[mike777]

pescetom, on 2024-November-24, 09:49, said:

IMPs

---

Playing 2/1 with strong 1NT, partner decides to torture you with 3♦ (good 15-17, well honoured suit).
What is your agreement for 3♥ here and would you bid it with this hand?

Is it still standard for 1D. 3D rebid to be 16 -18 HCP with a side stiff or void?

[mikeh]

mike777, on 2024-November-26, 20:29, said:

Is it still standard for 1D. 3D rebid to be 16 -18 HCP with a side stiff or void?

Afaik, that was never standard. Yes, it could have a stiff, but 6322 is certainly possible. As for a void….that would, I think, be quite rare, since one must have a side 4+ suit unless one is 7330.

As for the range, I think it used to be standard for around 16-18 but 15-18 has been popular for almost as long as I’ve been playing (which is a long time), depending upon the 15.

[mike777]

Thanks, Is 6322 long minor shape often taken out of the rebid by treating it as balanced and making the rebid imply a stiff somewhere and more defined?

[apollo1201]

 mikeh, on 2024-November-26, 19:13, said:

If 1D 1S 3D 3S is either 4 or 6 spades, please explain to me how opener knows when to raise with, say, Ax or Qxx and weakness in a side suit so 3N isn’t attractive?

You say some very good players use this ‘4 or 6’ treatment. I’ve seen a lot of weird agreements in my time….played a few too….but this one, imo, can’t be played both ethically and profitably. It’s profitable if one is illegally letting opener know which you have. It’s unethical if you do. It only works if opener ‘guesses’ correctly all the time and that’s literally impossible, over a long enough sample, absent something very bad going on.

Mike, your posts are always a greater interest and I will not equate your knowledge and clear way of writing and explaining. Also even if I used to play a lot when student and young single adult, this time is over so my reasoning and analysis strength are lesser than what they were.

The fact that I emphasized it can get slippery and that when I had the hand, I did not dare it, says a lot about my confidence in it and my capacity of handing the risks it involves. It should be worked hard incl folllow ups in an established and serious partnership.

Nevertheless I do not think that Levy or Bessis (whom you probably played in international events?) can be suspected of unethical behaviors.

Diamonds consume too much space vs clubs. It is a choice between do we partially give up finding 3NT or do we partially give up finding 5-3 M fits. With opener s good 6-cd suit, 3NT if all suits stopped should play well enough even if there is a 53 M.

A mundane responder hand like

AJxxx (or make it worse by swapping H and S)
xxx
Qx
KJx

will probably play ok in 3NT regardless of opener S length, provided it comes with a H stop.

Otherwise 4S and 5D will have to be good spots even with this slightly modified and equally mundane hand

AJxx
xxx
Qx
KJxx

The stringish 55 responder hands you gave are a nightmare. Does pulling out 3NT imply sufficient strength to stand a 4NT refusal? Even without gadget.

I guess if the ambiguous call is 3H you can still play 4 steps like stopper with fit if you are long, stopper without fit, no stopper but fit, no stopper and no fit but it still is complicated. Anyway when opener has no stopper, either you wanted a M fit and you might have found one; or you did not want to, but 3NT was doomed on the opening lead.

I hope this makes what I remember from some years ago more clear, but sometimes directly invokingHamlman s rule without telling your life to the opps works as fine. For sure.

[pescetom]

apollo1201, on 2024-November-27, 15:31, said:

Nevertheless I do not think that Levy or Bessis (whom you probably played in international events?) can be suspected of unethical behaviors.

FWIW (no judgement on my part) Bessis did play with Lorenzini and the pair were publicly suspected a few years ago.

[mikeh]

Apollo. You have not addressed my point. How the f*%k did Bessis or Levy know how to avoid a 4-2 or 4-3 spade fit and still find their 6-2 or 6-3 fit if 1D 1S 3D 3S showed either 4 or 6. Without an answer to that, I very much doubt that your memory is correct, no matter who you cite

[apollo1201]

I guess they played in 3NT rather than 4M when everything was stopped.

And if they enriched the follow-up to distinguish 3-cd or less, they could still avoid 42 and be in 43 knowingly, otherwise end up in 5D and pray.

I guess unbalanced diamonders have a point where they can rebid 2NT or 3D to distinguish M length.

[Zelandakh]

pescetom, on 2024-November-27, 15:40, said:

FWIW (no judgement on my part) Bessis did play with Lorenzini and the pair were publicly suspected a few years ago.

There is nothing to suggest the proposed treatment on their CC, nor indeed any posted CC from any of the various players carrying the Bessis or Levy names as far as I can tell. I strongly believe this idea comes from confusion with a different auction. In NT auctions for example, the 4 or 6 idea works because the 6 card suit comes with a known fit, meaning there is space to distinguish on the next round; but that is not the case here.

[DavidKok]

 apollo1201, on 2024-November-27, 16:14, said:

I guess unbalanced diamonders have a point where they can rebid 2NT or 3D to distinguish M length.

This can be done without the unbalanced diamond, though it requires more work.

More generally though, on the start 1♦-1M; 3♦ we only have three bids at or below 3NT. If we wish to investigate stoppers in two suits, but also bid 3NT to play, there's no room left to investigate 5-3 or 6-2 fits (or 4-3 or 5-2 fits). Something has to give.

The traditional thinking is that stoppers are important, and we need at least one and maybe two stopper asks. Personally I think on auctions with limited space like this the bids are better utilised differently. This means blasting 3NT without a stopper sometimes, which is unpleasant but the alternative is no panacea.

If you want to solve this and other problems systemically it is much more effective to go back one bid and improve opener's rebid structure. With more space available we get more options, this time allowing us to address all of these concerns. What's more, the earlier in the auction you make sharp agreements, the more often they come up. This means you gain in more scenarios.