So you've agreed to play "attitude on opening lead". It's a pretty standard treament and most experts can field it even though it may not be their preferred method. I play nothing else, but know that even this standard treatment takes a lot of work.
The comments that follow refer to standard carding against suit contracts. Upside down carding is relatively the same with some minor twists.
So, positive attitude means you want the suit continued, and you "echo" with your suit. Holding 87 and wanting a ruff, or not wanting a shift, you play 8 followed by the 7. If you do not want a ruff, there is no reason to "echo" in the suit. Ask for a switch by playing the 7. If you wish the suit continued and you hold 973. Play the 7 (continue) then play the 9 --now switch.
As per usual in bridge when it concerns carding, the plot thickens fast.
Suppose you hold Ax, Kx, Qx, KQ, or QJ. Now what.
With Ax, you should only be concerned about overtakingthe K --should you overtake and ask for a ruff by returning your small card? Usually that is a good idea. However if you're staring at Jxxx in the dummy and you have a natural trump trick, why would you overtake and ask for a ruff. That might be crashing your tricks in order to set up dummy's suit.
The general principle with Kx and Qx is that one generally should not signal with an honor if there is a reasonable chance that it is needed for tricktaking purposes, i.e., if playing the honor is likely to reduce the number of tricks that you and partner can take.
So, if you hold Kx and partner leads the A, play K only when the K ranks to block the cashing tricks. You don't want to be stuck with Kx in your hand and let declarer run the rest of the tricks. Consider a hand where partner shows 5 good spades and is unlikely to have a quick side entry (for example, dummy has 1st round control of the other suits) and dummy has xxx in spades and top cards in another suit that are likely to provide quick pitches. Or perhaps you are defending 5m at IMPs and can tell that the only tricks for the defense are likely to be in spades. Now it might well be right to play K from Kx so hopefully the defense can cash 3 quick tricks, which would be impossible if one held onto the K.
If you don't see that happening, play low and let partner figure it out. If you pound the K in situations where blocking and cashing are not issues, partner is going to think you have a singleton and underlead. Oooops.
Playing the Q on an opening lead of A or K usually promises a singleton or the J.
So unless you're dire for something to happen, play low from Qx. Partner will underlead if he/she wants you in for a timely return through declarer's values. He/she thinks you hold the J with your Q, or that your Q is singleton.
Most folks echo with Jx if they wish to show partner a doubleton or want a ruff for some reason. Jx's usually don't compress tricks if the J is blown on another top honor. Playing the J from Jx would be appropriate if one wants the suit continued for a ruff, or in a count situation, if playing standard carding. But if one does not want to ruff (from one's natural trump trick, perhaps) or if partner leads the K showing the Q and not the A, and dummy has 10xx, then generally one should not play the J from Jx, because it will cost a trick.
Hope this is helpful. Ask if you have questions.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Monday, September 27, 2010
Two Level Overcalls--Discipline
Hi Folks,
One of our own is frustrated without having partnership discussions about two level overcalls. If you don't set parameters around those bids, it's hard to engage in constructive bidding, and advances may be much of a "potuck" affair. A ZERO in the making, I say.
I would be happy to give you some parameters my experts partners and I use. It might help if you adhere to some of these guidelines.
First, repeat after me, "If you make a two level overcall you have a good suit." (goes for one level overcalls, too actually). Then repeat after me again. "I will not make a two level overcall w/out a good suit".
Ok, so let's define the qualities of a "good suit". I would much rather make a two level overcall on QJT987 than AK543. Why is this? If the layout is foul, one would much rather defend with QJT93 in the suit than AKxx(x). Why is this? Prime cards help bring in no trump contracts and stop quick losers in opponent's suits playing your contracts. However, QJT93 are purely defensive cards. The T for example will be a cool defensive trick but it will do precious little in an opponent's offensive contract. It's like a "gift" from the bridge gods on D; as good as an ace. Value solid intermediate cards and honors when you overcall and be cautious about suits like AJ8532. Yuck.
Remember, when you're making a two level overcall in direct seat you are launching in an "non-fitting" auction where no one has, as of yet, claimed a majority of the points. It may just be that your "fit" is with your lho and he/she may have the remainder of the deck. This is why you need to be relatively solid. I say have this:
1) 10 points non vul
2) Opening hand with six card suit vul.
3) And all together now: "A good suit".
If you have less than that and your partnership and/or teammship gets in trouble, you have no one to blame but yourself. And if partner makes a reasonable raise and you still get in trouble, once again, the blame rests with the dubious overcall.
Sometimes you hear "one needs to stretch bidding 2C over 1D to make it hard for opponents to find their 4/4 major fits". What are you going to do with A54,QJT9,JT98,Q3 when the auction goes 1D (2c)?
"Stretching" is being at the bottom end of the overcall ranges.
