[Tramticket]

MrAce, on 2017-July-19, 16:43, said:

http://bridgewinners...m-2-qpe3zvvreu/

Thanks for setting this up. Interesting results.

[Zelandakh]

I have fairly a strong view that passing this hand is a mistake. First of all we have a partial fit for partner, so we should not be scared of the 2 level. We should certainly not be happy to pass it out if the bidding came back to us at 2♦ by them. It would be different with heart shortage where we would be fearing a misfit but with at worst a 5-2 fit and quite possibly a 6-2 or 4-4 or better?

Of course we could back in with a double but to me, quite aside from misleading partner about our strength, that whole approach is wrong. Without shape in competition we should describe our hand and shut up. In converse to some points made above about preferring 5 spades for bidding immediately, I would far rather have something like 5215 for the pass and double approach. The extra shape protects us to some extent from the risk of acting later and the chances of collecting a juicy penalty if it is a misfit are much higher.

In fact I think 1♠ is correct even if we are playing very light openers and frequent psyches in third seat. I would be disappointed as the 1♥ opener if partner gave them an easy ride after a well-timed psyche.

More generally, I already touched on what I consider some competitive fundamentals but my view on this auction, as indeed for most competitive situations, is to consider how the auction is likely to proceed and try to arrange it that we are in a good place to make decisions while making life as awkward as possible for the opps. Passing fails on both counts - we end up in a situation where we have not shown our values or shape whatsoever to help partner decide and eventually will be making the last guess in a situation where it might be dangerous to act, while at the same time the opps will have no difficulty in finding their best strain at a low level, or indeed investigating game if partner has chosen to psyche.

What would perhaps be interesting is if the poll split the passers into those that want to pass throughout regardless and those that would choose to double back in or bid 2♥ on the next round under the right circumstances. No doubt the pass-passers have some good logic as to why they could never miss a game - presumably Opener will for them always act with extras even without shape in such a way as to differentiate from normal competition. Similarly those taking the pass-act course will probably not see any serious risk in the delayed action. In the real world though, the downside of responding 1♠ is so much less than that of the alternatives that I am surprised the split is so close. I suspect the reason is the first few posts suggesting that Responder should have a 5th spade for 1♠ - it is remarkable how often posters are influenced by the initial responses in a thread unless a "big hitter" (Justin, Mike, Frances, etc) comes along and provides an alternative viewpoint.

[Cyberyeti]

What is partner supposed to do with some 35(32) 11-12 count if you bid 1♠ and next hand bids 2m ? if you have 5 spades, he wants to support, if you have 4, you can be going seriously minus on any action.

[fromageGB]

Cyberyeti, on 2017-July-20, 04:47, said:

What is partner supposed to do with some 35(32) 11-12 count if you bid 1♠ and next hand bids 2m ? if you have 5 spades, he wants to support, if you have 4, you can be going seriously minus on any action.

Perhaps we could consider the hand if South passed in place of that double. If you reply 1♠ and next hand bids 2m, what is partner supposed to do with some 35(32) 11-12 count? If you have 5 spades, he wants to support, while if you have 4, you can be going seriously minus on any action.

I think this seems to be making a case for a Kaplan inversion ...

[Zelandakh]

fromageGB, on 2017-July-20, 05:08, said:

Perhaps we could consider the hand if South passed in place of that double. If you reply 1♠ and next hand bids 2m, what is partner supposed to do with some 35(32) 11-12 count?

I imagine they would have opened 1NT given that the OP specified a weak NT system.

If it were a strong NT system then presumably Opener (support) doubles and Responder would complete the hand description with 2♥. We are certainly guessing less here than the corresponding auction starting with pass, even if this contract were to end up going down.

[Cyberyeti]

Zelandakh, on 2017-July-20, 06:31, said:

I imagine they would have opened 1NT given that the OP specified a weak NT system.

If it were a strong NT system then presumably Opener (support) doubles and Responder would complete the hand description with 2♥. We are certainly guessing less here than the corresponding auction starting with pass, even if this contract were to end up going down.

Not everybody opens 1N with 5M(332) although I think it's a good idea to do so

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2017-July-20, 06:50, said:

Not everybody opens 1N with 5M(332) although I think it's a good idea to do so

We would have opened 1NT with this shape. Partner actually held a 3541 shape.

[Tramticket]

I was interested in the general principles rather than the specific hand. Nevertheless, for those interested, the hand was:

---

[Cyberyeti]

Move 1-2 honours from S to N so N bids 2♣ and you can see the problem, what does E do ? my guess is he bids 2♠ and this is grim if they lead trumps, but you're onto a loser if he does anything other than pass.

