Jinksy

This must be that principle of fast arrival people keep talking about.

Not a specific comment, but an epic drama in multiple acts: Act 1 Playing at my local club, LHO (I’ll call her W) opened 1N, P passed, and RHO responded 1H. One director call later, E was invited to take back her bid and informed that W would be silenced. E opted for 3N, tabling dummy (2533ish) after my P’s lead, and then fidgeted anxiously until midway through the play, she shouted ‘Why aren’t you running my Hs, P?’ Everyone – her P included – asked her as politely as the circumstances warranted not to comment as dummy. Act 2 After W drifted one off, it seemed to everyone that 4H would have been a better contract. E angrily shouted ‘Why didn’t you bid Hs, P?’. We reminded her of the director’s ruling, and who had been responsible for it, but, not to be deterred, she grabbed her partner’s hand from its wallet, displayed its contents – including 4 hearts – to everyone at the table, and asserted loudly that 4H would in fact have made. Act 3 Feeling that fripperies like reason and table etiquette were obsolete at this stage, we suggested that they could discuss this afterwards, and we should move onto the next hand, given that we were already behind. E testily agreed, and we reached for our cards – at which point W realised that all 13 of hers – including 4 hearts – were lying face up on the table.

At the moment, via an xfer then natural bid. 1N 2D / 2H 2S is inv+, F1, with opener's rebids all being major-oriented. I like being able to take the non-GF 5-5 hands through Stayman, since it lets me hear opener's shape before deciding whether I want to invite or just sign off at the two level.

What, after I bid 3C their methods allow them to find the right spot *and* reliably rightside? That's some powerful system they've got. Also his discussion of Xing makes it sound as though he thinks we're mainly doing this for lead. I expect my P to virtually ignore my bid on this type of auction where lead's concerned (albeit less so at these colours) - I want to damage their bidding, with anything else a minor bonus.

I've just been fiddling around with my NT continuations, and come up with one particular sequence that I'd now like to play with all my weak NT partners, and probably the strong ones as well: 1N 2C / 2D 3H, where the 3H bid shows exactly 5-5 in the majors and is inv NF. This seems much more useful than Smolen to me, since on normal systems it's not normally possible to invite and show that distribution. Anyone else play this/something comparable?

Depends on why P is Xing. If I think it's to show a void/specifically requesting a lead of my suit, I'll lead a H. If it's asking me not to I won't. Otherwise, I agree with billw55's assessment. We're heavy underdogs in this case, so I'm not looking for a passive lead, but something that's going to generate tricks on a good day, such as a ruff, hoping for Cs eg 2335 clockwise from me. Meanwhile, P should at least be offering values that will work on defence. That's not D honours, and H honours are going to be less than normally valuable. My lead is unlikely to be relevant to any S honours, so I'll look at Cs. Maybe he has such as KQx and a red ace.

3C for me. I virtually have a 3C opening bid, and after a precision 1C, I have a better than normal risk/reward ratio for preempting.

I'll lead a top C, probably the A for my bidding.

Far from clear what happens in any method IMO. If they're playing natural retreats (or exit xfers), responder might pass or pull in desperation, probably to 2C (although 2S might be better for the higher risk of them Xing you into game - jackpot if the defence can find the X here). If 2C, then the doubler probably shouldn't be able to allow a penalty X (or penalty) pass on a hand like this*, or he'll be losing out on several more moderate trump splits where Xing is the best action, so we'll have to 'rescue' them, ending up in one game or another. Alternatively he might pass, allowing opener to bid 2D - though opener with a poor long suit and honours in the short ones might pass, hoping his P has a scattering of values. Again, jackpot for the defence - esp if they find a better lead than mine. Or a third possibility, responder might just try 2C planning to pull to 2S if it gets Xed, which one way or another will get pulled to 2S before it reaches him, and the doublers will end in game. If they're playing some sort of forced XX system, then responder can prob show Cs and (Hs or Ss), so opener will prob leave him in 2C, and again the doubler will have to pull. If they're playing a non-forcing pass then they probably don't have a two-suiter offer that includes Cs, so responder will have to either pass or treat his hand as a single-suiter, in which case see above. * But possibly the vulnerabilty should mean that a penalty X/pass is only made in extreme cases, but I'm not sure whether that means sitting the X/making a 'takeout' X should have some values in the suit instead. If you have the former understanding and can penalise 2C, it's hard to know if opener should pull to 2D. He's likely to have a 5-2 fit, but it's hardly the stuff dreams are made of. If he does, then a penalty pass of opener's 2D surely looks more likely since both defenders can envisage at least one more trump in their P's hand.

