Hand 1 from a B player: Matchpoints

Vul vs. NV

Playing 2/1 Game Force:

You hold:

S   KQ987xx

H   J10x

D  Axx

C   ------

RHO opens 1D.  Playing weak jump overcalls, I assume that 2S is incorrect.  So how many spades should you bid?  1S seems somewhat standard, but doesn't do much to inhibit the opponents.  Is the hand too good for 3S?  Is it too weak for 4S?

John Burgener

Any one of the 4 bids mentioned could result in the best result on this particular deal. But you want to work with your partner to reach the best contract most of the time. Why worry about “inhibiting” the opponents when you have the boss suit, nice support for the other major and the first round stopper in openers suit and a void in another suit as well! This hand should be overcalled 1 Spade because you want to play at the level appropriate to your combined assets with partner! If partner had been a passed hand as dealer then and only then could 3 Spades be considered. As it is bidding some other number of spades immediately will destroy partnership and cause you to loose ten times more matchpoints later because partner will have no confidence in the meaning of your bids.

Mark Boswell  

I would overcall 1S.  The good suit, outside A, and void make the hand too good for either 2 or 3 spades.

Tom Kniest
3S would be the equivalent of opening 3S - you're too good for that.  Start with 1S and see how the auction progresses.  Unless the opponents bid game opposite your silent partner, you will bid again at your next turn, even at the 3 level.  If the vulnerability were reversed, I would bid 4S right away.

Roger Lord

One Spade.  A direct overcall, even at the one level, need not limit the hand in playing tricks.  This deal will not be passed out at one spade, so we'll get another chance.

Tom Oppenheimer

I prefer an overcall of one spade.  I do not like to preempt at the two or three level with two first round controls on the outside.  I do not feel that the spade suit is good enough for a four spade bid.

Nancy Popkin

With the highest ranked suit, I am not as concerned with inhibiting the opponents as I am extracting information from my partner. I have too much for 2 spades or 3 spades, even vulnerable. My suit is not good enough for 4 spades, and I have too many losers. By process of elimination, I have to bid 1 spade.

Rod Van Wyk

1S.  This hand has considerable potential.  Partner is the one I don't want to inhibit.

Karen Walker  

4S has some appeal at other vulnerabilities, but not here. At IMPs, you'd like to be within two tricks of your bid for a red-vs.-not preempt, so 3S is about right on playing strength, but could cause you to miss a game, as partner won't expect two first-round controls. It's not a given that this is their hand, so I'd overcall just 1S and hope to have a constructive auction.

En Xie
This is a 5-loser hand. Personally I don't like either 3s or 4s bid. They might work well though. I would be more comfortable to bid with 7-3-2-1 or 7-2-2-2. With void in club not D, opponents might face bad split if they try game in clubs. In other words, I am not sure if preemptive bid here would work well. You might talk opponents out of bad contract. Furthermore, by making aggressive 4s bid, you might get hammered while they have nothing. By making conservative 3S bid, you might miss game. That hand you don't need partner to have much to have game, just couple perfect cards you will be home. I prefer 1s bid. It's not a flawless bid. Just don't want to gamble when I don't have clear direction.
 

Milt Zlatic

After traveling to LA to watch the Cards get beat up by Dodgers and then flying home to see the Dodgers finish the sweep of our beloved Cardinals, Milt is too distressed and distraught to answer this month's questions!

Playing 2/1 Game Force:

W is the dealer:

S   Q10

H   -----------

D   AK109x

C   AKJxxx

The auction has proceeded:

N     E      S       W

                   2H*

P    P     ?         

2H*= weak 2 bid

Question:

1.What call do you suggest/recommend  for the South hand ?

a.If you play standard (usual ) natural bidding.

b.If you play Leaping Michael after weak 2 bid opening. Is this hand good enough to jump over call to 4H?

The North hand was:

S Jxxx

H Q9xx

D Jxx

C xx

editor's note, Experts, not all readers will know the Leaping Michaels convention...

John Burgener

First in responding to the editor's note, Leaping Michaels is a convention where a jump to 4 of a minor after a weak 2 in the direct seat (some agree to use it in both seats) to show 5 or more cards in the other major and 5 or more cards in the suit bid and game forcing. The jump cue bid, in this example to 4 Hearts, shows both minors and is also game forcing.

