Book review: Right Through The Pack

Right Through The Pack by Robert Darvas and Norman de V. Hart is absolutely my favorite bridge book. First published in 1947, this book lets the cards tell the story-- each one, from the lowly Two of Clubs to the regal King of Spades, has a narrative ranging from instructional to fantastical. The text is over sixty years old, so the bidding seems quite antiquated to our super-modern minds, but the bidding is usually just used as a way to get to the strange contracts that need even stranger plays to come in. (In fact, in Ely Culbertson's introduction, he states "in many of the deals -- very many! -- the accompanying bidding could not be justified by the world's greatest optimist.") One of my favorite hands from the book is The Tale of the Nine of Hearts:

♠ AJ962 ♥ AJ6 ♦ T3 ♣ AT3 ♠ 74 ♥ 5 ♦ Q986 ♣ 876542 ♠ 5 ♥ KQT872 ♦ J54 ♣ QJ9 ♠ KQT83 ♥ 943 ♦ AK72 ♣ K

An "unjustifiable" auction got N-S to seven spades. The eight of clubs was led to the three, nine, and king, and South saw exactly twelve tricks and no legitimate possibility for a thirteenth... but there was an illegitimate possibility lurking around. He drew trumps while eliminating diamonds, finding out that East held one spade and three diamonds. The play to the first trick suggested that East held QJ9 of clubs, and therefore the 1=6=3=3 shape he actually held, leaving the position:

♠ J ♥ AJ6 ♦ ♣ AT ♠ ♥ 5 ♦ ♣ 76542 ♠ ♥ KQ87 ♦ ♣ QJ ♠ Q53 ♥ 943 ♦ ♣

Declarer led to the ace of hearts, then led the jack of spades, overtaking in his hand, leaving the ace of clubs stranded on the dummy! He then played the rest of the trumps pitching hearts from the board, making poor East believe the end position had been this:

♠ J ♥ AJ6 ♦ ♣ AT ♠ ♥ 95 ♦ ♣ 7654 ♠ ♥ KQ87 ♦ ♣ QJ ♠ Q53 ♥ 43 ♦ ♣ 2

East let go his king of hearts to save the club protection, thinking, as who would not, that declarer would never strand an ace on the dummy... but South took the last two tricks with his two little hearts.

Buy Right Through The Pack at amazon.com

Promoting Bridge to Young Players

This is a copy of a letter that I put together (with the help of McKenzie, of course) about a month ago and sent in to the Bridge Bulletin. I haven't had any response from the ACBL Editor, so I'm putting it up here in the hope that this spawns at least a bit of discussion.

At the Junior reception at the recent Las Vegas NABC, several speakers reiterated the same point: the ACBL needs more young players, and they want us, the juniors, to get our friends into the game. I have a question for those who keep telling us to get our friends involved: Who do you think our friends are?

Our friends are already here. We met them at the bridge table. And while there is a camaraderie among young players, most of our friends are the same as yours: other bridge players, young and old.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the ACBL cannot simply call on us juniors to revitalize the game with a few text messages and blog posts directed to our [non-existent] non-bridge friends. But hope is not lost! We're happy to help get the youth into the game, but you, the ACBL execs, and members of all ages, will need to help us.

We junior players are happy to welcome and befriend other young folks when we see them, but you all have to recognize and harness the power you have to bring kids to the bridge table in the first place. Right now, the ACBL and its members are failing at this task.

I played in my first ACBL game at age 11. I caddied for many years as well. I traveled to tournaments all over the US and became well-known among players and ACBL officials. Forgive me for tooting my own horn, but I was a smart kid with definite potential. Nevertheless, the encouragement I got in my thousands of hours at bridge tables never went beyond a patronizing “It's so nice to see young people playing bridge!”

Not once in my fourteen years as an active and eligible junior did anyone speak to me about the opportunities available to junior bridge players – and I know now that those opportunities are many. No one ever took me under their wing; no one told me about the scholarships or travel; no director even mentioned to me the junior entry fee discount.

It wasn't until nearly the very end of my juniordom that I married former junior standout McKenzie Myers and realized just how many opportunities I had missed. My husband was lucky enough to take up bridge in an area full of knowledgeable and helpful players who helped him get involved in the junior program and become the successful and enthusiastic young bridge player that he is today. If all young players received the attention and nurturing that McKenzie got from District 20, junior bridge would be a much bigger part of the ACBL.

If the ACBL and its members are ready to back up that statement we keep hearing (everybody together now: It's SO NICE to see young people playing bridge!), here's what you need to do:

Give kids some incentive to turn off their Wiis and iPods and pick up a deck of cards. Class credit in high schools and colleges is a great way to get kids to try the game at an age where they're still young enough to take advantage of junior opportunities.

A friend of mine who is a professor at a Virginia university taught a semester long bridge course for honors students. He used supplies and lesson plans of his own, because he didn't know of any of the ACBL's education initiatives. The ACBL needs to work harder to reach out to educators who are in the best position of all to recruit young players to the game.

Next comes PR. Stop letting young players fall through the cracks. When a new player joins the ACBL, take note of their birthdate. When a new junior joins, reach out! Tell them about discounts, scholarships, special events, and other junior players. A simple information packet and a handful of tournament free plays could go a long way toward boosting junior bridge and the entire ACBL in turn.

I suggest that every district dedicate some energy toward junior relations. This means electing juniors to serve on boards and to reach out to new junior players in the area. This junior liaison can provide names and numbers of folks in the district who can partner and teach new young players. Most juniors have parents who play bridge, but let's be honest – teenagers are not going to get excited about social lives that revolve around their parents. Furthermore, many of us would find our development stunted if we relied only on our parents' instruction. (My mother is one of the finest players in Unit 139, but my goal is to be one of the finest players in the world.)

Bridge is a wonderful game, and you don't need gimmicks to lure kids into it. Even though my days as a junior are waning, I plan to enjoy everything that remains available to me and all players in the game for the rest of my life. But there are so many additional opportunities in bridge for under-26 players that it really should be easy to hook these kids on the game. All we have to do is get the word out – and that's not just the job of the handful of juniors in the ACBL right now – that should be a priority for all ACBL members.

Kudos to those who are already working hard on behalf of young bridge players. The first Youth NABC in Atlanta earlier this year was a great success, and if all districts had dedicated members like the Atlanta crew, you'd see a lot more young faces at the table. If you'd like to keep this discussion going, please email me at Meg@DoubleSqueeze.com.

Meg Myers

Charlottesville, VA

Board Member – Unit 139

Tournament Chairman – 2009 Charlottesville Regional

Co-Editor – www.DoubleSqueeze.com

Smolen and Delayed Texas: Bidding after 1N - 2C

We play a very extended version of Stayman. When our partner opens 1NT, most of he time that we hold both majors (4-4, 5-4, 5-5, 6-4, 6-5), we'll start with 2C. Here's our response structure after starting 1NT - 2C:

2D = no major
2H = weak hand, both majors; pass with better hearts, bid 2S with better spades
2S = invitational with 5 or 6 spades (may or may not have four hearts)
2NT = invitational (should have a four card major)
3C, 3D = natural, game forcing
3H = five spades, four hearts, game forcing (Smolen)
3S = five hearts, four spades, game forcing (Smolen)
3NT = to play
4C = 5-5 or better in the majors; opener bids his better one
4D = four spades, six hearts (Delayed Texas Transfer)
4H = six spades, four hearts (Delayed Texas Transfer)
4NT = invitational to 6NT

2H = four hearts, will only have four spades if a maximum hand
2S = invitational with 5 or 6 spades (tends to deny four hearts)
2NT = invitational with four spades
3C, 3D = natural, game forcing
3H = natural, invitational
3S = artificial slam try in hearts with no minor suit shortness
3NT = game values, four spades; opener can correct to 4S with 4-4 in the majors
4C = splinter raise of hearts
4D = splinter raise of hearts
4H = to play
4NT = invitational to 6NT (to ask for keycards in hearts, you need to start with 3S)

2S = four spades, can have four hearts if non-maximum
2NT = invitational with four hearts
3C, 3D = natural, game forcing
3H = artificial slam try in spades with no shortness
3S = natural, invitational
3N = game values, four hearts; opener can correct to 4H with 4-4 in the majors
4C = splinter raise of spades
4D = splinter raise of spades
4H = splinter raise of spades
4S = to play
4NT = invitational to 6NT (to ask for keycards in spades, you need to start with 3H)

This is simpler than it looks if you just remember that three of the other major is an artificial raise of opener's major. Another good system is what I play with my good friend Drew:

1NT - 2C - 2M -
3 Other Major = artificial slam try in partner's major with a side singleton
Next step = asks for singleton
4C = quantitative slam try with a fit
4D = keycard ask in partner's major
4NT = quantitative slam try without a fit

As with all other agreements---- a bad agreement is better than none at all! Do you know what your partner would have for these sequences? Talk it over!

A Plea to Eliminate Travelers at Club Games

Travelers are those little score sheets that you stick in each board at a club game where every table writes their score on one sheet of paper. As the boards get played, you can see how others before you have done, and get a general sense of how your game is going. Our club in Charlottesville now uses Bridgemates for scoring, which have an electronic traveler that even calculates your percentage.

