumb)

FYP :P

Three weak 2s? :P Failing that, Lebensohl seems to be the only one from the original list that makes some unbiddable hands biddable.

The challenger should at least have an option - you don't want to have to issue an open ended challenge to someone if you don't know in what form they'll accept it and you have no interest in (say) Total Points.

FWIW I think a spade lead is marked on both auctions. If E has the strength we need to have a shot at beating this but couldn't overcall 1♥, it's hard to imagine setting up hearts is our best bet (and KTx is an awkward holding to lead away from, at least vs a human partner).

I also like the claim 'It also gave me the chance to put my money where my mouth was and answer my critics' when , having been repeatedly challenged to play for money, he only accepted the challenge with zero stakes.

That must be why you have such insight into the country's dominant bidding system.

Is there more about this written somewhere?

Pass. Does r/w mean we vul or dealer vul? Pass NV. Close if vul. Would prob still pass, but partly depends on what I know of P's bidding style here (I know very little of GIB's). Mine is to keep these bids pure rather than strong, so I'd pass opposite me. If I was playing with a P who liked to a smattering of points for such a preempt, I'd raise. Pass. 1N. J♦. I've got too much strength to care about involving partner, esp when I'm leading from such a carveable holding.

Well what on Earth does it mean for a meaning to be obvious if it's not comparable with something else and isn't 'to play'? Or, as a third possibility that you've ignored, he's got a shapely hand that had grand slam interest iff opener showed up with 4 spades, and has now signed off. That seems perfectly natural, requiring the least interpretation - it might not be optimal use of space in a practice partnership, but neither is this sequence showing 4 spades exactly, for the reasons people have given above.

Regardless of what it should be, if you're going to claim that 6♠ 'obviously' shows four of the suit, I feel like you should provide some kind of analogous auction whose meaning we might map it from. This isn't hard with the 'to play, and don't worry your head about what exact hards I have' meaning. I would certainly assume the latter if any of the following auctions came up undiscussed: 1♣ 6♠ 1♦ 6♠ 1♥ 6♠ 1♠ 6♥ 1N 6♠ 1N 2♦ / 2♥ 6♠ 1♦ 1♠ / 2♣ 6♠ 2♦ 6♠ 2♥ 2N* / 3♥ 6♠ I'm basically typing out semi-random sequences ending with a jump to the six level, and in all cases it seems clear to me that (without discussion) P is showing a desire to play the contract he's bid. It seems far more like 'overthinking' to claim that this auction is the one exception to the pattern.