Simple Enough

[kenrexford]

Exactly. (What Foo and Justin said.)

 

So, why would anyone bid 2♠ with this hand? This is a 10-loser piece of crap. I thought maybe I was missing something.

[Impact]

A lot depends on what you double with: if partner doubles because he has a weak NT - then it is silly BUT if you accept the prototypical 4-1-4-4 this hand is worth getting to 2S without being pushed there (and it will help partner evaluate for competition and game anything else).

 

 

I concede your distribution is sterile, the suit less than robust and you would rather that the HA was elsewhere but you have 4 cards in the Major partner invited you to bid, no wasted values (absent HT) and a bare 9HCP.

 

Every time you look at your hand and see only the 4333 shape you ignore the fact that partner has implied some shape (or considerable additional values).

 

I would be less enamoured getting to the 3-level but I think this is just good enough to bid 2H (transfer advance to takeout double) which will allow doubler room to make an intelligent (or other) decision...mind you it is borderline.

 

As between 1S, 2S and 1NT - notwithstanding my enormous respect for Jeff Rubens, I am not yet in the school that bids 1NT unless I have a 5 card suit and values....

 

Notwithstanding the inherent unlikelihood of holding 0-4HCP that range of 0-8/9 is very wide and if I can make a "limit" bid in one hit, I will. Take away even a S pip and I am much less sanguine so it is borderline...

 

regards

[foo]

Yours: ♠ J863 ♥ AT5 ♦ 864 ♣ KJ3

(1H)-X-pa-??

 

Let's say you do bid 2♠ on this 9 count despite it being "a 10 loser piece of crap".

 

Let's give pd the nice hand that Ken posted earlier:

KQxx.x.Axxx.Axxx

 

Now what do you think pd is going to do with this or any other Medium strength T/O X if you jump advance the T/O X?

 

I know what I'm doing with Ken's hand. I'm bidding 4♠.

...and I'm bidding 4♠ with lot's of hands that are not as perfect as Ken's as well.

 

Ken's perfect hand gets Us to a ~50% 4♠. Guess what the odds are on 4♠ bid with a less perfect and more realistic Medium strength hand?

 

Now look what happens if we bid 1♠.

Ken's hand will obviously raise.

our hand now obviously has undisclosed extra's, so we reraise.

(you decide just how much extra you have. I'd bid 3♠)

[awm]

Ken? Wow... am I being equated with Kenrexford or Kenberg here? I distinctly recall suggesting that hand, and I've been careful to put my name at the bottom of all my posts in the signature line.. I know how much Foo complains when people call him "Ron" and he hasn't ever given us a real name to go with... B)

[Robert]

Hi everyone

 

This hand is a wonderful piece of junk that is well worth a 1S bid. You deserve to play 1NT(if you bid that) opposite a 4144 hand.

 

Hi kenrexford A raise to 2S would show 16-18 dummy points. A jump raise is

19-21 dummy points. A jump to 4S is 22+. Show support with support is often more than a very good slogan.

 

A cue bid is not listed in many bridge books, I play that it shows 19+HCP and 3 card support. "Partner please do something smart."

 

I play that I may pass a 'rebid' of the 1S bid 'which does not(repeat not) show any extra spades(it might be a three card suit in a 3433 hand)

 

I am also with Jlall when he raises to 2S 'just showing 4 trumps after they bid 2Hs.

I use a double here to show a 'normal' raise to 2S(showing extra values)

 

Hi foo a jump to 3Ss in America tends to be a six(+) card suit and very little else.

A cuebid tends to be forcing to suit agreement(unless you have some private agreement that you can pass a suit bid by partner after you cuebid)

 

Opposite a 1S reply that KQxx x AQxx Axxx is worth a 2S 'raise' playing standard methods in America.

 

When you are paid to play, do you provide a summary of 'your methods' so that a student will have some idea of what you are trying to show with your bidding?

 

Regards,

Robert

[pclayton]

A few comments.

 

BWS defines a raise of a one bid after a TOx as a King more than a minimum. This definition might be in competiton. For me, a 4144 13 comes damn close.

