I'm mystified. Why would you not want to play fit-showing jump-shifts by a passed hand if you have them in your bidding arsenal?

OCP (where Opener is limited to 15 hcp), plays fit-showing jump-shifts over 1 and 1 (it plays mini-splinters as well LOL), all showing a hand in the region of 8-9 hcp. Since your Opening 1 or 1 bids can be much stronger than 15 hcp, it suggests that your fit-showing bids can afford to be a little weaker than OCP's, if anything. They certainly don't need to be stronger, so why omit them from your system when Responder is a passed hand?

If you're interested, OCP gets to use both mini-splinters and fit-showing jump-shifts by an ingenious method of swapping the 1 - 2 and 1 - 2NT responses around, so 1 - 2NT is a fit-showing jump-shift in Spades. Now 1 - 2 and 1 - 2NT are both mini-splinters in an unspecified suit, a little like a request to make a short-suit trial bid agreeing Hearts. Opener can decline by bidding 3M or go straight to game, or, if the location of Responder's shortage makes a difference, they can relay and now Responder shows where the shortage is.

Again, if you interested, by sheer coincidence my OCP session tomorrow (Saturday) happens to be on this exact topic. (Splinters, Mini-Splinters, and Fit-Showing Jump-Shifts over a Major suit Opening). Mini-Splinters and Fit-Showing Jump-Shifts are a hugely more beneficial use of bidding space than game-forcing jump-shifts. On the basis of frequency alone, you get that sort of hand far more often, and reaching thin (sub-minimum but making) games on the basis of a really good fit will gain you IMPs hand-over-fist compared to strong jump-shifts, which crop up much less often and which hands can always be bid in other ways. You can bolt them onto literally any bidding system, so if you don't already use either of these methods, or want to know how to combine them so you have the option of using either one at will, please come along to IAC tomorrow night (9pm UTC, 10pm UK, 5pm EDT).

Hand 1: This seems like a difficult question, but in reality I don't think it is:


Pre-supposing that you're ultimately going to make 3 Club tricks...

• Winning trick 1 works any times when East has the Ace of Clubs (50%) or when the Diamonds are no worse than 5-3 (80%) whoever has the Ace of Clubs.
• Ducking trick 1 only wins over winning trick 1 when the Diamonds are 6-2 exactly (17%) and West has the Ace of Clubs, which comes out at an 8.5% chance (50% of 17%). Ducking loses only the 8.5% of the time when the Diamonds are 6-2 and East has the Ace of Clubs

If the Diamonds are 5-3 or 4-4 it really doesn't matter (Because Opps are only ever going to get 4 Diamonds and the Ace of Clubs). If Diamonds are 7-1 it doesn't matter what you do, because West can never continue Diamonds. So it only matters what you do the 17% of the time when East has exactly Q109xxx in Diamonds, and West has the Ace of Clubs, so you're down to whether you play for that 8.5% chance or the 80% chance of the Diamonds being 4-4 or 5-3.

At Matchpoints I think I have to play for the 88.5% because I have more of a chance for an overtrick, but at IMPs I feel I have to play safe by catering for that 8.5% chance, because you're also only going to lose out 8.5% of the time when the Diamonds are exactly 6-2 and East has the Ace of Clubs. At IMPs the overtrick(s) are largely irrelevant, but at MPs, the 50% chance of an extra trick by winning trick 1 is worth the risk.

Yes,I had added pretty much the same thoughts to my original post.  I have a tendency toward impatience.  Partly this is just me, partly it is that it has been a long time since i have had a partner who likes to objectively go over hands, the result being that extended or possibly ambiguous sequences are undiscussed.  In the sequence you and I think is the best, I suggest that after partner's 3 call my 3 is not likely to be looking for a full stop. If partner had a full stop she/he/it would presumably have bid NT over my hypothetical  2 .  So the 2 !h can be seen as "Maybe NT is still ok if you can help", and Qxx is certainly help.

Absolutely. As you say, some people are afraid to have constructive sequences like this for fear that Partner is going to pass unexpectedly, or that they're going to keep on bidding with nothing when they ought to pass over an obvious sign-off from you.
In reality, though, hands like this ought to pretty much bid themselves.

• 2 is showing game interest in the context of your Double then 2 .
• 2 is clearly forward-going with only 3-card Spades (in case Partner has 5) and probably not a great holding in Hearts (but showing the Spade support takes priority in any case).
• 3 is showing no 4-card Spades and 3-card Clubs and also no great Heart holding.
• 3 is saying "Well I have something in Hearts. Can you help?".
• The answer is always going to be 3NT ("Yes") or 4 ("No).
• The original doubler can decide over 4 whether to pass that or bid 5 .

Just a reminder that Oliver's year-long course on OCP Super-Precision starts all over again on Saturday 23rd September, always at 9pm UTC (10pm UK, 5pm EDT).

Prior knowledge of Precision is definitely not required, but a thorough grounding in natural approach/forcing bidding will be a great help (even though Precision does a lot of things rather differently).