Do you have their hands? On my hand at these colours whether I'm playing penalty or takeout Xes, I'm never leaving them in 2Cx.

What's the chance they were making 1N? I'd prefer aggressively Xing weak NTs on strongish dist hands with good lead choices like this (although I'm not sure if I then prefer AS or QH - prob the former). That might save me this problem - if they retreat to Cs, I'll pull to Ss, if they end up in a red suit I'll give my P a chance to pass a takeout X then pull Ds to Ss (or raise his Hs). Now at the cost of a minor overbid I've given P more info about both my hand and theirs. Having started with Landy, I agree with Helene on 2S.

I want more values for my X, but in circumstances like this where they've found a strong fit, I like 4th suit natural by overcaller - so how about 4C when 3S is passed back to him? ETA didn't see E hadn't specified his minor, so never mind.

IMPs, don't remember vul. What's your answer for both? The 1C opening on that hand shape was not discussed.

QTxx xx KQ98 KQT vs AKJxx Axx AJx xx N dealt, and the auction was uncontested: 1C 1S 2S 3D 4S 4N 5D* 5H** 6S *0/3 ** Q ask ATB System was fairly basic, fairly standard stuff with no relevant complicated agreements.

That never even occurred to me! I really should start being more mercenary at the table...

Do you mean the robots lead singleton trumps at the table? If so I don't see why they'd be likely to prioritise a DD defence - they must have been optimised for SD play.

Bird and Anthis' book looks in depth at this auction (1N:2C, 2D:3N), and concludes that you should treat it basically as 1N:3N - ie major leads dominate (DD) almost as much as they do in the latter.

I think *they're* playing Precision, and he's protecting. Put me down for a pass.

Totally missed this Q. At the end of the auction, S said it probably should have been alerted since it was agreeing Ss, but N didn't seem to have any idea what it meant (I don't remember at what point we asked him, but it was presumably before that). We didn't think it was worth seeking a ruling for N forgetting the system - I think that's just caveat emptor?

Vul on this auction I would assume lead/low level competition only.

Hm, it'd be interesting to see some simming of this. Shame David Bird's book didn't cover it.

Thanks for posting actual arguments. His X would have been pens. Not sure why P's strength should be a deterrent, per se? I figured at these colours I'd rather get one suit in at a low level than 2 in at a higher level. Yeah, I agree this is a factor, I just didn't think it likely enough to be a strong deterrent. We're not playing total points, so if other than this it's a positive expectation bid, I doubt this is enough to tip it over. Like I said, I still have the extra chance to pull to 3D if they do XX. Maybe I'm just underestimating the probability of this - but like I said, I had (later) justified reason to doubt these opps would find it even when it was right. If I'm unpassed, X would be values. When we're both passed hands I don't expect my P to drop me in game without consulting me first - he's got lots of encouraging bids in between here and 3H. I'm not claiming the X was a good call, only that the arguments that it's a bad one don't are either off target, or an estimation of the likelihood of bad outcomes that seems too generous here - and no-one's posted any sort of counterargument against the arguments in favour of it. That was le sarcasme.

I'm only really thinking about your initial assumption here, before RHO has even followed. I agree Jxx isn't nice, but a priori I would guess it has higher expectation than leading a singleton, esp on an auction like this, where there's a good chance even if P has the Q, both S honours are to your right. Meanwhile surely xx and xxx are more attractive trump leads than x?

[hv=pc=n&n=sak5432hd9832cqt6&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=pp]133|200[/hv] Teams - what's your call? Does it make a difference if a) you're in the last 8 boards of a match you were losing by 42 IMPs at the start of the set, and/or b) you're playing 4 or 5 card majors?

Really? My initial reasoning was almost the opposite - that a stiff trump is a very dangerous lead, and xx, xxx, Kxx, Kxxx, and maybe even Jxx are all more appealing holdings to lead from - and that on this auction the S lead suggested D values. Turns out I was completely wrong, or at least that this S agreed with you. My argument against expecting a stiff trump lead is a) the likelihood of trapping P's honours that weren't otherwise dropping, b) that being a textbook 'bad lead' for the reasons in a. Textbooks esp on lead can contain pretty dubious advice though, so I'm interested in hearing an argument against my expectation - what's your reasoning?