 

The Subject hand looks nothing like a 2S call to me. Those that bid 2S must make TOx's on much better hands than I do.

 

Next - how on earth are the 1S bidders getting to NT? I understand they have the chance to play 3N but 1N and 2N seem unachievable.

Playing spades after 1NT looks a lot simpler. Josh - geniusing is too strong a term. Its MPs remember?

 

Justin is a double by a 1S bidder of (say) 2H by opener really cooperative? I would think absent discussion that it can be mostly penalty. Arent there hands like Kxxx KJTxx xx xx that dont want to saw 1H but want to give pard the option of defending 2H or playing 2S?

 

OTOH, if the doubler's pard balances over 1S, then a stack seems unlikely and the subject hand resembles a double to me.

[foo]

Exactly. (What Foo and Justin said.)

 

So, why would anyone bid 2♠ with this hand? This is a 10-loser piece of crap. I thought maybe I was missing something.

for your reference awm.

[foo]

[The way I understand things, 2♠ by Advancer shows a five-card suit and not necessarily HCP strength, whereas 1♠ can be somewhat meaty when holding four cards. 2♠ by Doubler indicates four spades and non-minimum, meaning roughly six dummy tricks (four honors and a stiff; five honors and a doubleton). Something like that. KQxx-x-Axxx-Axxx would work.

 

With seven dummy tricks, maybe KQxx-x-AQxx-Axxx, would Doubler jump to 3♠ or cue 2♥? Or, am I in a strange world of my own personal fantasy again? LOL

for your reference awm

[foo]

Ken? Wow... am I being equated with Kenrexford or Kenberg here? I distinctly recall suggesting that hand, and I've been careful to put my name at the bottom of all my posts in the signature line.. I know how much Foo complains when people call him "Ron" and he hasn't ever given us a real name to go with... B)

I have posted quotes of Ken for attribution. I did not "disrespect you".

[foo]

Hi everyone,

This hand is a wonderful piece of junk that is well worth a 1S bid.  You deserve to play 1NT(if you bid that) opposite a 4144 hand.

We agree on this.

 

A raise to 2S would show 16-18 dummy points.  A jump raise is 19-21 dummy points.  A jump to 4S is 22+.   Show support with support is often more than a very good slogan.

...and this.

 

A cue bid is not listed in many bridge books, I play that it shows 19+HCP and 3 card support.  "Partner please do something smart."

Mike Lawrence's book _Takeout Doubles_ should provide you with some better ideas than the above. paraphrasing p110:

"RULE- A cue bid after a T/O X is usually a GF, but it is also used on 2 suited hands w/ invitational strength. Usually when you have invitational strength, you have both Majors."

I teach that you can show

a= the Inv+ S+H 2suiter with a cuebid of a 1m opening and

b= the Inv+ D+C 2suiter with a cuebid of a 1M opening.

As well as the GF hand that is unsure of direction.

 

 

I play that I may pass a 'rebid' of the 1S bid 'which does not(repeat not) show any extra spades(it might be a three card suit in a 3433 hand)

 

I am also with Jlall when he raises to 2S 'just showing 4 trumps after they bid 2Hs.

I use a double here to show a 'normal' raise to 2S(showing extra values)

Any extra bidding you do in a Contested auction should show =something= extra in terms of playing strength. More values, or more trump length, or higher ODR, etc. Something. Else you risk getting Us in trouble.

 

 

Hi foo  a jump to 3Ss in America tends to be a six(+) card suit and very little else.

A cuebid tends to be forcing to suit agreement(unless you have some private agreement that you can pass a suit bid by partner after you cuebid)

Again, see Mike Lawrence. I consider that SA, and it's different from what you are saying here.

 

 

Opposite a 1S reply that KQxx.x.AQxx.Axxx is worth a 2S 'raise' playing standard methods in America.

...and just about everywhere else Bridge is played as well I'd imagine.

 

 

When you are paid to play, do you provide a summary of 'your methods' so that a student will have some idea of what you are trying to show with your bidding?

When playing with students, I cater System to what they have been exposed to.

