Now that you've all rested from my MSS sequences and, of course, know them by heart, I'll fill in some hand patterns as responder that we haven't discussed yet.
I usually play that 1N 2N is an automatic relay to 3C. Period. Partner can say alert! and bid 3C --that's it. Now, that would cover the club signoffs. Responder passes and has set the contract at 3C.
There is one other important hand pattern that you can describe with this relay: the 4441 pattern game forcing. What you do, is relay opener to 3C then bid your shortness.
1) 1N 2N!, 3C! 3D --shortness in diamonds, thus 4414
2) 1N 2N!, 3C! 3H --shortness in hearts, thus 4144
3) 1N 2N!, 3C! 3S --shortness in spades, thus 1444
4) 1N 2N!, 3C! 3N --shortness in clubs, thus 4441
The questions begs, what does one do with the basic "1N 2N invite to 3 w/out a four card major" sequence? All invitational sequences with or without a four card major go through Stayman. If partner responds to Stayman with a 2D bid, bid 2N. Partner now knows you have an invitational with or without a four card major. Opener doens't really care whether you have one or not since opener has denied a major. If opener bids 2H over your Stayman query, and you have an invitational hand with four spades, you must bid 2S at this point. Opener has not had the opportunity to fess up to a four card spade suit so responder must check back. If the bidding goes 1N 2C, 2H 2S responder has specifically an invitational hand with four spades. Opener can take it from there.
Game forcing hands with minors I handle by going through Stayman also. This means that opener once again does not know whether responder has a major or not when it goes 1N 2C, 2X 3m. Oh well.
Hope this is somewhat helpful. Ask if you have any questions.
Friday, March 27, 2009
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Minor Suit Stayman --Sequences described
The very first convention I learned was Stayman, checking back for majors over nt. You, too no doubt (after blackwood, that is). About 30 master points later, I was asked to learn Minor Suit Stayman. Cool, I had mastered Stayman so figured this was a piece of cake.
As per usual when learning new conventions, some of the memorization of the early sequences is the easy part, i.e. 1N 2S asks opener to bid a four card minor and says nothing about "spades". However, how this query system fits into existing sequences, how the information gleaned is useful in determining the potential of the hand, how to handle pesky opponents and their actions in the bidding. These are all sequella learning points that one needs to discuss, explore and sometimes tweak!
I use MSS in tandem with a convention where 2N relays to 3C to describe various responder hands. Because I don't want to overwhelm this discussion with two new treatments, I'll defer the 1N 2N! discussion to a later blog -suffice it to say we aren't going to cover all the responder type hands one encounters in this treatise when partner opens 1N. Ready, set go!
First off, when responder asks for a four card minor by bidding 2S over 1N, the basic responses are thus:
2N --sorry pard, I have no four card minor
3C--I have a four card club suit (says nothing about strength or suit quality)
3D--I have a four card diamond suit (says nothing about strength or suit quality)
One queries opener for such minor suit holdings with four hand-types that through these sequences are well described to opener.
1) Diamond sign off, responder has long, weak diamonds. After opener bids 3D, pass. If opener bids 3C, bid 3D and opener drops the auction there. If opener bids 2N, bid 3D and opener drops the auction there.
2) Responder has weak 5/5 hands, minors. After opener bids 3C, pass. After opener bids 3D, pass. If opener bids 2N, bid 3C and opener is required to pass or correct depending on which minor suit is better.
3) Responder has a game forcing hand 5/4,5 in minors. After opener bids a minor, confirm the minor and make slam try if appropriate. Otherwise, bid game. If opener bids 2N, responder bids shortness (major). Opener has now described a 5/4,5 game forcing hand with shortness in a major.
4) Responder has a slamish 5422 hand with minors. After opener bids 2N, 3C or 3D bid 3N.
If there is anything I need to add, please let me know. Otherwise, look forward to the next blog piece on 1N 2N sequences.
