Almost everybody who can sort cards knows about Jacoby Transfers in no trump bidding. Usually after a 1 No Trump opener and a Jacoby Transfer, partner will dutifully accept the transfer by bidding the indicated major at the 2 level. From there the bidding proceeds in three directions. Responder either passes, invites or bids game. Responder’s strength requirement for each of these three options is a little fuzzy depending on whether the game is matchpoints or IMP’s, the vulnerability and just how gosh darn mad you are. Almost equally familiar is the concept of “Super Acceptance”. If you asked 100 people in a 25 table game about super acceptance, 99% would say raise to the three level if you have a max and 4 trump and the other guy would be looking for a partner..
Most players today know the name Marty Bergen, a wonderful bridge theorist who brought aggressive competitive bidding to the forefront in matchpoint bridge. He gained bridge immortality by his innovative way of dealing with major suit raises known as “Bergen Raises”, probably second only to Stayman in terms of popular conventions. Since Better Bidding by Bergen was published 24 years ago, there are many players in the game today who have never even seen the book, much less read it. Marty may not have been the father of “super acceptance”, but he was one of the first to write about it. It may come as a surprise to today’s players that Marty had a somewhat different take on Super Acceptance borne out of his championing of the Law of Total Tricks.
In a recent e-mail to me Marty reiterated his position: Jump to the 3 level in the major if you have a “bad” opening 1NT hand, bid 2NT with 4333 and a “max” and bid any doubleton you hold if you have a “nice” hand and 4432. Notice Marty did not seek to define the term “bad”, “nice” or “max”. Marty would place greater value on Aces and Kings and discount Queens, but to avoid subjective arguments, let’s assume they mean roughly 15-16 and 17 to the unwashed. When I asked about the premise for what I call “Super Duper Accepts” (also known as Bergen Super Accepts), four letters came rolling back on my screen, LOTT!!! After all, we have 9 trump so we need to be at the 3 level, why wait? Hold onto that thought for a moment.
The problem arises when responder has a hand that he intends to transfer and pass. Modern thinking on this technique holds that you transfer anytime you have a 5 card major and it can be done with 0 points. Earlier this week I held AKQx, Q752, KQT, 85. The bidding went 1NT/2h(transfer)/3spades(super accept). I thought I would give Marty’s theory a try. Partner’s hand was J7643, T8, 75, QJ72. As you can see, we lose 5 tricks off the top, down 1 on a hand that every other pair made +110. Certainly the fault is not with partner in making the transfer.
The problem I see with the application of the LOTT is that it is a competitive bidding guideline. By the time responder passes the 2 level transfer bid, the auction is only competitive if opponents will balance by bidding 2 spades (in the case of hearts) or double or a make 3 level bid. This may be standard balancing procedure at professional levels, but when was the last time you witnessed this at the club level. Even with skilled amateurs you don’t see much balancing in these sequences, and if opponents don’t compete, you often are just one level too high.
Confused by this, I asked another nationally renowned bridge theorist, Danny Kleinman, to look at my hand and tell me what went wrong. In short order Danny told me “Tommy, your hand was not good enough to make a super acceptance.” His “idiots guideline” for me was revalue your hand as a supporting hand and if you have 4 supporting trump and the hand has now grown out of your no trump range, then super accept. Thus if you have 17 and a doubleton, you revalue to 18 and super accept. Otherwise be content with a standard acceptance.
You may have been wondering about Marty’s recommendation to bid your doubleton suit when you have 4 card trump support and a “nice” hand. This is pretty clever since the no trump opener is now the short trump hand and the additional trump will be of value only if the hand has a ruffing value. By locating the doubleton for responder, you enable him to better gauge the value of the 4th trump. It may look like this is on the slippery slope to wrong siding the hand, but Marty solved that as well with his concept of “retransfers.” Upon hearing the doubleton bid, responder simply transfers again and now opener bids the major. Everything back to square.
Lets take a final look at Marty’s recommendation to bid 2NT when you have 4 trump, 4333 and a max. This is the opposite of the 4332 hand, it may have a 4th trump, but the hand has no ruffing value. It will probably make the same number of tricks in no trump as it will in a major suit even with a 9 card fit. The 2NT bid is a clear warning to responder about playing a suit contract and the last chance to get off the train by passing 2NT if responder has one of those “transfer and duck” hands.
If you currently have only one flavor to your super accept, I think you might consider Bergen’s technique of bidding the doubleton with 4432 and nice hand and bidding 2NT with a max and 4333. As for three level jumps, I think Danny Kleinman’s idiots rule suits me best. If you promise you will always balance over the passed transfer, I may change my mind. :-)
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Reopening Doubles
There was bridge before negative doubles. If you played bridge in the 1950’s, and are still alive to tell about it, you will remember after the sequence 1s/2c/, a double of the 2 club overcall was a serious event intended to teach discipline to any who would make the call with anything less than a solid suit and an opening hand. It was not a negative double, an optional double, a BOP double or a DSIP double, it was for penalties and woe onto opener if he took the double out. These first round doubles are probably what brought about bidding boxes, because the always came out with a serious growl.
