Jinksy

Let me join the dots for you: this auction actually came up, and my partner of comparable experience and I disagreed on it. Since there happens to be a forum for just this type of question which both of us read, I foolishly thought that using it might be permissable.

I haven't heard this method. What do you rebid on such hands? 1♠?

Seriously, what kind of expert says to a pickup P 'double of (opening bid) is always (anything)'. Obviously people play these things different ways - hell, half a dozen people might even be daft enough to play it his way.

MPs: [hv=pc=n&s=sk62haq9754dj2c32&w=s87ht62dkq743ck64&n=s54hkj8d965ca9875&e=saqjt93h3dat8cqjt&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=1s2hp3hppp]399|300[/hv] Not a stellar result. Who gets the kicking?

1C 1H / 2N 3S Assuming you're not playing NMF or checkback over 2N, what's the min number of ♥s you expect from responder here?

One of my Ps recently persuaded me to play this as 'to play', on the grounds that it helps with game bidding: with a hand like QJTx x xxx KJTxx, you can start with Stayman, planning to raise 2♠ to 3, but otherwise bid 3♣. At IMPs this seems to lead to a better partial than continuing with 2N, esp since P will often raise it to a hopeless 3. That said, we play a weak NT (and not 4-way xfers), so slam-chasing is less of a priority for us.

I'm passing. Looks like too much risk of slow losers in a 5-level contract, never mind a slam (and I agree with MrAce on the relative merits of all the non-pass bids).

X for me, too, for all the reasons above. Also, this isn't just any 2-level overcall - it's the least space-removingy 2-level overcall available, so I want a slightly better suit than I normally would for such a bid.

Qxxx leads certainly work out much better, but Kxxx seems to come out better than you'd expect against 1N (though I don't think they sim any hands where it's the top lead). Keep in mind, leading from Kxxx towards nothing won't necessarily cost if declarer still has to play the suit later, and leading from Qxxx towards P's J can still carve the suit.

I've never seen it any other way. Bridgeguys also say 1N shows five: http://www.bridgeguys.com/Conventions/granville.html And this MIT article: http://web.mit.edu/mitdlbc/www/articles/Flannery_Nightmare.pdf I think the idea is it allows you to find 5-3 (and occasionally 5-2) fits reliably when you're going to settle at a low level - after 1H 1S, opener's 1N typically shows 4 spades. I've tried it both ways to some extent - showing 5 has produced better results so far. (edit - pre-empted twice!)

I was quite surprised by the responses to whereagles' thread here, but was persuaded by the responses to change my view. I'm curious what the responses are if we take the same hand... [hv=pc=n&s=sat986ht65d9cqj42&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1hp]133|200[/hv] ... but specify that we're playing Kaplan inversion such that 1♠ shows 0-4♠ and, for the sake of argument, 0-11 points, and 1N shows 5+♠s and 6+ points. The same arguments for 2♥ still theoretically apply, but with the opportunity to show your 5th spade, do you still eschew it? *** Separately, but while I'm considering Kaplan inversion, how do those people who play it play the auction 1♥ P 2♠? With many partners I'd play this as a weak jump shift, but that seems to lose much of its value here - especially if you play Gazzilli over responder's 1N bid.

Thanks Siegmund. I took the details from the book, so can't add much. They say 'opener would not rebid a 4-card minor suit, preferring to pass 1N unless he was strong enough to see a chance at game'! Sounds odd to me too, but I'd guess they're including at least 51(34s) and 53(14)s in the pass, unless say 15+HCP. If you're feeling really industrious, their results might help you calibrate: With a hand identical to the one posted, except with T96 in ♣s, they had J♠ 27.9% 5.65 4♥ 37.8% 6.00 6♦ 40.5% 6.15 T♣ 42.0% 6.21 Where the first stat is equivalent to your second %age (1N can be beaten after this lead) and the second is average number of tricks possible to take after this lead.

I voted for 1♠ initially, but the arguments for 1♥ persuaded me.

I'm passing both, but pausing a lot longer on the first one. Second one has too many negatives - misfit for P's suit, defensive tricks, no great prospect of a three level part score, and a probable loser in their suit.

Yeah, but are you *expecting* that to happen? Most of the time when you have a fifteen count, LHO doesn't have an X. Against that you have the obvious upside of a better score for making the 8 or more tricks, and occasionally 1N might stop them finding a ♥ fit that they'd scrabble into over 2♣, making you a few MPs even if it goes down.

After the auction 1♠* P 1N** P P*** P, would someone mind testing the leads from this hand: AJT KT4 K976 654 * 5+♠s ** 6-10 HCP *** may include a four-card minor, may not include 4+♥s. May include a 6-card ♠ suit with only 1 of AKQJ unless also 15+ HCP. This hand is very slightly modified from a Bird and Anthias one, which is being annoyingly inconsistent with the algorithm I'm trying to develop based on their data - I need to test a hypothesis. Any bets on how it will work out, while we wait? I'm hoping for a marginal win for a small ♦ over a small ♣. Thanks, J

Three posters and four opinions. Is that a record? :P

In your defence, my double was almost as bad as your opening :P

[hv=pc=n&s=skj5hj83dkcakt963&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p1s]133|200[/hv] How greedy are you feeling? If you bid 1N, LHO Xes, P passes, RHO bids 2♠.

Vs BBO randoms. [hv=pc=n&w=skhjt43dk543cq932&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1s1np2c2spp]133|200[/hv] What now? Other than that 2♣ was probably Stayman, you have no agreements.

To BBO randoms, yeah.

All true, but if they're making, there's a 130% chance P will X on the grounds that he's got an ace and you must have a couple of defensive tricks for such strong bidding.

Sigh. Long day.

Sure, but I'm just saying it reduces the weight of that hand as evidence for opening 2♠.

In Fantunes 1♠ would show a much stronger hand. The choices are 2♠ or pass (or 3♠, I suppose).