BPO-003A

[Rebound]

Sorry, I was imprecise. I'm can't argue the text-book definition of a weak jump-shift, but each time I've seen it bid by a partner or opponent on BBO, it has always been with a much weaker hand. To me, your post implies I have basically reversed the meanings of 1♠ and 2♠ over 1♣ as described in my previous post. Answering this and such other questions as whether 3♠ would be forcing or what have you by consensus are what these quizzes are all about if you ask me.

[Winstonm]

To me, your post implies I have basically reversed the meanings of 1♠ and 2♠ over 1♣ as described in my previous post.

 

This is my problem as well. For me, the WJS is used for 2 reasons: to 1) find a better spot that 1C when you don't have enough to respond and 2) obsruct the opponents (namely LHOwhen RHO passes). Obviously, this changes if RHO makes a 1-level bid. I simply don't respond on KJxxx, Jx, xxxx, xx.

 

WinstonM

[mike777]

To me, your post implies I have basically reversed the meanings of 1♠ and 2♠ over 1♣ as described in my previous post.

 

This is my problem as well. For me, the WJS is used for 2 reasons: to 1) find a better spot that 1C when you don't have enough to respond and 2) obsruct the opponents (namely LHOwhen RHO passes). Obviously, this changes if RHO makes a 1-level bid. I simply don't respond on KJxxx, Jx, xxxx, xx.

 

WinstonM

Here is one tiny vote for junking WJS :P Now we can play 2h over 1minor as reverse flannery which is one convention(perhaps not with 2h) Fred favors.

[inquiry]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sj83haq92dcakqj54]133|100|Scoring: IMP

BPO-003A

 

No opponent bidding.

 

You  Partner

1♣     1♠

2♥     2♠

? you bid

 

Submitted by Mike777

[/hv]

 

This hand deals with follow up following a reverse. The panel was one vote short of unanimous for 4♦ as a splinter. The discussion, however, showed some disagreement how they play after a reverse, with two expressing the desire for 4♣ to be long clubs, short diamonds, and a spade fit (just as Richard wanted in the this thread. But, since 3♣ would not be forcing by opener, it seems that 4♣ has to be held back for clubs and forcing unsuited for notrump.

 

I will let the panel speak for themselves, and only interject a few comments. We will start with the newly crowned USBF championship.

 

Fred 4♦. This is the strongest bid I can make in support of spades. We might belong in clubs, but I cannot get that message across without distorting my distribution at the same time. In my style partner's 2♠ does not promise a good 5-card suit (or any extra values) so I have an easy Pass if he signoffs in 4♠. Fred’s willingness to stop in four spades is echoed by Henri (Ritong) The toughest of this set 4diamonds, we see later. I’ll pass 4 spades with discipline. Fluffy agreed almost word for word with his collegues. 4♦, let partner decide if slam is playable, or if 5 level is too high already. Will pass 4♠

 

While Fred, Fluffy and Ritong were thinking a discipline pass over a potential 4♠ bid, Luis was looking for more positively, but even he plans to pass 4♠ by his partner. 4♦ splinter. A very useful bid, it shows pd we have 3 card support for spades, a singleton or void in diamonds and a strong hand with clubs and hearts. But the best is that pd who hasn't promised anything will now cuebid 4♥ with the king or a singleton, that's mandatory. I plan to look for slam over 4♥ or pass 4♠.

 

Our last contest winner, Arend (cherdano), was on the same wavelength 4♦ splinter. (I assume 2♠ is forcing with 5+ spades) Splinter with only 3 trumps is iffy, but I have a void, and hopefully partner will allow for only 3 trumps (since I didn't splinter immediately). Hence we may still be able to get back to clubs when that is right. I won't move on to slam myself even if partner encourages with 4♥ last train, as with 2 out of ♠AKQ ♥A slam is probably bad (imagine playing 6♠ or 6♣ opposite ♠AKxxx ♥xx(x) ♦xxx ♣xx(x) on a diamond or heart lead) , and with 3 of them partner will insist on slam.

