Marshall Miles
MORE ACCURATE BIDDING
AN HONORS eBOOK FROM MASTER POINT PRESS
Marshall Miles
MORE ACCURATE BIDDING
AN HONORS BOOK FROM MASTER POINT PRESS
Text © 2011 Marshall Miles All rights reserved. Honors Books is an imprint of Master Point Press. All contents, editing and design (excluding cover design) are the sole responsibility of the author. Master Point Press 331 Douglas Ave. Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5M 1H2 (416) 781-0351 Email: Websites:
[email protected] www.masterpointpress.com www.bridgeblogging.com www.teachbridge.com www.ebooksbridge.com
ISBN: 978-1-55494-515978-1-55494-515-3 3
Layout and Editing: Marshall Miles Cover Design: Olena S. Sullivan/New Mediatrix
MORE ACCURATE BIDDING By Marshall Miles Since this is not a book for beginners, I will not bore you with rehashing things you already know. I have chosen topics that are are somewhat controversial, controversial, and have urged my point of view. You may not be persuaded by everything I recommend, but perhaps you will adopt part of it, and it won’t hurt you to discover how some other people play, even if you refuse to play that way, yourself. If what I recommend recommend is contrary to to Bridge World Standard, what a majority of experts play as indicated by a poll, I say so; you don’t need to worry about being misled. misled. Let’s start with a very very common sequence.
GAME INVITATIONS AFTER A RAISE OF OPENER’S MAJOR Suppose, as dealer, you open 1♠ and partner raises to 2♠. If you you want to invite a game, how do you go about it? it? Most players players make make a help-suit help-suit game try. With ♠AQxxx ♥Kxx ♦x ♣AQxx they would bid 3♣ or 3♥, Either bid would get them to a good game opposite ♠Kxx ♥Q10x ♦Jxxxx ♣Kx, an excellent game opposite ♠J10xx ♥Ax ♦Jxxx ♣Kxx, but to a very poor game opposite ♠Jxx ♥xxxx ♦KQxx ♣Kx or ♠9xxx ♥QJx ♦KJxx ♣Kx. This time, a short suit try for game would work far better, at least in a bidding contest, but short suit tries for game help the opponents opponents too much. much. Often, after after a short-suit short-suit try, try, and a spot spot card lead lead rd (lowest from even, 3 best from odd) your RHO will be able to figure out your exact distribution. If so, the defense may be double dummy. It is very undesirable for the player who will be declarer to show his distribution to the opponents. It is far less harmful harmful for the dummy to describe his hand, since since the opponents will see it anyway after the opening lead. I believe Peter Nagy was the first person to suggest that opener should bid 2NT to ask his partner p artner to show where he has the most secondary values that would be wasted opposite a singleton. With the last last two hands, responder responder would bid bid 3♦. If he has possible wasted values in two suits, he shows the suit where most of the wasted values are, or with close to a tie, he bids the cheaper suit. Some people play that that opener can make a second game try (if there is room without forcing to game) by b y showing his shortest remaining suit, but that defeats the purpose of concealing his hand. Obviously, over the 2NT bid, responder can bid 3♠ to show a bad raise or 4♠ to show a very good raise. It is only with a medium or medium plus raise that he shows a concentration concentration of values which would be wasted opposite a singleton. This method often often works well, even when opener opener does not have a singleton. Suppose he holds ♠AKxxxx ♥Axx ♦Kx ♣Jx. If, over 2NT, his partner bids 3♥ with ♥KQx or ♥QJ10x plus an ace or king in the minors, there must be a reasonable play for 4♠. If his partner bids 3 ♣ with the ♣AK10x and not much else, or ♣KQx and an honor in the red suits, there will probably be a More Accurate Bidding | 1