Most people love being able to look at travelers. They want to see how they've done and what others are doing. I, however, am not a fan. After all, I can tell when the dummy comes down if I've reached the proper contract, and paying attention during the play or defense of the hand is enough to tell me if our side has taken all our tricks. So without looking at a traveler, I already know how well I've done compared to the optimal result -- and isn't that what matters more? Would you rather play bad bridge, but get lucky and score well, or play good bridge on a day where everyone else at the club is going bonkers and settle for a 50% game?

Some folks prefer masterpoints. I prefer to play well. On most days, the masterpoints will come when you play well, after all.

So that's why travelers aren't necessary. Here's why they're just plain bad:

• Someone always reads off the results. "Some people made 3N, but 4S goes down every time!" The people at the next table thank you for this hint.
• Club games are slow enough already without everyone taking extra time to analyze "what the others did." You'll know what the others did when the final scores come out. Take all the time you need at the end of the game to go over the hands.
• It's impossible for you to say "We got a top board, pard," without it sounding like gloating. If you're going to discuss the results of a hand, whether there are travelers or not, you should always do it quietly and out of the earshot of your opponents.
  
• Travelers tell an incomplete story and therefore give you an inaccurate idea of how your game is going. After a hand has been played 3 times, you may have a 100%, but by the time it gets all the way around the room, that 100% could be only a 40%. You can't know how your score is going to change as the board gets played more and more, so what's the point in looking now?
• If you're playing against us, we don't want to hear the scores so far. But you're going to read them anyway, aren't you?

Most of these things could fall under the category of pet peeves, and then you'd have the right to tell me to lighten up, I guess, but the first thing on the list there is a big one. Certainly you wouldn't take advantage of anything you overhear about boards you have yet to play, but not everyone in the club is as ethical as you are.

Furthermore, if you are being ethical, let's just say you've heard from the guy with the loud voice at the table behind you that your side makes 6S on board 12. But even after going through your normal sequence, you have a 50-50 guess as to whether or not to bid the slam (except that you know from UI that you should). Maybe in normal circumstances, you almost always bid your 50% slams, and without the UI, you would've bid this one. But you have information that you're not entitled to, and it tells you to bid, while pass is undeniably a logical alternative. I don't know about you, but I'd have a hard time sleeping at night if I didn't pass. (What you should have done is called the director before you played the hand, actually, but even this will likely result in an average plus for you at best, which may be less than the score you would've earned otherwise.)

Sure it's neat to see how your score measures up as soon as you're done with a hand, but unless you're playing a barometer movement, you're not seeing your real score anyway. It may seem like a long wait to the end of the game to see how you did, but the end of the game will come a lot faster if we stop wasting so much time on travelers.

Transfer McCabe

How do you build a convention? Well, first you look for something artificial you need to insert into your system, then you look for an unused (or seldom-used) bid that you can assign that meaning to. Seventy-some years ago, Easley Blackwood got tired of going down in slams missing two aces, and noticed that almost nobody ever bid 4NT. He put those two things together in what is now the most famous and widely-used convention of all time.

When your partner opens a weak two and your right-hand opponent doubles, what does a redouble mean? Generally, a redouble shows a good hand and invites partner to make a penalty double if he has length and strength in the opponents' runout suit. But when partner opens a weak two, he's specifically saying he doesn't have length or strength in any of the side suits! So, the redouble can be used as something artificial without giving anything up.

So, many partnerships play the modern form of the "McCabe Adjunct" over their weak two bids.

Originally, McCabe was a convention used in noncompetitive auctions. When a weak two bid was opened, responder would bid 2NT "McCabe". This forced opener to rebid 3C, which responder would either pass or bid 3 of another suit to play. As originally written up, this wasn't terribly useful.

Eventually, someone adjusted this to being on only over doubles. The modern McCabe Adjunct is:

2H (double):

XX = relay to 2S, to sign off there or bid 3C or 3D
New suit = lead-directing raise of the hearts
2NT = asking bid (Ogust, Feature, or whatever it is you play 2NT as over a pass)

This worked pretty well for me for years, but when I heard of the concept of adding transfers to this auction I immediately adopted (and loved) it. Here's what I play with any partner that's willing to learn it:

2H (double):

XX = Long spades or a spade lead-directing heart raise
2S = Long clubs or a club lead-directing heart raise
2NT = asking bid
3C = Long diamonds or a diamond lead-directing heart raise
3D = raise to 3H with ace or king of hearts
3H = raise without one of the top two honors

So here you can have your cake and eat it too-- sign off in a long suit (transfer to it and pass partner's forced acceptance), direct the lead in a side suit (transfer to it and return to partner's major), or direct the lead (or don't direct the lead) in partner's suit (transfer to it or just bid it).

One of my partners uses this over all preempts... weak jump overcalls, opening three-bids, and even opening four-bids! I think this is just as theoretically sound.

Doorknob Doubles and Redoubles

This mini-convention was originally written up in the March 1996 Bridge World. I think it's a fine idea.

Doorknob is a double or redouble only used by the opening side in auctions that start:

1C (1H) 1S

and

1D (1H) 1S.


So basically, we've opened a minor, they've overcalled a heart, and our partner bid a spade (showing five or more). When right-hand opponent doubles, or bids 2C/2D/2H, we can use an artificial double or redouble to show our handtype.

Most 2/1 players use Support (re)Doubles here, but I've never found that too useful. When I have a minimum opening and know we have an eight-card spade fit, I want to get to 2S ASAP without giving the opponents more room for discussion. So until I read this article, I used double or redouble to show a good non-directional hand.

Kleinman suggests using a double as showing the common handtype that's the toughest to show here-- a good five card minor with two-card (generally honor-x) spade support. This follows the 'Support Double principle' in that a double shows a known seven card fit for partner's suit.

In several years of use, this convention has come in very handy several times, getting us to strong 5-2 fits in spades and good 5-3 fits in the minor. The one time that the Doorknob double got passed, it was a great board too. Both partners knew there was a misfit, and knew their partner's source of defensive tricks.

As with all new conventions, we need to think about what we're giving up. In this instance (assuming we're already playing Support Doubles), all we're giving up is responder's knowledge that opener has three or four spades for the raise to two. I really don't think this is a problem though I realize some Law of Total Tricks nuts do. For you Law folks-- when opener raises to 2S under Doorknob, responder knows that there's an 8 or 9 card fit, but opener knows the exact length of the partnership's fit, and can LOTT-compete as necessary. Oh, and read Anders Wirgren and Mike Lawrence's great book I Fought The Law Of Total Tricks.

Adventures in System Building

Sometimes, playing at a club can be really frustrating. It seems very few of the players there take bridge ethics very seriously, often including the director. For folks who try to take the game seriously and work on their play every time they sit down, club games can be really...difficult. At one of our regular clubs, hesitations and misinformation are the two biggest elements of partnership bidding. The only way we can deal with such ridiculous bridge is to give them something to hesitate over.

Introducing a system invented by McKenzie Myers: Strip Club.

I'll leave it to him to describe the system in detail, but basically it's a system where nearly every bid is artificial and we open any 10-count, as well as 3-9 point undisciplined preempts.

I only started studying the system about 90 minutes before game time, so of course there was a lot I didn't absorb. I knew we weren't playing to win yesterday so much as just to have fun and watch people squirm over our weird system, so whatever.

Somewhere early in the session, I picked up an awful hand: Txxx Jxx Qxxxx Q.

I was the dealer and we were favorable. Remembering the part about undisciplined preempts, I immediately pulled the STOP card and reached for 2D. Then I remembered that 2D shows both majors. But that damn STOP card was already on the table. Oh well. 3D.

LHO passes and McKenzie confidently pulls out 3N. Righty asks me what 3N is. I tell her it's an offer to play. RHO is holding three aces and three kings. She passes, and we buy the contract, undoubled, in 3N.

They took the first eight tricks, and the last four. McKenzie apologized afterward. "I should've held it to down 7." Ha!

His hand was almost as awful as mine. He had four diamonds, though (Jxxx), and reasoned that by going through 3N first, we were less likely to be doubled in 5D, or maybe we could even escape to 4D, in our "11-card" fit. Heh.

So my biggest screwup with the new system earned us a top board. All the other tables have results ranging from -660 to -1470.

I doubt this is a system we'll ever use in tournament play, but it was fun to mess around for a day. We finished with a 65%. Go figure.

Splinters Over One Notrump

Sounds a little oxymoronic, doesn't it? A splinter normally shows a big fit for partner, a game-forcing hand, and a singleton or void in the bid suit. The splinter over 1NT certainly has the last two qualities, but we don't know about a fit yet.

We use 3H or 3S over partner's 1NT opening to show shortness in that suit and both minors. Some use this bid as 4441-type hands, but we prefer to have them show 5431-type hands. We'll open pretty much any in-range balanced hand with a five-card major with 1NT -- any 5332 and some 5422s. We've found that it's often right to play 3NT on these hands even with a 5-3 fit. The three times it's right to play a 5-3 major suit fit are

(a) You can ruff something from the three-card holding.

(b) You have an unstopped side suit that you can ruff to stop the bad guys from running tricks against you.

(c) You have a long (but not great) side suit in dummy that you need to ruff to set up.

Parts (b) and (c) don't usually come up when you've opened 1NT, so we worry about the first one. When responder has three cards in one major and a stiff or void in the other (and a game-forcing hand), we bid three of the short suit. Opener now knows (99% of the time) the best strain (if not the best level) for the partnership to play!

1NT - 3H = 3=1=(4-5), 3=0=(5-5), 3=0=(4-6), game force.