•  I believe you must bid where you live: 3 Clubs, being able to perhaps bid diamonds on a later round.

•  Yes. I would use Leaping Michaels with this hand. The weak two bid is still a preemptive bid attempting to steal from the opponents. That is why artificial conventions like Leaping Michaels were invented. The fact that you found partners hand disappointing (2 jacks and queen and little fit) is irrelevant in the long run.

Mark Boswell

If 4NT is unusual in your methods by all means bid it, otherwise bid 3H.  Partner's hand is well below what I would expect would be his average hand and still 5 diamonds has a decent play.

Tom Kniest

I don't know what my methods are here: if I play lebensohl, it's more tempting to double because you'll find out if your partner has positive values.  The most descriptive bid is 4H - pick a minor, and may have an unhappy ending when partner is 5422 and 3NT is cold.  Double is probably what I would do with most partners...then try to land on my feet.  The beauty of 4H is that identifies your hand type.  You can also play that 3H here is multiple hands, including a big 2 suiter.  I foresee a slow auction developing after that call...

Roger Lord

Three clubs.  This risks missing game, but it avoids the problems that would ensue if you double and partner were to bid spades.  Maybe partner will raise clubs.  If s/he passes and RHO keeps the bidding open, I will bid notrump, which would announce a second suit shorter than clubs.  Example:  2H-P-P-3C-P-P-3H-3NT.

Tom Oppenheimer

I use a bid of 4 no trump here to ask for the minors...not blackwood.  I think that the hand is too good to bid one of your minors.  I am sure that some use four hearts to ask for the minors.

Nancy Popkin

Leaping Michael's would not work here because typically when it goes 2 of one major by the opponents and then a leap to one of the minors, that indicates a good hand with at least 5 of that minor and at least 5 of the other major (in this case, spades). So since we don't have spades we have to resort to something else. I believe I would double first because I have so many points. Since my RHO did not raise hearts, it is possible partner may make a penalty pass. If partner bids 2 spades instead, I would bid my 6-card suit, clubs. If partner corrects to diamonds I would 3 hearts asking for a heart stopper. If partner leaps to 4 spades, I am not afraid of playing 5 of a minor.

Rod Van Wyk

a. double

b. 4H (L. M.).  If you are going to wait for a better hand,  you may as well take it off you card, as it would be too rare.

Karen Walker

A Leaping Michaels overcall (4H to show both minors) feels a bit pushy, but no other bid describes this pattern or strength, so that would be my gamble. Even with partner's awful hand, 5D isn't hopeless (it makes if West is 3-6-2-2 and East has the diamond queen).

En Xie
It's a 4-loser hand. But if partner has fit in clubs or Diamonds, game/slam would be likely even with few points. That's the hand you don't need partner to have much, just perfect cards or good fit. In team games, the hand is much easier to bid. In pairs games, it becomes complicated. I play 4H to show 2.5 losers or better hand. So I won't bid 4h with that hand. I would choose either 4NT or 3D. Notice here, you are void in H, that means your LHO has some Hearts. She/he might compete after your 3D bid, then you might have chance to bid 4C. By the way, some pairs play 3NT or 3H to show minors, then for them there is no problem.
 

Milt Zlatic

After traveling to LA to watch the Cards get beat up by Dodgers and then flying home to see the Dodgers finish the sweep of our beloved Cardinals, Milt is too distressed and distraught to answer this month's questions

Question 3 from a C Player

My question for Ask the Expert is not a card playing or bidding question but this: 

What two books would you recommend

1) for novice players, and

2) for more advanced players (i.e., players on the verge or just beyond Life Master level)? 

John Burgener

Tough question for someone who hasn't read a beginning bridge book in years. Perhaps Sheinwold's 5 Weeks to Winning Bridge , Watson's Play of the Hand For more advanced players there are not just two books. More like all by Mike Lawrence and Ron Klingler and Eddie Kantar. If I must name two Larry Cohen's Law of Total Tricks and Geza Ottlik's Adventures in Card Play.

Mark Boswell

Any general play of the hand books and bidding judgment books for novices and the LMs Larry Cohen's first book “To Bid or Not to Bid” on the law of total tricks and or advancing players any book by Kantar, Kelsey, Reese, or Lawrence.

