Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Masse24

Pages: 1 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 51
601
Sleight of Hand / Re: Kickback, and all that jazz, from today's lesson
« on: July 06, 2019, 09:49:22 AM »
Ken, the simple answer is yes to both.

The difficult questions to answer are not so much, when is it on, but when is it not on?

602
Sleight of Hand / Re: 6D? Maybe?
« on: July 05, 2019, 04:46:21 PM »
I agree, Ken.
The “discussion” thing is a big problem. We play with plenty of randoms on BBO, so detailed minor suit slam auctions go undiscussed. And in the IAC the agreements before beginning are along the lines of, “2/1, 1430, 4-suit transfers, and UDCA” – and away they go.
Stepping away from the “minors suck” think we were all taught is where it must begin. I love to find minor suit slams where everyone else is in 3NT +3!
A few things to begin with:

1.    Visualize the possibility of slam. Don’t fall into the, “well, we do not have a major fit so let’s park it in 3NT” mind-set.
2.   Have well-defined methods to show (and agree) minors over 1NT & 2NT. There are lots of them. Do some research!
3.   Make proper use of splinters.
4.   Employ Minorwood or Redwood as RKC asks for the minors—and know when they apply! I recently witnessed IAC experts who had this auction: 1 !C – 4 !C and neither knew if it was Minorwood (which they had agreed to play) or not.
5.   Understand how to agree to partner’s suit without actually bidding it.
6.   Make proper use of control bids. This is mandatory.

Off to do some yard work. Be back to watch.

603
Sleight of Hand / Re: 6D? Maybe?
« on: July 04, 2019, 02:37:23 PM »

Jim’s hand:

Not a slam I want to be in for the reasons stated by Jim and Ken.

Also, I am not in love with the reverse, which must be decided when the hand is opened. It would not be my choice of rebids. Half the values are in the short suits. This is not a feature, it’s a flaw. I would be much more inclined to upgrade this robust 17 to an 18 count and rebid 2NT (planned when I opened 1 !C).

However, in the search for a !D slam, and assuming the reverse is my partner’s choice:
1 !C  – 1 !S
2 !D  – 3 !Da
3 !Hb – 3 !Sc
4 !Dd – 4 !He
4 !Sf – 5 !Dg
Off a keycard and the trump queen, opener bows out gracefully in game.

Where:
(a) 3 !D is game-force and agrees trump.
(b) 3 !H is a control.
(c) 3 !S is a control.
(d) 4 !D is Minorwood.
(e) 4 !H (1430) shows one keycard.
(f) 4 !S asks for the trump Queen.
(g) 5 !D denies the Queen.

A minimal degree of sophistication must be assumed, so either Minorwood or Kickback for minor suit slams is highly preferred over a 4NT ask.

604
Sleight of Hand / Re: 6D? Maybe?
« on: July 04, 2019, 11:54:03 AM »
Ken’s hand:

1 !S – 2 !H
2 !S – 3 !D
4 !C – 4 !H
4 !S – 4NT
5 !D – 6 !D

With 4 !C agreeing !D as trump and showing a control. (It’s not asking for a stopper, we blew past 3NT. It’s not a continuing search for strain, since with four !C responder bids them after 2 !S. Ergo, it agrees !D. It must.)

The other “science” route would have opener agree !D with 4 !D. A far more common method I am sure.

Jim’s comment about both partners having questions about slam is right. Responder doesn’t know of the nine-card fit or partner’s stiff !C honor. 

605
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: Master Solvers Club - August 2019
« on: July 02, 2019, 07:27:10 PM »

One week remains. 

August MSC problems can be found here: https://www.bridgeworld.com/indexphp.php?page=/pages/msc/mastersolversmainpage.html

606
2/1 Talk / Re: Counterintuitive
« on: June 26, 2019, 07:38:49 PM »
Quote from: Curls77 on June 26, 2019, 07:01:02 PM
Unsure if it is relevant to this discussion, but let's not forget in IAC most pardships are new and do not have any specific agreements.
Assuming vanilla 2/1 or Joe's IAC standard, best they could do is play fast arrival principle, in which jump to 4S would show hand forced to game, that choose least of evils in their opinion. Which would leave 3S to show nice natural raise of spades, not necessarily Hxx, awaiting cues from p.
Sanya, it's entirely relevant to the discussion. And the concept of "fast-arrival" is partially the reason for my post. Significantly, not because it does apply here, but because it does not. Remember, a suit has not been agreed. Responder must be able to show simple preference or, because of the forcing NoTrump, the 3-card limit raise. The jump to 4 !S is the widely recognized "expert standard."