better play for 3NT than for 4♠. The nice thing about this convention convention is that the defenders don’t know why the opening bidder, who will be declarer, likes or doesn’t like his his hand. If the uncontested uncontested bidding goes 1♠ 2♠, 2NT 3♦, 4♠ the opponents don’t know whether opening bidder likes concentrated honors in diamonds (to go with his ♦Axx) or likes the fact that responder doesn’t have many wasted values opposite his singleton club, or that opener had such a strong game try, that he planned to bid game over any response except 3♠. If the bidding starts 1♥ p 2♥, opener can bid 2♠ to ask about secondary values. This is the equivalent of 1 ♠ p 2♠ p, 2NT. With ♠KQxx or ♠QJxxx responder would bid 2NT, not 3 ♠, to show possible wastage in spades—since 3♠ would force to game. The 2NT bid over 2♠ and the 2♠ bid over 2♥ should be used for about 80% of your game tries. If opener o pener has a true two-suiter, two-suiter, like ♠QJxxx ♥AQxxx ♦x ♣AJ, he should bid his second suit. suit. Even though this gives information information to the opponents, the benefits benefits outweigh the detriments. detriments. Responder will know that that his honors in opener’s two suits will be valuable, while honors, other than aces, in the other two suits suits are of dubious value. Suppose that opener has ♠AKxxx ♥KQ10 ♦Kxxx ♣x. Over a raise to 2♠ he should bid 3♦ because his honors in spades and diamonds are crucial, and high cards, other than aces, in the other two suits will probably be wasted. wasted. The purpose of these conventions conventions is to allow both both opener and responder to evaluate their hands accurately. accurately. After 1♠ p 2♠ and 1♥ p 2♥, there is one remaining remaining game try. Suppose opener has ♠Jxxxx ♥x ♦AKQJx ♣Ax. The king of clubs might be of value, but he is primarily interested in good spade support, and to a lesser extent, in any other ace that that responder might hold. With ♠AQxx or even ♠KQxx and nothing else of value, responder should should raise to game. game. Also with ♠K10xx ♥Axx ♦xxx ♣Jxx. With ♠xxx ♥KQx ♦KJ10xx ♣xx, opener should pass and hope the partnership isn’t isn’t too high already. already. Opener may also also “psyche” a bid. After 1♥ p 2♥ p, ? opener might might bid 3♥ with ♠xx ♥AKQJxx ♦Kxx ♣xx. He doesn’t really want to get to game), g ame), but in a strong field, if he passes, his LHO is almost certain to reopen with a double or an overcall. overcall. Since your trumps are so good, partner partner is unlikely to accept your your “try” except with four or more more trumps and two aces. Even that may not be enough unless one of the aces is in diamonds, and it has to be singleton or doubleton. However, with with that holding he might have made made a limit raise. My guess guess is that the opponents have have a far better chance of making game, probably in spades, spades, than you do, and and almost a cinch cinch to be able to to outbid you at the part-score level. level. 3♥ is a somewhat greedy bid. If you are not vulnerable, it might be right to bid 4♥ at imps. Since neither opponent has bid nor doubled so far, which one could logically double a 4♥ bid without without a trump trump trick? trick? But I would probably just just bid 3♥ since it is dangerous for the opponents to reopen at the three level, and I am too stingy to give away 50 points or 190 points (or 2 to 5 imps) when it probably won’t be necessary.
2 | Marshall Miles
Suppose the bidding starts as follows:
Partner Pass 2♣ 2♥
Opponent pass pass pass
You 1♥ 2♦ ?