Sometimes folks forget this fact. This might not be the last time you get in the auction. Perhaps if you lay quiet now, you know you'll belong in the auction after the opponents have settled in a low level fit aution. Now you can balance and tell partner volumes about your hand due to the delayed entry
Hope this helps.
One of our own is frustrated without having partnership discussions about two level overcalls. If you don't set parameters around those bids, it's hard to engage in constructive bidding, and advances may be much of a "potuck" affair. A ZERO in the making, I say.
I would be happy to give you some parameters my experts partners and I use. It might help if you adhere to some of these guidelines.
First, repeat after me, "If you make a two level overcall you have a good suit." (goes for one level overcalls, too actually). Then repeat after me again. "I will not make a two level overcall w/out a good suit".
Ok, so let's define the qualities of a "good suit". I would much rather make a two level overcall on QJT987 than AK543. Why is this? If the layout is foul, one would much rather defend with QJT93 in the suit than AKxx(x). Why is this? Prime cards help bring in no trump contracts and stop quick losers in opponent's suits playing your contracts. However, QJT93 are purely defensive cards. The T for example will be a cool defensive trick but it will do precious little in an opponent's offensive contract. It's like a "gift" from the bridge gods on D; as good as an ace. Value solid intermediate cards and honors when you overcall and be cautious about suits like AJ8532. Yuck.
Remember, when you're making a two level overcall in direct seat you are launching in an "non-fitting" auction where no one has, as of yet, claimed a majority of the points. It may just be that your "fit" is with your lho and he/she may have the remainder of the deck. This is why you need to be relatively solid. I say have this:
1) 10 points non vul
2) Opening hand with six card suit vul.
3) And all together now: "A good suit".
If you have less than that and your partnership and/or teammship gets in trouble, you have no one to blame but yourself. And if partner makes a reasonable raise and you still get in trouble, once again, the blame rests with the dubious overcall.
Sometimes you hear "one needs to stretch bidding 2C over 1D to make it hard for opponents to find their 4/4 major fits". What are you going to do with A54,QJT9,JT98,Q3 when the auction goes 1D (2c)?
"Stretching" is being at the bottom end of the overcall ranges.
Sometimes folks forget this fact. This might not be the last time you get in the auction. Perhaps if you lay quiet now, you know you'll belong in the auction after the opponents have settled in a low level fit aution. Now you can balance and tell partner volumes about your hand due to the delayed entry
Hope this helps.
Monday, August 16, 2010
Maximal Doubles-A Discussion
Hi all,
Doubles, man their multi-facited purposes never quit, do they? We have doubles
that in some sequences actually mean "penalty" you're not making this --or at least not with overtricks :). Some doubles are "take out" meaning "opponents are attempting to land in a suit, or have landed in a suit fit, perhaps we can find our fit this way". There are those doubles that are lead direct and control showing.
However, there is one double that my advanced partnerships use routinely having a meaning different from all of the above--this double (maximal) means "game try, are you at the max or min of your limited bid?"
These maximal double sequences are mostly used over major suit raises when the opponents have taken away a level of bidding under your suit so that natural suit-asking game tries are not possible.
For example. You bid 1S on AKxxx,A,QJTxx,xx. Lefty bids 2H and partner raises, 2S. Rho bids 3H and now what. Wouldn't you like to make a 3D game try? Well, if you try that you're going to get a director call. 3D is below 3H so instead of using the double for penalty in this sequence, we use the double as an "all purpose game try".
I play these sequences with most of my established partnerships but usually I have brief discussion about whether maximal doubles are on if the opponents have not bid and raised their suit. For example, has the auction gone 1S 2S (3H)? or 1S (2H) 2S (3H)? Some of my partnerships play maximal doubles in the latter situation and not the first. Be on the same page, discuss. If not, get ready for -730 at imps. Don't ask me how I know :-).
If you agree to play maximal doubles, remember they are usually "on" in overcall situations also i.e. 1D (1H) 2D (2H), 3D. Now X is not penalty of diamonds but an all purpose game try in hearts. Make sense?
Hope this is helpful, please ask if you have further questions.
Doubles, man their multi-facited purposes never quit, do they? We have doubles
that in some sequences actually mean "penalty" you're not making this --or at least not with overtricks :). Some doubles are "take out" meaning "opponents are attempting to land in a suit, or have landed in a suit fit, perhaps we can find our fit this way". There are those doubles that are lead direct and control showing.
However, there is one double that my advanced partnerships use routinely having a meaning different from all of the above--this double (maximal) means "game try, are you at the max or min of your limited bid?"
These maximal double sequences are mostly used over major suit raises when the opponents have taken away a level of bidding under your suit so that natural suit-asking game tries are not possible.
For example. You bid 1S on AKxxx,A,QJTxx,xx. Lefty bids 2H and partner raises, 2S. Rho bids 3H and now what. Wouldn't you like to make a 3D game try? Well, if you try that you're going to get a director call. 3D is below 3H so instead of using the double for penalty in this sequence, we use the double as an "all purpose game try".