As per usual when learning new conventions, some of the memorization of the early sequences is the easy part, i.e. 1N 2S asks opener to bid a four card minor and says nothing about "spades". However, how this query system fits into existing sequences, how the information gleaned is useful in determining the potential of the hand, how to handle pesky opponents and their actions in the bidding. These are all sequella learning points that one needs to discuss, explore and sometimes tweak!
I use MSS in tandem with a convention where 2N relays to 3C to describe various responder hands. Because I don't want to overwhelm this discussion with two new treatments, I'll defer the 1N 2N! discussion to a later blog -suffice it to say we aren't going to cover all the responder type hands one encounters in this treatise when partner opens 1N. Ready, set go!
First off, when responder asks for a four card minor by bidding 2S over 1N, the basic responses are thus:
2N --sorry pard, I have no four card minor
3C--I have a four card club suit (says nothing about strength or suit quality)
3D--I have a four card diamond suit (says nothing about strength or suit quality)
One queries opener for such minor suit holdings with four hand-types that through these sequences are well described to opener.
1) Diamond sign off, responder has long, weak diamonds. After opener bids 3D, pass. If opener bids 3C, bid 3D and opener drops the auction there. If opener bids 2N, bid 3D and opener drops the auction there.
2) Responder has weak 5/5 hands, minors. After opener bids 3C, pass. After opener bids 3D, pass. If opener bids 2N, bid 3C and opener is required to pass or correct depending on which minor suit is better.
3) Responder has a game forcing hand 5/4,5 in minors. After opener bids a minor, confirm the minor and make slam try if appropriate. Otherwise, bid game. If opener bids 2N, responder bids shortness (major). Opener has now described a 5/4,5 game forcing hand with shortness in a major.
4) Responder has a slamish 5422 hand with minors. After opener bids 2N, 3C or 3D bid 3N.
If there is anything I need to add, please let me know. Otherwise, look forward to the next blog piece on 1N 2N sequences.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Rule of 11
Hi All,
Most of you are advanced enough to have come across the rule of 11. Surely some of your advanced partners/teammates/mentors have mentioned it once or twice, or you've read about it in some bridge book/column somewhere. As a growing bridge player I ignored this basic analytical tool too long. I, no doubt, was more involved with learning systems, getting to know partners, learning rules and competitive strategies to bother with this basic skill.
I've since lost my naivite and perform that analysis automatically every single time a partner or opponent fesses up to a "fourth best" lead. Here's how it works.
What you do is subtract the spot card that hits the table from the number 11 and it denotes how many outstanding cards there are higher than the spot card that hit the table. So, what you do is count the number of cards in the disclosed hand and your own hand, subtract that number from the result of the difference obtained in the previous subtraction process and voila, you know the remaining number of cards higher than the original led card in the undisclosed hand?
Clear as mud? Let's go through an example. The bidding was simple. 1S 1N!,3N. Cool, the H7 hit the table to this dummy: AJT64,T8,AQ,AK73 and this is my hand. K7,J652,T972,Q42. Immediately, without a moment's hesitation the math starts: 11-7 =4. There are four outstanding cards greater than the 7 in the remaining three hands. I count three that I can see (HT, H8, HJ) which means that the undisclosed hand, my rho has one card higher than a 7. This one is easier than most. Since lefty does not hold AKQ in the suit (or else he/she would not have led fourth best) rho must have one of those cards. I play the h8 and sure enough, rho rises with the Q. I wait for a lower card back than the 7 (or perhaps another suit) but something funny happens. Rho plays the HK. Given the math, he/she should not have that card --that would be two cards higher than the 7 spot which is impossible unless lho did not lead fourth best. Hmmm, I played low again and lefty now produces the 9. So lefty has the 9,7 and didn't lead like he/she had a doubleton. Apparently he/she led from A97 (third best). And so it was, I ducked that next card and the A popped on air.
