[wank]

i am a conservative pre-emptor. i wouldn't open a weak 2 on the actual hand. still, even opposite myself i would never dream of doubling 4S.

[nige1]

IMO

• A bid isn't a lie if it's natural, conforms to normal practice, and you haven't agreed anything specific.
• You should allow some lee-way for partner's styles and treatments.
• Both the auction and the play are reasonable
• You can attribute the result to bad luck

[rmnka447]

I can sympathize some with Red Spawn about the quality of his partner's weak 2 bid. However, if being a "substitute" means playing with someone you've never played with before, then making any assumptions about partner's preempts is dangerous. That's especially true on BBO where player's chosen skill designations often have little bearing on the player's competence.

There is sentiment that the weak 2 presented was nothing unusual. Fine, if that's your style and partner is aware of how "light" you open weak 2s in 1st or 2nd seat. But something to consider is the overall range of weak 2 hands that you are opening. If you'll also open something like xx KQJxxx Kxx xx as a weak 2, you'll make it more of a problem for responder to visualize where the hand belongs. That's especially true in competitive situations where you lose tools, such as Ogust, to provide information about the weak 2 opener. Opposite OP's weak 2 hand, 4 ♥ has no chance, but opposite my example hand 4 ♥ is a good bet.

Somehow that does get lost on free and easy weak 2 proponents who emphasize the jamming aspects. Against weaker competition, that jamming can be very successful. But against really accomplished players, it is much less so. Those better players will still find their games and slams, but also discern when healthy sets are in the works and double.

How you play weak 2s is a choice. But make sure you understand what you gain and lose making that choice.

As for the actual hand --

Doubling 4 ♠ versus an unknown partner is a bit of a crap shoot. I'd probably pass.

As for the opening lead, I'd fall back on the Fred Will (a very good Detroit player 50-60 years ago) approach -- "I never do anything in the bidding or play that I can be criticized for in the post mortem." So, if partner bids a suit, Fred would lead partner's suit unless there was an overwhelming reason not to. A trump lead might be mandatory if the opponents showed a lot of distribution, but there's also a good chance that leading a trump might aid overcaller in bringing in the trump suit for minimum loss. So ♥ 10 for me.

Assuming declarer can see the need for ♣ pitches, I'd expect declarer to play the ♥ J from dummy and win in hand with the ♥ K maintaining a ♥ entry to dummy. Declarer has to tackle ♣ immediately. If he touches ♠ at all, it'll be easier to find the right defense. So ♣ 10 should be next.

As the cards lie, the best defense is to duck the ♣ A and have partner give count. I'm not so sure it would be easy to see at the table. If ♣ 10 is singleton, declarer has ♦ length and can't ruff out ♣ to provide needed discards even if the lead is overtaken in dummy. Let's say partner shows an odd number of ♣ and declarer ducks the ♣ 10. If declarer continues ♣, partner is in perfect position to give a suit preference signal with his/her remaining ♣ when you take your ♣ A.

If you rise with the ♣ A at trick 3, it'd be more of a guess. But the one thing you know is that partner had only ♥ Q and nothing in ♣. So partner ought to have something in either ♦ or ♠ for the weak 2 bid. If ♣ 2 under your ♣ A is count, then underleading in ♦ is less likely to cost anything. Unless overcaller started with 7 ♠, overcaller ought to have at least 3 ♦.

If declarer takes a round of trump after winning the ♥, it exposes that partner likely doesn't have anything in ♠. So the only way to beat the contract is to get 3 ♦ tricks. Underleading is then right to prevent blocking the suit.

[mcphee]

Up hard to believe you would cry about this hand especially sine you should beat it.

[johnu]

MrAce, on 2017-May-15, 18:43, said:

Redspawn controls both minor suits very well ( AQ AQ) and his pd says he has the hearts. What can be better reason on earth for leading trump when your side locked all other 3 suits and opponents still bid 4♠?