I play these sequences with most of my established partnerships but usually I have brief discussion about whether maximal doubles are on if the opponents have not bid and raised their suit. For example, has the auction gone 1S 2S (3H)? or 1S (2H) 2S (3H)? Some of my partnerships play maximal doubles in the latter situation and not the first. Be on the same page, discuss. If not, get ready for -730 at imps. Don't ask me how I know :-).
If you agree to play maximal doubles, remember they are usually "on" in overcall situations also i.e. 1D (1H) 2D (2H), 3D. Now X is not penalty of diamonds but an all purpose game try in hearts. Make sense?
Hope this is helpful, please ask if you have further questions.
Friday, July 30, 2010
A Ruse is Sometimes Very Effective
Have you ever heard the phrase. "Let the opponents make the last guess". It is usually uttered when one side has a contract option with power, and the other side has a save option. You are to continue preempting to the level where you don't know if their contract is making or not. Hey, if you don't know, perhaps they don't know either.
I fielded an interesting hand at the Eastside bridge club the other day where I wanted to invoke this practice. NV vs Vul (MP) my left hand opponent started the bidding with 1D. My partner jumped right in there with 3S (preemptive) and right hand opponent bid 4C freely. Holding xxx,Jxxxxx,QJ,xx it didn't take a trip to A land to figure out that the opponents were on for slam. If I were to make the opponents truly have the last guess, I would bid 6S, knowing full well that 6m is makable but not being sure whether 7m is. The "last guess" theory is.........if I don't know, maybe the opponents don't know either.
When I approached my mentors with this hand, they, as usual had a lot of other thoughts to share as well.
In this kind of situation, "last guess theory" is not nearly as important as your attempt to take away their machinery. You may know 6m is on, but if you take away their opportunity to find even that and they land in 5m -- look how happy you will be. Remember, offensively your spade tricks are limited and even a 5S save may go for more than 5m.
Here are their options! pick your favorite.
1) Bid 4S -- hides the degree of your fit and lack of defensive potential. Somebody will bid 5m and they can languash there. Also takes a way a 4S Q bid often use as a power raise.
2) X. Who knows, they may play 4CX when they're on for six. (Look at the score cards, you just got a top). If they XX -- "correct" to 4S and see what happens.
3) Bid 4N. This takes away the opponent's aces asking bid. You can always land safely in 5S no matter what the response of your partner is to this seemingly blackwood auction, and the opponents are now thinking you're stopping short of slam based on some values.
4) Bid 5S. You might buy it there X'd when they're on for six or seven.
It is very important to know who your opponents are when you try to guage the liklihood of success of each of these options. The more sophisticated the partnership, the more a Q bid will mean, the more a 4N bid will mean, the more forcing passes will have meaning. And trust me, the real pros won't get fooled by your X at all! That's the way they are!!
Hope this has been helpful!
I fielded an interesting hand at the Eastside bridge club the other day where I wanted to invoke this practice. NV vs Vul (MP) my left hand opponent started the bidding with 1D. My partner jumped right in there with 3S (preemptive) and right hand opponent bid 4C freely. Holding xxx,Jxxxxx,QJ,xx it didn't take a trip to A land to figure out that the opponents were on for slam. If I were to make the opponents truly have the last guess, I would bid 6S, knowing full well that 6m is makable but not being sure whether 7m is. The "last guess" theory is.........if I don't know, maybe the opponents don't know either.
When I approached my mentors with this hand, they, as usual had a lot of other thoughts to share as well.
In this kind of situation, "last guess theory" is not nearly as important as your attempt to take away their machinery. You may know 6m is on, but if you take away their opportunity to find even that and they land in 5m -- look how happy you will be. Remember, offensively your spade tricks are limited and even a 5S save may go for more than 5m.
Here are their options! pick your favorite.
1) Bid 4S -- hides the degree of your fit and lack of defensive potential. Somebody will bid 5m and they can languash there. Also takes a way a 4S Q bid often use as a power raise.
2) X. Who knows, they may play 4CX when they're on for six. (Look at the score cards, you just got a top). If they XX -- "correct" to 4S and see what happens.
3) Bid 4N. This takes away the opponent's aces asking bid. You can always land safely in 5S no matter what the response of your partner is to this seemingly blackwood auction, and the opponents are now thinking you're stopping short of slam based on some values.
4) Bid 5S. You might buy it there X'd when they're on for six or seven.
It is very important to know who your opponents are when you try to guage the liklihood of success of each of these options. The more sophisticated the partnership, the more a Q bid will mean, the more a 4N bid will mean, the more forcing passes will have meaning. And trust me, the real pros won't get fooled by your X at all! That's the way they are!!
Hope this has been helpful!
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Quantitative Bids...the ins and outs
Cool, one of the first things one learns in beginning bridge days is that there is this neat convention where 4N “asks for aces”. Pretty nifty!! That way you can figure out whether you can take 12/13 tricks or less than that.