In 1957 Al Roth first wrote about the idea of a negative double and it became part of the Roth-Stone system. At the time the double was called “Sputnik” after the famous Russian satellite. As the negative double gained popularity it also became necessary to prevent the proliferation of cheap overcalls since responder could not double for penalty. If, instead of the perfect negative double hand, you had a stack of good cards in the overcalled suit (a hand that you would have previously inspired a penalty double) you not only could not double, but with 5 or 6 cards in overcaller’s suit, you most likely had no suit to bid. Out of this dilemma was born the so called “automatic reopening double.”
Last Thursday I was dealt 9, K54, AJT8, A9842. When my RHO opened 1 spade. I decided to make a 2 club overcall, non-vul against vul opponents. I suppose some might double and others make an Unusual NT bid, but I thought 2 clubs best described my hand and was good lead direction. Now the bidding went pass, pass, pass, so the reopening double must not be “automatic” after all. This experience led me to believe that even among experienced bridge partnerships, there may be no definitive agreement on the standard to be applied to the reopening double. I asked several players about this and got a variety of comments. Here is a sampling.
(a) It is automatic, no questions!
(b) You do it if you have the right hand.
(c) You do it if you have a doubleton, single or void in the overcalled suit.
(d) You do it because your partner expects you to.
(e) You do it unless you have a minimum opening hand.
(f) The double shows extra values, so pass without them.
(g) You do because you don’t want to give up the hand.
What this indicates is that if you have not discussed this issue with your regular partners, now may not be too soon to do so. Oh, did I say that my LHO held K4, J, KQ42, KQJ753! His partner opened a 11 hcp “Rule of 20” hand and decided if there was an exception to the term “automatic”, his hand was it. Since he also had a single club, it was an ill fated decision.
Setting aside all the well intended advice I received, I decided to see what a real expert would say. In August of 2006, Karen Walker wrote an article in the Bridge Bulletin about this very subject in her series “12 Habits of Highly Effective Bidders.” Karen may lack the glitz of some of the top Bridge Super Stars, but she is very solid, reliable, sensible and an excellent writer. Her web site is always one of my first stops.
Karen rejects the concepts of “automatic” or “always double with shortness in overcaller’s suit.” She also rejects the concept of doubling “for partner” pointing out that except for rare occasions where partner has a monster trump stack, partner is not in a position to make a unilateral decision about whether to leave the double in. He needs to know whether opener’s hand is suitable for joining a defense.
Ideally opener should have not only shortness in the overcalled suit, but also support for the unbid suits and 2½ quick tricks. When you put this all together, a good guideline is that “if you were sitting behind overcaller and he opened rather than overcalled, would you make a take out double?” If so, make a reopening double, and if not pass or take some other appropriate action.
What if opener has a void in the overcalled suit, is that ideal? Hardly! First, the void gives opener extra length in the unbid suits, so the slow quick tricks like KQxxx may not be winners. Another reason is that when opener gets in, partner expects him to lead a trump through declarer. It is hard to lead a void (a certain director call) and the failure to lead through declarer often means that partner is going to ultimately get end played in the trump suit.
Do you pass with all hands that do not meet the “acid test” of a double? Obviously not. If you have a distributional hand such as 6-4 or 5-5, you are probably better off declaring, so you need to make a descriptive bid. If you have a strong single suited hand that is close to an opening 2 club bid (4 losing trick count), you can jump in your suit to show the strength. If you have a real good hand (again 4 LTC) without any clear direction, you can always make a cue bid forcing responder to describe his hand.
Assume partner has reopened the bidding, how do you know when to pass for penalties? Mel Colchamiro in his book “How to Play Like an Expert ….” advocated applying the Rule of 9 in determining when to leave in partner’s take out double. Since opener’s hand often looks like a take out double hand, I would apply the Rule of 9 to the reopening double as well. Her it is! Leave the double in if the total number of cards you have in overcaller’s suit + the total honors you have in that suit + the level of the contract equal 9.
So if the contract is 2 clubs doubled and you are sitting behind the overcaller with KQxxx, whack it! 5+2+2=9. Are you Smarter than a 3rd Grader?? Arrest your partner if he doesn’t show up with 2 1/2/quick.
To see some example hands where you should not make a reopening double see www.pattayabridge.com/conventions/negativedoubles_main,htm
In 1957 Al Roth first wrote about the idea of a negative double and it became part of the Roth-Stone system. At the time the double was called “Sputnik” after the famous Russian satellite. As the negative double gained popularity it also became necessary to prevent the proliferation of cheap overcalls since responder could not double for penalty. If, instead of the perfect negative double hand, you had a stack of good cards in the overcalled suit (a hand that you would have previously inspired a penalty double) you not only could not double, but with 5 or 6 cards in overcaller’s suit, you most likely had no suit to bid. Out of this dilemma was born the so called “automatic reopening double.”
Last Thursday I was dealt 9, K54, AJT8, A9842. When my RHO opened 1 spade. I decided to make a 2 club overcall, non-vul against vul opponents. I suppose some might double and others make an Unusual NT bid, but I thought 2 clubs best described my hand and was good lead direction. Now the bidding went pass, pass, pass, so the reopening double must not be “automatic” after all. This experience led me to believe that even among experienced bridge partnerships, there may be no definitive agreement on the standard to be applied to the reopening double. I asked several players about this and got a variety of comments. Here is a sampling.
