Brian Davies
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I am all for opening a major and making it more difficult for the opponents to compete, but this feels like a strange strategy with strong 4441 hands:
- We are looking at three potential trump suits. It must be better to give partner the space to find the best trump fit. Particularly as we are strong and a minor suit slam might be our best spot.
- We are less worried about our opponenrs competing because (a) 4441 hands tend to lack playing strength but have plenty of defensive strength; (b) if the opponents find a 4-4 fit, we know that the trumps will break badly for them and (c) opposition bidding will often help us describe our hand, giving us an easy take-out double if they bid our shirt suit.
- We will have a problem if partner responds in our minor. We can’t raise without implying a five-card major and risk having partner “correct” to our major.
I would always open 1C with 4414, regardless if strength.
An interesting idea David. With a balanced hand and three or four points, I would sit the double. But if really do have a bust I would tend to run to my lowest four-card suit – these type of hands tend to be pretty ugly even if partner holds (say) 20 points. Partner will continually find herself on lead having to lead away from her honours.
You don’t usually want to do this. But …
(a) ♠KQJ98742 ♥7 ♦96 ♣73 – If partner opens one heart, you know that you want to play in four spades, so why not just bid it? Bidding three spades is the splinter, so it can’t mean anything else.
(b) One of my partner’s doesn’t like strong jump shift responses. We used to play that a jump showed four or fewer points and no interest in playing in any other suit. We used to jump to two spades over a one diamond opening with: ♠KJ9872 ♥74 ♦96 ♣763. It was a surprisingly effective method when it came up – it could make life very difficult for the 4th player who might have a strong hand.
(c) We have changed methods and now play that a jump to two of a major is 4-8 HCPs and a six-card suit – something like: ♠AJ9872 ♥74 ♦96 ♣J63. This gets this hand-type across in one bid and it means that a sequence such as 1♦-1♠-2♣-2♠ is constructive (about 9-11 HCPs) and 1♦-1♠-2♣-3♠ is forcing. This is much more efficient than traditional Acol where you have to jump to the three-level to invite and you can’t make a strong and forcing spade bid without going through 4th suit forcing.
Note that in each of these examples you are taking up bidding space but giving a very precise message. I would not recommend (b) or (c) without prior discussion with your partner.
I was wondering about this. I might have a go on Q Plus instead. Does anyone know which seats we should sit at for each hand to get the most out of the defensive learnings?
Hi Julian, Stephen suggested above that after 1S-3S-4C–4D-4S, partner will bid on to 4NT with a heart control and will settle for game without a heart control. But is responder obliged to always bid on past game with a heart control?
My understanding is that opener’s cue bid showed some slam suitability and responder is obliged to show any controls below game level. But responder should also judge slam suitability to carry on past 4S. If opener wanted to insist on slam whenever responder had a heart stop, he could have cue-bid 5D?
Stephen hasn’t given the actual hands, but I would have thought that a 17-count would need to be particularly good (a 4-loser hand maybe), to drive to slam opposite a responder who invited game? I would welcome your thought please.
I would add that leading face down and inviting questions achieves two purposes:
- It gives your partner a chance to ask questions at the proper time.
- It gives everyone at the table a chance to tell you (in unison): “It’s not your lead”! 🙂
The discussion was started by others on Facebook. I chose to give a more detailed analysis here as Facebook does not lend itself to lengthy responses. I am not “sowing doubt”, but it is an area where there can be legitimate debate. Chris Jagger and Jeffrey Allerton represented England at the most recent Bermuda Bowl playing a form of Acol based around opening a minor in preference to a major, which suggests to me that there can be opinions other than those held by Bernard and Andrew Robson (who doesn’t play Acol in high-level competitions).
Here’s a tip for you Michael, which will allow you to get PBN files from BBO at any time.
Bridgesolver (mentioned above) can also be installed as a Google Chrome Extension. You can invoke the Bridgesolver extention when playing a hand on BBO or reviewing it using the BBO Hand Records Feature. The Hand is opened as a PBN file in the Bridgesolver window and can be saved to your computer from Bridgesolver.
Bernard held: K J10987 AQ10643 Q.
On this occasion his partner held four-card heart support and a diamond void!
Bridgewebs might look a little old fashioned, but many players play at multiple clubs and will be used to the format.
And yes, it incorporates Bridgesolver (John and Mirna developed this and play at our club – they deserve recognition for developing and making it available free of charge).
So, to precis:
- What do we need to alert? Any double except a take-out double.
- Great, so what is a take-out double? It is defined in the Blue book!
- What does the Blue Book say? “‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'”
Sorry David, I know that you are not on the committee! 🙂
Thanks Bernard. I am relieved that you are not rejecting double because you think that it would be penalties. 🙂
So with: ♠43 ♥AK95 ♦A732 ♣KQ6 you would double rather than bidding 3♠? Does the 3♠ cue bid promise four-card club support?
I think that this is related to another recent discussion on Opener’s Double, where I wrote a long (over-long?) response. My inclination is to double to convey the Strong NT type hand (“showing values”), but pass with weaker hands and trust partner to compete in the pass-out seat. But I can also see a lot of merit in a double being pure take-out – particularly as there might be further bidding from North.
I find these auctions interesting – particularly if playing pairs.
It is not practical to consider the diamond suit when considering a NT contract. We have 25+ points and the opponents have 15 or fewer, most of which will be in spades. We should focus on whether we have a spade stop and assume that one of us will have diamond coverage.
Bidding 3S asks directly about a spade stop. Partner will usually show a spade stop in response to a double. Either approach will find 3NT if suitable. My contention is that a double gives us more options if partner doesn’t have a stop.