Opponent pass pass
You are playing reverse Drury, guaranteeing at least three card heart support, and the way I play, 2♦ by opener simply shows a sound opening bid (not necessarily a hand good enough to accept a limit limit raise). Responder, having shown his values, values, does not need to jump to game himself unless he has a super hand (maybe ♠Ax ♥QJxxx ♦KJxx ♣xx) with which he would have jumped to game directly except rd that he didn’t want to trap you if you had made a very weak 3 hand leaddirecting bid. He would plan to bid 3♥ even after you attempted to sign off in 2♥. With ♠Kxx ♥QJxx ♦x Axxxx Axxxx he should should bid 3♦ to show to show his singleton singleton (and (and get to game opposite ♠Axx ♥A109xx ♦xxx ♣Kx and stay out of game with his minors reversed). Responder has shown shown roughly 10-13 10-13 support points (counting (counting distribution) distribution) instead of 6 to 10. Except for the ability of responder to show a singleton and the fact that the ranges are different, the bidding now should follow the same pattern as after 1 ♥ p 2♥ p, 2♠ or 1♠ p 2♠, p, 2NT. When bidding or inviting game, it usually is a bad idea for the eventual declarer to describe his distribution. distribution. Many game contracts contracts would be defeated if the opponents were to make make the right opening lead. Declarer often makes makes a game, even after the best opening lead, when the defenders can’t figure out, or are too lazy to count, his distribution. distribution. But when you are contemplating contemplating a slam it usually pays for both partners partners to describe describe their hands as accurately accurately as possible. possible. If the slam is makable, the opponents will only be on lead twice—on opening lead and possibly once more. more. When the bidding goes 1M 2NT, 4x (the “x” being any any new suit), it should show 5-5 5-5 or 6-5 distribution. But I also think this sequence sequence should deny two quick losers in in either of the unbid suits. Some players say the second suit should be strong (like headed headed by two of the top three honors). They would open 1♠ and jump to 4 ♦ over a 2NT response with ♠KJxxx ♥Qx ♦AKJxx ♣x. I would just bid 3♣, showing showing my singleton with this hand. Why? Because almost almost any king or queen partner has, other than than in clubs, will be of potential potential value. If responder has ♠AJ10xx ♥Kxx ♦Qx ♣AJx, he will know that the king of hearts won’t be wasted. What if partner has ♠Axxxx ♥Ax ♦Qxx ♣Axx? Won’t the king of hearts be worth a trick opposite ♠KJxxx ♥Qx ♦AKJxx ♣x? Probably not, since partner should be able to discard his losing heart on your diamond suit.
More Accurate Bidding | 3
I have a suggestion. After 1M p 2NT (which (which guarantees four four card trump 1 support, no singleton or void, and at least enough values for game), if opener jumps to the four level, responder responder should show in steps how many many useful points he has, counting 2 for each ace, 2 for each king in the two suits shown, and 1 for each queen in the two suits. The cheapest bid would show show a maximum of three three points, the next bid bid would show 4, still the the next bid after that would show 5, etc. Let’s see how that would work. After 1♠ p 2NT, opener bids 4♣ with ♠AQxxx ♥Ax ♦x ♣Q10xxx and responder has ♠KJxx ♥J10x ♦Qxx ♣AKx. He has 6 “Jacoby points”—2 points”—2 for the ace and 2 for each black king. Unless the clubs break badly, he will will get rid of his heart loser loser on the club suit. suit. Suppose responder holds ♠KJxx ♥Qxx ♦Axxx ♣Kx. Missing either two aces or king in the black suits or one ace or king plus both black queens, queens, declarer would sign sign off. Usually declarer declarer has more “Jacoby points” points” than in my example, and responder responder has fewer. With an ace or king in the black suits plus a black queen missing, responder will often bid a small slam with a doubleton in opener’s second suit, and if he is missing the queen of trumps, he will have, at worst, a 40% play for no trump loser, and better than that when either hand has the jack or a combined total of 10 trumps.