Roughly two years ago, I emailed a handful of world-class players about the above auction. I received a handful of responses. They all agreed. Marty Bergen, giving one of his usual cryptic responses wrote, "Responder's 3 !S bid is a preference; assumed to be a doubleton. His jump to 4 !S is a lim raise. Many players don't know the above.
Regards,
Marty"

Some of the ideas above by Ken, Jack, and the quoted material from Heitzman would require careful discussion. If I had a regular partner, I would explore some of those methods. But opposite a random partner I would expect (or hope for) the bog standard method that Bergen wrote about.



 

607
2/1 Talk / Re: Counterintuitive
« on: June 26, 2019, 03:48:43 PM »
Searching Bridgewinners, I found a several discussions of jump-shift auctions. In one of them, Bob Heitzman discussed a portion of his method. I’ve included it below, which I think looks very good and not too terribly complex. Heitzman, by the way, wrote two articles, both published in The Bridge World pertaining to these auctions.
They are:
  • “Clarifying After Opener's Jump-Shift” February 2011, and
  • “Superstrong Raises by Opener”  June 2011

Unfortunately, I was a new player then and had not yet subscribed to The Bridge World. (Anyone have back issues?)

Quote
In "expert standard", the jump to 4 !S shows a 3-card limit raise. This has come up in several MSC problems in the Bridge World. That doesn't mean it is the only way to play, or perhaps even that it is best, although I think it is best.

Continuations after opener's jump shift rebid are among the most controversial in standard bidding. If you follow the MSC, every time this situation comes up you will see that every panelist has his own idea of what the various bids should mean (although the jump to 4 !S is one of the few non-controversial issues).

That's the main reason I wrote a recent Bridge World article about this situation. I'm not saying my suggestions in the article are the only way to go, and certainly not that they are accepted by all experts, but I think they are a good starting point for discussion.

On this particular auction, I suggest in the article that 3S should show a doubleton honor in spades (Qx or better). 3N should show a hand with stoppers in the unbid suits and less than enough to jump to 4N, which is quantitative with around 11-12 hcp (it also implies little slam potential in either of opener's suits). A raise to 4 !D should show a decent hand with 4-card support (higher raises are barred since the jump shifter may not have real diamonds).

The meaning of 4 !C and 4 !H depend on what 1N is--in the usual case where it is either semi-forcing or forcing but limited, these should be cue-bids in support of diamonds. If 1N is unlimited and responder might have 3 spades with 12+ support points, the 4-level cues should be in support of spades, not diamonds (this would be the case for 1 !H – 1 !S - 3m, since the 1 !S bid is unlimited).

All other hands are shown with a "punt" of 3 !H, including hands with 3-card support that were deemed too weak for an initial raise to 2 (this hand will usually bid 4 !S next).

In auctions where there is no unbid suits available at the 3-level, rebidding 3 of opener's first suit becomes the punt, and no longer shows Qx or better. If there are two unbid suits available (e.g., 1 !S - 1N - 3 !C), then 3 of the lower is the pure punt, while 3 of the higher unbid suit (by responder or by opener after responder's punt) shows a stopper in that suit and asks partner to bid 3N with a stopper in the other unbid suit.     

608
2/1 Talk / Re: Counterintuitive
« on: June 26, 2019, 02:49:15 PM »
On the first hand, Ken, if the auction begins 1 !S – 1NT – 3 !D – 3 !S, although it’s not the out-of-the-box “expert standard,” I can see a two-way either/or treatment for 3 !S. It could simply be showing preference, presumably with at least two cards (Qx or better?), or the 3-card limit-raise in the example hand above. Opener can then show slam interest with a control bid. If responder has garbage, he sign off in 4 !S. However, if responder has the limit raise and opener expresses slam interest he can cooperate. Obviously, because of the space constraints due to the jump-shift, having Last-Train in the arsenal could potentially come in handy.