 

Roland (Walddk) Also was on the same page except perhaps the comment about responders rebid of his suit as being not forcing. I am not sure that is the way the panel plays reverses. 4♦. Rebid of own suit is the only bid I can pass after a reverse, but I'm much too good for that with this hand. Let's see if a splinter wakes him from the dead. I will still be interested if he can cue bid 4H now (5S next). If he signs off, I have done enough. He could easily have a weak hand with 5-5 in spades and diamonds, and then we are high enough. Even though we play weak jump shifts, his 2S is not invitational after a reverse. If he has a limit+ hand with 6 spades, he should rebid 3S over 2H.

 

Justin (Jlall) wanted to do more than 4♦ perhaps, but in final analysis, he too went with the majority. 4♦. Really tough hand. I looked at BBO advanced notes and it included 1430 exclusion (this should really be 0314 exclusion btw) so that is a viable option. There are two main problems with that bid. First, we can't find out about the queen of trumps if pard has only 1 keycard. Slam may be awful if he doesn't have it and great if he does. Secondly, they may work out to lead a heart through. Maybe we should play in 6C? This will protect our heart king as well as avoid this possible defense: diamond lead ruffed. spade jack, ducked all around. If pard has KQxxx of trumps he may still go down. 6C won’t work when we need tricks coming from diamond ruffs (meaning pard has no HK). It also won’t work if they can holdup twice in spades and shut us off from dummy. As partner will strain to respond to 1C with a 5 card major I won't bury him but this plan is not foolproof. 4♦ is obviously a splinter for spades, if I actually had diamonds I would bid 3N now.

 

Also wanting to do something else, but finally agreeing on 4♦ was Gabor (ng) 4♦. Good problem! Btw, is Lebensohl here or Ingberman are part of the system? Yes, ingberman is part of the system) 4♦ is splinter, 3 card support with 3-4-1-5, 3-3-1-6 or 3-4-0-6 distribution and game forcing strength. 3♠ is not forcing (I guess), 4♠ is to play, no slam prospects. But...4♣ would be better than 4♦, if my partner think about it as follows:

 

“If 3♣ is not forcing, 4♣ definitely is: game forcing AND spade support. Without spades, South would have had many other GF bids. If 3♣ is forcing (I think it is not), 4♣ shows some extras: solid suit and 3-4-0-6 or 3-3-1-6 distribution. It promises 3 card spade support, because with other disributions South's third bid would be:

with

• 2-4-2-5 or 1-4-3-5 = 2N (with D stopper, 17-18 HCP)
  
• 2-4-2-5 or 1-4-2-6 or 1-3-3-6 = 3C (without or soft D stopper, 17-18 HCP)
  
• 2-4-2-5 or 1-4-2-6 or 1-4-3-5 or 1-3-3-6 = 3D (without (good) D stopper, 19+HCP)
  
• 1-4-3-5 or 2-4-2-5 or 1-3-3-6 = 3NT (with AK or AQ or AJx or KQx in diamonds, 18+HCP)
  
• 2-4-0-7 or 1-4-1-7 = 5C.
  

So I prefer 4♣, but for KISS (Keep It Simply Simple), my vote is 4[D splinter.

 

Finally there was Rich, (Reisig) who was out on a very lonely limb by himself with the creative “4♣ - should show a ♠ raise with great ♣ suit -similar to a direct 4♣ over 1♠.”