I originally said that a trump lead could be successful, but it could easily let a hopeless contract make. e.g. Give dummy a 3rd trump for transportation, and change West and North's red suit kings. Now West has KQ 6th of hearts so presumably everybody is happy with opening 2♥. You have to make an opening heart lead or it's too late.

MrAce, on 2017-May-15, 18:43, said:

I mean it is ok to criticize the double. I would never double myself but I do not think it is such a huge logical mistake when his expectations from his pd and a weak 2♥ bid are more sound than the rest of us.

IMP odds don't favor double when the opponents voluntarily bid game and you have nothing unexpected. I don't think you can expect more than down 1.

Other table Your table IMPs
3♠ +140 4♠X +100 +6
3♠ +140 4♠ +50 +5

If 4♠ is down 1, the other table stops in a partscore making, you gain an IMP by doubling

4♠ +420 4♠X -590 -5
4♠ +420 4♠ -420 0

If 4♠ makes, the other table bids a game, you lose 5 IMPs by doubling

3♠ +170 4♠X -590 -9
3♠ +170 4♠ -420 -6

If 4♠ makes, the other table bids stops in a partscore, you lose 3 IMPs by doubling

4♠ -50 4♠X +100 2
4♠ -50 4♠ +50 0

If 4 spades is down, both tables bids a game, you gain 2 IMPs by doubling

Not a huge mistake, but why leak IMPs if you don't have to.

MrAce, on 2017-May-15, 18:43, said:

After he wins the ♣A he could perhaps panic (seeing 4 clubs in the dummy are literally ready to go after trumps are cleared) and decide to play pd for K of ♦, but the the fact is if 2♥ opener held the ♥K instead of ♦, only defense that beats 4♠ is to play ♥ now immediately which he did. It is not that hard for defenders to spot the entry issues of NS. So I disagree with the comments that says he defended bad.

MrAce, I would expect you to automatically beat this contract after winning ♣A and seeing partner give a suit preference signal ♣2 on that trick. Since this is a BBO random game, you could argue that partner isn't good enough to give a suit preference signal, and you could be right, but you certainly have to make that decision and not automatically return a heart.

[johnu]

rmnka447, on 2017-May-16, 00:43, said:

Assuming declarer can see the need for ♣ pitches, I'd expect declarer to play the ♥ J from dummy and win in hand with the ♥ K maintaining a ♥ entry to dummy. Declarer has to tackle ♣ immediately. If he touches ♠ at all, it'll be easier to find the right defense. So ♣ 10 should be next.

As the cards lie, the best defense is to duck the ♣ A and have partner give count. I'm not so sure it would be easy to see at the table. If ♣ 10 is singleton, declarer has ♦ length and can't ruff out ♣ to provide needed discards even if the lead is overtaken in dummy. Let's say partner shows an odd number of ♣ and declarer ducks the ♣ 10. If declarer continues ♣, partner is in perfect position to give a suit preference signal with his/her remaining ♣ when you take your ♣ A.

If you rise with the ♣ A at trick 3, it'd be more of a guess. But the one thing you know is that partner had only ♥ Q and nothing in ♣. So partner ought to have something in either ♦ or ♠ for the weak 2 bid. If ♣ 2 under your ♣ A is count, then underleading in ♦ is less likely to cost anything. Unless overcaller started with 7 ♠, overcaller ought to have at least 3 ♦.

If declarer takes a round of trump after winning the ♥, it exposes that partner likely doesn't have anything in ♠. So the only way to beat the contract is to get 3 ♦ tricks. Underleading is then right to prevent blocking the suit.

If declarer had singleton ♣10 and you duck, then probably has 6=2=4=1 distribution, so can afford to lose 2 or 3 diamond tricks, no trump tricks, no heart tricks, no club tricks.

If partner is supposed to give a suit preference on the 2nd club assuming you duck, a suit preference is even more obvious to make if you win the ace first club trick.