Tom Kniest

For a novice, assuming they've been bitten by the bug, there are no 2 books that do it - they need to read widely, and can make huge strides in their games by doing so.  Kantar's books are great.  Just stay basic at first, and read many authors.  Don't waste time on a complicated system until you fully understand basic two over one, which most players play some form of.  For the advanced player, there are 2 indispensable books - both by Victor Mollo:  Bridge: Case of the Defense (1970) and I Challenge You (1984) on the play of the hand.  Both books are in quiz format and will improve your defense and dummy play immediately.  Any book on play by Terence Reese is a treasure.  Last of all, any novice up to the highest level should become acquainted with Karen's Bridge Library - Karen Walker's website which has a wealth of teaching materials and links.

Roger Lord

Edwin Kantar's latest comprehensive textbooks on bidding and play and defense.

Tom Oppenheimer 

My favorite book is "The Play of the Hand" by Louis Watson.  It was written in 1934 and while bidding evolves, the play of the cards will never change.  This book is as appropriate today as ever.

Nancy Popkin

Without a doubt, for a novice, I would recommend Watson's Play of the Hand . For advanced players, I would recommend How to Read Your Opponents Cards by Mike Lawrence.

Rod Van Wyk

a.  The Everything Bridge Book, by Brent Manley, Adams Media Corp., 2003.

b.  How to Read Your Opponents' Cards - The Expert's Way to Locate Missing High Cards, by Mike Lawrence, Prentice-Hall, 1973.

Karen Walker

For learners: Five Weeks to Winning Bridge by Alfred Sheinwold. It teaches 4-card majors, but the principles are easily adapted. Close runners-up are The Fun Way to Serious Bridge by Harry Lampert, Bridge for Dummies by Eddie Kantar and any book by Bill Root.

For “serious” novices: Classic Book on the Play of the Hand by Louis Watson and Eddie Kantar's Introduction to Declarer's Play and Introduction to Defender's Play .

For advancing players: Mike Lawrence's Complete Book of Hand Evaluation, How to Read Your Opponents' Cards, and Play Bridge with Mike Lawrence . For more advanced concepts, consider Matchpoints and Partnership Defense by Kit Woolsey.

For everyone: Bid Better, Play Better by Dorothy Hayden Truscott (still the greatest bridge book of all time) and Why You Lose at Bridge by S.J. Simon.

More recommendations and mini-reviews are here: http://kwbridge.com/books.htm

En Xie
 
Sorry, I am not good on recommending books. I remember ACBL bulletin once had a list of recommending books for different level players. You might check it out.
 

 

Milt Zlatic

After traveling to LA to watch the Cards get beat up by Dodgers and then flying home to see the Dodgers finish the sweep of our beloved Cardinals, Milt is too distressed and distraught to answer this month's questions

John Burgener

 Assuming no other option exists for making an additional trick, no squeeze can be considered, and no table information or waiting for the opponents action to give a reason to choose otherwise and no counting information to fall back on I play for the drop most times. Tricks not lost may not be lost later. But statically while 6 cards divide 4-2 about10% more of the time than 3-3 after all follow twice and no significant card (here the jack) are 53% that the suit will divide 3-3 assuming you have played a fair amount of the hand away already.

Mark Boswell

The percentage play is to play for the drop.  Note all of the 6-0, all of the 5-1, and one-third of the 4-2 breaks (those where Jx is doubleton) are eliminated.  The probabilities of the remaining possible distributions retain their relative value, and the 3-3 break becomes slightly more probable than the 50% finesse.

Tom Kniest
I knew this was close, but didn't know the exact %, so I went to the Bridge Encyclopedia.  A 3-3 break is about 36%, and you've eliminated all other breaks except Jxxx onside and Jxx offside.  In a vacuum, it's 2% better to play the high honor.  However, surely there's been some bidding or play in some other suit prior to tackling this suit...and that might turn the odds to the finesse.

Roger Lord

Drop.

The general rules s that any two nonrestricted cards are more likely to be split than not.  In this example, once LHO follows to a third round, but before RHO plays, PHO holds one unplayed card more than LHO.  Consequently, there is more of a chance that RHO has the missing jack than LHO.

Tom Oppenheimer

You play for the drop.  Per the bridge encyclopedia, this is 2 percent better than the finesse.