DO YOU OR DON’T YOU? There are four main issues over which bridge players are almost evenly divided. (1) If you open one of a major and partner makes a 2/l response, does your rebid of a major show a six card suit? (2) If you open a suit and partner bids a higher ranking suit, do you ever rebid notrump with a singleton in partner’s suit? (3) If you open a suit and partner bids a suit at the one level, do you usually (or always) refuse to raise with three card support? (4) Do you play 2/1 forcing to game? Let’s consider the pros and cons of o f each issue. There is an advantage, when you open a major and partner responds at the two-level, in letting him know right away whether you have a five five or six card suit. The argument in in favor of showing a six card suit by rebidding it is that you have already shown a at least five, so why not tell partner whether whether you have five or six (plus) (plus) rather than making an ambiguous bid that tells him nothing nothing more about your your hand? The counter 1
If responder intends to take control of the bidding on the following round by RKCB, it is permissible permissible for him to to bid 2NT to agree upon the suit first. With ♠A ♥AJ10x ♦KQJxxxx ♣x responder could bid 2NT over partner’s 1 ♥ bid so that when he bids 4NT next round, he can find out about the missing heart honors as well as the minor suit aces. However, unless he takes immediate control of the bidding, he denies a singleton or void. 4 | Marshall Miles
argument is that your your other bids are not as narrowly defined if you play that way. way. Suppose the bidding starts 1♥ p 2♦ p, ? and you hold (a) ♠Kxx ♥AKxxx ♦x ♣Qxxx or (b)♠Kxxx ♥AKxxx ♦x ♣Qxx. Even if you play 2/l unconditionally unconditionally forcing to game, you have have a problem. How do you distinguish hand (a) from (c) ♠Kxx ♥AKxxx ♦x ♣AQxx? Can partner afford to raise you you to 4♣ with (d) ♠AJx ♥x ♦AKJxx ♣Kxxx? There is not enough enough bidding room below the 3NT level for him to to tell. I think most players with with opener’s hand, if bidding 2♥ shows six hearts, would would bid 2NT. 2NT. If responder responder held ♠Qx ♥xx ♦AK10xxxx ♣Jx he would elect to gamble gamble on 3NT if opener showed at least least two diamonds. diamonds. He would prefer to play in a diamond part-score if he thought opener held a singleton or void in diamonds. diamonds. With hand (b) should should opener rebid rebid 2♠? Do reverses mean nothing after a 2/l response? response? As you may surmise surmise from my comments, I favor favor using the major rebid rebid as the catch-all bid when there there is no better bid available. available. It gives negative information information to partner and leaves more room for later bidding. With ♠Kxx ♥AKxxx ♦Kxxx ♣x, of course you would rebid 2♦ if partner had responded 2♣, since it doesn’t raise the bidding level or show extra values. Suppose you open 1♣ and partner responds 1♥. What would you rebid with ♠AJx ♥x ♦Qxxx ♣KQxxx? Rebidding your your opening minor minor strongly suggests a six card suit because it is usually easy to find a good alternate rebid. Players who refuse to rebid 1NT with a singleton are forced to open 1♦ with this hand so that they can rebid 2♣. If partner has 4-5-2-2 distribution with a mediocre hand. he will will probably take you back to diamonds. diamonds. Admittedly, Admittedly, it is good practice to play in 4-2 fits occasionally, but they seldom result in a good score. Even a 4-3 diamond diamond fit is is unlikely to do better than one notrump. notrump. Or 5-1 fits if you prefer to open and rebid clubs rather than 1NT 1NT with this hand. Suppose you hold ♠Kxx ♥x ♦AKJxxx ♣AJx. You open 1♦ and partner responds 1♥. If your diamonds were solid solid (AKQJxx), you would rebid rebid 3NT. With this hand a majority of players would rebid 3♦. Is so, what should his partner partner call with with ♠xxx AKxx ♦xxx ♣xxx? I think that that when opener has the strength to to make a jump jump rebid in his minor, but has stoppers in the unbid suits, he should rebid 2NT. Whether to raise partner’s one-level major response with three card support, is a much more complicated issue, which involves other issues, such as whether you bid suits up the line or respond Walsh style (skip over diamonds to bid weak four card card majors) and and if so, how that affects opener’s opener’s rebids. So So I may as well discuss all of these issues at the same same time. Incidentally, Incidentally, in bidding diagrams a small “m” means either minor suit and a capital “M” means either major. In the Walsh style of bidding responding 1♦ to 1♣ denies a four card major unless the responder has opening bid strength. Consequently, if responder bids 1♦ followed later by a major at the two level or higher, it is forcing to game, and if the bidding goes 1♣ p 1♦ p ? opener will not bid a major without at least five card length, which which is almost never. never. Most of my partners and I play less rigidly. After 1♣ p1♦ p, most of us will rebid 1NT with ♠Kxxx ♥AQx ♦xx More Accurate Bidding | 5
♣AJxx or ♠Kxxx ♥AQxx ♦xx ♣Axx, but with more concentrated values, like ♠AKQx ♥xx ♦xxx ♣AJ10x we will rebid 1 ♠. Among other reasons, if if we get to
a notrump contract, we would rather that partner be declarer. Also, opposite this strong spade suit, a 4-3 fit could be quite playable when partner is weak in hearts. (♠Jxx ♥xx ♦AKxxx ♣KQx) 1♣ 1♦, 1♥ 2♥ presumably shows 3 card support, support, like ♠xx ♥KQx ♦AJ10xx ♣Jxx.
