weak two ATB

[johnu]

Oh boy! Now you are stepping into my world. Card play and defense and giving lectures?

 

I learned from the best :D

 

You are assuming, wrongly, that WEST will always have available spots to suit preference. Assume West played the 5. How on earth East is supposed to know whether you played 5 from 75 or 52 ?

You are assuming , wrongly again, that W knows who has the ♣Q so East will not worry W holding Q2 clubs. All of these pathetic signals make sense only when you see both hands.

 

I am not assuming anything about spots. You may not be able to read the spots in which case you may have to guess. In the case, ♣2 (which was played in real life) is always the lowest card in the suit, ♣7 is always the highest card left in the suit. On this hand, does East really need to worry about who has ♣Q? You can argue whether a heart or trump lead was better, but a heart lead would have cleared up the heart situation at trick 1.

 

You call them pathetic signals? Really? There was recently a hand on Bridgewinners where a suit preference signal was given in the trump suit, which was approved of by some top name players. I don't attribute suit preference to most plays, but when it is clear that partner needs to shift, a suit preference signal is usually the most valuable signal.

 

 

 

As I told before, you can keep on pimpin in bidding topics or water cooler since no one can prove you wrong. But pimpin ain;t easy when it comes to play and defense of a hand.http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif

 

Good advice for you to take.

[MrAce]

You call them pathetic signals? Really?

 

I really was trying to be polite when I said pathetic about someone mentioning SP when following a suit where dummy has KJ98x and pd jumped the A. I am still laughing!

What is worst is, not only you did not see it but still can't see it (or pretend like you do not see) that W can not know E has ♣Q so he should read the cards of W as SP. After all everyone on this planet will play the x from Qx and that alone makes x no way a SP!

 

Please tell us what would East play on first club from

 

Jx

KQxxxx

Jxx

Q2

 

On this hand, does East really need to worry about who has ♣Q?

 

That is what I am saying, he should worry that the x ♣ pd follows can be from Qx. The only reason that makes you believe E should not worry about this is simple.....because you see E holds it in his hand. You just skip a very important issue that W does not know it.

 

What would E play from

 

Jx

Qxxxxx

Kx

Q7

 

??? Does that mean he is asking for ♥ shift? LOL

 

More...You know there are times when E may hold AQxx(x) ♣ instead of AQx. Surprise! He may need to know whether declarer played his stiff ♣T or Tx or Txx. Guess what helps your partner? Not the SP!

[RedSpawn]

IMO

• A bid isn't a lie if it's natural, conforms to normal practice, and you haven't agreed anything specific.
• You should allow some lee-way for partner's styles and treatments.
• Both the auction and the play are reasonable :)
• You can attribute the result to bad luck :(

 

Thanks.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ytCEuuW2_A

[Vampyr]

I originally said that a trump lead could be successful, but it could easily let a hopeless contract make. e.g. Give dummy a 3rd trump for transportation, and change West and North's red suit kings. Now West has KQ 6th of hearts so presumably everybody is happy with opening 2♥. You have to make an opening heart lead or it's too late.

Yes. Lead a trump against a doubled contract or w/e, but you lose a potentially crucial tempo.

[xbabarx]

im conservative and use rule of 2/3/4 with reg partner

[nige1]

Of course people love to create such signals when they see both hands in forums.

[hv=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn|S,W,N,RedSpawn|st%7C%7Cmd%7C2STAHJAD389TC489JK%2CS8JH34568QDJKC256%2CS3679QKH7KD567C7T%2C%7Crh%7C%7Cah%7CBoard%208%7Csv%7Co%7Cmb%7C2H%7Cmb%7C2S%7Cmb%7C3H%7Cmb%7C3S%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7C4S%7Cmb%7Cd%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cmb%7Cp%7Cpc%7CS5%7Cpc%7CST%7Cpc%7CSJ%7Cpc%7CSK%7Cpc%7CCT%7Cpc%7CCA%7Cpc%7CC4%7Cpc%7CC2%7Cpc%7CHT%7Cpc%7CHJ%7Cpc%7CHQ%7Cpc%7CHK%7Cpc%7CC7%7Cpc%7CC3%7Cpc%7CCJ%7Cpc%7CC5%7Cpc%7CSA%7Cpc%7CS8%7Cpc%7CS3%7Cpc%7CS2%7Cpc%7CCK%7Cpc%7CC6%7Cpc%7CD5%7Cpc%7CCQ%7Cpc%7CC8%7Cpc%7CH3%7Cpc%7CD6%7Cpc%7CS4%7Cpc%7CDA%7Cpc%7CD3%7Cpc%7CDJ%7Cpc%7CD7%7Cpc%7CD2%7Cpc%7CD8%7Cpc%7CDK%7Cpc%7CS6%7Cpc%7CSQ%7Cpc%7CDQ%7Cpc%7CD9%7Cpc%7CH4%7Cmc%7C10%7C]399|300[/hv]