[RedSpawn]

MrAce, on 2017-May-15, 18:43, said:

Redspawn controls both minor suits very well ( AQ AQ) and his pd says he has the hearts. What can be better reason on earth for leading trump when your side locked all other 3 suits and opponents still bid 4♠?

I mean it is ok to criticize the double. I would never double myself but I do not think it is such a huge logical mistake when his expectations from his pd and a weak 2♥ bid are more sound than the rest of us.
I do not think the lead was a mistake, I would have led spade myself. After he wins the ♣A he could perhaps panic (seeing 4 clubs in the dummy are literally ready to go after trumps are cleared) and decide to play pd for K of ♦, but the the fact is if 2♥ opener held the ♥K instead of ♦, only defense that beats 4♠ is to play ♥ now immediately which he did. It is not that hard for defenders to spot the entry issues of NS. So I disagree with the comments that says he defended bad.

I am trembling as I type this.

Thank you, MrAce.

We have had our share of controversy and we may still differ from a style standpoint on what actually qualifies as a weak 2 from 1st seat too, but I am a straight-shooter on my bids -- that may be to my own detriment or benefit.

Very rare BBO Forum moment.

[RedSpawn]

wank, on 2017-May-15, 21:19, said:

i am a conservative pre-emptor. i wouldn't open a weak 2 on the actual hand. still, even opposite myself i would never dream of doubling 4S.

Fair enough and that is a very balanced view. It speaks of both the opener and the respondent.

I also found some lecture notes from Josh Donn on weak 2 on BBO Forum. I should cross-advertise his thoughts as well.

Pretty good read.

Josh Donn Lecture Notes Weak 2

[MrAce]

johnu, on 2017-May-16, 02:40, said:

MrAce, I would expect you to automatically beat this contract after winning ♣A and seeing partner give a suit preference signal ♣2 on that trick. Since this is a BBO random game, you could argue that partner isn't good enough to give a suit preference signal, and you could be right, but you certainly have to make that decision and not automatically return a heart.

Oh boy! Now you are stepping into my world. Card play and defense and giving lectures?

When you start to give suit preference in a suit which declarer is trying to establish, instead of giving the count, or instead of simply following the suit without having to drop an honor card, it creates much more problems in other hands where giving SP has no value. It would not even occur to me to take ♣2 as a SP. Of course people love to create such signals when they see both hands in forums.

You are assuming, wrongly, that WEST will always have available spots to suit preference. Assume West played the 5. How on earth East is supposed to know whether you played 5 from 75 or 52 ?
You are assuming , wrongly again, that W knows who has the ♣Q so East will not worry W holding Q2 clubs. All of these pathetic signals make sense only when you see both hands.

Bottom line is, your comment on SP signal in a suit that declarer is trying to establish is ridiculous at best! People can not afford to follow with honors when declarer plays a club T from hand and pd wins with A. No one will play the Q from Q2 or Q7. You can live your dream of SP in this particular hand because you see E holds the Q and therefore he can assume that you followed the club suit according to SP and not had to follow from Qx.

As I told before, you can keep on pimpin in bidding topics or water cooler since no one can prove you wrong. But pimpin ain;t easy when it comes to play and defense of a hand.

[johnu]

rmnka447, on 2017-May-16, 00:43, said:

As the cards lie, the best defense is to duck the ♣ A and have partner give count.

As the cards lie, switching to a diamond always beats 4♠. If you switched the red kings, ducking the first club lets declarer have a winning line. Win heart ace, pitch a heart on ♣K, ♠A, finesse ♦10, later play ♦K to hold diamond losers to 2.

[johnu]

MrAce, on 2017-May-16, 10:56, said:

Oh boy! Now you are stepping into my world. Card play and defense and giving lectures?