Opener bids 3NT with a double stopper or better in hearts;
With slam interest, opener bids 3S, 4C, or 4D showing his preferred suit, or 4H positive in both minors;
Without slam interest, opener bids 4S, 5C, or 5D showing his preference, or 4N to get partner to bid his best minor.

The minor suit distribution isn't terribly important, as long as you've got a hand with both minors, so partner can pick either one. It is important with these splinter bids to promise exactly 3 cards in the other major, so when pard has opened 1N with five cards in that major, you know you have the magic 8-card fit.

One for the Record Books

Most bridge players are familiar with the game Creights. For those who aren't, Mike Develin has posted a great explanation of the game here.

McKenzie just kicked the tar out of me. Normally I get frustrated when I hit a run of bad Creights luck, but this was just comical. Note that we play 8-1-8 for 2-player games. Here's the breakdown of our scores:

Meg McKenzie
288 0
328(SP) 0
398 0
398 85
398 210
506 210 <~~~That's right, I rang on the first round of 3.
586 210
667 210
680 210
683 210
798 210
798 325
1064 325
1267 325
1267 461
+20(SP)
1287 -- 461


Now that's just ridiculous.

Quickie

From BLML:

IMPs, red vs. white
LHO opens 4H in third seat, and it gets passed around to you.

---- --- (P) P
(4H) P (P) ?

You hold:

KT73 T 972 AQJ94

What's your call?

Regional Prizes & Registration Gifts

With the Charlottesville Regional coming up in just a few months, I'm starting to get lots of suggestions for things like prizes. I have a few ideas of my own, but of course the budget is the overriding concern. Lots of the best ideas simply aren't affordable.

I'm trying to think of some good registration gifts and prizes that will help make this tournament stand out. I want to give away things that bridge players will actually want and use; not just random crap with our logo stamped on. We joked that the Hunt Valley Regional gave away body bags this year -- actually they were travel bags for dresses and coats, but then I can't really see how these are useful gifts. People who need them already have them, don'tcha think?

So some ideas I've had for registration gifts:

• Pens or pencils -- boring, I know, but definitely useful.
• Pencil extenders -- don't know what these are actually called, but they're basically little things you can stick the ACBL golf pencils into to make them easier to hold, and they have erasers, too. Not sure they'd be a huge hit or anything, but I think a lot of people would use them.

And for prizes:

• Discounts at the booksellers' table -- say, a $2 off coupon for section tops. Now, I know not everyone would use these, but even if they don't want to buy books, they could buy pencils or convention card holders and such. This would help the bookseller, too, who is a friend of ours.
  
• $2 bills -- not really original, but definitely a Charlottesville prize.
  

At our sectionals, we do a lot of "WINNER" glasses, but do people really even like those? My understanding is that they're not wildly popular. I feel like I've had more ideas, but they're not coming to me at the moment.

I'm interested in some feedback here. What's the best registration gift you've ever received at a tournament? What do you think makes the best section top prizes (not overall prizes -- those are handled by the MABC and are usually just free plays)? Remember, these prizes and gifts need to be something I can get for ~$2 apiece, or less.

Leave your suggestions in the comments here, or email me at Meg@DoubleSqueeze.com. I'm looking forward to your ideas!

Hunt Valley Weekend KO: Third Session

Just so there's no suspense, we lost 9-60. It was hideous.

We were down 25 at the half. 13 of those were fairly random imps, and 12 were due to over-optimism on defense. On the first board of the second half, another 10 went out the window, and it became a scramble from there. Nothing worked to our advantage, and neither pair had a very good card either half. Not many problem hands, except for the easy ones we got wrong.

(A) A643 A K95 QJ865, red vs. white
It went three passes to me. Had this been in the second half, I probably would've called this a strong notrump... but I opened 1C.

(P) P (P) 1C;
(P) 1D (1H) 1S;
(2H) P (P) ?

(B) KT853 K5 52 J973, all white
You pass in first chair. LHO opens 1D, pard passes, and RHO bids 1H. Is this enough to overcall?

(C) AQ7532 K94 975 K, white vs. red
You open 1S, and partner lifts to 3S - a 4-card invitational raise. Is this an accept?

I misplayed this hand:

Dealer: S Vul: All

♠ KQJT85 ♥ AT9 ♦ Q5 ♣ 82 ♠ 5 ♥ K7643 ♦ AT972 ♣ A5

1♥ (2♣) 2♠ (3♣) 3♦ (P) 3♥ (P) 4♥ (All Pass)

West led the queen of clubs, two, three (encouraging), and I won to lead a spade up. West hopped ace and tried to cash the jack of clubs, but East overtook with the king and shot a diamond through. My only shot was to let it ride to the queen... but West won the king and they later took a trump trick for down one.

Now, if I had just let the queen of clubs hold the trick, assuming the diamond king (and spade ace) on my left (what else can he have for a vul two-level overcall on a QJ-high suit?), when trumps break 3-2, all they can take is a club, a diamond, and a spade. Yet another case of playing too quickly.

Apparently, this was played card for card in the other room.

Master Solvers' Club

The Bridge World is the premier magazine for serious bridge players. I would recommend a subscription to anyone with a keen interest in the game.

TBW's mainstay feature is the Master Solvers' Club. This feature has been copied by almost every other bridge magazine on the planet. There are seven bidding problems and one opening lead problem given to a panel of a few dozen of the world's top experts. Bridge World subscribers enter their choices online every month, and the very few who get a perfect score on all eight problems in a month get invited on the panel for an upcoming month. This can be a lot of fun as an email discussion between a group of friends. I used to have a lot of fun as a member of the S.O.Bs (Southern Oregon Bidders). Since moving to the East Coast, I haven't had the opportunity to be in a group like that, so I'd like to start one. If there are any other subscribers out there who would like to join me in this, please email me at McKenzie (at) DoubleSqueeze (dot) com.

Hunt Valley Weekend KO: Second Session

After skating through the first session, we came into another three-way. We had a repeat from the first ring (the MABC allows playbacks at any time. I think this is a poor idea) and our old friends Cheech and Chong.

First quarter, vs. Cheech and Chong:

(A) Q KJ864 J532 AK7, all red
RHO opens 1D. You overcall a heart, lefty passes, and pard advances with a forcing 1S. Pass on your right. You bid 1NT (do you?) and pard bids 2D. What's your call?

(B) 62 73 KT942 T854, all red
Pard opens 2NT (good 19-awful 22). Do you have a bid?

After six boards, we held the commanding lead of 11-10.

Second quarter, vs. Cranky Old People:

(C) 9754 AJ96 KQ9 AK, all red
LHO passes, pard passes, and RHO opens 1S. Green? Red? Else?

(D) KQJ763 5 K J9652, white vs. red
RHO opens 2H. You overcall 2S. Lefty bids 3D, pard cues 4D, righty passes, you bid 4S (do you?), and lefty bids what he probably should have the last time, 5D, pass, pass. You're up.

After six, we were up 14-3.

Third quarter, vs. C+C:

(E) J 432 AK73 KT752, white vs. red
Partner opens 1C in first chair, and RHO comes in with 1H. You cue 2H to show an invite or better in clubs, which pard pulls to 2NT. Pass, 3C, or 3N?

This was a very quiet set. Our teammates bid to a good game and went down on a ruff while C and C stopped in 2S making 3 for the only swing. We lost 12-18.


Fourth quarter, vs. COP:

I screwed up this hand mightily:

KT7 QJT87532 none 72, all white

Pard opened 1D, I responded 1H, she bounced to 2N, I bid 4H, and she passed. RHO came out of the bushes and doubled! I forgot to redouble, and when LHO led a low spade and dummy came down as

A95 A4 QJ96 AK93,

I also failed to pick up Kx of hearts onside... what should have been +1480 and win 14 was turned into a sad +790 and win 7.

We didn't need the seven imps. It got ugly... we won the match 41-8. On to the semis! We drew... you guessed it... Cheech again. Grr.

I'll post what happened at the table in the Comments. Please feel free to leave your own thoughts about these hands!

Hunt Valley Weekend KO: First session

We entered the Weekend Knockout with our old friends UK and Mullet. With 11,000 MPs on our team and only 54 teams in the event, we expected to make Bracket I, but when the sheets came out, we ended up in the middle of II. There were ten teams in the bracket, so there were two three-ways and two head-to-head matches in the first match. We fell into a three-way.

As always, I'll post what happened at the table in the Comments. If you're reading this via RSS or LiveJournal feed, come to the site and find out.

First quarter:

MY LHO made some insane calls. At unfavorable, she bid 3D over my 2S with xxx xx Axxxx ATx. Apparently her partner had seen her overcalls before-- she competed to 4D only over pard's 3S with a hand I'd be making a slam try on. +100. This was a quiet six boards, except for our teammates' going for 800 at unfavorable in a weak notrump escape auction. We were down 2-12 after six.

Second quarter:

(A) KJ862 KJT652 8 Q, white vs. red
RHO passes in first chair, and you?

(B) K KT4 AKT52 8642, all red
LHO opens 1H, pard overcalls 1S, RHO bids 1NT. Your bid.

(C) 963 54 AJ8752 K8, all white
Pard opens 1H in first seat, and RHO overcalls 1S. You make a negative double (do you? What would you do if your minors were switched?), and LHO leaps majestically to 4S. Pard's in there with 5C, righty passes, and it's up to you.

After six boards, we led 35-0.

Third quarter (down 2-12):

Again, nothing very spectacular our way. The big swing hand was the opponents flailing their way to slam off three bullets for win 11. The final score of the match was 27-15.