However, the plot thickens quickly when someone informs you that over nt, this bid is meant as “quantitative”. Quantitative means it's an inquiry about how much you have in overall values, as opposed to an inquiry about something specific, like number of key cards. So, confusion often arises as to when a 4N bid is “quantitative" or “ace asking”.
Here’s my slant on the subject.
When opener denotes a balanced hand that has a range, we use 4N as an asking bid for slam, thus quantitative. There are lots of auctions where opener denotes a balanced NT hand of some sort with specific ranges:
Examples:
1N (15-17) usually
1C 1D, 1N (12-14) usually
2N (20-21) usually
2C 2D, 2N (22-24) usually
4N over these types of auctions asks opener to accept a slam invite with a max or pass the invite for a 4N contract.
The auction after a quantitative bid are not relegatedto NT contracts, however. Often folks will play them “Baron” style which means one will accept the slam invitation by bidding a four card minor at the five level. The hand may fit better in a 4/4 minor fit for 12 tricks rather than NT. Thus: 1N 4N, 5C.
One can also accept the slam invitation by bidding six of a minor. This denotes a five card suit or better and request responder to agree to the minor suit slam, or correct back to NT. Thus 1N 4N, 6C.
In order to ask for aces, we use 4C Gerber replacing the traditional 4N bid. This serves the purpose of keeping many nt auctions lower and the ability to bail at 4N when that seems right.
Quantitative bids are also often used in minor suit auctions once the contract has settled in 3N. Now 4N is a “slam ask” for strength.
Example:
1S 2C, 3C 3N, 4N.
Since it’s usually wrong to take 3N out to 4m, 4m in this auction now says “I’m interested in slam, but not NT yet. Please start Q bidding if you accept, bid 4N sign off if you don’t. In these type auctions, 4N is showing as much as asking--i.e., it says "I have substantially more than I have shown from my prior actions, but not enough to drive to slam, so act accordingly
In order to divine whether 4N is ace asking or quantitative one might ask what a 4m bid would mean at the same point of the auction. If this bid is ace asking or a suggestion to start Q bidding, then 4N is probably quantitative. That is a round about way of going at it, but it might help to think that way when you’re dead tired in the finals of the Spingold and about 100 different notions are taxing your brain –mostly how to win the thing!
However, the plot thickens quickly when someone informs you that over nt, this bid is meant as “quantitative”. Quantitative means it's an inquiry about how much you have in overall values, as opposed to an inquiry about something specific, like number of key cards. So, confusion often arises as to when a 4N bid is “quantitative" or “ace asking”.
Here’s my slant on the subject.
When opener denotes a balanced hand that has a range, we use 4N as an asking bid for slam, thus quantitative. There are lots of auctions where opener denotes a balanced NT hand of some sort with specific ranges:
Examples:
1N (15-17) usually
1C 1D, 1N (12-14) usually
2N (20-21) usually
2C 2D, 2N (22-24) usually
4N over these types of auctions asks opener to accept a slam invite with a max or pass the invite for a 4N contract.
The auction after a quantitative bid are not relegatedto NT contracts, however. Often folks will play them “Baron” style which means one will accept the slam invitation by bidding a four card minor at the five level. The hand may fit better in a 4/4 minor fit for 12 tricks rather than NT. Thus: 1N 4N, 5C.
One can also accept the slam invitation by bidding six of a minor. This denotes a five card suit or better and request responder to agree to the minor suit slam, or correct back to NT. Thus 1N 4N, 6C.
In order to ask for aces, we use 4C Gerber replacing the traditional 4N bid. This serves the purpose of keeping many nt auctions lower and the ability to bail at 4N when that seems right.
Quantitative bids are also often used in minor suit auctions once the contract has settled in 3N. Now 4N is a “slam ask” for strength.
Example:
1S 2C, 3C 3N, 4N.
Since it’s usually wrong to take 3N out to 4m, 4m in this auction now says “I’m interested in slam, but not NT yet. Please start Q bidding if you accept, bid 4N sign off if you don’t. In these type auctions, 4N is showing as much as asking--i.e., it says "I have substantially more than I have shown from my prior actions, but not enough to drive to slam, so act accordingly
In order to divine whether 4N is ace asking or quantitative one might ask what a 4m bid would mean at the same point of the auction. If this bid is ace asking or a suggestion to start Q bidding, then 4N is probably quantitative. That is a round about way of going at it, but it might help to think that way when you’re dead tired in the finals of the Spingold and about 100 different notions are taxing your brain –mostly how to win the thing!
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Competing over weak NT..Clarify your methods!
Ahhh yes it wasn't too many masterpoints ago when I and my then-regular partner would sit at the table against opponents with weak nt methods and were almost guaranteed a zero. The solution to that was to practice those methods on our own. 12-14 nt promptly put on our card. We got our undeserved tops in limited fields but wo! be the partnership, got a significant amount of zeros when smacked with flight A competition.
