Brian Davies
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
John Joseph: “With a strong hand, it’s best to transfer and then bid your other 4 card major as most people play this as forcing to game.” – I think that a transfer then new suit at the three level is a game forcing, but a transfer to hearts then 2S is usually invitational.
John Carew: “The sequence 1nt-2d-2h-2s is forcing for one round showing at least 11+ points and at least 5-4 shape in hearts and spades.” – I agree with this, but Bernard suggested in one of his earlier “Lock Down” videos that it is invitational and non-forcing. On this occasion responder is a passed hand, so I think it is definitely non-forcing, but still invitational. I would definitely follow this sequence.
Hi Bernard, yes it is an interesting paradox because a 10 lead can sometimes cost a trick. It costs a trick on your actual given solution and it might if partner has QJXXX and declarer has AK98.
But on the other hand, leading the 10 might allow us to establish length winners. Maybe partner has the QJXXX holding and declarer only has AK9. Partner must have honours outside spades and we need to establish our spade winners before declarer can knock out partner’s outside honours.
It will sometimes be right to defend passively, but I would expect our opponents to have the values for 3NT and the auction has ensure that declarer can almost play double dummy. I would judge that it is best to attack in Partner’s assumed 5-card suit, but I do accept that this will not always work.
It isn’t perfect. If you put down KX as dummy it will fail if your opponent on the left holds th AQ and your opponent on the right leads the suit. But sometimes partner will hold the ace or queen (quite likely since partner is strong). Sometimes your right hand opponent will hold the ace or queen. Sometimes the opponents fail to lead the suit. The chances are good that KX will be enough to ensure that you don’t lose two quick tricks.
You can wait until you hold a better control – but you will probably miss out on many slams.
Hi Sam,
– First round controls are an ace or a void.
– Second round controls are a king or a singleton.
Yes you would love to hold KQ rather than KX, but the latter still counts as second round control.
Clear Cut Tricks was a definition in the EBU regulation defining what was the legal minimum to open as an artificial strong two – which is very different to the assessment of what is advisable for the bid. It was never suggested, even by the EBU, that it was a good method of hand evaluation and conflating Playing Tricks and Clear Cut Tricks IS an unhelpful red herring for newer players wanting to understand how to evaluate their hands.
I’m guessing that Julian missed this question. I have also only just seem it.
Standard methods are not very good at developing the auction over 2NT openings. You have already used up one round of bidding. I will be interested also in Julian’s opinion.
Personally, if playing simple methods, I would bud 3C (Stayman) and if partner responds 3D or 3H, I would continue with 4D – forcing and implying a 4-card spade suit (If the response was 3H) as well as a diamond suit. I think that this gives us the best chance of finding our best slam in either diamonds, spades or no trumps.
Even with point counts there are different methods of evaluation. All start at the basic High Card count, but then use different methods to adjust for shape etc. Some add for length, others add for shortages – but length in one suit tends to imply shortage in another suit, so of course they tend to produce similar answers in the end. But yes there will be small differences and this is where judgement and experience come in.
It is exactly the same with Playing Tricks – the answers will usually be similar and where there are differences it probably means that the decision is close. Use your judgement. Maybe use point count to split close calls.
Incidentally, Playing Tricks is a good method of evaluating strong shapely hands. I would not be using Playing Tricks as a a method for evaluating three-suited hands.
Mention of Clear Cut Tricks really is a red herring Charles. Cleat Cut Tricks were never intended as a hand valuation method, but was a short-lived legalistic definition used in an old Blue Book regulation.
A simple way of thinking if Playing Tricks is the number of tricks that you would usually expect to win, with your long suit as trumps and a reasonable suit division. Bernard mentioned that it is also reasonable to consider the number of Total Points (including length winners) – a 2C opening will usually have 20+ Total Points. Ideally you will have several hand valuation methods in your tool kit and compare your hand against different metrics in close decisions.
Hi John, the difficulty with a three-point range is how many points do you need to raise? Maybe you think that 4 is enough? After all, you will have the required 25 most of the time? It is a counter-intuitive fact that the likelihood of 20 high card points is greater than the combined odds for 21 and 22! If you raise with 4, you will have a combined 24 most of the time. 3NT is a difficult contract when you have a very strong hand opposite a very weak hand because there is a lack of entries. If playing 20-22 you really should only raise with 5 points – particularly at pairs.
But sometimes opener will have 22 and responder will have 4. You are playing in 2NT when the rest of the field is playing in and making 3NT. This is why I prefer 2-point ranges at this level.
Hi Christopher, I think that Bernard said that the sequence 2D-2H-2NT tradionally shows 23-24, which I believe us correct and is analogous to a traditional Acol sequence which starts with 2C as the strongest bid.
But the because Benji has two strong bids, many players adjust the NT range. Bernard suggested the following as a better set of ranges;
– 2NT = 20-22
– 2C-2D-2NT = 23-24
– 2D-2H-2NT = 25-26
This is not standard and you would need to agree the range with partner. Personally, I don’t like the 3-point range for 2NT. I might make 2NT 20-21 and reduce the other bids by a point.
It would depend upon your system Nicholas. Most play that a raise to 4S would be preemptive. If you play 2NT as Jacoby then this would be perfect, otherwise East should respond two diamonds initially, then bid four spades at the next turn (a delayed game raise).
Hi Nicholas, I think that your auction is now flawed, in that East is now too good for a 3S response. But having bid 3S, East can now bid 4NT once West invites slam with the 4C cue bid.
In case Charles doesn’t know how to do this:
Bernard presented the hand from the West perspective, so the North/South bidding that Charles questions is the computer’s auction rather than Bernard’s.
I think that different partnerships have differing styles and some are more willing to raise on a three-card suit. Personally, I would be quite happy with the North/South bidding on the first round (I’m less keen on the jump to 4S). I do sometimes raise on a three-card suit, particularly if I am unbalanced with a singleton or possibly a small doubleton. But this South hand is balanced, has an honour in the doubleton and feels to me to be a hand which will be suited to no trumps. A 1NT response looks very reasonable.