Fourth quarter (up 35-0):

(D) 84 A7 KQT84 9872, white vs. red
RHO quickly passed, and when I pulled out my Stop card prior to opening 2D (which I strongly believe is the right call), lefty disinterestedly pulled out a pass card. We certainly could have called the Director and exercised our options, but it didn't seem too necessary in this match. Pard passed 2D, and righty balanced with 2H. On the table action, do you have a call?

This was the quiet set we wanted it to be, and won the match 42-2. So onward to the quarterfinals! With six teams left in the bracket, it was another three-way. We drew the other survivor of our ring (the slam off three aces team) and our old friends Cheech and Chong.

Stay tuned.

The Impossible Spade

When your partner opens 1H and you bid 1NT (forcing or semi-forcing), there are many possible shapes for your hand. You could have any hand from

AKx xx Kxxx Jxxx

to

x none QJxxxx KJxxxx.

So many different handtypes in this one bid... but the one thing they all have in common is that they have fewer than four spades.

So what does a later spade bid by the 1NTer mean?

If opener rebids something at the two level, a jump to 3S is a splinter raise. So, 1H - 1NT - 2D - 3S should look something like:

7 K3 AQ6432 QT53.

But how about the "simple" 2S rebid?

The way I play it, over 1H - 1NT - 2m, 2S shows a maximum raise in the minor (tending to not have spade shortness - see above). 1H - 1NT - 2C - 2S is probably something like

K63 J4 Q75 AJT83.

Playing this, I can give a "courtesy raise" to 3C with a hand like

J63 J4 T75 AJT83,

and partner will know not to take me too seriously since I didn't start with 2S.

When partner rebids 2H over my 1NT, I use 2S as a two-way bid. This shows either a three-card limit raise in hearts, or an invitational hand with 5-5 in the minors. Opener treats it as the minor hand, generally showing his preference at the three level. If he wants to accept game in a particular minor, he bids four of that minor, forcing. You still have to leave room for partner to correct back to 4H with the three-card limit raise!

The flip side of this is when the auction goes 1H - 1NT - 2H, a 3H bid shows limit-raise strength with only two cards. This information can be very helpful for close game decisions.

So let's say responder holds

(A) A8 6 KJT62 Q8532

(B) J86 KQT A963 T65

(C) 4 KJ3 AJT74 J752

in these sequences:

(1) 1H - 1NT - 2D -

(2) 1H - 1NT - 2H -

My suggested auctions:

(A1) ... 2S! [great diamond raise] - 3D [I'm not interested] - P
(A2) ... 2S! [good hand with both minors] - 3m [I choose this one, please go away] - P

(B1) ... 3H [three-card limit raise]
(B2) ... 2S! [good hand with both minors]- 3D - 3H [cancel that, I really have a great heart raise]

(C1) ... 4H [started out as a three-card limit raise, but your diamond bid made this hand a game-force]
(C2) ... 2S! [good hand with both minors] - 3D - 4H [started out as a three-card limit raise, but your diamond bid made this hand a game-force]

Kickoff KO: Day Two, Cont'd

So we're in the semifinals now, and we draw a team of four women. There was absolutely nothing interesting in this match, which tends to bode well for the better team. We were up 27 at the half, so there you go.

My LHO clearly hadn't gotten the memo about the STOP card, because she could not have used it more improperly. It was annoying at the time, but one of my favorite moments was when she opened 1C and her partner bid 1S. When the bidding got back to her, she went into the tank for about a minute. Then she pulled the STOP card from her bidding box and laid it on the table...and proceeded to do nothing for another minute.

When she finally decided on 4S (I would've been especially amused had she not made a skip bid), she left the STOP card on the table until my partner asked her to remove it so we could get on with the auction. And thank goodness she was so emphatic about that STOP business, because her partner took her seriously and forgot to bid the cold slam. Win 11:) That's what you get for bad bidding behavior.

The final was, again, not so interesting. Throughout the first half, I was the one faced with most of the decisions. I didn't think any of them were real decisions (accept a game try with a bad 13? Invite game with a balanced 9 opposite a 3rd seat opening? Compete to 4 of a minor at unfavorable vulnerability?), but unfortunately, the logical actions in all these situations (no, no, and no) turned out to be wrong. Sigh. Not that it's necessarily wrong to bid the way I chose, but I know that players at this level tend to bid ridiculous games and only exercise restraint when they really shouldn't, so I was concerned that we were adding up a lot of negative swings.

At halftime, I estimated that we were taking a minus 20 card back to our partners. Little did I know, our teammates had just piled up a flawless card. Well, flawless enough. We did lose 10 on one of the boards where I opted to stop short of game, but that was our only minus score and we were up 52 to 10 after the first twelve boards.

According to our teammates, the opponents at their table were experiencing some sort of meltdown. Given that we'd all been at the bridge table for more than twelve hours by then (counting the dinner break...), we sort of hoped the others would want to withdraw. One of them did, but she got outvoted. I overheard her on the way back to our teammates' table saying "I don't want to play those guys anymore! I don't understand them!" Heh.

So we hunkered down for twelve more hands of bridge, just hoping to stay awake enough not to fall on our swords.

The set went by pretty quickly at our table, with the only interesting deal coming on the very last hand. Pard was dealer and we were unfavorable. I held: xx KQTxx xxxx Qx

The auction:
1N(15-17) (P) 2D(transfer) (3C -- after a loooong tank)

Then pard goes into the tank and I'm thinking, oy, just pass, them making 3C will be at worst a lose 6. Then, out comes 4H. Huh?

Did partner open 1N with a club void? 6 hearts? 26 points? I'm not sure where this bid came from, but when it passed out, I was just glad we weren't doubled. I don't think we're losing our lead, but it would be a shame to finish the match on a downer.

I watched the hand play out in disbelief. Pard had short(?!) hearts and a bad break to contend with, but LHO took exactly zero club tricks. Apparently that was partner's suit. I think the tank over 2D was lefty deciding whether or not to try a psych bid for the first time. Righty didn't get the joke and kept leading clubs when she got in, which my pard kept winning for ten whole tricks. I never did make sense of any of the bidding on this hand, and I didn't write anything down because I was too busy thinking what just happened?

Anyway, sorry I don't have any hands to share. The play on Tuesday was mostly boring and uninteresting, but I had a fantastic time with this team. It's good to know I can still whip up on Bracket VII players...

Both McKenzie and I finished the day with wins, and we decided to take the rest of the week off until we reunite with our Reston teammates, UK and Mullet, for the Sat-Sun KO.

Hunt Valley: Tuesday Evening Hands

This was the wackiest set of hands I've played in years.

All problems matchpoints. What happened at the table will follow in the Comments.

(A) KJ963 A 9 986432, red vs. white
RHO passes. First of all, what's your action? I decided to open 1C. LHO bid 1D, pard bid 1NT, and RHO tabled 2H. What's your call here?

(B) AQ74 none KQT753 Q42 white vs. red
You open 1D in first chair. Lefty passes, partner bids 1S, and RHO butts in with 2H. You're up.

(C) 43 J72 AT43 T865, all red
LHO opens 1C. Pard doubles, and RHO bids 1H. I know I won't get a lot of support here, but let's say you bid 2D. (For those of you who disagree with 2D, would you bid if you could show the suit at the one level?) LHO now bids 3C, partner bids 3H, and righty passes. Your call.

(D) KQ9 A96 AJ754 K7, red vs. white
You open 1D (1N would have been 14-16). LHO overcalls 2C, which is raised to 3C on your right. What's your bid?

(E1) A9 T65 KJ8765 T4, white vs. red
Partner, in first seat, opens a 14-16 NT. Your choices are 2N (natural), 3N, or 2S (clubs or invite in diamonds). What's your guess?

(E2) Say you go the third route, and start with 2S. Pard bids 3C (does not accept an invitation in clubs), and you bid 3D, revealing your hand. Partner continues with 3H. You're up.

(F) 62 AJT8753 72 KJ, all white
Pard opens 1D in first chair. RHO bounces to 3C, and it's your call.

(G) AK6 J85 93 AKQ63, red vs. white
In second chair, pard opens a weak 2D. RHO comes in with 2S, and you bid 3N. This is passed around to righty, who viciously doubles. You can make a "content" pass, a "doubt" redouble, or a "pansy" pull.

(H) 8763 none A732 J6542, white vs. red
Pard opens 2S in first chair. Righty doubles. You can bid some number of spades, or stick in a lead director at the three level (by bidding one under the suit). You're up.

Kickoff KO - Bracket VII, Day Two

Match two began at 9am on Tuesday. I hate the way they schedule this, so that if you win (finishing at 11pm), you have to be back at it bright and early. Thank goodness I'm a morning person.

My RHO for this match had the annoying habit of thinking with his hands. He counted all his points with his fingers, suit length and distribution were obvious from his gestures, and he tanked over every bid, drawing lots of attention toward this bad behavior. I watched his partner closely for signs that he was taking advantage of this UI, but he maintained a far-off, glazed look, so I was confident that he was not. While I do feel that you are entitled to take advantage of all the information your opponents want to give you, I didn't want to win that way, so I did my best to ignore my RHO throughout the match. Apologies to my partner, who thought I was upset with him. No, I was just cranky.

