[Vampyr]

wyman, on 2012-April-04, 15:59, said:

(this was true after an opening 1-bid as well, I think, but you should defer to the LTPB software).

If not playing 1NT forcing, often the best choice is a 2-level bid in a 4-card suit.

[Vampyr]

HL, doubletons in both majors? Better not to confuse the issue for Lesh who is a complete newbie and may not have even had any lessons or played in a novice game yet. Anyway 5-4-2-2 never is appropriate for beginners; for more advanced players it is still "never-ish"; it is "not" done but maybe twice a year we come across one that "has to" be opened 1NT. And we don't play our partners for this distribution.

[Stephen Tu]

Lesh18, on 2012-April-04, 16:59, said:

b) I have also been struggling with planning the play. The ACBL software teaches me to count winners in no-trump and losers in trump plays.

In the long run you probably should learn to count both winners & losers in all contracts, although the software recommendation is reasonable to start, if you have trouble counting both. After you get through the software tutorial, I strongly recommend getting Bill Root's book "How to declare a bridge hand".

Quote

I have no problem with counting winners, but I struggle with counting losers. Are all trump cards considered winners, and thus not losers in this sense? How do I actually count losers?

No, not all trump cards are considered winners. You have to count how many trumps the opponents are likely to win in the suit. If your trump suit is QJT9x opposite xxxx, then you have two losers in the trump suit, the ace and the king. If your trump suit is QJTxx vs. Axxx, you have one loser, the king. That loser may vanish if you are able to take a winning finesse. Sometimes you count losers assuming common breaks, but may find out in the play you have extra losers. If your trumps suit is akxxx vs. xxx, you expect 1 loser, but if the suit breaks 4-1 now you have 2.

For counting losers, you pick one hand between declarer and dummy as "the master hand". This is *usually* (not always, in bridge there are almost always exceptions), the hand with longer trumps. If both hands have the same # of trumps, you are usually picking the one with stronger side suits. Then you go suit by suit and count how many tricks you could possibly lose, limited by the # of cards in the master hand. You are assuming that you will ruff later rounds if the master hand runs out in that side suit, and the opps play it. Say declarer has the long trumps and is the master hand. Your side suit is Axx opposite xxx in dummy. In that suit you have 2 losers, since the opps can win 2 tricks after the ace is driven out. Say you have Ax vs. xxx in dummy. Now you only have 1 loser, since you are ruffing third round in the long hand. If you have Axx in hand vs. xx in dummy, you count it as 2 losers (you are counting losing cards in the suits of the master hand). Although you will often be ruffing the third card in dummy, it still counts as a loser you probably need to get rid of, a reminder that you have to do something about it before dummy runs out of trumps to deal with it. If there are finesses involved, you initially count them as losers for the purposes of planning the play, but you can hope for them to win if you need them to make the contract.

You aren't always going to count losers. Some hands the best way to play is a "cross-ruff", in which case you basically just count side winners, and how many ruffs in both hands you can do, and you just count ruffs as winners and try to have enough winners. You don't really worry about the losers because in the end game multiple losers can collapse together in the same trick, the late round trick you can't ruff anymore goes on the same trick as the opponent's trump, etc. Also some hands are best played as a "dummy reversal", where you ruff multiple times in the long hand, and in effect make the short trump hand the "master".

Quote

And also, If I have AKQ and my dummy has J10 all in the same colour, that only makes for 3 tricks won, right? Or is there a way I can get 5 tricks out of it? Perhaps cashing some trumps or other colours from the declarer and discarding those J10? Is there any point in that?

The only way you can ever get more than 5 tricks from this combo is if it is the trump suit, and you can ruff twice with the J and T. (or ruff 3 times with AKQ )

[Antrax]

I am astounded at some of the replies here. Why drag Jacoby Transfers into it? The OP specified what he knows and wants to play at this point. No doubt soon he will begin playing them, but is it so impossible to answer the question posed, in the meantime?

Lesh18, the software is trying to show a more general principle. You're right that if partner's 1NT is guaranteed to either have three hearts or three spades, then it doesn't matter whether the auction goes:
1NT - 3♥ (partner, I have the 10+ HCP I need to be in game opposite a 1NT opener, and also have five hearts - if I had only four I'd use stayman)
3NT (okay, but I don't have three card support for you) - 4♠ (I also have five spades. You must have three, so we're in an 8 card fit)

or
1NT - 3♠
3NT - 4♥

In both cases responder's second bid would determine the contract, and opener will have nothing to add.
However, more generally speaking, when you have two long (five card or more) suits of equal length, you usually show the higher-ranked one first. Then you can bid the other suit and know you won't go any higher than the level you've bid, since if your partner prefers your first suit (maybe he has two cards in it but only one in your second suit), he can bid it at the same level you bid your second. In a non-NT opener auction to show this principle, let's say you have five spades and five hearts. You open 1♠, partner responds 1NT and you bid 2♥. Now partner can choose to play either 2♥ or 2♠. If instead you open 1♥, partner responds 1NT and then you bid 2♠, partner has to choose between 2♠ and 3♥.