I learned from the best

MrAce, on 2017-May-16, 10:56, said:

You are assuming, wrongly, that WEST will always have available spots to suit preference. Assume West played the 5. How on earth East is supposed to know whether you played 5 from 75 or 52 ?
You are assuming , wrongly again, that W knows who has the ♣Q so East will not worry W holding Q2 clubs. All of these pathetic signals make sense only when you see both hands.

I am not assuming anything about spots. You may not be able to read the spots in which case you may have to guess. In the case, ♣2 (which was played in real life) is always the lowest card in the suit, ♣7 is always the highest card left in the suit. On this hand, does East really need to worry about who has ♣Q? You can argue whether a heart or trump lead was better, but a heart lead would have cleared up the heart situation at trick 1.

You call them pathetic signals? Really? There was recently a hand on Bridgewinners where a suit preference signal was given in the trump suit, which was approved of by some top name players. I don't attribute suit preference to most plays, but when it is clear that partner needs to shift, a suit preference signal is usually the most valuable signal.

MrAce, on 2017-May-16, 10:56, said:

As I told before, you can keep on pimpin in bidding topics or water cooler since no one can prove you wrong. But pimpin ain;t easy when it comes to play and defense of a hand.

Good advice for you to take.

[MrAce]

johnu, on 2017-May-16, 12:30, said:

You call them pathetic signals? Really?

I really was trying to be polite when I said pathetic about someone mentioning SP when following a suit where dummy has KJ98x and pd jumped the A. I am still laughing!
What is worst is, not only you did not see it but still can't see it (or pretend like you do not see) that W can not know E has ♣Q so he should read the cards of W as SP. After all everyone on this planet will play the x from Qx and that alone makes x no way a SP!

Please tell us what would East play on first club from

Jx
KQxxxx
Jxx
Q2

Quote

On this hand, does East really need to worry about who has ♣Q?

That is what I am saying, he should worry that the x ♣ pd follows can be from Qx. The only reason that makes you believe E should not worry about this is simple.....because you see E holds it in his hand. You just skip a very important issue that W does not know it.

What would E play from

Jx
Qxxxxx
Kx
Q7

??? Does that mean he is asking for ♥ shift? LOL

More...You know there are times when E may hold AQxx(x) ♣ instead of AQx. Surprise! He may need to know whether declarer played his stiff ♣T or Tx or Txx. Guess what helps your partner? Not the SP!

[RedSpawn]

nige1, on 2017-May-15, 22:51, said:

IMO

• A bid isn't a lie if it's natural, conforms to normal practice, and you haven't agreed anything specific.
• You should allow some lee-way for partner's styles and treatments.
• Both the auction and the play are reasonable
• You can attribute the result to bad luck

Thanks.

[Vampyr]

johnu, on 2017-May-16, 02:40, said:

I originally said that a trump lead could be successful, but it could easily let a hopeless contract make. e.g. Give dummy a 3rd trump for transportation, and change West and North's red suit kings. Now West has KQ 6th of hearts so presumably everybody is happy with opening 2♥. You have to make an opening heart lead or it's too late.

Yes. Lead a trump against a doubled contract or w/e, but you lose a potentially crucial tempo.

[xbabarx]

im conservative and use rule of 2/3/4 with reg partner

[nige1]

MrAce, on 2017-May-16, 10:56, said:

Of course people love to create such signals when they see both hands in forums.

---

IMO, on the actual defence, declarer should probably make 2 overtricks.
On a ♥ lead, however, If Zia were

• West, then he might play ♥Q under dummy's ♥A, at trick 1
• East, then he might read that as signal for ♦ switch, if he wins ♣A, at trick 3
• West, then he might unblock ♦K if his partner switched to ♦A

[johnu]

♣

MrAce, on 2017-May-16, 14:25, said:

What is worst is, not only you did not see it but still can't see it (or pretend like you do not see) that W can not know E has ♣Q so he should read the cards of W as SP. After all everyone on this planet will play the x from Qx and that alone makes x no way a SP!