 

When We trip across something they don't know about Standard, that becomes a "field trip" to learn Standard in that area.

 

Only after Standard is known do I want to talk about or suggest "better" alternatives.

 

When playing with experts, system discussion is of course very different.

[cherdano]

BWS defines a raise of a one bid after a TOx as a King more than a minimum. This definition might be in competiton. For me, a 4144 13 comes damn close.

It's an ace more than a minimum. (A queen in competition.)

[foo]

BWS defines a raise of a one bid after a TOx as a King more than a minimum. This definition might be in competiton. For me, a 4144 13 comes damn close.

It's an ace more than a minimum. (A queen in competition.)

Both of those definitions are hinting at the right thing.

 

The right thing is "a trick more than a minimum".

 

It's Common Sense. (Voltaire not withstanding.)

An opening bid + an opening bid => game

A medium opening + a invitational response => game

A maximum opening + a normal minimum response => game

 

All in terms of trick taking strength of course B)

[awm]

I'd go with 1♠. Note that game isn't great opposite a hand like:

 

♠KQxx ♥x ♦Axxx ♣Axxx

Yes, Ken mentioned this hand. Because he was quoting me.

 

Anyways, thanks to Ken Rexford for attributing the hand I suggested to me, then discussing how problematic this hand type could be for the 2♠ bidders in more detail than I thought to post.

 

Foo's post, on the other hand, attributed this hand to Ken three times very specifically. Occasionally I come up with an idea that other people actually agree with and listen to (rare I know!) -- it's just polite to attribute such things to the person who actually suggests them.

[Codo]

I think that BWS or any other system which says that 1 any X pass 1 another

shows 0-9 HCPs has a big disadvantage compared with other systems, where this just shows 0-7. Just because the gap is quite high. Where are the upsides?

(Besides that it is played this way since Eli Culbertson was your hero?)

[jdonn]

Playing spades after 1NT looks a lot simpler. Josh - geniusing is too strong a term. Its MPs remember?

You have one heart stopper, which is the ace to boot, and 4 spades opposite a takeout double in which spades was the only unbid major. Bidding notrump is trying too hard to be a genius, it's not like your hearts are KQJ9 or something.

[ochinko]

I can understand 1NT, and if you swap clubs and hearts, I'd bid 1NT too.

 

But I can never understand the masterminding of bidding 1♠ if you don't have some magic bid other than 1♠ that would describe a hand with nine points less and only three spades when you would be forced to bid 1♠. (Boy, what a sentence, should show how appalled I am that people don't bid their hand with 2♠ here. ;) )

 

Edit: 1♠ bidders basically say that regarding a possible game(slam) in spades, having

 

xxx

xxx

xxxx

xxx

 

is the same as having

 

Hxxx

HHx

xxx

HHx

[lowerline]

Here's a hand that cropped up in a tournament this morning. I was curious what folks might bid.

 

You hold

 

♠ J863

♥ AT5

♦ 864

♣ KJ3

 

The auction starts

 

(1♥) - X - (P) - ???

 

What's your call?

1NT in MPs, but 1♠ in IMPs...

 

Steven

[gwnn]

oops sorry didnt read the thread properly silly post ;)

[jdeegan]

I'd go with 1♠. Note that game isn't great opposite a hand like:

 

♠KQxx ♥x ♦Axxx ♣Axxx

 

;) I normally like the idea of placing partner with some (i.e. more than one) generic hands when analyzing bidding problems. My problem with this one is that versus most experienced opponents, it doesn't exist. With nearly half the high cards and a nine card heart fit, they haven't raised hearts.

True, lho may have a 6 or 7 bagger in hearts, but this is low percentage. The odds that partner is strong and off-shape looks greater than normal. If I bid 1♠, the odds are small that it will go all pass, and we will be in a bad contract - my main worry. So, 1♠ makes sense to me.

[whereagles]

I would bid either

 

1NT + 2♠

1♠ + dbl

2♠

 

depending on tactical factors. Under normal cirumstances, probably 2♠.