(a) It is automatic, no questions!
(b) You do it if you have the right hand.
(c) You do it if you have a doubleton, single or void in the overcalled suit.
(d) You do it because your partner expects you to.
(e) You do it unless you have a minimum opening hand.
(f) The double shows extra values, so pass without them.
(g) You do because you don’t want to give up the hand.
What this indicates is that if you have not discussed this issue with your regular partners, now may not be too soon to do so. Oh, did I say that my LHO held K4, J, KQ42, KQJ753! His partner opened a 11 hcp “Rule of 20” hand and decided if there was an exception to the term “automatic”, his hand was it. Since he also had a single club, it was an ill fated decision.
Setting aside all the well intended advice I received, I decided to see what a real expert would say. In August of 2006, Karen Walker wrote an article in the Bridge Bulletin about this very subject in her series “12 Habits of Highly Effective Bidders.” Karen may lack the glitz of some of the top Bridge Super Stars, but she is very solid, reliable, sensible and an excellent writer. Her web site is always one of my first stops.
Karen rejects the concepts of “automatic” or “always double with shortness in overcaller’s suit.” She also rejects the concept of doubling “for partner” pointing out that except for rare occasions where partner has a monster trump stack, partner is not in a position to make a unilateral decision about whether to leave the double in. He needs to know whether opener’s hand is suitable for joining a defense.
Ideally opener should have not only shortness in the overcalled suit, but also support for the unbid suits and 2½ quick tricks. When you put this all together, a good guideline is that “if you were sitting behind overcaller and he opened rather than overcalled, would you make a take out double?” If so, make a reopening double, and if not pass or take some other appropriate action.
What if opener has a void in the overcalled suit, is that ideal? Hardly! First, the void gives opener extra length in the unbid suits, so the slow quick tricks like KQxxx may not be winners. Another reason is that when opener gets in, partner expects him to lead a trump through declarer. It is hard to lead a void (a certain director call) and the failure to lead through declarer often means that partner is going to ultimately get end played in the trump suit.
Do you pass with all hands that do not meet the “acid test” of a double? Obviously not. If you have a distributional hand such as 6-4 or 5-5, you are probably better off declaring, so you need to make a descriptive bid. If you have a strong single suited hand that is close to an opening 2 club bid (4 losing trick count), you can jump in your suit to show the strength. If you have a real good hand (again 4 LTC) without any clear direction, you can always make a cue bid forcing responder to describe his hand.
Assume partner has reopened the bidding, how do you know when to pass for penalties? Mel Colchamiro in his book “How to Play Like an Expert ….” advocated applying the Rule of 9 in determining when to leave in partner’s take out double. Since opener’s hand often looks like a take out double hand, I would apply the Rule of 9 to the reopening double as well. Her it is! Leave the double in if the total number of cards you have in overcaller’s suit + the total honors you have in that suit + the level of the contract equal 9.
So if the contract is 2 clubs doubled and you are sitting behind the overcaller with KQxxx, whack it! 5+2+2=9. Are you Smarter than a 3rd Grader?? Arrest your partner if he doesn’t show up with 2 1/2/quick.
To see some example hands where you should not make a reopening double see www.pattayabridge.com/conventions/negativedoubles_main,htm
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Bergen, Jacoby, Hardy, Joe Sargent and Concealed Splinters
I played with a real bridge savvy guy yesterday. It cost me $6.50 to sit down, but as tuition goes it was surely cheap. I am sure if he started counting his master points after Board 24, he would still be running the total. My partner is named in the title to this blog, can you identify him? Hint: Oswald Jacoby and Max Hardy have both played their last card, and Marty Bergen is retired.
One hand that we defended reminded me of importance of partnership understandings in defining the hand characteristics of Bergen Limit Raises, Jacoby 2NT and Splinter responses to major suit openers. I think your bidding skills and partnership communication will vastly improve if you start with the proposition that each of these responses should be narrowly defined and distinguishable.
Start with the easy one, the Bergen Limit Raise. For most pairs today that response is 3 clubs. It shows 10 to a bad 12 points, 4 card support and no singleton or void. Since responder’s hand may have little or no ruffing value (4333 is really ugly) it is highly invitational , but not forcing. If you are opener, even with a bad hand do not pass 3 clubs. I already did that in the finals of a Regional knockout – nobody on our team was entertained. The bar tab was a killer!
Move forward to the Splinter bid. If differs from the Bergen Limit Raise in that the splinter must have a single or void. It should also show 10 to a bad 12 points, but because of the shortness it is a game forcing bid. If you have a void rather than a single upgrade your hand a little. The splinter is shown by making a triple jump in the short suit. If your short suit is a single honor, do not show the hand as a splinter, downgrade it to a Bergen Limit Raise. In order to make a good hand valuation opposite a splinter, opener must be able to assume that all of your points are “working points.” For more detail on splinter valuation, see my earlier blog on splinter bids in the archive.
