[Cyberyeti]

We played in the national pairs final at the weekend, came 7th less than a top off 3rd, these two hands were irritating. The first is a thinking on your feet situation with no agreements, the second a play problem. I've posted in I/A because experts might have the required agreements in the first case and I think it's the right level for the play problem.

1.

---

all vul

Partner opens 1♣, you play weak NT 4 card majors, so this shows at least 5 clubs and an unbalanced hand if less than 15 points unless exactly 4414.

RHO bids 2♣ which is an 8-11 takeout double.

Your system has just gone out the window (you would make a very minimum inverted raise, F2N not denying 4M over an overcall or double) you don't know what X and 2N mean in this sequence, take it from here.

2.

---

W leads 10♠, plan the play.

[mike777]

given our system I think I will start with x.

[dwar0123]

I'd bid 3♣ but I would not be happy about it.

For the play problem, I would raise with the A♠ and lead a diamond intending to run the 8. This wins vs all but 1 2-2*, 4-0 break onside and every 3-1 onside break except kq7. There is no play that takes in kq9 or kq97 offsides. If the 8 forces out a diamond honor and then 9 shows up in rho next round, restricted choice would suggest not playing for the drop. So this play will lose kq offsides.

I will try to ruff out the q♥ to establish them for losers that dummy cant ruff.

[Cyberyeti]

mike777, on 2012-April-16, 13:59, said:

given our system I think I will start with x.

Showing what ?

[mike777]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-April-16, 15:16, said:

Showing what ?

If I understood your OP, you have no discussion or agreements on this.

rho made a t/o of clubs

I hope pard takes it as if the auction went 1c=x=xx but.....over to pard now.

[Cyberyeti]

mike777, on 2012-April-16, 15:20, said:

If I understood your OP, you have no discussion or agreements on this.

rho made a t/o of clubs

I hope pard takes it as if the auction went 1c=x=xx but.....over to pard now.

This is what I'd like it to mean (essentially a natural 2N quite often) with 2N being a good club raise, but I wasn't sure partner was going to read it.

We as most people do play almost all our doubles takeout, an exception being where we've redoubled for business or otherwise indicated a wish to penalise (like a double of U2N), so I wouldn't like to put 1♣-2♣-X-2♥-X to the test and find we both had short hearts if I passed.

[mike777]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-April-16, 16:48, said:

This is what I'd like it to mean (essentially a natural 2N quite often) with 2N being a good club raise, but I wasn't sure partner was going to read it.

We as most people do play almost all our doubles takeout, an exception being where we've redoubled for business or otherwise indicated a wish to penalise (like a double of U2N), so I wouldn't like to put 1♣-2♣-X-2♥-X to the test and find we both had short hearts if I passed.

I understand..the good news is if pard x's 2h I will pull to 3c.

In any event I dont think partner should play my x as takeout of clubs or a really weak hand.

Now my 3 clubs should deny a heart stopper, promise clubs and something more than a weak hand.....you can debate how strong I show....but it must be less than a 3h cuebid.

[Cyberyeti]

mike777, on 2012-April-16, 17:21, said:

I understand..the good news is if pard x's 2h I will pull to 3c.

In any event I dont think partner should play my x as takeout of clubs or a really weak hand.

In the end, I decided to make the completely unambiguous bid. If there was a club stack, it was going to be well placed, and the explanation of "weak takeout double" conjured up 11-13 in my mind rather than 8-11 so I thought the spade Q was odds on to work. I bid 5♣.

Partner had Jx, K10xx, Ax, AJ10xx so given that you're not going to find 3 trumps offside on the auction, this was a straight 50:50 for almost all or almost none of the matchpoints. Unfortunately the finesse didn't work.

[mike777]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-April-16, 17:34, said:

In the end, I decided to make the completely unambiguous bid. If there was a club stack, it was going to be well placed, and the explanation of "weak takeout double" conjured up 11-13 in my mind rather than 8-11 so I thought the spade Q was odds on to work. I bid 5♣.

Partner had Jx, K10xx, Ax, AJ10xx so given that you're not going to find 3 trumps offside on the auction, this was a straight 50:50 for almost all or almost none of the matchpoints. Unfortunately the finesse didn't work.

I gather you cannot open a wk nt with that shape?

this is really close to a 14-16 nt for me.


yes it seemed that you thought rho had more than 8-11 here.

[Cyberyeti]

mike777, on 2012-April-16, 17:39, said:

I gather you cannot open a wk nt with that shape?

this is really close to a 14-16 nt for me.


yes it seemed that you thought rho had more than 8-11 here.

Theoretically we can't open 1N on this shape, I occasionally do, particularly in 3rd/4th, partner never does. I think now that 4♣ might have been a better bid, although partner might still have bid 5, it's a nasty decision for him.

[mike777]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-April-17, 01:26, said:

Theoretically we can't open 1N on this shape, I occasionally do, particularly in 3rd/4th, partner never does. I think now that 4♣ might have been a better bid, although partner might still have bid 5, it's a nasty decision for him.

stiil prefer x to start but ok.


I tend to almost never try and drive to a close mP minor suit game and I dont want to rush to get above 3nt or miss a penalty x.

[Cyberyeti]

dwar0123, on 2012-April-16, 14:48, said:

I'd bid 3♣ but I would not be happy about it.

For the play problem, I would raise with the A♠ and lead a diamond intending to run the 8. This wins vs all but 1 2-2*, 4-0 break onside and every 3-1 onside break except kq7. There is no play that takes in kq9 or kq97 offsides. If the 8 forces out a diamond honor and then 9 shows up in rho next round, restricted choice would suggest not playing for the drop. So this play will lose kq offsides.

I will try to ruff out the q♥ to establish them for losers that dummy cant ruff.

As nobody else is biting on this one, I think it's better to play a diamond to the ace then ruff out the hearts as this gives you plenty of chances when either opponent has ♦KQx (W will need 3 or 4 hearts too if he has the trumps), plus good chances of 12 tricks if as at the table, an honour drops on your left. Where it loses is where W has Kx or Qx of trumps and only 2 hearts, but in all other non extreme heart break situations you're fairly well placed.

[Statto]

1. I like X too.

2. I'll duck the opening lead to give opps a chance to make a helpful trump switch. Either way, I then hope to play trumps for 1 loser by starting with small from dummy towards the 8, and aim to establish the ♥ by ruffing. Hopefully I have enough entries to dummy to do this. I think this works whenever ♦ are no worse than 3-1, ♥ no worse than 4-2, and ♦KQ or stiff ♦9 are not offside.

[Cyberyeti]

Statto, on 2012-April-17, 18:16, said:

1. I like X too.

2. I'll duck the opening lead to give opps a chance to make a helpful trump switch. Either way, I then hope to play trumps for 1 loser by starting with small from dummy towards the 8, and aim to establish the ♥ by ruffing. Hopefully I have enough entries to dummy to do this. I think this works whenever ♦ are no worse than 3-1, ♥ no worse than 4-2, and ♦KQ or stiff ♦9 are not offside.

I'm wondering whether if your intention is diamond to the 8, you should win the first spade, then play ♥AK before touching trumps. The third of the 4-2 breaks where the Q drops allows you to switch horses and play the A♦ next if it drops on your L.

I don't see that it's very likely that you will get a trump switch from any useful holding (and opps can choose who wins the spade) if you duck.