My first hand of the day was this, in third seat, all red:
8632 QJ5 86432 A

Pard opens 1D and there's a pass to you. We play inverted minors, so 3D is an option here. I could also mention my 4-card major, or just bid 1N, which sounds like a sign-off and in retrospect is the call I would make if I had it to do all over again. I started with 1S. Here's the auction:
1D(P)1S(2C)P(P)2D(P)P(3C)?

Now, I really have said my piece, and I'd opted against 3D at the start...but I don't think we're setting 3C and it feels right to compete. I won it for my pard at 3D, which was just in. If I'd bid 3D directly, showing perhaps a bit weaker hand than I implied in this sequence, I wonder what the opponents would have done. It's hard to predict in this bracket. I did at least discourage a spade lead...a little trick I learned from my husband, but probably don't use optimally.

I had a little lead problem later in the match, after this uncontested auction:
(1H)(2N)(3D)(4N)(5C)(5H)

Holding 9642 2 KJ6 KT652, I decided to go fishing for the ace of diamonds. I figured that with shortness, declarer wouldn't bother finessing, and maybe my K would be worth a trick later, since it'll take a few rounds to draw trumps. I was proud when this came true for down one and win 13.

We were up 23 at the half, which leads into a segment I'd like to call "How Not to Make up a Deficit in Teams."

The first incident came on the second board, where I'm in fourth chair and I see the auction go (P)1N(2S). I had a bad hand with a spade stack, so I didn't ask for an explanation and sat for the bid. It passed around and was explained as natural. So, what does a natural 2S overcall look like?

If you can figure it out, you'll set them several more than the 2 tricks we beat it by. Can you guess?

It's pretty much a yarb with five spades. Silly me for thinking he'd have shortness or honor cards anywhere -- I guess I should have watched him when he was counting on his fingers this time. Our teammates set something by 2 tricks at the other table -- I didn't ask, but I can't imagine it was spades. We actually have tricks in that suit.

With nine unspectacular boards in the tank, the opponents have got to know they're in trouble with only four boards to go. Time to start swinging, maybe?

Well, when you hold AQJT KJxxx xx xx and your opponents bid to what smells like a misfit in 4S, what do you do? Hint: your partner has bid in this auction.

You pass, of course! Why would you double when you only have four sure tricks?

Then, on the final board of the match, you open 1D with this: AQJT Q65 QT96 K4. Pard comes in with 1S, so you...2S? 3S? 4S? (I don't actually agree with 3 or 4, but knowing I'm down a lot and have one measly board to do something about it, I'm happy to lay it on the line).

In their 1S contract, declarer managed to take only 10 of the 12 available tricks.

So now we're in the money round...will the bridge get any better? (Hint: no.)

Hunt Valley: Tuesday Afternoon Hands

Mike and I placed 3rd overall (of 78) in the Tuesday Open Pairs. The event certainly was ours to win if we'd played perfectly. We ended up about 1¼ boards out of first place. There were an amazing amount of interesting hands. All problems matchpoints. What happened at the table will follow in the Comments.

(A) Q Q653 AJ43 AK84, red vs. white
LHO open 2S, pard passes, RHO lifts to 3S, and you?

(B) A2 AJ6532 A7 A83, all white
You open 1H. LHO overcalls 1S, pass, pass to you. Your call.

(C) A5 T5 KQJ4 T8753, red vs. white
Pard opens 1C, RHO overcalls 1H, you bid 2H (limit raise or better in clubs), and partner rebids 2NT. Pass, 3C, or 3NT? [A 1NT opening by partner is 14-16.]

(D1) J63 J973 AQ4 A93, all red.
Pard opens 1S. Your choices are 2C [game force], 1N [semi-forcing], or 2N [limit raise or better].

(D2) If you bid 1N, what are your rebids over partner's two-level rebids?

Kickoff KO - Bracket VII, Day One

I met up with my buddy Al on Monday afternoon to talk about a card. We'd played together for a few days in Gatlinburg, but that's the extent of our partnership to date, so we wanted to do some tweaking and fine tuning before competing here in Hunt Valley.

In Tennessee, we'd played a Standard card. This time, Al wanted to try some 2 over 1. We kept the card pretty simple, with just a few must-have gadgets like Drury (one-way, reverse, fit). I'm constantly deflecting the question "What do you play here?" New partnerships probably shouldn't even discuss 90% of my card with McKenzie.

When the dust settled around the selling table, our team's combined 1350 points landed us at the bottom of the seventh bracket (out of nine total). I was introduced to our teammates just before the first match. Mike and Jon are indeed solid players for their ~600 combined points, and they play Precision. Knowing that few of the other pairs in the event would be playing anything more than SAYC or a basic, basic 2/1, I predicted that we would have lots of swings -- hopefully all in the right direction.

The very first board was a good one for feeling out the competition. Nice little preempt situation here:

Fourth seat, favorable, you hold: AQT9843 62 K 853
(1N)P(2D)?
1N is 15-17, and 2D is a transfer.

I decided 3S was best here. It would be good to put pressure on the opponents right away, and show them that I'm not afraid of their 1N bids. I got to play here, undoubled, and when dummy wasn't totally broke, I was able to bring in 10 tricks. Lose 6 against a making 4S at the other table. Dang. It's about a 17 point game.

The next board was another bidding problem of sorts. This time unfavorable, you're in third seat with:
J42 K63 84 AJ632
P(P)P(1C)P(1S)P(P)X(P)?

So pard has hearts and diamonds, apparently, but none good enough to open, preempt, or overcall at the 1-level. The old "but we can't let them play at the 1-level!" balancing double. Having no idea what partner's really got, and all but certain there's no fit, I chose 1N. 2C was my other option, but with bad spots and in front of the 1C bidder, I decided not to take my chances here. Imagine my joy when the auction continued (P)P(2C)! I worried when pard tanked in the pass out seat, but was pleased to see his green card. We set this two tricks for a win 5 opposite our teammates' making 1N.

There wasn't much more excitement in this set, but there were swings aplenty, and we found ourselves down 25-34 at the half. I reminded our teammates that 9 imps in 12 boards is nothing -- please, please, don't start swinging. Just play bridge.

When we returned for the second half, our opponents were confused. They thought they'd won. "I've NEVER played in an event where you play the same people twice!" Oh, Bracket VII, you're so cute.

We explained the halftime concept to them and got down to business. I declared one hand in the entire second half, which should say quite a bit about the quality of my cards. I felt pretty confident that we'd made up our gap by the third board of the set, when the opponents bid all the way up to 3D and brought home a score of 190. Our teammates didn't find the granny, but were able to eke out a game bid anyhow for a win 6. A few boards later, I knew the match was over when pard made a doubled and vulnerable 4S for 790 and win 13.

The hands were really boring for me this set so I don't have anything fun to share from it, but there will be some gems from the upcoming match. We gave up one imp in the second half of match one, but gained 39, so we advanced comfortably into the quarterfinals.

Stay tuned...

Hunt Valley: Monday Hands

Mike and I played in the Single-Session Knockouts. We did some bad things, and some good things, and a lot of neutral things. There wasn't a heck of a lot in the cards. It was a surprisingly boring set.

All hands IMPs. What happened at the table will appear in the Comments.

(A) A5 T943 AKQJ94 A, all white
In fourth chair, I opened 1D. Pard bid 1H. I pulled out an undiscussed 4D (one of our final agreements was "anything we haven't discussed, assume expert standard"), and he keycarded with 4S. I showed 0 or 3 (5C), and he bid 5H. We had also agreed that 5H is a signoff opposite zero and the queen ask opposite 3, "unless you've opened 2C or something." Do you pass 5H or bid 6H to show three without the queen?

(B) AKQJT3 AJ T3 A63, red vs. white
You to open. Your choices are 1S, a semi-wacky but not ridiculous 2NT, or an Acol 3NT (16-21, source of tricks with side stoppers).

(C) T5 AKT JT2 JT742, red vs. white
You pass in first chair. The auction continues: P (1C) 1D (1H) 1N (2H) P (P). Do you have a call?

(D) 6 AQ873 AT5 QT84, white vs. red
You open 1H, and partner splinters with 4D. You're up.

(E) KT63 J AQT843 A5, red vs. white
Pard opens a weak 2H in first chair. Righty passes, and you...?

(H1) JT8 A7 QJ3 KQT73, red vs. white
Righty opens a strong notrump and plays there. Your lead.

(H2) KJ954 865 K95 Q8, all white
RHO opens 1D. You overcall 1S (unless you're Brian Meyer). LHO cues 2S (LR+), RHO bids 2NT, and LHO lifts to 3NT. Your lead.

Hunt Valley: Monday

For the Hunt Valley Regional (held this week just north of Baltimore, MD) Meg had a previous commitment for the first two days, so I get to try out a new partner for a few days. Mike Gill was nice enough to agree to join me. Mike is a great player and a heck of a nice guy. He's a grad student at the University of Maryland in astrophysics. He was also a member of the 2005 USA Junior Team in Sydney, Australia.

Mike and I had a couple of hours to cobble agreements together. Here's a few of the things we decided on.

14-16 notrumps, with extended Stayman and better-minor lebensohl
1H-2S and 1S-2N as a limit raise or better (with these responses)
3S relay over 2N
Semi-forcing notrumps over 1M
Fit-showing jumps in competition
Upside-down count and attitude with standard Smith echo
Snapdragon and Doorknob doubles and redoubles
Modified Landy over their notrumps (2C = majors, double of a strong NT = major/minor, all else natural)
Transfer McCabe
Kickback
Exclusion Keycard
Non-serious 3NT
Modified responses to Michaels
Acol 3NT openings
Pass-double inversion
Bad/good 2NT

...and a few other fun things.