Most often the splinter bid will be at the 4 level so we have eaten up a lot of bidding space. This is what makes it so important that the bid be narrowly defined. Opener is not handcuffed, but he must count on you being within the defined range in making the slam/no slam decision. If opener bids anything other than 4 of the major, he is showing slam interest. There is no science involved if responder has 10 points one time and 17+ points another.
The Jacoby 2NT response also shows 4 card support, and it will have game forcing strength. It may resemble an overgrown Bergen Raise or an overgrown Splinter. It will be a minimum of a good 12 hcps, but the bid is unlimited in strength. In both the Bergen Limit Raise and the Splinter bid, opener is in charge of the hand and makes the crucial decisions. With the Jacoby 2NT bid, responder takes over the hand and is the "Captain of the Ship". Opener describes his hand strength and distribution and responder puts all 26 cards together and makes the final contract decision. Since responder is the decision maker, it really doesn’t matter that he has a singleton or void, or 12 or 22 points, he simply takes that into account in his hand analysis.
One of the problems of the Splinter bid is that you are giving information about responder’s hand distribution and the defender’s can read your smoke signals. The defender’s are being told where they should not expect tricks. A lead of the splinter suit will most often give declarer a “tempo” which may be all the hand needs to make the contract. Both Bergen and Hardy discussed the use of “concealed splinters” in connection with the Bergen Raise complex. With a splinter hand, responder jumps to the 3 level in the opposite major. Thus, 1h/3s or 1s/3h shows a concealed splinter raise. If opener has a big hand and wants to investigate slam, he asks for the shortness by bidding one step up (3s over 3h and 3NT over 3s). Responder then shows the short suit.
If the bidding is: 1s/3h(splinter)/3s(where?)- then 3NT(short clubs) or 4c(short diamonds) or 4h(short hearts).
If the bidding is:: 1h/3s(splinter)/3NT(where)- then 4c(short clubs) or 4d(short diamonds) or 4h( short spades).
That obviously has achieved no advantage over the traditional method, but if opener has no slam aspirations, he can simply bid game in the major directly, and then the location of the splinter has not been disclosed to the defenders. This also opens up all the direct four level calls in the unbid sits for whatever use you wish to make of them. One idea might be to have them show a void as opposed to a singleton. Another choice may be to show a good secondary 5+ card suit along with 4 card support.
After our opponent’s Jacoby 2NT sequence yesterday, the dummy came down with AT76, Q6, AJ8652, x. Do you like that 2 NT bid? Partner held QJ9543, K7, K7, A92 and did a fast arrival of 4 spades. The King of spades was offside, but it shows the dangers of getting the wrong hand in control. Just when you think you have clarified everything, a hand like this comes along. I’ll take criticism on this, but I am splintering that hand. Preferably a concealed splinter! Maybe 6 spades down 1. I would have had company!
One hand that we defended reminded me of importance of partnership understandings in defining the hand characteristics of Bergen Limit Raises, Jacoby 2NT and Splinter responses to major suit openers. I think your bidding skills and partnership communication will vastly improve if you start with the proposition that each of these responses should be narrowly defined and distinguishable.
Start with the easy one, the Bergen Limit Raise. For most pairs today that response is 3 clubs. It shows 10 to a bad 12 points, 4 card support and no singleton or void. Since responder’s hand may have little or no ruffing value (4333 is really ugly) it is highly invitational , but not forcing. If you are opener, even with a bad hand do not pass 3 clubs. I already did that in the finals of a Regional knockout – nobody on our team was entertained. The bar tab was a killer!
Move forward to the Splinter bid. If differs from the Bergen Limit Raise in that the splinter must have a single or void. It should also show 10 to a bad 12 points, but because of the shortness it is a game forcing bid. If you have a void rather than a single upgrade your hand a little. The splinter is shown by making a triple jump in the short suit. If your short suit is a single honor, do not show the hand as a splinter, downgrade it to a Bergen Limit Raise. In order to make a good hand valuation opposite a splinter, opener must be able to assume that all of your points are “working points.” For more detail on splinter valuation, see my earlier blog on splinter bids in the archive.
Most often the splinter bid will be at the 4 level so we have eaten up a lot of bidding space. This is what makes it so important that the bid be narrowly defined. Opener is not handcuffed, but he must count on you being within the defined range in making the slam/no slam decision. If opener bids anything other than 4 of the major, he is showing slam interest. There is no science involved if responder has 10 points one time and 17+ points another.
The Jacoby 2NT response also shows 4 card support, and it will have game forcing strength. It may resemble an overgrown Bergen Raise or an overgrown Splinter. It will be a minimum of a good 12 hcps, but the bid is unlimited in strength. In both the Bergen Limit Raise and the Splinter bid, opener is in charge of the hand and makes the crucial decisions. With the Jacoby 2NT bid, responder takes over the hand and is the "Captain of the Ship". Opener describes his hand strength and distribution and responder puts all 26 cards together and makes the final contract decision. Since responder is the decision maker, it really doesn’t matter that he has a singleton or void, or 12 or 22 points, he simply takes that into account in his hand analysis.