All welcome!

Have you noticed that finesses are like a red rag to a bull sometimes?

We were defending on this hand. Eszter and I essentially played a fairly passive defence. We could have played it more aggressively, but it wouldn't have made a single bit of difference to the outcome. Declarer here defeated himself, pure and simple:

EW Game, Dealer East (Hands re-arranged as per the posts below)

East (Dummy)
  AJ97
  954
  K973
  32

West (Declarer)
  KQ842
  KQ
  AJ
  K974

Bidding
East     South     West     North
No        No           1        2
2       No           4        All Pass

My Partner, who was North, led a small Spade. Declarer drew trumps in rounds, ending in Dummy (Spades were 2-2). Next he Led a Diamond to his Ace and then ran the Jack of Diamonds, losing to South's Queen.

WHAT??

Before you take any finesse you have to think what you can possibly hope to gain from it (win or lose). EW are in the par contract here. Trumps have split and there are only three possible losers for Declarer on this hand (The Ace of Hearts and 2 Clubs if the Club Ace is offside) West can ruff East's red-suit losers and East can ruff West's Club losers. The only ways you can possibly go off on this hand it (1) to needlessly draw a 3rd round of trumps, or (2) to lose a Diamond trick.

Aside from the idiotic "chinese" finesse in Diamonds (East will surely cover with Qx(x) or any number of Diamonds with Q10x), what West needed to ask himself is this: "Is my position going to improve if this finesse somehow succeeds?". Of course the answer is no. If the Jack wins and West gets to discard a Club (or a Heart) on the King, he is still going to lose 2 Clubs and a Heart. It doesn't even matter if Declarer finesses against South in Diamonds - he's still going to lose three tricks on this hand because the discard on the King doesn't gain him anything. It can only lose if the finesse loses.  Even if NS tried to commit suicide and started chucking the Q and 10 under the A, K and J and West somehow managed to gain two discards on the Diamonds, he's still only making 10 tricks, depending on the position of the Ace.

The whole world, practically, was in 4 making exactly or with an overtrick. This guy and only one other West (who did exactly the same thing, except that that West didn't even play the Ace first LOL). were the only two going off. North had the AQ and the Ace.

Swapping a 100% cold game for a 50% finesse which, even if it wins, doesn't gain you an overtrick and if it loses means you might go off, is pure insanity, yet I see people doing it nearly every day. Finessing is a valuable tactic, but sometimes you need to give yourself a reality check. "Am I actually going to gain anything if this finesse wins?"

I was also watching the hand and despite that comment couldn't be entirely sure whether Moss/Grue were using Asking Bids or not, because the writer hadn't appended any explanations to any of the other bids and so clearly wasn't 100% sure what they were playing.


The thing is, he never ASKED about the Diamonds if it was an asking sequence, so from his viewpoint Partner might have had Qxx, Qx, xx, xxx. In the OCP sequence I know Partner has 3rd round control of the suit, so there is a good chance he has Qx or Qxx in Diamonds rather than exactly xx. Even when he does have exactly xx, the Ace might be inside or they might not even lead Diamonds, in which case I know that the second losing Diamond is going away on the King first chance I get. Those are good enough odds for me.

The penultimate hand was disappointing in that hardly anyone got to the unbreakable small slam, which I found astonishing. Once again, OCP breezes into this slam:


NS Game, Dealer South

West               East
A                  K972
AJ10732        K954
Q83              K94
K85              AJ


OCP Bidding
West                  East
1                     1NT(Forcing)
2                     2 (Asking in Hearts)
3 ( Hxxxxx)   3 (Asking about Controls)
4 (5 Controls)   4 (asking about Spade Controls)
4NT(No or 1+2)   5 (Asking about Controls)
5 (3rd)             6 (Knows Spades are the stiff Ace)

East also knows that West cannot have Qxxx because if they did they would bid 2 over 1NT no matter how many Hearts they had. The only danger is an opening lead through the King when West has xx rather than Qx or Qxx (which is possible). East knows West has the Club King here, so they don't have to have the Diamond Queen for their opening bid.

Given the state of the match, I was astonished that the French EW never even looked like considering the possibility of a slam. At least Moss and Grue got to the 5-level and Moss only wimped out when Grue, somewhat weirdly, denied a Diamond Control.

We probably reverse more often than you might think:


1 - 1
2            is a 14-15 hcp hand with 4-card hearts and longer Diamonds


1 - 1NT(F1)
2                 is 14-15 hcp with 4-card Spades and longer Hearts


1 - 2
2                 is 14-15 with 4-card hearts and longer Diamonds

1 - 2
2 - 2       is game-forcing with 4-card Spades and longer Clubs

When your Opening bid can be 19+ hcp, a reverse by Opener pretty much has to be forcing for one round. A reverse by Responder, of course, is always treated as game-forcing (pretty much universally, I think - certainly I've never come across any system where it isn't).