The moral of this story is: Get your defense ready over weak NT.
1) What artificial methods you use over weak nt is immaterial. I highly recommend you preserve the X for penalty, however with whatever methods you use. If, by opening a weak nt in front of you, opps take away your 1S bid on AKJT,Kxx,Qxxx,xx then at least allow them the chance to go for a telephone number if it's right. In most of my partnerships, all X's force to our 2S level or X them off for penalty.
A fairly popular method is to play all X's after a direct X of a weak nt are take out until one pass has been passed for penalty, i.e. (1N) X starts forcing sequences. When a X has been passed for penalty all subsequent X's are penalty should the opponents try further runouts to other suits.
Example: (1N) X (2H) X the second X is TO of hearts
Example: (1N) X (2H) P (the pass is forcing here and denies a TOX of hearts)
Example: (1N) X (2D) X, (P) P (2H) X pass is penalty since partner already wanted to X diamonds by passing your TOX.
This allows safe passes when it's right and forces auctions at the appropriate times. It takes a little bit of work (and some zeros) before this is adequately executed, but I find the work worth it.
2) Weak nt are considered "preemptive" which means you don't preempt over a preempt. Jumps (at least at the three level) are strong. (1N) 3D is a hand akin to a 1D 1M, 3D auction.
3) The idea of interference over strong NT is to confuse the issue and land in a safe part score. Constructive bidding methods are still needed over weak nt to find your own games. Compete with a slightly better than opening hand. If your hand is highly distributional but weak, you may have a chance to come in later.
4) Constructive sequences are still needed by unpassed hands over their artificial advances. Therefor 1N 2C (X) should be "like hand or strong hand" not lead direct for clubs. In case their advance is game forcing i.e. 1N 2D (gf Stayman) revert back to lead directing X's.
This will give you a healthy start as to getting those tops the experts get against weak nt. Bridge is hard work, and sharpening up your defense against weak nt is no exception to that process. Results-wise the work is worth-it in my book.
Ask if you have further questions
The moral of this story is: Get your defense ready over weak NT.
1) What artificial methods you use over weak nt is immaterial. I highly recommend you preserve the X for penalty, however with whatever methods you use. If, by opening a weak nt in front of you, opps take away your 1S bid on AKJT,Kxx,Qxxx,xx then at least allow them the chance to go for a telephone number if it's right. In most of my partnerships, all X's force to our 2S level or X them off for penalty.
A fairly popular method is to play all X's after a direct X of a weak nt are take out until one pass has been passed for penalty, i.e. (1N) X starts forcing sequences. When a X has been passed for penalty all subsequent X's are penalty should the opponents try further runouts to other suits.
Example: (1N) X (2H) X the second X is TO of hearts
Example: (1N) X (2H) P (the pass is forcing here and denies a TOX of hearts)
Example: (1N) X (2D) X, (P) P (2H) X pass is penalty since partner already wanted to X diamonds by passing your TOX.
This allows safe passes when it's right and forces auctions at the appropriate times. It takes a little bit of work (and some zeros) before this is adequately executed, but I find the work worth it.
2) Weak nt are considered "preemptive" which means you don't preempt over a preempt. Jumps (at least at the three level) are strong. (1N) 3D is a hand akin to a 1D 1M, 3D auction.
3) The idea of interference over strong NT is to confuse the issue and land in a safe part score. Constructive bidding methods are still needed over weak nt to find your own games. Compete with a slightly better than opening hand. If your hand is highly distributional but weak, you may have a chance to come in later.
4) Constructive sequences are still needed by unpassed hands over their artificial advances. Therefor 1N 2C (X) should be "like hand or strong hand" not lead direct for clubs. In case their advance is game forcing i.e. 1N 2D (gf Stayman) revert back to lead directing X's.
This will give you a healthy start as to getting those tops the experts get against weak nt. Bridge is hard work, and sharpening up your defense against weak nt is no exception to that process. Results-wise the work is worth-it in my book.
Ask if you have further questions
Friday, April 9, 2010
6/5 Open Them Right!
Hi all,
One of my protegees asked me some time ago to put together some guidelines for opening 6/5 hands when the major is the five bagger and a minor is the longer six bagger--and the hand does not have reverse values.
One thing I need to share up front is that my mentor taught me a valuable lesson in my early years: any 6/5 hand opposite the right opening bid makes slam. Repeat that 100 times before you go to sleep at night.
Reverse values start with meaty 16 counts. One can give some 6/5 hands reverse values even with lower high card point values. Trouble is, those hands have to have playing strength.
For example, AJ654,4,KQ6543,6 is not a reverse strength hand, but something like this might be: AJT98,JT,KQT987,v. So, if you think you have enough playing strength for a reverse, then go ahead and bid out your pattern, minor followed by the major.