[P_Marlowe]

Lesh18, on 2012-April-04, 14:27, said:

<snip>
Why should I always bid the higher-ranking suit, when bidding the lower-ranking suit makes more sense to me? (when 4-4 I am to bid the lower-ranking suit, which makes more sense)
<snip>

When 4-4 you start with the lower ranking suit, or more precisie the suit, that
can be bid cheapest. The different wording is relevant for responder.

After a heart opening, and if you have 4 spades and 4 clubs, you start with the
spades, not because spades is major, but because bidding spades is cheapest.

When 5-5 you start with the higher ranking, if you bid the lower ranking next,
partner will know, that you have at least 5 cards in the higher ranking suit,
because you started with the higher ranking first.
Partner wont know, that you are 5-5, but he will kno, that you are at least 5-4,
if your higher ranking suit would be longer, than you would start with the higher
ranking suit.

In general - the length of the 2nd suit, that gets bid by the same person is at best
of equal length, than the first suit.

The above prinicple is true for suit basically all situations, when a player starts
bidding a suit (opening, responding, overcalling).

With kind regards
Marlowe

[S2000magic]

P_Marlowe, on 2012-April-05, 02:31, said:

When 4-4 you start with the lower ranking suit, or more precisie the suit, that
can be bid cheapest. The different wording is relevant for responder.

After a heart opening, and if you have 4 spades and 4 clubs, you start with the
spades, not because spades is major, but because bidding spades is cheapest.

When 5-5 you start with the higher ranking, if you bid the lower ranking next,
partner will know, that you have at least 5 cards in the higher ranking suit,
because you started with the higher ranking first.
Partner wont know, that you are 5-5, but he will kno, that you are at least 5-4,
if your higher ranking suit would be longer, than you would start with the higher
ranking suit.

This principle is quite valuable when opening the bidding with one-of-a-suit, or responding to a one-of-a-suit opening, because there is the possibility that your partner will be short in one or both of your suits, and you want to make it as easy as possible to find a playable trump suit.

When partner has shown a balanced hand (as with a 1NT opening bid), this principle is much less valuable, because you are (essentially) assured of a fit for one of your suits.

Lesh's idea of responding 3♥ to a 1NT opener with a game-forcing 5-5 in the majors is sound. If opener has 3+ ♥, he will raise to 4♥. If opener has only 2 ♥, he can bid 2♠ with 3+ ♠, and responder can raise to 4♠ (or bid 3NT if he decides to). If opener is 2-2 in the majors (unlikely, but not impossible), he can rebid 3NT, whereupon responder can decide whether he wants to play in 3NT, or 4-of-a-major on a known 5-2 fit. If responder starts with 3♠, and opener bids 4♠, responder cannot choose to play in 3NT; if opener rebids 3NT, responder risks bidding 4♥ and finding opener with 2-2 in the majors. These are rare occurrences, but Lesh's approach can handle them at essentially no cost.

[pooltuna]

also see Smolen

[Vampyr]

Quote

If opener has only 2 ♥, he can bid 2♠ with 3+ ♠, and responder can raise to 4♠ (or bid 3NT if he decides to).

What is responder supposed to do with 4 spades and 5 hearts if opener's spades may be only 3 cards? Yes, he can start with Stayman, but the continuations are a bit more complicated.

[Vampyr]

pooltuna, on 2012-April-05, 11:53, said:

also see Smolen

and splinters, transfers... can people please keep the discussion appropriate and stop introducing random conventions? The OP and others at his level (check forum name) are not looking for these.

I at first disagreed with JustaDummy; now I see that he was right.

[P_Marlowe]

S2000magic, on 2012-April-05, 10:22, said:

This principle is quite valuable when opening the bidding with one-of-a-suit, or responding to a one-of-a-suit opening, because there is the possibility that your partner will be short in one or both of your suits, and you want to make it as easy as possible to find a playable trump suit.

When partner has shown a balanced hand (as with a 1NT opening bid), this principle is much less valuable, because you are (essentially) assured of a fit for one of your suits.