IMO, on the actual defence, declarer should probably make 2 overtricks.

On a ♥ lead, however, If Zia were

• West, then he might play ♥Q under dummy's ♥A, at trick 1 :)
• East, then he might read that as signal for ♦ switch, if he wins ♣A, at trick 3 :)
• West, then he might unblock ♦K if his partner switched to ♦A :)

[johnu]

♣

What is worst is, not only you did not see it but still can't see it (or pretend like you do not see) that W can not know E has ♣Q so he should read the cards of W as SP. After all everyone on this planet will play the x from Qx and that alone makes x no way a SP!

 

In my bridge circles, we call that playing an entirely different hand. Everybody on the planet knows that with a potential Qx, you are going to play the x (unless you are making a spectacular falsecard).

 

 

 

You know there are times when E may hold AQxx(x) ♣ instead of AQx. Surprise! He may need to know whether declarer played his stiff ♣T or Tx or Txx. Guess what helps your partner? Not the SP! [/size][/color]

 

Well now you are completely changing the hand. Well done. Believe it or not, I may want to adjust the defense based on a completely different hand.

[MrAce]

♣

Well now you are completely changing the hand. Well done. Believe it or not, I may want to adjust the defense based on a completely different hand.

 

LOL. Thank you! You just admitted what I told at the beginning. Yes you may adjust the defense from E point of view but since W can not see your hand, W will not follow the cards with SP when E wants a SP and will not give count when E wants count. It does not work this way unless you see both hands and/or can read partner's mind! Yes there are a lot of defensive situations and positions where we can vary our carding depending on what pd maybe expecting us to do or what is most useful signal for him, but you do not do this in a long suit declarer is trying to establish because there are so many other factors involved in it, such as you need readable spot cards, mandatory plays (x from Qx), the count of the suit etc etc.

 

When you see both hands and suggest something, and it works great for this hand but does not in many other hands, then your suggestion is called "resulting".

Even then I could have sympathy to SP in club suit if you commented something like "it is best to agree to the meaning of cards when following the side suit of declarer". You commented as if it is the most priority signal and therefore should be read as SP and the blame goes to E for not reading it this way.

 

What you suggest is not even playable. Why? Because in a side suit of declarer that he is trying to establish, if you take your time on what to play from 752 or 542 or any xxx they will call TD on you. This is one of the things that most bridge players hate when their opponents do. And how can you possibly solve and decide the position and which card to follow with in a timely manner? They will not allow you to vary your tempo depending on which info you want to send.

[Winstonm]

I'd pass. The ODR just isn't good enough for even a weak 2 in 1st seat.

 

Redspawn: 1st seat is almost as good a time to preempt as 3rd and should not be mentioned in the same breath as one in 2nd.

 

Yes, there are three unknowns, two opponents and one partner, so the odds favor the disruption will affect the opps more often that us.

[johnu]

Yes you may adjust the defense from E point of view but since W can not see your hand, W will not follow the cards with SP when E wants a SP and will not give count when E wants count. It does not work this way unless you see both hands and/or can read partner's mind!

 

When partner sees you play ♣A and dummy, can you figure out that partner probably doesn't need count in clubs and is going to switch to something? I think it is obvious, you apparently don't. I'll leave it at that.