FAST ARRIVAL AND PICTURE BIDS I hate “fast arrival.” arrival.” One of the few times I use it is after a Jacoby 2NT response response to an opening bid of 1♥ or 1♠, and even though I play that way, I am not convinced that it is the the best way to play. The following uncontested auctions: auctions: 1♠ 2m, 4♠ and 1♥ 2m, 4♥ skip several rounds of bidding, but that is all right if they have specific meanings. meanings. I think they should show a long, solid major suit suit without as much as an ace or two kings on the side, which is basically a picture bid, allowing responder to to take control if that that is all he needs for a slam. But 1♠ p 2m p, 2♠ or 2NT p 4♠ just to show a bad hand makes no sense sense to me. me. Why not raise raise to 3♠, which is forcing, to let opener show extra values, if he has them, below the game level. If neither opener nor responder responder has substantial extras, extras, the bidding can stop safely at the game game level. Besides, there are other other ways for responder to limit his hand. If he bids 1NT (forcing (forcing by most west coast players players but nonforcing by most easterners), he can jump to game the next round, the notrump response retro-actively retro-actively having limited limited his hand. (I will discuss discuss the pros and cons of a semi-forcing semi-forcing 1NT response to a major later). later). A jump, when a non-jump non-jump bid in the same suit would be forcing, should have a special meaning to compensate for preempting preempting partner. The special meaning meaning can be varied; it can show a splinter, extra strength in the jump suit, or it can deny a control in an unbid suit, etc. In a sequence like like 1♠ 2♦, 2♠ 4♠, responder should have a good diamond suit and good spade support, but no control control in the other two suits. suits. Controls are aces and kings, voids and singletons—in singletons—in other words, first or second round controls. Thus 1♠ 2♦, 2♠ 4♠ might show ♠AQx ♥Qx ♦AKJxxx ♣xx or ♠K109x ♥xx ♦AKQxx ♣Jx. 1♥ 2♣, 2NT 4♥ might show ♠QJ ♥KJxx ♦QJx ♣AKQx, but change the queen of clubs to the jack, and I think the hand is slightly too weak for this sequence. If the hand is much stronger, stronger, the uncontested bidding might go 1♠ 2♦, 2NT 4♦ when responder holds ♠AQxx ♥xx AKQJx ♣xx, over which opener is almost forced to a slam if he has a first and second round control 2 in the unbid suits. 2
4♦ is not a practical natural bid to show a slam try in diamonds since it leaves so little room for investigation below the game level, so you might as well give it this special meaning. Besides, why wouldn’t you bid 3 ♦ over 1♠ with a one-suited slam try in diamonds? 6 | Marshall Miles
Let’s see what what the recommended recommended treatment accomplishes. You, You, opener, hold ♠KQxxxx ♥x ♦Qxx ♣Axx. When the uncontested bidding goes 1♠ 2♦, 2♠ 4♠, you know you probably have a slam. Partner can hardly have less than the ace of spades and the ace-king of diamonds since since he can’t have the ace or king of hearts or the king of clubs. The opponents can’t take the first first two tricks, so so you can pull their trumps trumps and discard your losing clubs on the diamonds. diamonds. But if you have ♠KQxxxx ♥AK ♦Qx ♣QJx, which has six more points than the previous hand, you know that you can’t make a slam unless the opponents make the wrong 3 (non-club) opening lead. Picture bids are are not restricted restricted to the above sequences. sequences. Suppose the uncontested bidding bidding starts starts as follows: 1♠ 2♦, 2♥ ? With ♠Kx ♥QJxx ♦AKQxx ♣xx you could bid 4♥, which would would show a good hand hand with extra extra values, but deny a control in clubs. Change the hand hand to ♠Qx ♥QJxx ♦AKQxx ♣Kx and you should bid 3♥ over 2♥. Partner would require require extra values values to bid anything anything other than 4♥, but you do not deny a club control. 1m 1♠, 2♣ 2♦/2♥, 3♠ is forcing to game, and purportedly gives opener the choice between 3♠ and 3NT. But responder may follow up with with Blackwood or other slam try after setting the trump suit. 1m 1 ♠, 1NT, 2♣, 2♥ 3♥ is invitational. invitational. The general rule is that a raise raise of partner’s suit is is invitational; a new suit is forcing for one round. round. If responder wants to to play in a club partscore when the opening bid was 1♣, he must jump to 3 ♣ over 1NT. If 2♣ was the last makable bid, and was natural, the opponents probably wouldn’t allow him to pla y there. 1♣ 1M, 1NT 2♣ 2x, 3♣ is forcing.