[MrAce]

Cyberyeti, on 2017-July-20, 07:08, said:

Move 1-2 honours from S to N so N bids 2♣ and you can see the problem, what does E do ? my guess is he bids 2♠ and this is grim if they lead trumps, but you're onto a loser if he does anything other than pass.

LOL typical Cyber response! This is not correct. You are resulting as usual. Even then you are wrong. N will be more likely to bid NT before he bids clubs with some more hcps.

But even if he bids clubs, supp DBL and you play 2 ♠, if they lead trumps down -2 for -200, if not down 1 for -100,
2 ♣ scores 9 tricks for -110

With the original hand S should have bid 1 NT anyway over 1♠, then N bids 2♣ for +110 or leaves to 1 NT for +90 both scoring better than -80. 1 ♠ going down on one lead? Cyber always finds it!

As EW, one can only be happy for being left to play 1♠. Make pd hold 4 clubs and stiff ♦ instead and you are in great shape.

Moral side of the story is, some of you guys are making too many predictions at very low level and hiding your legit values for a response. Outcome will be random with so many variables. Maybe opener would bid 2 NT and you would raise to 3 and 1♠ bid would be the winning bid particularly if it avoided a spade lead. Or Give pd the QJ of ♥ and only contract making would be 2♠, not 2♥. Did I know this when bidding 1♠? Hell no, but you are commenting as if you have a talent to see these when passing. Stop resulting, MikeH wrote many posts about your resulting and you still do the same thing on almost every hand posted here.

[nige1]

Tramticket, on 2017-July-17, 02:53, said:

I'm interested in understanding the bidding approach after opponents make a take-out double. Do you vary responses? Does a change of suit require a fifth card / additional strength? Do you pass marginal hands? This hand started the discussion. But I am interested in your views more generally.

---

I rank

• Pass = NAT. Nothing sensible to say. LHO's double seems to have relieved you of the obligation to bid 1♠, a bid of doubtful merit. A pass is unlikely to end the auction but if it does, so what?
• 1♠ = NAT. The expert choice according to Mr Ace's poll. The fact that you have some values might be of interest to partner. Against that, you have a poor ♠ suit that you don't want led. And you don't want to hear a support double (or a raise on fewer than 4).
• 1N = NAT.
• 2♣ = NAT but partner will expect more ♣s.

[MrAce]

nige1, on 2017-July-20, 09:56, said:

I rank

1♠ = NAT. The expert choice according to Mr Ace's poll. The fact that you have some values might be of interest to partner. Against that, you have a poor ♠ suit that you don't want ;led. And you don't want to hear a support double (or a raise on fewer than 4)

I am asking again, one more time, everyone making this "expert wannabe comment" on lead showing but they conveniently skipping this question; in which bridge book and/or publication have you guys read something, if anything, that suggests 1 level responses to an opening, with or without the double, should have "lead directing" function? Please tell me or show me!

Having poor spades and/or lead directing function and/or pd opening in 3rd seat, are these enough excuses not to bid your hand? Not like you are jumping to 2-3-4 levels! You are bidding at 1 level ffs with a very legit hand!

[nige1]

MrAce, on 2017-July-20, 10:01, said:

I am asking again, one more time, everyone making this "expert wannabe comment" on lead showing but they conveniently skipping this question; in which bridge book and/or publication have you guys read something, if anything, that suggests 1 level responses to an opening, with or without the double, should have "lead directing" function? Please tell me or show me! Having poor spades and/or lead directing function and/or pd opening in 3rd seat, are these enough excuses not to bid your hand? Not like you are jumping to 2-3-4 levels! You are bidding at 1 level ffs with a very legit hand!

I concede that 1♠ is the expert choice according to Mr Ace and his BridgeWinners poll. Nevertheless, other things being equal, we ordinary players often lead partner's bid suit, as do many experts. Please note that I'm not accusing Mr Ace of this habit.

[MrAce]

nige1, on 2017-July-20, 10:43, said:

I concede that 1♠ was the expert choice according to Mr Ace and his BridgeWinners poll. Nevertheless, other things being equal, we ordinary player often lead partner's bid suit, as do many experts. Please note that I'm not accusing Mr Ace of this habit.

I do not say it is expert choice. All I am having hard time to understand is that "lead directing function of a 1 level response!" I mean look if you had Txxxx spade you would all bid 1 ♠ and not even mention the lead directing values of this suit, no?

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2017-July-20, 09:53, said:

LOL typical Cyber response! This is not correct. You are resulting as usual. Even then you are wrong. N will be more likely to bid NT before he bids clubs with some more hcps.

I was thinking a 6 count rather than the 8 count that might bid 1N.