If you have a 65 hand without reverse values, then there are to main points to consider: 1) How many suits are in between the two that you have. 2) How strong is one suit relative to the other.
So, for example, if your suits are six clubs and five spades, you have two suits between the blacks, namely diamonds and hearts. So you can handle a bid from your partner at the one level and rebid spades without reversing at the two level. However if your suits are diamonds and hearts, then you're in trouble immediately if it goes 1D 1S--and you don't have the values/playing strength for a reverse. Now you need to evaluate whether switching the order in which you bid the suits may be right.
Another strong indicator of the order in which you should open the suits is the strength of the relative suits. Suppose your hand were: A5432,4,AKJ543,5. Now, one would likely open 1D because you want that to be trump. However, should your hand be: AKJ43, 5,A97543,6 one would likely open 1S.
These bids are hard for us all. Once, vul at imps I held 65,98743,AKQJ54,v. Well, the bridge Gods don't give me solid tricks in my hand very often so I opened 1D. I was most surprised when all the experts chose to pass the hand and "show" the hand later somehow. I don't know how to let on to partner that you passed a six trick hand initially, but apparentl;y the experts do.
So to sum up. There are three things to consider: playing strength, how many suits are between the 6/5 suits, and relative strength of the suits.
And here's the real rub. If you get them all right, you'll be playing much better than the experts.
Hope this is somewhat helpful, please ask if you have further questions.
One of my protegees asked me some time ago to put together some guidelines for opening 6/5 hands when the major is the five bagger and a minor is the longer six bagger--and the hand does not have reverse values.
One thing I need to share up front is that my mentor taught me a valuable lesson in my early years: any 6/5 hand opposite the right opening bid makes slam. Repeat that 100 times before you go to sleep at night.
Reverse values start with meaty 16 counts. One can give some 6/5 hands reverse values even with lower high card point values. Trouble is, those hands have to have playing strength.
For example, AJ654,4,KQ6543,6 is not a reverse strength hand, but something like this might be: AJT98,JT,KQT987,v. So, if you think you have enough playing strength for a reverse, then go ahead and bid out your pattern, minor followed by the major.
If you have a 65 hand without reverse values, then there are to main points to consider: 1) How many suits are in between the two that you have. 2) How strong is one suit relative to the other.
So, for example, if your suits are six clubs and five spades, you have two suits between the blacks, namely diamonds and hearts. So you can handle a bid from your partner at the one level and rebid spades without reversing at the two level. However if your suits are diamonds and hearts, then you're in trouble immediately if it goes 1D 1S--and you don't have the values/playing strength for a reverse. Now you need to evaluate whether switching the order in which you bid the suits may be right.
Another strong indicator of the order in which you should open the suits is the strength of the relative suits. Suppose your hand were: A5432,4,AKJ543,5. Now, one would likely open 1D because you want that to be trump. However, should your hand be: AKJ43, 5,A97543,6 one would likely open 1S.
These bids are hard for us all. Once, vul at imps I held 65,98743,AKQJ54,v. Well, the bridge Gods don't give me solid tricks in my hand very often so I opened 1D. I was most surprised when all the experts chose to pass the hand and "show" the hand later somehow. I don't know how to let on to partner that you passed a six trick hand initially, but apparentl;y the experts do.
So to sum up. There are three things to consider: playing strength, how many suits are between the 6/5 suits, and relative strength of the suits.
And here's the real rub. If you get them all right, you'll be playing much better than the experts.
Hope this is somewhat helpful, please ask if you have further questions.
Monday, February 8, 2010
What bridge players can learn from football
Hi all,
Well another football season is over and it's time to write another blog spot on one of my favorite topics: gleaning winning strategies from other competitive endeavors.
Who can relate to 2009/2010 season when Bret Favre in the instrumental moments of a quarterfinal game took a high risk call to blow a chance in the playoffs? Conservative run was needed instead of a high risk pass--interception. Who's done similar things at the bridge table?
Who can relate to the final superbowl game (Colts vs Saints) where onside kicks, two point conversions and blitzes were made at the appropriate times and executed appropriately for a Saints win. Who's done similar things at the bridge table?
It has always amazed me that in team events, most players in lower level competitions concentrate on individual execution, solo or within the partnerships, to promote a win without fully analyzing or paying attention to what is needed to win the event.
I speak from experience. Once in a relatively tough flight A event we had "won" the event before the final two matches were played. Phone calls were placed to "home folks" that the Knaap team was clearly leading and would easily slide into the first place position. What happened? One of the partnerships ended up playing 3DXX in opponents' suit. The result: a 1 VP overall loss. Was somebody paying attention to what needed to be done, or were players just executing as per the first two rounds of the event? Who wouldn't sell out a low level contract before confusing the issue for an "at most" lose five imps?
I had another example last Salem tourney. As promoted by team captain Knaap, if there is anything on the line at all before the last match, it pays to execute a team "huddle" to assess the placement of the team at that point in the competition.