One of the problems of the Splinter bid is that you are giving information about responder’s hand distribution and the defender’s can read your smoke signals. The defender’s are being told where they should not expect tricks. A lead of the splinter suit will most often give declarer a “tempo” which may be all the hand needs to make the contract. Both Bergen and Hardy discussed the use of “concealed splinters” in connection with the Bergen Raise complex. With a splinter hand, responder jumps to the 3 level in the opposite major. Thus, 1h/3s or 1s/3h shows a concealed splinter raise. If opener has a big hand and wants to investigate slam, he asks for the shortness by bidding one step up (3s over 3h and 3NT over 3s). Responder then shows the short suit.
If the bidding is: 1s/3h(splinter)/3s(where?)- then 3NT(short clubs) or 4c(short diamonds) or 4h(short hearts).
If the bidding is:: 1h/3s(splinter)/3NT(where)- then 4c(short clubs) or 4d(short diamonds) or 4h( short spades).
That obviously has achieved no advantage over the traditional method, but if opener has no slam aspirations, he can simply bid game in the major directly, and then the location of the splinter has not been disclosed to the defenders. This also opens up all the direct four level calls in the unbid sits for whatever use you wish to make of them. One idea might be to have them show a void as opposed to a singleton. Another choice may be to show a good secondary 5+ card suit along with 4 card support.
After our opponent’s Jacoby 2NT sequence yesterday, the dummy came down with AT76, Q6, AJ8652, x. Do you like that 2 NT bid? Partner held QJ9543, K7, K7, A92 and did a fast arrival of 4 spades. The King of spades was offside, but it shows the dangers of getting the wrong hand in control. Just when you think you have clarified everything, a hand like this comes along. I’ll take criticism on this, but I am splintering that hand. Preferably a concealed splinter! Maybe 6 spades down 1. I would have had company!
Monday, June 29, 2009
Response to Bidding Quiz
In my last blog I showed two hands that were forwarded to me for a bidding opinion. To stimulate some interest, I asked my readers to comment on their own technique for opening these hands. The two obvious opening calls on each hand were either one spade or a forcing 2 clubs. While the responses included all 4 possible answers, the preponderance of elevated thought opened both hands 1 spade.
Hand One: KQ432, Q, AQ32, AKT. Open it 1 spade. For those who auger for 2 clubs, I ask “Where’s the beef?” I don’t see a forcing bid on tricks or on hcps (a bad 20). There are 4 LTC hands that I would open 2 clubs, and I think the modern trend is in that direction, but this is not one of them. If partner can’t muster up some kind of supporting bid (2,3 or 4 spades) or 1NT forcing, where are we going on this hand. If responder has as much as 6 hcps and sits on his hands, I’m heading for the partnership desk. I am assuming that we play jump shifts as forcing so there are no rebid problems.
I also think there is a risk in placing too much emphasis on Losing Trick Count before anyone has put their hand on a bidding box. While Ron Klinger did not invent LTC (it has been around since at least the 1930”s), his book, The Modern Losing Trick Count (1987) is today considered the unchallenged authority on the subject. At page 13 he states:
“The LTC can be used after a trump fit has been established. It is not designed for no trump hands and is quite unsuitable for misfit hands. Thus, it is vital that you do not envisage the LTC as replacing point count. It is used as an adjunct to point count when a trump fit comes to light. After the trump fit is known, the LTC will give a more accurate guide to the potential of the partnership hands.”
There is also this about LTC that is often forgotten and that is that there is a disconnect between the concept of losing trick count and winning tricks. A hand that has 4 LTC often does not have 9 Winning Tricks. Try this test out on either hand.
Jeff Rubens in his classic book on hand valuation, The Secrets of Winning Bridge (1969) states one of the principles of hand valuation: “PRINCIPLES OF HONORS WITH LENGTH: Other things being equal, honors are more valuable in your long sits than in short suits. The longer the suit in which the honor is located the more valuable the honor.” In an example he shows a hand Axxxx, xxxxx, AK, K and notes that the single club King is unguarded and as such loses much of its value.
Other features that show hand weakness are only 4 ½ quick tricks and only 6 controls. This may be more significant when compared with hand two which is stronger and has 5 Quick Tricks and 7 controls. I am keeping a list of those who voted to open this monstrosity with 2 clubs so I can protect myself!
Hand Two: AQxxx, AKT2, AQJ, 2. A much tougher case. I know good players (and some other self styled experts) who would open this two clubs. 4 LTC, 5 Quick Tricks, 7 controls and good defensive values, but still it fails to meet time honored standards. I am going to show my traditional values and reputation for foot slogging stodginess and open this one spade. I can hear the rhetoric now that I am risking getting passed out. That may be true, but not passed out in a probable game. I prefer not to dilute opener’s standards and rather rely on responder not to be shy if he has anything that looks like a plausible response. My odds of getting a response out of partner go up considerably when I only hold 20 hcps as opposed to 24-26, so the traditional danger of opening at the one level is mitigated.
I also think the communication will be better if the hand is opened 1 spade. The bidding structure and responses of a forcing 2 club opener are not what you call eloquent. Two diamonds “Waiting” or 2 hearts negative always leave you wondering. Even if responder bids his “controls”, opener may be left guessing about the club suit. With a singleton club, if exploration is warranted, wouldn’t you rather get into a cue bidding sequence? I think doing that successfully is more likely if you open 1 spade.