 

The scoring here should be clear, 4♦ was the prohibitive favorite

 

 

 

VOTES  Panel  Score

4♦        8      100

4♣       1       40

4♠        0      20

3♠        0      10

[Elianna]

Ok, someone sent a request to Ben, which was forwarded to me, asking for totals of bids (that you, the contestants sent in). I don't know if I'll do this for all problems, but for this one:

 

4♦ 14

5♦ 5

4♠ 4

3♠ 3

4♣ 2

3♦ 1

6♠ 1

5♠ 1

 

Please let me know if you find this interesting/useful. It's a bunch of work, and if only one person wants it, they can just get the file and do it themselves. :P

 

Also, if I see even one post that says something along the lines of "I can't believe that someone (or some number of people) made such and such bid" I will not post any of these totals anymore. Please remember that even if you hate a bid, you should not be mean to people who are feeling their way through the contest, and didn't know that their bids would become public (since it wasn't stated in the COC, and this was just a request made by Ben).

[Winstonm]

I will defend to the death my right to bid badly. :P

 

WinstonM

[P_Marlowe]

Ok, someone sent a request to Ben, which was forwarded to me, asking for totals of bids (that you, the contestants sent in).  I don't know if I'll do this for all problems, but for this one:

 

4♦ 14

5♦ 5

4♠ 4

3♠ 3

4♣ 2

3♦ 1

6♠ 1

5♠ 1

 

Please let me know if you find this interesting/useful.  It's a bunch of work, and if only one person wants it, they can just get the file and do it themselves.  :P

 

Also, if I see even one post that says something along the lines of "I can't believe that someone (or some number of people) made such and such bid" I will not post any of these totals anymore.  Please remember that even if you hate a bid, you should not be mean to people who are feeling their way through the contest, and didn't know that their bids would become public (since it wasn't stated in the COC, and this was just a request made by Ben).

Hi Elianna,

 

at least regarding this problem, it feels good to know,

that I am not alone with my 4S bid.

 

I still believe, that anything else is shooting for the

moon, but I am just me, and the panel consist of

some world class players.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[joker_gib]

at least regarding this problem, it feels good to know,

that I am not alone with my 4S bid.

 

I still believe, that anything else is shooting for the

moon, but I am just me, and the panel consist of

some world class players.

You're not alone ! I'm with you Marlowe ! :P

 

Alain

[luke warm]

well there's not much to say about the panel's reasoning... my 5♦ was a little too optimistic :rolleyes:

[Walddk]

well there's not much to say about the panel's reasoning... my 5♦ was a little too optimistic :rolleyes:

A little bit. Opposite

 

Qxxxx

Jx

Qxxxx

x

 

even 4♠ is in jeopardy. I don't think anyone would pass 1♣ with that hand.

 

Roland

[Fluffy]

Just wanna say that IMO 3♠ could be a 2425 without ♦ stopper. 3♦ would be NATURAL, 4sf is a convention used by RESPONDER, not opener.

[Double !]

You seem to forget that weak jump shifts are part of the system, so we can rule out quite a few hands partner can have.

Oh, great....sigh

 

Now we need a poll to determine what kinds of hands people bid wjs on. Some play it like a mini-weak 2, about 3-7 with 6-bagger, some play it as weaker and less disciplined.

 

Isn't it nice to know that there is such a thing as Standard? lolololololololololol

Forgive me if this was intended as a joke and I'm just being a pedantic dud, but I believe one of the stated purposes of the quizes is to reach a consensus about BBO Advanced and such treatments. Suspect this in large part the reason for selection of this particular problem.

Senior Rebound

amigo

 

c'mon, you know me better that

 

actually I was serious about the fact that different people play the same bid usin different criteria

 

Jocularity was also intended.

[Double !]

Ok, someone sent a request to Ben, which was forwarded to me, asking for totals of bids (that you, the contestants sent in). I don't know if I'll do this for all problems, but for this one:

 

4♦ 14

5♦ 5

4♠ 4

3♠ 3

4♣ 2

3♦ 1

6♠ 1

5♠ 1

 

Please let me know if you find this interesting/useful. It's a bunch of work, and if only one person wants it, they can just get the file and do it themselves. :D

 

Also, if I see even one post that says something along the lines of "I can't believe that someone (or some number of people) made such and such bid" I will not post any of these totals anymore. Please remember that even if you hate a bid, you should not be mean to people who are feeling their way through the contest, and didn't know that their bids would become public (since it wasn't stated in the COC, and this was just a request made by Ben).

yes

please post the data if not too much trouble

thanks

[cherdano]

While I chose the same bid as the majority of the panel, I feel I am more pessimistic about slam prospects than others. Justin mentions that slam may go down opposite KQxxx in spades. I still think that you don't want to be in slam if partner has ♠AK9xx and some 3-3-2 in the remaing suits (clubs not including the 10).