2NT - 3S Relay, and The Most Dangerous Convention in Bridge

How do you handle minor suit oriented hands when your partner opens 2NT? Most casual partnerships have no way of showing minor one or two suiters over this space-guzzling opening. I've cobbled together a somewhat simple set of responses to cover these hands.

When my partner opens 2NT*, my bid of 3S forces 3NT out of partner. Once partner rebids 3NT, my further actions define my hand.

*Note: All these bids are also used in the auction 2C - 2D - 2NT.

2NT - 3S - 3NT -:
4C = natural clubs, slam try
4D = natural diamonds, slam try
4H = shortness in hearts with both minors
4S = shortness in spades with both minors
4NT = transfer to clubs
5C = transfer to diamonds

Some partnerships prefer to switch the 4C and 4D responses, to show the other minor, to make opener declare more often.

The 4H and 4S bids show at most one in the suit bid, and at least 5-4 in the minors (usually 5-5).
There's also one important sequence in here that I forgot to mention: 2NT - 3S - 3NT - Pass. Sure, you could've just bid 3NT in the first place, so there has to be some special meaning to this sequence, right? Well, many years ago, the Pakistanis played this to say "I'm sorry I screwed up that last hand!" We have our own meaning for it... and we'll tell you if it comes up at our table.

Warning! The following is for people with strong stomachs and good memories only!

The following has been termed "the most dangerous convention in bridge." I play it with only one partner at the moment...

Over 2NT, 3S is the relay to 3NT, and 2NT - 3NT is a relay to 4C!

The shortness bids of 2NT - 3S - 3NT - 4H/4S now definitely show 5-5 in the minors.

Starting with 3NT shows 5-4 in the minors.

2NT - 3NT - 4C - 4D/4H are "transfers". These show three cards in the suit above. So you'd bid 2NT - 3NT - 4C - 4H with 3145 or 3154. Partner can bid the transfer suit to suggest a place to play-- he has a 5 card fit (or maybe a good 4 card fit) with your three-card major.

If you're 2-2(45) you rebid 4S.

So the whole scheme of The Most Dangerous Convention In Bridge:

Starting with 2NT or 2C - 2D - 2NT:

3S = relay to 3NT
3NT
4C = slam try with clubs
4D = slam try with diamonds
4H = 2-1-5-5, 2-0-6-5, 2-0-5-6
4S = 1-2-5-5, 0-2-6-5, 0-2-5-6
4N = transfer to clubs
5C = transfer to diamonds

3NT = relay to 4C
4C
4D = 1-3-4-5, 1-3-5-4, 0-3-5-5
4H = 3-1-4-5, 3-1-5-4, 3-0-5-5
4S = 2-2-4-5, 2-2-5-4
4NT = I forgot the convention again! I really wanted to play 3NT!

Yes, we really have "I forgot" in the system notes.

Regional time

Starting tomorrow, we'll be at the Hunt Valley Regional, just outside of Baltimore, MD. If you're going to be around, say hi!

Modified Two-Way Drury

Drury is a "must" convention for any partnership that may open light in third and fourth chair. Especially at matchpoints, it's good tactics to open the bidding in third chair with a hand like AKT96 K753 97 T5, but when your partner will gleefully leap to 3S with a hand like QJ83 T6 K542 QJ32, you'll go down hard (sometimes doubled) at the three-level.

Douglas Drury devised his now-famous convention in self-defense. He was tired of raising his partner Eric Murray's third chair openings to the three-level and watching him go for 1100. He felt much better being able to stop at the two-level for only 800!

As originally written up, responder would bid 2C with almost any maximum passed hand, and opener would bid 2D with any minimum. This got quickly amended by most tournament players to promise a fit with the 2C call, with opener's negative rebid being two of his major (known as Reverse Drury).

A further innovation was Two-Way Drury. Responder would bid 2C with a good three-card raise, or 2D with a good four-card raise. I played this this for a few years, until I learned of this modification:

2C = 4 card constructive or limit raise
2D = 3 card limit raise
2M = 3 card constructive raise

After P - 1M - 2C, opener can sign off in two of his suit, or bid 2D to ask which type of raise. With the constructive raise, responder returns to two of the major. With the limit raise, responder bids as naturally as possible. So, with

KT98 QJ52 J76 83

the auction would go (opponents silent)

P - 1S;
2C! - 2D!
2S

but with

KT98 QJ52 A76 83

the auction would go

P - 1S;
2C! - 2D!
2H

and with

KT98 QJ52 A763 5

the auction would go

P - 1S;
2C! - 2D!
4C (splinter).

Knowing partner's exact trump length is a very important thing for some players. I made the decision a while back that I'm not one of them. I decided that three bids (2C, 2D, 2M) to raise partner was a little too much wastage. The argument for two-way Drury is that on a lot of hands that would bid a natural 2D over partner's third chair opening would've opened a weak 2D in first chair. I decided to go with that argument... so now, with most partners, I play P - 1M - 2D as Reverse Drury, and P - 1M - 2C as natural!

Modified Responses to Michaels Cuebids

When the opponents open one of a major and your partner bids two of that major (Michaels Cue Bid), what do you do with a good hand and a fit for partner?

"Standard" procedure in this auction is to bid 2NT (asking for partner's minor) and correcting partner's minor suit bid to three of his major with a fit there, or raising the minor suit call to 4 with a fit there. This seems pretty ungainly to me. So I've accepted a new set of responses.

Let's say your left-hand opponent opens 1S, partner bids 2S, and right-hand opponent passes. Here's the response structure I prefer:

2NT = game try in partner's minor
3C = pass with clubs, bid 3D with diamonds
3D = game try in hearts
3H = to play
3S = heart raise with spade shortness
3N = to play
4C = heart raise with club shortness
4D = heart raise with diamond shortness
4H = to play
4N = bid your minor

It's basically the same structure over (1H) 2H (P), except you have the possibility of playing 2S:

2S = to play
2NT = game try in partner's minor
3C = pass with clubs, bid 3D with diamonds
3D = game try in spades
3H = stopper ask
3S = preemptive raise
3N = to play
4C = spade raise with club shortness
4D = spade raise with diamond shortness
4H = spade raise with heart shortness
4S = to play
4N = bid your minor

You may wonder how I am able to make all these game-tries opposite the standard wide-ranging Michaels bids. Well, that's easy-- I've stopped making Michaels bids with bad hands. In my bridge youth, when I was dealt Jxxxx xx Jxxxx x, I was thrilled to throw in a 2H bid over my righty's 1H. I considered it unlucky the first ten times pard went for a number at a low level, or overvalued my hand and pushed to a no-play game, but after that I started wising up. These weren't unlucky hands for the method, they were reasonable results playing a bad method. My buddy Roger suggested a fairly strict set of rules for Michaels two-of-a-major bids and Unusual 2NT bids, which I've (mostly) stuck to:

When you're at favorable vulnerability, have 7 HCP in your two suits;
When you're at equal vulnerability, have 9 HCP in your two suits;
When you're at unfavorable vulnerability, have 11 HCP in your two suits.

Note that this doesn't say anything about total hand strength. At unfavorable, I'd happily Michaels with AKTxx xx AT9xx x, but wouldn't think of it with Txxxx AK T9xxx A.

Since I started playing Michaels as good hands (or at least two respectable suits), my partners have been going down in silly contracts a lot less. Not forcing them into dumb spots is a good way to keep partners happy!

Fit-showing Jumps

I think that fit-showing jumps (FSJ) are one of the most useful competitive treatments out there. With many of my favorite partners, I play these jumps in almost all competitive situations.

The basic fit-showing jump is a fairly simple concept. When your partner bids a suit and your RHO takes an action, a new-suit jump by you shows invitational values, length and strength in the bid suit, and a fit for partner. For example, let's say I hold 742 A76 KQJ93 94. My partner opens 1H, and my RHO bids 1S. Most folks would just bid 2S, showing a limit raise or better in hearts. Playing FSJs, I leap to 3D to show this hand. Let's give partner two sample hands, and see what he would do on the two auctions.

(A) A53 KQJ84 A87 52

(B) A53 KQJ84 52 A87

Of course, with either hand, over 1H (1S) 2S (P), partner will take the same action (if it was me, it would be bidding game at IMPs and signing off at matchpoints, but wouldn't be sure if either was right), but over a descriptive call like 3D, partner can confidently bid game on (A) and confidently sign off with hand (B).

Of course, as with any convention, we need to ask ourselves "what are we giving up?" Here, to play FSJs, we're giving up strong or weak jump-shifts, whichever your partnership is currently using.

A strong jump-shift should be a hand like:
AK AQJ864 KJ3 J2.
Over your partner's one of a suit opening and an overcall, you jump in hearts to show a powerhouse with long hearts.

A weak jump-shift should be a hand like:
85 KJT864 963 52.
Over your partner's one of a suit opening and an overcall, you jump in hearts to show an awful hand with long hearts.

Most tournament players long ago dropped the "standard" strong jump-shifts in competition in favor of the weak jump-shift. They noticed that the weak hands came up far more often than the strong ones, and, especially with the rise of Two Over One Game Forcing, the big hands had many other ways to show strength and get information out of partner.

So they moved to weak jump-shifts, in large part (in my opinion) because there weren't any other widely-publicized alternatives. I played them for a while, but noticed that even when the right hand for a weak jump-shift came up*, two or three of my long suit wasn't always the right contract. In fact, it'd often give the opponents the fielders' choice of doubling me or bidding to their best contract (remember, they've already shown values and shape on your right). So when someone explained FSJ to me, I was an overnight convert.