I am not saying that every 2 club opener has to be a crushing brute, only that it should represent some considerable guaranteed trick taking assets. I think there are some instructive examples of these types of hands in Max Hardy’s Advanced Bidding for the 21st Century (2000) at page 175-176.
One final caveat. If you are looking for expert bridge opinion you at the wrong web site.
Hand One: KQ432, Q, AQ32, AKT. Open it 1 spade. For those who auger for 2 clubs, I ask “Where’s the beef?” I don’t see a forcing bid on tricks or on hcps (a bad 20). There are 4 LTC hands that I would open 2 clubs, and I think the modern trend is in that direction, but this is not one of them. If partner can’t muster up some kind of supporting bid (2,3 or 4 spades) or 1NT forcing, where are we going on this hand. If responder has as much as 6 hcps and sits on his hands, I’m heading for the partnership desk. I am assuming that we play jump shifts as forcing so there are no rebid problems.
I also think there is a risk in placing too much emphasis on Losing Trick Count before anyone has put their hand on a bidding box. While Ron Klinger did not invent LTC (it has been around since at least the 1930”s), his book, The Modern Losing Trick Count (1987) is today considered the unchallenged authority on the subject. At page 13 he states:
“The LTC can be used after a trump fit has been established. It is not designed for no trump hands and is quite unsuitable for misfit hands. Thus, it is vital that you do not envisage the LTC as replacing point count. It is used as an adjunct to point count when a trump fit comes to light. After the trump fit is known, the LTC will give a more accurate guide to the potential of the partnership hands.”
There is also this about LTC that is often forgotten and that is that there is a disconnect between the concept of losing trick count and winning tricks. A hand that has 4 LTC often does not have 9 Winning Tricks. Try this test out on either hand.
Jeff Rubens in his classic book on hand valuation, The Secrets of Winning Bridge (1969) states one of the principles of hand valuation: “PRINCIPLES OF HONORS WITH LENGTH: Other things being equal, honors are more valuable in your long sits than in short suits. The longer the suit in which the honor is located the more valuable the honor.” In an example he shows a hand Axxxx, xxxxx, AK, K and notes that the single club King is unguarded and as such loses much of its value.
Other features that show hand weakness are only 4 ½ quick tricks and only 6 controls. This may be more significant when compared with hand two which is stronger and has 5 Quick Tricks and 7 controls. I am keeping a list of those who voted to open this monstrosity with 2 clubs so I can protect myself!
Hand Two: AQxxx, AKT2, AQJ, 2. A much tougher case. I know good players (and some other self styled experts) who would open this two clubs. 4 LTC, 5 Quick Tricks, 7 controls and good defensive values, but still it fails to meet time honored standards. I am going to show my traditional values and reputation for foot slogging stodginess and open this one spade. I can hear the rhetoric now that I am risking getting passed out. That may be true, but not passed out in a probable game. I prefer not to dilute opener’s standards and rather rely on responder not to be shy if he has anything that looks like a plausible response. My odds of getting a response out of partner go up considerably when I only hold 20 hcps as opposed to 24-26, so the traditional danger of opening at the one level is mitigated.
I also think the communication will be better if the hand is opened 1 spade. The bidding structure and responses of a forcing 2 club opener are not what you call eloquent. Two diamonds “Waiting” or 2 hearts negative always leave you wondering. Even if responder bids his “controls”, opener may be left guessing about the club suit. With a singleton club, if exploration is warranted, wouldn’t you rather get into a cue bidding sequence? I think doing that successfully is more likely if you open 1 spade.
I am not saying that every 2 club opener has to be a crushing brute, only that it should represent some considerable guaranteed trick taking assets. I think there are some instructive examples of these types of hands in Max Hardy’s Advanced Bidding for the 21st Century (2000) at page 175-176.
One final caveat. If you are looking for expert bridge opinion you at the wrong web site.
Monday, June 22, 2009
A Short Bidding Quiz to Start Summer
It seems that I always need recertification as an expert authority on bidding. Since I have repeatedly denied any bridge expertise on this blog, I will turn to my real experts, my readers, to help me out. A reader sent these hands to me and asked how I would open the bidding. It is your turn to bid, you are in first seat, the game is match points, your card is Standard American or 2/1 and vulnerability is not an issue.
Here are the 2 hands:
Hand 1
KQ432
Q
AQ32
AKT
Hand 2
AQxxx
AKT2
AQJ
2
The first thing I always do with bidding questions is to make sure that there are 13 cards. Half the hands I get have 12 or 14, just waiting for me to pontificate on the bidding and not notice the card issue. I have gone for that for the last time. I also received assurance that this is not a trick question, that the selection should boil down to one of two possible bids. I saw a hand like this opened last week with 2 No Trump, and the result was a disaster, so I don’t think that is one of the choices. Now that is the end of the coaching, its your bid and you do not want to start “out of tempo.”
A long story or explanation is not necessary, but your pithy comments will be appreciated. If you are a bridge player you probably do not see an issue, a more opinionated bunch I have never run into. So if you just want to give it a hip shot and a “What’s the Problem”, that will be O.K. as well.
I am in Rochester, New York on my summer leave from the Florida heat, so don’t use your address book to e-mail your response. Send your answers and opinions to me at tommy@rochester.rr.com .