 

What you suggest is not even playable. Why? Because in a side suit of declarer that he is trying to establish, if you take your time on what to play from 752 or 542 or any xxx they will call TD on you. This is one of the things that most bridge players hate when their opponents do. And how can you possibly solve and decide the position and which card to follow with in a timely manner? They will not allow you to vary your tempo depending on which info you want to send.

 

Well, you are really grasping if you have to get into tempo issues when that was never a consideration in the original problem. Also, this was on BBO so you never know what's going on with delays in play or bids. Even so, that's why third hand is supposed to take their time before they play to the first trick. This particular hand is one of the easier hands for West to figure out what cards need to be played, and try to reconstruct the other 2 hands.

 

First the bidding. What's going on? Somebody doesn't have their bid, so it is North or East? Who knows?

 

Spades/trumps played - follow suit

Hearts - Play low on the ace, cover the jack

Diamonds - Play king if partner switches, probably correct if declarer leads from dummy.

Clubs - What signal does partner need if they win the first club? If they win the 2nd club? You barely need to think at trick one if you are always going to give count.

[Winstonm]

Would anyone else double 4S in this auction with that East hand? I wouldn't.

[ArtK78]

I find these weak 2 discussions very amusing.

 

There was a day - about 30 years ago - when I considered a weak 2 bid to be a highly constructive call. I would never open a weak 2 bid with less than QJTxxx and, if the suit were that weak, I had compensating values on the outside.

 

Then I discovered something. When used obstructively, weak 2s (and higher level preempts) were very effective weapons against the opponents getting to their contracts. I remember distinctly playing in a North American championship pair event opening 2♦ vul against not on QJxxx. My opponents got to 3NT. Declarer naturally assumed that I had 6 diamonds for my bid and did not hold up enough times in the suit. This got us a near top.

 

Since then I have adopted a very aggressive preempting style. With one of my regular partners, our nonvul weak 2 bids are typically 5 cards (we usually open 3 if we have 6 cards). Not only that, the 5 cards can be xxxxx! It is amazing how well this works.

 

So, I find these discussions of the need for good suits and such so 1980s.

 

 

 

[nige1]

East hand posted to BridgeWinners as a Bidding Poll

[masse24]

East hand posted to BridgeWinners as a Bidding Poll

Already posted--four days ago--as a BW bidding poll here: Pass or Double?

 

Pass is currently running at 96%.

[Winstonm]

I find these weak 2 discussions very amusing.

 

There was a day - about 30 years ago - when I considered a weak 2 bid to be a highly constructive call. I would never open a weak 2 bid with less than QJTxxx and, if the suit were that weak, I had compensating values on the outside.

 

Then I discovered something. When used obstructively, weak 2s (and higher level preempts) were very effective weapons against the opponents getting to their contracts. I remember distinctly playing in a North American championship pair event opening 2♦ vul against not on QJxxx. My opponents got to 3NT. Declarer naturally assumed that I had 6 diamonds for my bid and did not hold up enough times in the suit. This got us a near top.

 

Since then I have adopted a very aggressive preempting style. With one of my regular partners, our nonvul weak 2 bids are typically 5 cards (we usually open 3 if we have 6 cards). Not only that, the 5 cards can be xxxxx! It is amazing how well this works.

 

So, I find these discussions of the need for good suits and such so 1980s 1960s.

 

FYP :P

[ArtK78]

FYP :P

 

I should have said 1970s, as my bridge life goes back to 1972.

 

 

 

 

 

[Winstonm]

I should have said 1970s, as my bridge life goes back to 1972.

:D

[MrAce]

I should have said 1970s, as my bridge life goes back to 1972.

 

Art how old are you? I thought you are younger than me or same age.http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/ohmy.gif

[johnu]

Already posted--four days ago--as a BW bidding poll here: Pass or Double?

 

Pass is currently running at 96%.

 

One poll says to assume matchpoints, the other IMPs. A discussion about doubling at IMPs versus matchpoints deserves a separate topic.

[nige1]

One poll says to assume matchpoints, the other IMPs. A discussion about doubling at IMPs versus matchpoints deserves a separate topic.

I (mistakenly?) assumed that it was Pairs after reading Redspawn's OP.

IMO,

• It's close between Pass and Double
• If opponents never make doubled contracts, then you're not doubling enough.