The situation was clear, on a 20 VP scale we were leading second and third by 7/9 vp's respectively. We took a look, the opposing team seemed OK! but we knew we had a chance to nail this thing here. I told the team that we didn't need to win by a huge margin but that a small margin win would make us unquestioned victors of the Sunday team event. My advice to the players? "Slow down, think and stay steady. Take advantage of any mistakes."
So what happened? The team had to score up a grand off a cashing ace vul. Lose 17. Yep, it was admitted that listening to the captain(ess) might have been appropriate at this important juncture of the competition. We did end up winning the event, however, since no one blitzed to put us second/third and teammates managed to cover a -17.
So here's the deal. In almost every other serious competitive endeavor, someone keeps an eye on what needs to be done while the individual competitors concentrate on execution. The football teams have a myriad of coaches at all levels. Baseball has their first and third base coaches. The gymnasts have spotters and coaches who say when the high risk moves are needed to win the competition, or when they are to be avoided to possibly turn a win into a loss.
So as you are entering the final rounds of a team competition, at least take a moment to get the team together and recognize what needs to be done and plant a firm reminder in everyone's consciousness. It seems only normal as this is done in most other competitions --sport or otherwise.
I'm not sure this is universal thinking, but you might try it and see if it works.
I would be glad to answer any further questions.
Well another football season is over and it's time to write another blog spot on one of my favorite topics: gleaning winning strategies from other competitive endeavors.
Who can relate to 2009/2010 season when Bret Favre in the instrumental moments of a quarterfinal game took a high risk call to blow a chance in the playoffs? Conservative run was needed instead of a high risk pass--interception. Who's done similar things at the bridge table?
Who can relate to the final superbowl game (Colts vs Saints) where onside kicks, two point conversions and blitzes were made at the appropriate times and executed appropriately for a Saints win. Who's done similar things at the bridge table?
It has always amazed me that in team events, most players in lower level competitions concentrate on individual execution, solo or within the partnerships, to promote a win without fully analyzing or paying attention to what is needed to win the event.
I speak from experience. Once in a relatively tough flight A event we had "won" the event before the final two matches were played. Phone calls were placed to "home folks" that the Knaap team was clearly leading and would easily slide into the first place position. What happened? One of the partnerships ended up playing 3DXX in opponents' suit. The result: a 1 VP overall loss. Was somebody paying attention to what needed to be done, or were players just executing as per the first two rounds of the event? Who wouldn't sell out a low level contract before confusing the issue for an "at most" lose five imps?
I had another example last Salem tourney. As promoted by team captain Knaap, if there is anything on the line at all before the last match, it pays to execute a team "huddle" to assess the placement of the team at that point in the competition.
The situation was clear, on a 20 VP scale we were leading second and third by 7/9 vp's respectively. We took a look, the opposing team seemed OK! but we knew we had a chance to nail this thing here. I told the team that we didn't need to win by a huge margin but that a small margin win would make us unquestioned victors of the Sunday team event. My advice to the players? "Slow down, think and stay steady. Take advantage of any mistakes."
So what happened? The team had to score up a grand off a cashing ace vul. Lose 17. Yep, it was admitted that listening to the captain(ess) might have been appropriate at this important juncture of the competition. We did end up winning the event, however, since no one blitzed to put us second/third and teammates managed to cover a -17.
So here's the deal. In almost every other serious competitive endeavor, someone keeps an eye on what needs to be done while the individual competitors concentrate on execution. The football teams have a myriad of coaches at all levels. Baseball has their first and third base coaches. The gymnasts have spotters and coaches who say when the high risk moves are needed to win the competition, or when they are to be avoided to possibly turn a win into a loss.
So as you are entering the final rounds of a team competition, at least take a moment to get the team together and recognize what needs to be done and plant a firm reminder in everyone's consciousness. It seems only normal as this is done in most other competitions --sport or otherwise.
I'm not sure this is universal thinking, but you might try it and see if it works.
I would be glad to answer any further questions.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
(1N) X --handle this treatment for optimum results
Hi all,
It is always with great pleasure that I, through this forum, get to review the teachings of my mentor. This subject presents another occasion. I too well remember discussing different methods of competing over opponent's NT. The retort was this "I loathe to give up the penalty X over NT". There was no qualifier there --i.e. baby, weak or strong NT. Penalty X's over all NT can reap huge rewards.
I can share with you that through my own experience I have reaped a wealth of mp and imps from this treatment. Unfortunately I have not reaped the optimum results because of an inability of the partnership to field the penalty X over NT properly.
First, let me say that a penalty X over NT could be a balanced hand at the top of the opponent's NT range. However, it's important that one has prime cards and/or a source of tricks. Using a penalty X over a strong nt with this hand: QJ4,KJ,QJ543,KQ is ill advised. Please have at least a prme seventeen count or a solid suit somewhere. Also, be aware that penalty X's can be made with one or two suited hands also. Here are some examples: AKQ10xxx, xx, x, Axx; AKQJxx, xx, xx, Axx; AKQxx, xx, xx, AKJ10.