Nancy Popkin
Considering just percentages, I would finesse, just because this suit breaking 3-3 is only 33%.

Rod Van Wyk

The drop is slightly better than the finesse.  Coming to your hand first does not change anything, unless RHO shows out in the suit you come in.

Karen Walker

In isolation, you have a 61-percent chance of four tricks by playing the AKQ. The odds change slightly when both opponents follow small to the first two tricks (the chances for stiff jack and Jx have been eliminated), but it's still a very close decision. In practice, I'd look around the room. If I'm in a “normal” contract and if I don't expect the other players/declarers in my seat to be considering a third-round finesse, I'd settle for my average/average-plus and go for the drop.

En Xie
 
Playing for drop has slightly higher percentage.

Milt Zlatic

After traveling to LA to watch the Cards get beat up by Dodgers and then flying home to see the Dodgers finish the sweep of our beloved Cardinals, Milt is too distressed and distraught to answer this month's questions

John Burgener

 I would bid 5 Diamonds giving partner a chance to raise diamonds to slam or bid 5 No Trump or 6 No Trump (if my showing a good 5 card diamond suit has improved his hand enough to try with or without a true fit for diamonds).

Mark Boswell

Your chance of getting to 6D ended when your partner did not bid 3D over 2C.  The richness your partner's controls points to a suit slam rather than a NT slam.  The chances of a diamond fit increase when you respond that you have no 4-card major.  I would pass 4NT with your hand.

Tom Kniest

I'll hedge on this a little: I play with all of my partners some variation of the following:  in this case 4S is either better or worse than 4NT, and is quantitative - the better bid says -
"Bid a slam unless you have a reason not to," and the weaker bid says - "Bid a slam if you have a reason to."  There is no reason not to have this agreement - just agree on which bid is better.  For this hand, I would tend to get there from both sides; while S has a minimum in HCPs, he has a good 5 card suit - thus, he should bid 6D to say he has 5 of them and no other 4 card suit.  If you accept without a 5 card suit, then you bid 4 card suits up the line and wind up in 6 in a 4-4, or you give responder a chance to bid 6 in his 5 card minor in this case.  I think N, with his absolute prime hand, in the absence of the above agreement, should bid 5NT - willing to play 6NT, but looking for diamonds along the way.

Roger Lord

6 Diamonds, announcing a 5-card or 6-card suit.  The extra diamond plus two 1-s should make up for the lack of a 16th point.  Could your side be missing two aces?  Yes.  In this situation, my partnerships lay 5 Clubs as artificial, askln9g for aces, similar to Gerber.

Over 4 NT, it would go 5 Clubs by opener, 5 NT by responder (showing 3 Aces), 6 Diamonds.  Instead, if responder on a different hand bids 5 Hearts (showing 1 Ace), opener would retreat to 5 NT.

Tom Oppenheimer

Nancy Popkin

Something is wrong with either the hands or the auction. Why did south use stayman when he/she has no major? Why did north deny a major when he has 4 spades? If I were bidding this hand with my favorite partners who do not use forcing stayman, I would respond 2NT to 1NT (transfer to clubs) then bid 3S showing a diamond slam try. Partner should cue bid the club ace; I would cue bid the heart ace, and then we're off to the races.

If your only question is does north have an acceptance, I would say yes with all the prime values, but why not bid 6 diamonds on the way?

Karen Walker
Pass. The only plus is the good 5-card suit. The big minus is the minimum point-count that includes an unsupported queen and jack. If I had somehow talked myself into accepting the invitation, I'd bid 6D to show a 5-card suit and offer a choice of slams. That would get us to the miracle spot on this deal, but the next ten (or fifty) times I try this, partner will have three or four hearts and/or two diamonds and no slam will make.

En Xie

T o be honest, I would pass 4NT. Even from the hands shown, we know 6D is an excellent contract while 6NT has little chance. I don't think 4NT is the best choice of bid for responder. With 3 Aces and 1 King in your hand, partner would have hard time to bid further if you invite with 4NT. Some special systems/agreements can solve the problem. But it's beyond our discussion here. Hope you can find your own way.

Rod Van Wyk

 5D.  We should get to 6D after that.  (Showing the North hand makes this easy.)