*Also, my partners would often not wait for the right hand to come up to make the weak jump-shift... giving the opponents even more of a fielders' choice.

Two Hands from BBO

I played on Bridge Base Online this evening with my friend Anne. Anne was the winningest female player in the ACBL last year. She ended up the year with 1,419.97 masterpoints-- just ahead of Melanie Tucker with 1,419.86! Check out the tight race here. We held two hands that illustrate the importance of accuracy with high-level competition.

Dealer: South Vul: N-S Scoring: IMPs

♠ K963 ♥ J3 ♦ AKT ♣ K954 ♠ 7 ♥ AQT9742 ♦ Q52 ♣ 86 ♠ A52 ♥ K865 ♦ 976 ♣ QT7 ♠ QJT84 ♥ none ♦ J843 ♣ AJ32

1♠(2♥)4♠(5♥) P (P) X (P) 5♠ (6♥) X (All Pass)

Anne and I play a system that allows light openings with good playing strength and the spade suit. The South hand certainly has both, so I had an easy 1S opening. Lefty bid 2H, pard bounded to 4S, and righty bid 5H. Now, 4S by us is sort of a 'two-way' bid. It shows either a minimum game-force in high cards and a fit, or a preemptive raise to 4S. So my pass to 5H wasn't forcing. When pard doubled 5H, by agreement this said "I was bidding 4S to make", so with my undisclosed playing strength, I bid to 5S. LHO made the good decision to continue on to 6H (would you bid one more after being doubled in 5?), and partner's double ("Please don't bid any more, pard") ended the auction. On most lies of the cards, we would be on for 5S but not 6, and the opponents would be -500. With both minor-suit finesses on for our side, though, 6S was on, and 6H went -800. This was a well-judged hand for both sides, bidding to the single-dummy right spot. We figured out what was going on by good partnership and good understandings. West did it from a good (educated) guess.

On the very next board, we picked up

Dealer: West Vul: E-W Scoring: IMPs

♠ 987 ♥ QT9764 ♦ 6 ♣ 752 ♠ KQ6 ♥ A85 ♦ Q742 ♣ 863 ♠ AJT543 ♥ none ♦ AJ85 ♣ QJT ♠ 2 ♥ KJ32 ♦ KT93 ♣ AK94

(P) P (1♠) X (3♠) 4♥ (4♠) 5♥ (P) P (5♠) X (All Pass)

My RHO opened 1S in third chair, and I had an automatic takeout double. My lefty made a limit raise in spades, and pard (bless her-- great bid!) was in there with 4H. Righty bid 4S, and it was my guess. At IMPs, it tends to be percentage to bid one more, so I pulled out 5H. This would've gone for 300, but righty had heard of the 'bid one more' principle also, and bid to the doomed 5S. I didn't want my partner to worry about re-saving in 6H, so I doubled. We collected our two clubs and a diamond for +200.

These were both big pick-ups. Sure, there are hands consistent with the auctions that would have worked out poorly for our actions, but I think all of our bids were 'right'. Thanks again, Anne, for playing! (And nice 4H call!)

Semi-Forcing Notrump

"Semi-forcing" is a bit of an oxy-moron, isn't it? Either a bid is forcing or it's not. Whatever -- we play semi-forcing notrumps over an opening bid of 1 of a major.

Most 2 over 1 players play forcing notrumps, at least as a non-passed hand. We did that for a while, too, but I got sick of squirming over what to do with my 4522 12-count over pard's forcing bid. And why should I have to bid? Pard's already denied 4 spades and game forcing values, I'm not accepting a 3-card limit raise anyway, and if we have a 6-2 minor suit fit, we're probably doing just as well in 1N. This is a hand that wants to pass.

McKenzie already plays semi-forcing notrumps with several partners, so he was happy to change our card when I asked about it. Our agreement is pretty simple. If you have a game forcing hand, find a 2 over 1 bid, even if it is a 3-card minor (for example, pard opens 1S and you're 3-4-3-3 with a 15 count -- I like 2C here better than 2H or 2N -- it's less of a lie and I can show the spade fit on the next round). If you have a hand that is not strong enough to force, you can bid a semi-forcing 1N.

Over the 1N, opener can pass any balanced minimum -- hands that wouldn't accept invitations to game and hands that have no extra shape. Now, when opener bids on over 1N, he is promising either a real suit or extra values. Because we're not shy about opening 1N with a 5-card major, a new suit over 1N tends to be real - 4 or 5 cards in length.

With this structure, responder has a much clearer picture of opener's hand, and you don't get pushed up when both of you have bad hands.

This is simple and convenient, and it's one of the few things I try to insist on when making a card with a new partner.

Fun Hand from the Las Vegas NABC

Playing with my friend Tammy in a morning Swiss match, I picked up the following hand (first seat, all white):

862 AKQJ63 --- QJ74

Never mind the auction -- we had a misunderstanding about a piece of our system. But we stumbled to 4H. Dummy hits with:

KQJT954 T92 742 ---

On the lead of the Spade 7 (from 73), this is ice cold for 6, off three aces. Ironically, our bidding mishap kept us out of 4S, which only made 5. Win one. Go team:)

How would the auction go at your table?

Sometimes You're a Max, and That's Okay

Whenever I hold borderline hands, I always feel like no matter how I bid, it's wrong. You know the ones -- too strong for this, too light for that, not shapely enough for the next alternative...

Here's one I held yesterday in second seat, all hot:

KT4 A AJ52 KQT74

At first glance, this is a really pretty hand... Until it's time to bid the thing, and it gives you a headache. I felt that opening 1D and rebidding 2C over any of partner's 1-level actions would show a worse hand than I actually held. But starting with 1C and planning to reverse might not work so well if pard responds with 1H -- now my hand's not really pretty enough for a reverse -- is it worth 2N now? No, I don't have any transportation. And 1N shows at best a bad 14 count.

I figured that given the likelihood of a 1H response from pard, I couldn't start with 1C, and I started with 1D, bidding 2C over partner's 1S, but feeling really bad about it. I was heartened when he kept the bidding alive with 2N, and happily pulled to 3N, though in retrospect I think this would have been the perfect opportunity to show my third spade -- I was just so glad we were going to get to game that I steamrolled right past my best call. McKenzie scored 10 hard-earned tricks for a 7 on an 8-top, though 4S comes in much more smoothly, and one pair found an 11th trick in the contract. Oh well -- live and learn.

After the hand, I lamented that surely there must be a better way to bid this moose.

"What's wrong with the way you bid it?"

"I never got to show you my real strength. I hated that 2C was non-forcing."

"Would you have hated it so much if I'd held Qxxx of spades and a few stray jacks?"

Point taken. I never denied holding as many as 17HCP, after all, and as my good friend Chris likes to remind me, "Your partner has heard about the game bonus." If there's a chance it's there, he'll keep the bidding alive. And sometimes it's right to stop in a part score, even when you are in love with your hand.

As a sequel, McKenzie will be writing up a request about valuing and overvaluing your distributional hands. Keep an eye out...

Another defense

A few days ago I posted the worst defense ever perpetrated. To show that we're not totally pathetic, here's a nice defense we put together yesterday.

Dealer: West Vul: Both Scoring: MPs

♠ QJ ♥ Q96 ♦ KJT ♣ AQ976 ♠ AK97 ♥ 53 ♦ 9752 ♣ T32 ♠T led ♠ T42 ♥ KJT82 ♦ A43 ♣ K5 ♠ 8653 ♥ A74 ♦ Q86 ♣ J84

1♣(1♥)X(P) 1N (All Pass)

North-South got to 1N from the North seat after Meg overcalled 1H. She got off to a spectacular start with the ten of spades (playing attitude leads), starting the unblock. (You can see that if she leads a spade spot card, the suit blocks and we get only three spades.) I won with the king, dropping the jack, and continued with the ace, dropping the queen. Now a heart through, declarer ducking, partner playing the ten, and declarer winning the ace (it's probably the right play to duck the ten of hearts, but we would untangle our tricks anyway). A club finesse was taken to partner's king. She shot her last spade through the eight to my 97. I took two spades and led hearts through again. We took four spades, four hearts, a club, and a diamond, for +400 the hard way.

Points and the Partnership Desk

I try to tag along with McKenzie whenever he has a professional bridge gig, and a lot of times that means I'm left floating around the tournament with no partners lined up. His work takes him all over the place, so it's pretty common that I don't know anyone else at the tournament aside from his teammates. That means that if I want to play, I have to visit the partnership desk.

For every one good partner you find at the partnership desk, there are at least five who will give you a migraine. After all, these are usually people who couldn't get anyone to agree to play with them.

When you request the services of the partnership desk, pretty much the only criterion they use to match you with someone else is your masterpoint total. Have you ever noticed that every bridge player in the world thinks that they are better than their masterpoints indicate?

I know I feel this way. I have about 560 masterpoints as of this writing, which is 260 more than I started the year with, and something like 550 more than I had this time three years ago. Some people spend their whole lives trying to rack up the points that I've won in the last year -- clearly I'm better than these people, right? Well, maybe...but there's also the fact that I play bridge all the freaking time. Anyone who plays enough bridge can win a Mini-McKinney race.