The text below, pulled from The BWS 2017 Poll Results and changes, a non-jump of four of a new suit is “a control-bid ostensibly in support of opener's second suit.”

Quote
1426. After a one-notrump response and a jump-shift, a non-jump bid of four of a new suit by responder [e.g.: one spade -- one notrump -- three diamonds -- four clubs] should be . . .
A. a control-bid ostensibly in support of opener's second suit [78]
B. natural [22]
System addition: After one of a major -- one notrump -- two of a lower-ranking suit -- ? or a one-notrump response and a jump-shift, four of a suit ranking below opener's second suit is a control-bid supporting opener's second suit.

But note the failure to mention a 3-level non-jump, which could happen with the other auction we mentioned above: 1 !H – 1NT – 3 !D – 3 !S.
Could this 3 !S, as Jack mentions, be a grope for 3NT? Obviously it is limited to no more than three !S due to the initial 1NT response. Maybe that’s why it is not mentioned in the BWS 2017 poll—because 3NT is still in play? 



609
2/1 Talk / Re: Counterintuitive
« on: June 25, 2019, 04:56:31 PM »
I do suppose that, logically, in the following jump-shift auction, 3 !S should be artificial, ostensibly an “Impossible 3 !S,” showing a good raise of opener’s second suit.

1 !H – (P) – 1NT – (P)
3m  - (P) – 3 !S 

But does it (should it) promise a !S control as well?

Probably just a partnership agreement. Or does anyone have authoritative opinions on this?

610
2/1 Talk / Counterintuitive
« on: June 25, 2019, 02:12:36 PM »
Counterintuitive



Another in the “What means what” series. I saw this auction while kibbing a recent IAC Spur Team Match. North/South were playing a standard 2/1 system with a forcing notrump. At both tables, North opened a heavy 1 !S. (Some may choose to open this hand 2 !C , but I am fine with 1 !S).
South responded 1NT, intending to show a three-card limit-raise over partner’s rebid. But opener threw a wrench in the works by jumping to 3 !H , unequivocally a game-force. So how does responder now show what he initially intended to show?

We all learn the following early on in developing our bridge knowledge—once a game force has been established, to show more, go slowly. But there are exceptions. This is one of them.
Assume that, as responder, you have this hand:
!S Q8
!H 9742
!D 32
!C KQT83

The common default here is that 3 !S merely shows preference. It DOES NOT even promise three of partner’s suit! So with very little in the way of strength, and even less in the way of support, the “expert standard” call with the above responder’s hand is 3 !S. Counterintuitive!

The responder in the IAC Spur Match, with a 3-card limit-raise, correctly jumped to 4 !S . Again—counterintuitive! Unfortunately, even with the massive hand that north had, 4 !S was passed. My guess is that north was not aware of what it showed.

I believe continuations after opener’s jump-shift to be a very difficult area of bidding, and one that is often undiscussed. With discussion, I believe a viable overloading of responder’s 3M bid could be accomplished, including both the “showing preference” garbage bid and the 3-card limit-raise. But knowing the “expert standard” continuation is where the discussion begins.

Any ideas?

611
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: Master Solvers Club, posts up to July 2019
« on: June 11, 2019, 05:07:02 PM »
Quote from: kenberg on June 10, 2019, 12:30:32 PM

PROBLEM E: 2 Spades
Todd asked just how Walshy BWS is and the answer is perhaps pretty Walshy but with exceptions.  My thinking is that if pard has a minimum then he will pass and this could well be the right contract. If he has more I would  like it if he allows for other contracts than 4S but is he doesn't, it still could be the right contract.



Ken, I was chicken to try this. I'm impressed you went out on a limb. Interesting that both 3 !D and 2 !S received a score of 100. I actually like the 2 !S more.

612
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: Master Solvers Club, posts up to July 2019
« on: June 11, 2019, 01:27:20 AM »
SOLVER: Todd Holes
        Glen Ellyn IL
        U.S.A.
 