 

But maybe it's not slam prospects but only my declarer play that is lacking, so how about this as a play problem:

 

You have ♠AK9xx ♥xxx ♦xxx ♣xx opposite the hand of this thread:

♠J86 ♥AQ92 ♣AKQJ54. What's your plan on a diamond lead? What would you do differently with 3 clubs and (32) in the reds? How would ♠10 or ♥J or ♦K change the odds?

 

Arend

[Winstonm]

even 4♠ is in jeopardy. I don't think anyone would pass 1♣ with that hand.

 

I must be playing out here in my own little world - which is good because if I'm right then everyone else must be wrong, LoL - but I am the lonely passer holding the hand you gave, Roland - but for reasons.

 

I use WJS to solve these problems: I don't have enough to respond yet I most likely don't want to play 1 of a minor, either; I want to obstruct LHO after his partner has passed; I want to do this with some reasonable amount of common sense and safety.

 

I would pass (unless mp's) as the hand does not fit my criteria for either A) a respnding hand or :D a WJS. That only leaves pass.

 

True, this hand could produce a magic game - but as bridge is about mostly taking percentage action, going out on a limb to bid with these cards I believe will produce more poor results than good. If I really wanted to bid with this hand, I should be playing a forcing club system - as a matter of fact, isn't this the reason forcing club systems came into being - so partner had to keep the bidding open?

 

However, I am not playing a forcing club, and partner needs to be able to rely on some kind of minimum holding for my initial squeak - otherwise bidding becomes instead of a conversation a guessing game. In my experiece it's easier to catch up later with some strength than to try to "take back" an overbid.

 

WinstonM

[joker_gib]

While I chose the same bid as the majority of the panel, I feel I am more pessimistic about slam prospects than others.

You are absolutely right !

 

I took 2♠ as the weaker bid of responder only showing 5♠ and saying "I don't want to play game" !

 

With those weak hands I still don't see how I can have a good slam and I still don't understand the panel 4♦ bid ! :P

 

I suppose they took 2♠ with another meaning :huh:

 

Alain

[ochinko]

3♦ would be NATURAL, 4sf is a convention used by RESPONDER, not opener.

And what's the worst that could happen? Partner thinks you are 0=4=4=5, so he bids 3NT with DKxx or 4D with DKxxx, which you correct to 4Sp.

 

Yes, 4D is the textbook bid. I wouldn't expect any other bid to be rewarded if this was a BEGINNER-INTERMEDIATE contest. It would be great if your spades contract is rock solid. But if it isn't, you have drawn the map for the defendants, and quite unnecessarily too. And we expect expert defense, right?

 

Even 5Sp looks better than 4D to me (while riskier, because you could have only 4), because you don't reveal your hand, but still allow partner to bid 6Sp with two top honors.

 

Petko

 

--Added--

I admit that there is a drawback in 3D, which is not practical but legal. Opps could have a valid complaint that your partner didn't alert the fact that 3D could be bid with a void. So you escaped from the killing hearts lead only to watch your great result adjusted :P

[JLOGIC]

Jlall is crazy. Exclusion?! 4D is just right, if anything we would often have a better hand than this.

 

It is interesting though, I think mikeh and maybe others argued in a thread not that long ago that 3S in this auction should be forcing. I agree with myself wholeheartedly that it's not, we have 4S available, 4D available, and could be 2425 with Hx and no stopper here or 3415 with a light reverse like 15 ( I know mikeh disagrees with this).