[foo]

I'd go with 1♠. Note that game isn't great opposite a hand like:

 

♠KQxx ♥x ♦Axxx ♣Axxx

Yes, Ken mentioned this hand. Because he was quoting me.

 

Anyways, thanks to Ken Rexford for attributing the hand I suggested to me, then discussing how problematic this hand type could be for the 2♠ bidders in more detail than I thought to post.

 

Foo's post, on the other hand, attributed this hand to Ken three times very specifically. Occasionally I come up with an idea that other people actually agree with and listen to (rare I know!) -- it's just polite to attribute such things to the person who actually suggests them.

I very much apologize. I simply quoted Ken's post when answering Ken's questions.

 

No offense or disrespect towards you was intended or implied by me. I simply was answering Ken's questions.

 

(gods, this is beginning to sound like intellectual property case law. We are seriously discussing who "owns" a specific bridge example?)

 

I in fact often agree with most of what you post. Which is why I usually don't spend much time responding to or about it! Ironic.

[foo]

I think that BWS or any other system which says that 1 any X pass 1 another

shows 0-9 HCPs has a big disadvantage compared with other systems, where this just shows 0-7. Just because the gap is quite high. Where are the upsides?

(Besides that it is played this way since Eli Culbertson was your hero?)

A T/O X is supposed to be a hand that =at the least= evaluates to a minimum opening bid in support of what ever suit Advancer chooses. Just as an overcall is supposed to evaluate to the playing strength of at least a minimum opening bid.

 

The reason a minimum Advance of a T/O shows ~0-9 is that a minimum response to an opening bid shows ~6-9 and in addition you must allow Advancer to bid with 0-5 because the T/O Doubler has forced Advancer to bid (except in the rare cases where Advancer will make a penalty pass.)

 

Think of a T/O X as a way to "open" the bidding for the overcalling side just as an overcall does.

 

The ranges used here have nothing to do with "fashion" and everything to do with logic. Culbertson and Goren used the same ranges that Miles, Lawrence, Hardy, Grant, etc etc do now. Because the range is dictated by the cards. Not fashion.

[foo]

I can understand 1N, and if you swap clubs and hearts, I'd bid 1N too.

 

But I can never understand the masterminding of bidding 1♠ if you don't have some magic bid other than 1♠ that would describe a hand with nine points less and only three spades when you would be forced to bid 1♠. (Boy, what a sentence, should show how appalled I am that people don't bid their hand with 2♠ here. :P )

 

Edit: 1♠ bidders basically say that regarding a possible game(slam) in spades, having

 

xxx xxx xxxx xxx  is the same as having  Hxxx HHx xxx HHx

No.

 

xxx xxx xxxx xxx has 12 losers

 

Hxxx HHx xxx HHx has at most 7 1/2 losers if H= (A, K, or Q)

(besides the minimum hand of this pattern is Qxxx.KQx.xxx.KQx- a 12 count)

(if you allow "H" to include J's, a bad idea, then we are talking

Qxxx.KJx.xxx.KJx- a soft 9 1/2 loser 10 count that should be downgraded to ~an 8 count.)

 

Despite both being 4333's with no ruffing potential, the 2nd is clearly a much better hand in terms of playing strength.

 

Since We teach novices to count losers as the first part of planning the play in a suit contract, it would seem to make sense to include how many losers your hand has in evaluating how good your hand is for a suit contract.

 

1♠ is the "book bid" with the OP hand, not some mastermind bid.

[Fluffy]

This thread is named simple enough, why are there so many posts? :P

[ochinko]

1♠ is the "book bid" with the OP hand, not some mastermind bid.

In my book the normal bid with 8-11 points and 4 spades is 2♠, 3♠ with the same points and a five cards suit. Yes, I would prefer to have a better shape, who wouldn't? 2♠ is still the proper bid even at MP unless you want 1♠ to mean "from zero to infinity".

 

When do you think the time will come to show signs of life, when LHO bids 2/3/4♥, and two passes follow to you?

 

It is completely possible that both sides have a game, and being MP, LHO decides there's not much point in announcing his minor suit that would provide the tricks. Both sides have two fits, who is more likely to win, how could it be the one that is playing dead?