Your Solutions for the July 2019 Contest
-------------------
PROBLEM A: 3 Notrump       100
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump       100
PROBLEM C: 5 Clubs            100
PROBLEM D: Double            100
PROBLEM E: 3 Diamonds     100
PROBLEM F: 1 Notrump       100
PROBLEM G: Pass                 80
PROBLEM H: Club Ace         100

TOTAL ---------------------   780

A very, very good month. My highest single month total ever and second highest placing (third). But did my rationale coincide with the panel's? Looking forward to the Bridge World to arrive in a week.

613
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: Master Solvers Club, posts up to July 2019
« on: June 05, 2019, 11:33:02 PM »
July guesses:


PROBLEM A: 3NT. Close. My second choice, 3 !D , is too heavy. But the 3NT indicating a solid !D suit is not quite as “solid” as I would like.

PROBLEM B: 3NT. My second choice, a rather esoteric 3 !H, should pigeonhole my shape (two !S ) and willingness to cooperate further or play the 5-2 !S fit.

PROBLEM C: 5 !C. To double then pull partner’s 4 !S to 5 !C to show this hand does not appeal to me. Also, 5 !C (minimally) protects my !D honor.

PROBLEM D: Dbl. What else? [ADDED]: Although I stayed with my first choice, I think 2 !H is very close. It is not too strong for a 2 !H overcall, in my opinion.

PROBLEM E: 3 !D. I am torn on this one (what’s new?). Partner is probably short in !D. Because partner is not flat (see BWS and note on Problem F). I am tempted to try a Walsh type 2 !S , which should deny four !S , but show Hxx and an invite. But how Walshy is BWS?

PROBLEM F: 1NT. A beginnerish call--today I’m a beginner. A race to 1NT—and this will be the explanation by a few of the panel. It’s MP. My second choice is to pass! [ADDED]: The lack of a !S bid from anyone at the table is enough to push me to choose 1NT. This is a "first to 1NT wins" hand.

PROBLEM G: Pass. A possible misfit with partner. Second choice is 2 !D .

PROBLEM H: !H T. Second choice is obviously one of the Aces, but which one? !C A would be a good choice . . . to get a peek at the dummy. Not a tactic I often use. [ADDED] I changed my mind here--going with the !C Ace. I'd lead the !H 10 against 1S-4S, but this preempt auction is different. The !C Ace is less likely to blow a trick directly because any opposing picture cards in clubs are most likely not on my right. The !H 10 might allow a declarer to dump a loser, too. (The !H 10 will be the runaway solver choice.) Admittedly, this is a high variance action.

First guesses. Will look again in a day or so, after some of the IAC cognoscenti chime in! :)


SUBMITTED BELOW ANSWERS:

SOLUTIONS FOR:
Todd Holes
Glen Ellyn IL
U.S.A.

PROBLEM A: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM B: 3 Notrump
PROBLEM C: 5 Clubs
PROBLEM D: Double
PROBLEM E: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM F: 1 Notrump
PROBLEM G: Pass
PROBLEM H: Club Ace


614
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Master Solvers Club: July 2019
« on: June 03, 2019, 11:37:47 AM »
July MSC

One week remains. Get your MSC thinking caps on.

July MSC problems can be found here: https://www.bridgeworld.com/indexphp.php?page=/pages/msc/mastersolversmainpage.html

615
Sleight of Hand / Re: working on mysteries without any clues
« on: June 01, 2019, 08:17:59 PM »
Not having read Washington Standard, my understanding of a negative double over 2 !C is similar, but not exactly the same. I fully agree that it does not promise both majors. But I am not so rigid with the "if one major then !D too" requirement. I did not read this in a book, I simply picked it up along the way. So my understanding is two places to play.

This:
  • A. Both majors
  • B. One major and diamond support
  • C. One major and a healthy club stop w invitational + values

I'm still trying to figure out the best way to agree trump and show slam interest.  :o

I know a cuebid will be a common method, but it can get murky. For example, what is responder's next call here wanting to go slamming in !S:

1 !D – (2 !C) – X – (P)
2 !S – (P) – 3 !C - (P)
3NT - (P) - ??

[Added] I suppose that 4 !C now or 4 !H would show a control agreeing !S .


Pages: 1 ... 39 40 [41] 42 43 ... 51