Quote

But even if he bids clubs, supp DBL and you play 2 ♠, if they lead trumps down -2 for -200, if not down 1 for -100,
2 ♣ scores 9 tricks for -110

I didn't see form of scoring, but -200 is death at pairs, also you probably actually play 2♥ after the support X, not sure how that goes, but prob not well.

Quote

With the original hand S should have bid 1 NT anyway over 1♠then N bids 2♣ for +110 or leaves to 1 NT for +90 both scoring better than -80.

Agreed.

Quote

1 ♠ going down on one lead? Cyber always finds it!

I find the spade against 2♠, it's harder against 1.

[MrAce]

Cyberyeti, on 2017-July-20, 11:08, said:

I didn't see form of scoring, but -200 is death at pairs, also you probably actually play 2♥ after the support X, not sure how that goes, but prob not well.

They probably play 2♠. Opener would not like playing in 2 ♥ when pd probably have only 2 card support and ruffing from the long trumps. But yeah they may still end up playing 2♥. All vary when pd has 3 card support to spades. When he has 2 or 4 card spades odds change a lot. You are in good shape because you have a very legit 7 hcp responding hand (AK in one suit) in most cases. Club shortness instead of diamond is kinda unlucky and changes the total number of available tricks a lot.

[nige1]

MrAce, on 2017-July-20, 10:59, said:

I do not say it is expert choice. All I am having hard time to understand is that "lead directing function of a 1 level response!" I mean look if you had Txxxx spade you would all bid 1 ♠ and not even mention the lead directing values of this suit, no?

Mr Ace understands perfectly well Players tend to lead partner's bid suit.

Of course, in spite of this, for valid reasons, we all bid bad suits.

That 1♠ is the expert choice is my conclusion from Mr Ace's poll.

But in the OP context, for various reasons, including dislike of the lead, Pass seems a sensible alternative to some of us.

[MrAce]

nige1, on 2017-July-20, 11:50, said:

Mr Ace understands perfectly well Players tend to lead partner's bid suit.

Of course, in spite of this, for valid reasons, we all bid bad suits.

That 1♠ is the expert choice is my conclusion from Mr Ace's poll.

But in the OP context, for various reasons, including dislike of the lead, Pass seems a sensible alternative to some of us.

Pass is reasonable choice, no doubt, but not for some of the reasons people mentioned here. Bidding takes pressure off of the N player is a good reason for passing and if he bids 2♦ we have an easy balancing double IMO. Lead directing aspect or missing the 5th spade are not valid reasons enough to pass a very legit responding hand for me.

EDIT: FWIW, I have to admit the top class players are not in same page with this hand either. You see in the poll all famous names bid 1 ♠ but I also checked with some world class players due to my friendship on face book, they certainly want to have nothing to do with 1♠ bid to my surprise. Tony Forester and David Gold for example. Also Zia Mahmood hates 1♠ bid here according to David. While some very strong names from Italy says 1 ♠ is their choice. But as I said, those who hate 1 ♠ do not hate because of missing the 5th spade and/or lead directing aspects of this bid.

[The_Badger]

MrAce, on 2017-July-20, 11:55, said:

EDIT: FWIW, I have to admit the top class players are not in same page with this hand either. You see in the poll all famous names bid 1 ♠ but I also checked with some world class players due to my friendship on face book, they certainly want to have nothing to do with 1♠ bid to my surprise. Tony Forester and David Gold for example. Also Zia Mahmood hates 1♠ bid here according to David. While some very strong names from Italy says 1 ♠ is their choice. But as I said, those who hate 1 ♠ do not hate because of missing the 5th spade and/or lead directing aspects of this bid.

First of all thank you Tramticket for posting this interesting hand, and thanks to Timo (MrAce) for finding out how expert (world class) players think, and thanks to everyone who got involved. This is what the BBO discussion forums are all about: constructive analysis.

As I said with a different hand last week, there is merit in both approaches. I'm not going to gloat that the likes of Zia Mahmood, David Gold or Tony Forrester have come down on the side of the 'Passers' because there are many other experts who rightly believe that 1♠ is the right bid. It's a personal choice.

There a lots of factors to take into account, and I think that most bases have been covered here now. On some days Pass will be the right bid, on others 1♠. Exchange the ♣ and ♠ suits on the hand, and many (perhaps nearly all) of the Passers would bid 1♠ - that's for certain, me included.

[helene_t]

1♠ obviously isn't forcing by a passed hand. Not that this matters so much: I could still have 11 points so partner will bid again most of the time.

Transfers are fine but don't make much of a difference on this hand. The fact that we are a passed hand makes transfers less useful as we don't need methods to show strong hands.

I pass. 1♠ is ok - it doesn't promise a good suit and it doesn't promise 5. However, here we have neither, and we are vulnerable.