I used to have a whole spiel that I would deliver when approaching the partnership desk. "I only have 350 points, but 150 of those are from the last six months and my regular partner is a bridge pro, I can pull my weight, please match me with an A player." Gosh, I really sounded like a tool.

Eventually I realized that everyone rates their own skill above what their masterpoints may indicate, and no real A player wants to get matched up with some full-of-herself novice, no matter how many times she claims to have defeated Meckwell (once).

I've been matched up with people like this, too. They have 100 points or so, or maybe even 1,000 or more, but insist that they are really top notch players, nevermind the points or lack thereof. And since I've always been a believer that masterpoints are no indicator of skill, I believed them when they made their proclamations.

Inevitably, within the first few boards, I'm thinking to myself "how on earth did this person EVER get out of of the 0-5 game?!" And players who think they are better than their points tend to make terrible partners. They want to look for blame when a defense goes awry, they misuse all the dozens of conventions they insist on playing, they don't trust their partners, and they don't listen. The only thing more painful than the migraine is the 28% next to your name on the score sheet. Ouch.

My best partnership desk experience ever was not with some expert player who listened to my BS about being better than my points -- it was in Gatlinburg 2008, when I finally realized that telling them I'm better than my 400 points won't get me a better partner. I just handed in my card and waited quietly to get matched up with whatever threesome was missing a fourth. As I'd expected, I was put with a group of players with about 700 points between them, and off we went to compete in bracket 26 of the KOs. My points actually pulled the group up, as the spread in the bottom brackets at Gatlinburg is very tight.

No one on the team thought they were better than anyone else, my partner was very respectful and kind, and no one did any teaching -- except when the beer card came up. We had a blast together, were moderately successful as a team, and for the first time ever, I got a lasting friendship out of a partnership desk experience.

Club "Bridge"

If we could play tournament bridge all the time, we would, but club bridge is better than no bridge -- or is it?

We often get very frustrated playing at the club, because others just don't take it as seriously, and the level of play can be depressingly pitiful. But still, we love the game, and we keep going back. Occasionally, like today, we get rewarded with gems like this, a story from a friend's table:

Two players were bidding in an uncontested auction, and East reversed. West went into the tank, then after about 3 minutes, looked to North and said "May I ask you a question? In an uncontested auction, is a reverse forcing?"

North diplomatically stifled his laughter and told West that this kind of question is not, in fact, allowed.

D'oh.

It's amazing that West could recognize a reverse but not understand its meaning. I didn't see the hand, but I'd put money down that East hadn't even meant to do it!

For the record, yes, a reverse is forcing...

Modified Smolski over Notrump

There's an ever-growing controversy over the best system to play over the opponents' 1NT opening. It seems like the most popular systems these days are DONT and Hamilton (Cappeletti), but I don't really like either of those. I think that there is a real competitive advantage to immediately overcalling two of a major without going through an intermediate step (double in DONT, 2C in Hamilton).

My other criterion for a notrump system is that all two suiters (with the possible exception of both minors) should be able to be shown at the two-level.

So I picked up a convention put together by the true gentleman of Bermudian bridge, Roman Smolski. Roman started with Brozel as a base. For those of you who are unfamiliar, the Brozel structure is:

Double = Unspecified single suit
2C = Clubs and Hearts
2D = Diamonds and Hearts
2H = Hearts and Spades
2S = Spades and a Minor
2NT = Clubs and Diamonds

He modified it with the "immediate majors" principle like this:

Double = Two-suiter including Spades
2C = Clubs and Hearts
2D = Diamonds and Hearts
2H = Hearts
2S = Spades
2NT = Clubs and Diamonds
3C = Clubs
3D = Diamonds

When your partner makes a Smolski double over 1NT (showing spades and another suit),
you can bid 2H or 2S as an offer to play, or you can bid 2C or 2D as a "pass or correct" action. Partner will pass if you've bid his second suit, or bid his second suit if possible at the two level. If pard has spades and clubs, over your 2D he'll revert to 2S to show the blacks. Of course, if you have a good hand, you can always pass the double! The final response is 2NT, "cuebidding the opponents' suit", showing a game-try or better in some suit (a game-try or better with a balanced hand would just pass the double). Over responder's 2NT, overcaller bids his second suit at the three-level without game interest, or at the four-level with game interest.

I played Smolski with some success for a few years, and enjoyed it quite a bit. Then I picked up a hand like QJT97652 J4 86 3. Over righty's 1NT I wanted to bid a preemptive 3S, but was afraid partner would think I had a big hand. Then, with a different partner, I held something like AKJT765 AQ8 K2 7. I wanted to bid a strong 3S, but was afraid pard would think I was preempting! So I decided we could pack a little more artificiality into Smolski without much problem. So here's the final (for now) product of Modified Smolski over Notrump:

Double = Two-suiter including Spades, or a strong Spade one-suiter
2C = Clubs and Hearts
2D = Diamonds and Hearts
2H = Hearts
2S = Spades
2NT = Clubs and Diamonds or a strong Heart one-suiter
3C = Clubs
3D = Diamonds
3H = Preemptive with Hearts
3S = Preemptive with Spades

Anyone with an improvement on this method? Feel free to comment, or email me at McKenzie@DoubleSqueeze.com.

Modified Responses to Jacoby 2NT

The Jacoby Two Notrump convention was a real revolution in its time-- prior to its use, most pairs played 1M - 3M as a forcing raise, and 1M - 2N as natural and forcing. Using 2N as the forcing raise allowed players to make invitational raises with 3M. This doesn't sound like a big deal to those of us who learned bridge in the '80s, '90s, or like me, in the '00s, but it was a huge advance.

But the Jacoby Two Notrump's time was forty years ago. Bidding has evolved so much since then that I think a new set of responses (maybe even a new bid for the forcing raise) is long overdue.

So here's the set of responses I like to play to my partner's 2N:

First step [3C] = any minimum hand
Second step [3D] = non-minimum, no singleton or void
Third step [3H] = non-minimum, a singleton or void somewhere without a good five-card side suit
Fourth step [3S] = non-minimum, a side suit of at least five cards headed by two of the top three honors

Over 3C, partner can relay (bid the next step, 3D), asking for hand-type. Opener responds in the same sort of steps as over 2N - first step [3H] no singleton or void, second step [3S] shortness somewhere, third step [3N] good side suit (this should be rare... when would you treat a 5-5 hand with a source of tricks as minimum?)

Over 3D, cuebids start. 3M is just 'waiting'.

Over 3H, partner can relay with 3S to ask where the shortness is. Opener re-relays with 3N to show a void (partner can ask with a re-re-relay where it is) or can bid their singleton naturally. (If the opening bid was 1H and opener has a stiff spade, opener will rebid 4H.)

Over 3S, partner relays with 3N to ask for the side suit. Opener once again substitutes hearts and spades, as in the last paragraph.

If responder declines to relay, he's showing a cuebid in whichever suit he bids (3N is a substitute cuebid for the relay suit, except, of course, over 3S).

This may seem way too complex written out, but it's fairly easy once you understand the relay and substitution principles in use.

Remember what I said about a new bid for the forcing raise? It seems to work fairly well to use the bid of either 2M+1 or CJS.

2M+1 just means the cheapest bid over a single raise -- 1H - 2S or 1S - 2N.

CJS stands for "cheapest jump-shift"-- 1H - 2S or 1S - 3C. If you use the second scheme, this frees up 1M - 2N as natural and forcing -- so with a hand like Q3 AQJ8 K642 QJ6 over 1S you don't have to bid 2C or 2D on a non-suit, or 2H on a four-card suit.

The advantage of using 2M+1 is that it will keep all of your asking sequences below 4 of your major.

I think overall, using CJS is the better way to go-- but either is better than 1M - 2NT.

STOP Abusing the STOP Card!

Do you know the proper way to use the STOP card? It has been my experience that very few people (no matter the experience level) use this card correctly all the time. So humor me even if you think you know all the STOP card rules and read on.

The rules for STOP card use are very simple: ANY time (that part is important) you make a jump bid, you must first place the STOP card on the table. Once you've made your bid, you remove the STOP card, and the next person is required to wait 10 seconds before taking his or her call, whether it is a bid or a pass.

In fact, even if your RHO fails to use the STOP card (shame on them), you are still required to wait 10 seconds after any skip bid. Why is that?

In a standard auction, you can plan out your actions ahead of your turn, and usually take no more than a moment to decide on your call at your turn. But a jump bid puts a kink in many plans. Acting quickly following an unexpected jump in the auction passes unauthorized information (UI) to your partner. A rapid bid or double says that your hand is too solid to be concerned about the high level of the bidding, and an immediate pass says that you never had anything to think about even before the skip. In competitive auctions, skip bids tend to create problems for hands with intermediate values, and anyone with such a hand will pause out of necessity. By requiring all hands to pause, we eliminate the UI -- partner can no longer (unethically and illegally) determine the strength of your hand by the speed of your action.

Furthermore, others at the table may have something more to think about, so observing the pause after the skip bid allows the others the time they need so as not to break tempo (giving more UI) at their turn.

That said, the mandated pause is mandated thoughtfulness. Sitting with your hand in the bidding box counting off the seconds is not within the spirit of the rule.

We must strive to obey the STOP card rules when our opponents make skip bids, but also in our own bidding. The only way to avoid passing UI is to use the STOP card every time you make a jump. The STOP card is not there for us to call pard's attention to our irregular bids, or to distinguish between weak and strong bids. It is there to be used consistently with the purpose of eliminating inconsistencies.