The idea here is that you suspect the opponents will never sit for 1NX with these hands. They'll run out to their own suit. Now when you compete over that with your own suit, your partner will know that you have an extraordinary strong hand. Remember jumps over strong NT are preemptive. This is the way to show strength (although one can jump with strength over weak nt)
The down side about maintaining this treatment in your partnership is that one needs to discuss with what types of hands one pulls the penalty X's. My teaching says that with a balanced hand you sit, period. If you're 4333, 4432, 5332 you sit. Get it, you sit, I don't care what your strength is. The idea is that even with a zero count there is no guarantee that your side is in a fit and might get X'd off for a number. And if by chance you happen to be -180 (1NX making one) then that is the risk you take. That -180 is probably a lot less than what you would get being X'd off in your two level contract on a 4/2 fit.
Just three days ago all vul at imps I held this hand: 8542,876,53,8532 . Pard opened 1N and rho X'd. Poker face I sat quietly and watched lho squirm. 2D PHEW PHEW PHEW. The opponents were plus 130 when they could have had a telephone number. PHEW PHEW PHEW. Lho had forgotten an important rule about penatly X's over nt. Pass with a balanced hand.
Some time ago I picked up this beaut over 1N. AKxx,Kxx,KQJx,Ax. It didn't take me long to find the red card. My partner bid 2S. Thinking he would have Jxxxxx,x,xxx,xxx or the like I blasted to four spades thinking we could probably make five. Down two. There went the masterpoint race for the tournament to my opponent. Heavy price to pay! My partner had pulled my penaty X with four spades and had to play the entire hand from the dummy.
If you're going to maintain the X as penatly over 1N --I can guarantee you'll get some stellar results. I certainly have. But field it properly! or else you'll be fighting each other instead of your opponents!
If you have any questions, I'd be willing to answer them.
It is always with great pleasure that I, through this forum, get to review the teachings of my mentor. This subject presents another occasion. I too well remember discussing different methods of competing over opponent's NT. The retort was this "I loathe to give up the penalty X over NT". There was no qualifier there --i.e. baby, weak or strong NT. Penalty X's over all NT can reap huge rewards.
I can share with you that through my own experience I have reaped a wealth of mp and imps from this treatment. Unfortunately I have not reaped the optimum results because of an inability of the partnership to field the penalty X over NT properly.
First, let me say that a penalty X over NT could be a balanced hand at the top of the opponent's NT range. However, it's important that one has prime cards and/or a source of tricks. Using a penalty X over a strong nt with this hand: QJ4,KJ,QJ543,KQ is ill advised. Please have at least a prme seventeen count or a solid suit somewhere. Also, be aware that penalty X's can be made with one or two suited hands also. Here are some examples: AKQ10xxx, xx, x, Axx; AKQJxx, xx, xx, Axx; AKQxx, xx, xx, AKJ10.
The idea here is that you suspect the opponents will never sit for 1NX with these hands. They'll run out to their own suit. Now when you compete over that with your own suit, your partner will know that you have an extraordinary strong hand. Remember jumps over strong NT are preemptive. This is the way to show strength (although one can jump with strength over weak nt)
The down side about maintaining this treatment in your partnership is that one needs to discuss with what types of hands one pulls the penalty X's. My teaching says that with a balanced hand you sit, period. If you're 4333, 4432, 5332 you sit. Get it, you sit, I don't care what your strength is. The idea is that even with a zero count there is no guarantee that your side is in a fit and might get X'd off for a number. And if by chance you happen to be -180 (1NX making one) then that is the risk you take. That -180 is probably a lot less than what you would get being X'd off in your two level contract on a 4/2 fit.
Just three days ago all vul at imps I held this hand: 8542,876,53,8532 . Pard opened 1N and rho X'd. Poker face I sat quietly and watched lho squirm. 2D PHEW PHEW PHEW. The opponents were plus 130 when they could have had a telephone number. PHEW PHEW PHEW. Lho had forgotten an important rule about penatly X's over nt. Pass with a balanced hand.
Some time ago I picked up this beaut over 1N. AKxx,Kxx,KQJx,Ax. It didn't take me long to find the red card. My partner bid 2S. Thinking he would have Jxxxxx,x,xxx,xxx or the like I blasted to four spades thinking we could probably make five. Down two. There went the masterpoint race for the tournament to my opponent. Heavy price to pay! My partner had pulled my penaty X with four spades and had to play the entire hand from the dummy.
If you're going to maintain the X as penatly over 1N --I can guarantee you'll get some stellar results. I certainly have. But field it properly! or else you'll be fighting each other instead of your opponents!
If you have any questions, I'd be willing to answer them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