In my bridge circles, we call that playing an entirely different hand. Everybody on the planet knows that with a potential Qx, you are going to play the x (unless you are making a spectacular falsecard).

MrAce, on 2017-May-16, 14:25, said:

You know there are times when E may hold AQxx(x) ♣ instead of AQx. Surprise! He may need to know whether declarer played his stiff ♣T or Tx or Txx. Guess what helps your partner? Not the SP! [/size][/color]

Well now you are completely changing the hand. Well done. Believe it or not, I may want to adjust the defense based on a completely different hand.

[MrAce]

johnu, on 2017-May-18, 11:30, said:

♣
Well now you are completely changing the hand. Well done. Believe it or not, I may want to adjust the defense based on a completely different hand.

LOL. Thank you! You just admitted what I told at the beginning. Yes you may adjust the defense from E point of view but since W can not see your hand, W will not follow the cards with SP when E wants a SP and will not give count when E wants count. It does not work this way unless you see both hands and/or can read partner's mind! Yes there are a lot of defensive situations and positions where we can vary our carding depending on what pd maybe expecting us to do or what is most useful signal for him, but you do not do this in a long suit declarer is trying to establish because there are so many other factors involved in it, such as you need readable spot cards, mandatory plays (x from Qx), the count of the suit etc etc.

When you see both hands and suggest something, and it works great for this hand but does not in many other hands, then your suggestion is called "resulting".
Even then I could have sympathy to SP in club suit if you commented something like "it is best to agree to the meaning of cards when following the side suit of declarer". You commented as if it is the most priority signal and therefore should be read as SP and the blame goes to E for not reading it this way.

What you suggest is not even playable. Why? Because in a side suit of declarer that he is trying to establish, if you take your time on what to play from 752 or 542 or any xxx they will call TD on you. This is one of the things that most bridge players hate when their opponents do. And how can you possibly solve and decide the position and which card to follow with in a timely manner? They will not allow you to vary your tempo depending on which info you want to send.

[Winstonm]

Phil, on 2017-May-15, 20:05, said:

I'd pass. The ODR just isn't good enough for even a weak 2 in 1st seat.

Redspawn: 1st seat is almost as good a time to preempt as 3rd and should not be mentioned in the same breath as one in 2nd.

Yes, there are three unknowns, two opponents and one partner, so the odds favor the disruption will affect the opps more often that us.

[johnu]

MrAce, on 2017-May-18, 12:09, said:

Yes you may adjust the defense from E point of view but since W can not see your hand, W will not follow the cards with SP when E wants a SP and will not give count when E wants count. It does not work this way unless you see both hands and/or can read partner's mind!

When partner sees you play ♣A and dummy, can you figure out that partner probably doesn't need count in clubs and is going to switch to something? I think it is obvious, you apparently don't. I'll leave it at that.

MrAce, on 2017-May-18, 12:09, said:

What you suggest is not even playable. Why? Because in a side suit of declarer that he is trying to establish, if you take your time on what to play from 752 or 542 or any xxx they will call TD on you. This is one of the things that most bridge players hate when their opponents do. And how can you possibly solve and decide the position and which card to follow with in a timely manner? They will not allow you to vary your tempo depending on which info you want to send.

Well, you are really grasping if you have to get into tempo issues when that was never a consideration in the original problem. Also, this was on BBO so you never know what's going on with delays in play or bids. Even so, that's why third hand is supposed to take their time before they play to the first trick. This particular hand is one of the easier hands for West to figure out what cards need to be played, and try to reconstruct the other 2 hands.

First the bidding. What's going on? Somebody doesn't have their bid, so it is North or East? Who knows?

Spades/trumps played - follow suit
Hearts - Play low on the ace, cover the jack
Diamonds - Play king if partner switches, probably correct if declarer leads from dummy.
Clubs - What signal does partner need if they win the first club? If they win the 2nd club? You barely need to think at trick one if you are always going to give count.