Lesh's idea of responding 3♥ to a 1NT opener with a game-forcing 5-5 in the majors is sound. If opener has 3+ ♥, he will raise to 4♥. If opener has only 2 ♥, he can bid 2♠ with 3+ ♠, and responder can raise to 4♠ (or bid 3NT if he decides to). If opener is 2-2 in the majors (unlikely, but not impossible), he can rebid 3NT, whereupon responder can decide whether he wants to play in 3NT, or 4-of-a-major on a known 5-2 fit. If responder starts with 3♠, and opener bids 4♠, responder cannot choose to play in 3NT; if opener rebids 3NT, responder risks bidding 4♥ and finding opener with 2-2 in the majors. These are rare occurrences, but Lesh's approach can handle them at essentially no cost.

Hi,

well it is a possible idea, but extremly nonstandard, to bid 3S on 3+ cards.
In fact, it is ...
Responder is not interested in spades, if he had interest, he would have bid
Stayman.
But the mentioned approach works here as well, you bid 3S, followed by 4H,
showing 5-5 - with 4 hearts you would bid Stayman, hence 4H cant be based on
a 54 hand, and opener will tell responder, what suit he prefers.

3H or 3S by responder showes a single suited hand, and opener should react on
this.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[phil_20686]

Lesh18, on 2012-April-04, 15:27, said:

Right

a) I have 5 spades and 5 hearts. I force a game with 3♥, if my partner has 3 hearts, he bids 4♥, if he only has 3 or more spades, he bids 3♠. If I do not have 5 spades for a spade-fit, and as I know that there is not fit in hearts, I will sing off 3NT. 3NT is playing safe after investigating the fit in both major suits (which proves there is no fit).

b) You say that I should bid 3♠ with those cards. Now my partner does not have his 3 spades for a fit, so correctly bids 3NT. Now, having those 5 hearts, I might investigate for a heart fit, I bid 4 hearts. My partner does not have his 3 hearts for a fit, so is left to pass to keep the contract low. Now I do not even know if he passed due to hopelessness or due to the heart-fit (that would make those 4♥ too)

So, apparently, both strategies have investigated a major suit fit, but the first one ends up being more safe than the second one. So, intiutively, keeping the bidding low all the times, thus going for the lower-ranking suit should be a more successful strategy. Why is ACBL promoting going with higher-ranking suit? Does it have something to do with pre-empting?

Thanks

Its just to get you into good habits. There are lots of times in bridge where "automatically" responding the higher ranking of two five card suits is right. Therefore it makes sense to make a habit of it.

An extra consideration here, is that from time to time partner may choose to bid 3N despite three card support. Suppose he does this over 3H with a 2344 pattern, something like AQ xxx QJxx KJxx. Then if you bid 4S next you will be in the wrong spot, as he cannot go back to the hearts at the 4 level. If you can cater for partner having `misbid' for free - why not do so? Even if you consider that you would `always' raise with three card support. Sooner or later you will play with a partner who will not. Maybe he forgot what 1N-3H is. Maybe he thinks the hand plays better in NT. Maybe he wants to protect the lead. System that caters for partner bidding badly is a long term winner . Especially for non experts.

[manudude03]

As others have said, the reason you show the higher of two 5 card suits over NT is to be consistent with the rest of the bidding. When it's a game only hand, the problem isn't too bad, but what if you had interest in playing in a slam? (AQxxx AKQxx xx x as an example). Suppose you start with 3H and partner bids 3NT, what are you bidding now? Suppose you bid 6S (slam should be a very good shot), what can partner do if he prefers hearts? (maybe the poster above is your partner and is sitting with Kx Jxx AQTx AQTx). I know there have been comments about about not mentioning possible offshape NT openers, but you will find times (rather quickly if you play often) where opening 1NT with a slightly unbalanced hand is a lot better than the alternatives.

In general bidding, an important aim for the majority of auctions is to search for a 8 card fit (combined holding) or better in a major. When you bid 4 card suits up the line, partner will show a higher ranked 4 card suit if he has it and so you won't miss a 4-4 fit. Partner will never introduce a new 3 card suit and so if you bid the lower of two 5 card suits, you may miss a 5-3 fit in your second suit- say you had 5 hearts and 5 spades and partner opens 1C: if you respond 1H, partner is likely to rebid 1NT. If you were to follow up with 2S, this would show 5 hearts and 4 spades (not 5), plus it is forcing meaning you may get too high with a weak hand. If you did happen to have a good hand and follow it up with 3S over 2NT (we're now at 1C-1H-1NT-2S-2NT-3S), you have now shown the 5th spade, but you've also shown 6 hearts now and partner will probably bid 4H preferring a 6-2 fit to a 5-3 fit (when the hand with more trumps is being forced to ruff, the more trumps you have, the better) and so you still don't land in your spades.