A couple of hands further, there was a like situation. Uncomfortably, we had hit 3N on these cards and the S7 hit the table. Here's my dummy: 8652,A5,J7,AK875 and here's my hand: AQJ4,K963,QT6,32. Immediately the arithmetic started. 11-7 is four. I see four spades higher than my spot card in the combined dummy and declarer hands: SA, SQ, SJ and S8. Rho followed with the ST a card he/she could not hold if the lead were from "fourth best". I figured it might be a doubleton lead and confidently finessed once again for the SK. Wrong, rho had lead form K973; i.e third best -no wonder the original math did not work.
I encourage you to practice this analytical manipulation so it becomes automatic and part of your tool box whether partner or your opponents lead the suit. Trust me, it gives a huge clue as to the flow of the hand when you can figure it out. Thereby, don't make this an arduous, laborious task when you play. Drill and memorize those two digit combos that add up to 11. 83 74 65 56 47 38; just like your third grade math teacher would have liked. Your brain is needed for much more important calculations during any serious bridge competition.
Good luck, I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Most of you are advanced enough to have come across the rule of 11. Surely some of your advanced partners/teammates/mentors have mentioned it once or twice, or you've read about it in some bridge book/column somewhere. As a growing bridge player I ignored this basic analytical tool too long. I, no doubt, was more involved with learning systems, getting to know partners, learning rules and competitive strategies to bother with this basic skill.
I've since lost my naivite and perform that analysis automatically every single time a partner or opponent fesses up to a "fourth best" lead. Here's how it works.
What you do is subtract the spot card that hits the table from the number 11 and it denotes how many outstanding cards there are higher than the spot card that hit the table. So, what you do is count the number of cards in the disclosed hand and your own hand, subtract that number from the result of the difference obtained in the previous subtraction process and voila, you know the remaining number of cards higher than the original led card in the undisclosed hand?
Clear as mud? Let's go through an example. The bidding was simple. 1S 1N!,3N. Cool, the H7 hit the table to this dummy: AJT64,T8,AQ,AK73 and this is my hand. K7,J652,T972,Q42. Immediately, without a moment's hesitation the math starts: 11-7 =4. There are four outstanding cards greater than the 7 in the remaining three hands. I count three that I can see (HT, H8, HJ) which means that the undisclosed hand, my rho has one card higher than a 7. This one is easier than most. Since lefty does not hold AKQ in the suit (or else he/she would not have led fourth best) rho must have one of those cards. I play the h8 and sure enough, rho rises with the Q. I wait for a lower card back than the 7 (or perhaps another suit) but something funny happens. Rho plays the HK. Given the math, he/she should not have that card --that would be two cards higher than the 7 spot which is impossible unless lho did not lead fourth best. Hmmm, I played low again and lefty now produces the 9. So lefty has the 9,7 and didn't lead like he/she had a doubleton. Apparently he/she led from A97 (third best). And so it was, I ducked that next card and the A popped on air.
A couple of hands further, there was a like situation. Uncomfortably, we had hit 3N on these cards and the S7 hit the table. Here's my dummy: 8652,A5,J7,AK875 and here's my hand: AQJ4,K963,QT6,32. Immediately the arithmetic started. 11-7 is four. I see four spades higher than my spot card in the combined dummy and declarer hands: SA, SQ, SJ and S8. Rho followed with the ST a card he/she could not hold if the lead were from "fourth best". I figured it might be a doubleton lead and confidently finessed once again for the SK. Wrong, rho had lead form K973; i.e third best -no wonder the original math did not work.
I encourage you to practice this analytical manipulation so it becomes automatic and part of your tool box whether partner or your opponents lead the suit. Trust me, it gives a huge clue as to the flow of the hand when you can figure it out. Thereby, don't make this an arduous, laborious task when you play. Drill and memorize those two digit combos that add up to 11. 83 74 65 56 47 38; just like your third grade math teacher would have liked. Your brain is needed for much more important calculations during any serious bridge competition.
Good luck, I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)