Have a nice summer.
Here are the 2 hands:
Hand 1
KQ432
Q
AQ32
AKT
Hand 2
AQxxx
AKT2
AQJ
2
The first thing I always do with bidding questions is to make sure that there are 13 cards. Half the hands I get have 12 or 14, just waiting for me to pontificate on the bidding and not notice the card issue. I have gone for that for the last time. I also received assurance that this is not a trick question, that the selection should boil down to one of two possible bids. I saw a hand like this opened last week with 2 No Trump, and the result was a disaster, so I don’t think that is one of the choices. Now that is the end of the coaching, its your bid and you do not want to start “out of tempo.”
A long story or explanation is not necessary, but your pithy comments will be appreciated. If you are a bridge player you probably do not see an issue, a more opinionated bunch I have never run into. So if you just want to give it a hip shot and a “What’s the Problem”, that will be O.K. as well.
I am in Rochester, New York on my summer leave from the Florida heat, so don’t use your address book to e-mail your response. Send your answers and opinions to me at tommy@rochester.rr.com .
Have a nice summer.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Rosencranz and Expanded Advances
My recent blog was intended to introduce Rosencrantz Doubles and Redoubles as responses to overcalls when Advancer (overcaller’s partner) has 3 card support. In what I thought was a “free toss”, I quickly dispatched advancer’s other supporting options as either a cue bid to show limit raise hands or a law of total tricks preemptive bid to show weaker hands with 4+ card support. “Incomplete and over generalized” says my Rochester, New York, partner Carol Van Der Voorn. “You wouldn’t make the same bid with 4 card support and 0-6 hcps as you would with 7-9 hcps, would you?”
Now even with a blog to flog with, you don’t want to mess with Carol. Three reasons: her beliefs about good bridge bidding are more than a little entrenched, she’s always ready with proof and citations and she is mostly right. I confess, I was trying to end the unrelated Rosencrantz discussions without putting too fine a point on “other supporting bids.” No such luck, back to the drawing board.
Let’s set up an auction: 1c/1h/x/? Here are the first two hands for Advancer: (i) xx, Qxxx, Qxxxx, xx and (ii) Ax, QJxx, xx, Jxxxx.
All my novice readers are on testosterone overload, so I think they would have no trouble bidding 3 hearts on hand (i). It is the new bridge that “the less you know the more important it is that you bid.” I was a guest in a novice game recently and I think I declared 1 hand! Hand (ii) is a little more troublesome. The usual choices are bidding 2 hearts, cue bidding 2 clubs (to show a limit raise and support) or preempting to 3 hearts..
Now if those are your only choices, I think in the long run with hand (ii) you will wish you had preempted by bidding 3 hearts. The hand is too weak for a cue bid and you run the risk that overcaller will misread your hand and run away with the auction. If you make the simple supporting bid of 2 hearts, as sure as God made green tomatoes you are going to hear opener bid 2 spades. Another sign of modern bridge, the pass and double cards are missing from the box, so everybody takes the push. Now without the “boss suit”, it will be hard to ever regain control of the auction.
The Mixed Raise
There is another choice for hand (ii) that I neglected to mention. The bid is some something called a ”mixed raise” which is shown by a jump cue bid in opener’s bid suit. It is a bid that is both preemptive and constructive, requires 4+ trump, generally has one defensive trick and will fall in the 7-9 hcp range. Mixed Raises usually have 8 or 9 Losing Trick Count.
Let’s look at a few more examples: (iii) Axx, Kxxxx ,xx, JTx (iv) Kxx, KJTx, Jxxx, xx (v) KJ43, KJ65, xx, xxx. All of these would be suitable for a mixed raise to 3 clubs in the example sequence.
Most of you play "Bergen" raises when you are responding to a major suit opening. The mixed raise has nothing to do with Bergen Raises, but note that all of the mixed raise hands look very much like the same hands that make a 3 diamond response playing Bergen Raises.
If overcaller has a standard overcall with 7 Losing Trick Count, he will simply bid 3 hearts and that ends the auction. If overcaller bids any other suit below 3 hearts it would be a game try. If Advancer has an 8 LTC hand he should accept and bid 4 hearts and with 9 LTC return to 3 hearts. Overcaller may bid 4 hearts directly with a strong overcall or excellent distribution. Remember that overcaller and advancer need to have a combined LTC of 14 or less to have a reasonable play for game.
The Fit Showing Jump
If you want a bid for every occasion, there are other supporting bids that Advancer can make. Now we are moving from intermediate play to the advanced category. Fit showing jumps show 4+ card length in overcaller’s suit, a good 5 card suit of your own with 2-3 working honors and 10-11 hcps.
The hand might look like this xx, KTxx AQxxx, Jx. Assume the same bidding sequence 1c/1h/x/?. To show the “fit showing jump” you jump in your 5 card suit, so in our sequence the bid would be 3 diamonds. You might say, well I could have made a simple cue bid on that hand. True enough, but with the fit showing jump you are passing additional vital information to overcaller. If overcaller holds the King of diamonds, his hand just got a whole lot better. Light contracts are made on double fits.
The Splinter
Surely you didn’t think I was done. The bidding is again 1c/1h/x/?. As advancer you hold xxx, QJTxx, AKxx, x. A cue bid could be made to do the job, but again it doesn’t really show the power of this hand, much of which lies in the single club. While it technically has only 10 hcps, the honors in sequence supporting each other and the singleton, make it a very strong playing hand in support of hearts. With this hand I think it is correct to show the splinter by bidding 4 clubs. Against any kind of disciplined overcall, this hand should have a good play for game.
So now if you combine the two ways to show 3 card support with Rosenkranz, the standard preemptive raise, the cue bid to show the limit raise, the Mixed Raise shown by the jump cue bid, the Fit Showing Jumps shown by jumping in your own 5 card suit and the Splinter Bid showing support and shortness, I believe you have a full menu to show your support for partner’s overcall. Now all you need is a graduate student at MIT for a partner!
Now even with a blog to flog with, you don’t want to mess with Carol. Three reasons: her beliefs about good bridge bidding are more than a little entrenched, she’s always ready with proof and citations and she is mostly right. I confess, I was trying to end the unrelated Rosencrantz discussions without putting too fine a point on “other supporting bids.” No such luck, back to the drawing board.
Let’s set up an auction: 1c/1h/x/? Here are the first two hands for Advancer: (i) xx, Qxxx, Qxxxx, xx and (ii) Ax, QJxx, xx, Jxxxx.
All my novice readers are on testosterone overload, so I think they would have no trouble bidding 3 hearts on hand (i). It is the new bridge that “the less you know the more important it is that you bid.” I was a guest in a novice game recently and I think I declared 1 hand! Hand (ii) is a little more troublesome. The usual choices are bidding 2 hearts, cue bidding 2 clubs (to show a limit raise and support) or preempting to 3 hearts..
Now if those are your only choices, I think in the long run with hand (ii) you will wish you had preempted by bidding 3 hearts. The hand is too weak for a cue bid and you run the risk that overcaller will misread your hand and run away with the auction. If you make the simple supporting bid of 2 hearts, as sure as God made green tomatoes you are going to hear opener bid 2 spades. Another sign of modern bridge, the pass and double cards are missing from the box, so everybody takes the push. Now without the “boss suit”, it will be hard to ever regain control of the auction.
The Mixed Raise
There is another choice for hand (ii) that I neglected to mention. The bid is some something called a ”mixed raise” which is shown by a jump cue bid in opener’s bid suit. It is a bid that is both preemptive and constructive, requires 4+ trump, generally has one defensive trick and will fall in the 7-9 hcp range. Mixed Raises usually have 8 or 9 Losing Trick Count.
Let’s look at a few more examples: (iii) Axx, Kxxxx ,xx, JTx (iv) Kxx, KJTx, Jxxx, xx (v) KJ43, KJ65, xx, xxx. All of these would be suitable for a mixed raise to 3 clubs in the example sequence.
Most of you play "Bergen" raises when you are responding to a major suit opening. The mixed raise has nothing to do with Bergen Raises, but note that all of the mixed raise hands look very much like the same hands that make a 3 diamond response playing Bergen Raises.
If overcaller has a standard overcall with 7 Losing Trick Count, he will simply bid 3 hearts and that ends the auction. If overcaller bids any other suit below 3 hearts it would be a game try. If Advancer has an 8 LTC hand he should accept and bid 4 hearts and with 9 LTC return to 3 hearts. Overcaller may bid 4 hearts directly with a strong overcall or excellent distribution. Remember that overcaller and advancer need to have a combined LTC of 14 or less to have a reasonable play for game.
The Fit Showing Jump
If you want a bid for every occasion, there are other supporting bids that Advancer can make. Now we are moving from intermediate play to the advanced category. Fit showing jumps show 4+ card length in overcaller’s suit, a good 5 card suit of your own with 2-3 working honors and 10-11 hcps.
The hand might look like this xx, KTxx AQxxx, Jx. Assume the same bidding sequence 1c/1h/x/?. To show the “fit showing jump” you jump in your 5 card suit, so in our sequence the bid would be 3 diamonds. You might say, well I could have made a simple cue bid on that hand. True enough, but with the fit showing jump you are passing additional vital information to overcaller. If overcaller holds the King of diamonds, his hand just got a whole lot better. Light contracts are made on double fits.
The Splinter
Surely you didn’t think I was done. The bidding is again 1c/1h/x/?. As advancer you hold xxx, QJTxx, AKxx, x. A cue bid could be made to do the job, but again it doesn’t really show the power of this hand, much of which lies in the single club. While it technically has only 10 hcps, the honors in sequence supporting each other and the singleton, make it a very strong playing hand in support of hearts. With this hand I think it is correct to show the splinter by bidding 4 clubs. Against any kind of disciplined overcall, this hand should have a good play for game.
So now if you combine the two ways to show 3 card support with Rosenkranz, the standard preemptive raise, the cue bid to show the limit raise, the Mixed Raise shown by the jump cue bid, the Fit Showing Jumps shown by jumping in your own 5 card suit and the Splinter Bid showing support and shortness, I believe you have a full menu to show your support for partner’s overcall. Now all you need is a graduate student at MIT for a partner!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