GAMES AND PARTSCORES When (if ever) do you raise a suit response at the one level with three card support? In the last 30 years I haven’t haven’t played outside California (and occasionally Nevada) except at nationals, so so I may be wrong. However, it is my my impression that players living in California or formerly from California are more inclined to raise with with three card support than those those from the east. And there are some players who who almost never raise with with three card support. The Walsh style, style, which they have adopted, is to avoid raising with three unless they have a singleton somewhere, and even then only when there is no reasonable alternative. With ♠AJx ♥x ♦A10xxxx ♣Axx, they would rebid diamonds rather than raise a 1♠ response, which I consider a very very poor choice. If you have a game your way, way, the odds are that it is in spades spades rather than notrump or diamonds. diamonds. If you rebid diamonds and partner bids 3NT, do you pass? The usual style in my area is to 3
If you are playing strong jump shifts, you could respond 3 ♦, followed by 4♠, but that sequence would not deny controls in the unbid suits. suits. Consequently I think the picture bid is better. More Accurate Bidding | 7
raise with good with good three card support and a singleton or doubleton, especially a weak doubleton. Others, including including me, raise even with with three small and a singleton, or with a doubleton and as weak support as Qxx, but with exceptions. For example, with ♠Qxx ♥Qx ♦AKQJx ♣J10x I would rebid 1NT over a 1♠ response since I don’t like my hand very well for spades and I think 3NT is a more likely game contract than 4♠. Also, if we do play in notrump, notrump, I would like like to be declarer since hearts is is the most likely opening opening lead. If so, and partner has ♥Axx or ♥Kxx, we have either a sure double stopper or a likely double stopper. I anticipate a heart lead lead for two reasons. (1) It is my shortest shortest suit; and (2) with 44 in the majors, partner would have responded 1♥ unless the hearts were very weak, but would not show clubs with 4=3=2=4 distribution, either initially or later. A good defender would think of these these things if he has roughly equal holdings in the unbid suits. Change my hearts hearts to two small and I would rebid rebid 2♦, although that normally shows at least six. If partner has something something like ♠Qxxx ♥xxx ♦xxx ♣Axx, (not to mention four small spades and a high card elsewhere) he might lose control if spades are trumps and wind up with two diamond tricks rather than five. If you and your partner raise a major frequently with three card support you may tend to avoid responding in a suit with four small. small. Here are some factors factors to consider. Partner opens 1♥ and you hold ♠xxxx ♥Jxx ♦Ax ♣Kxxx. You should raise to 2♥. If your opening bids in a major show five card suits (as almost everyone plays today), you have an eight card heart fit, so you have no urgency to look for a 4-4 spade fit. Wouldn’t you you rather play in hearts than in in spades if partner as something something like ♠Kxx ♥KQxxx ♦xx ♣Axx? Strengthen your hand to ♠Qxxx ♥Qxx ♦Ax ♣Kxxx, and it would still be a mistake to bid 1♠. Partner might raise to 2 ♠, in which case a 3 ♥ bid would be forcing (you might hold ♠KQxx ♥Qxx ♦Ax ♣AK10x, and want to make a forcing bid in hearts for two reasons: to describe your hand for slam slam purposes, and to set hearts hearts as the agreed suit so that partner would count the ♥K as an ace in a Blackwood response). response). If you (responder) held ♠xxxx ♥Jx ♦Kxx ♣Kxxx it would be better to bid 1NT. You don’t want to play p lay in a 4-3 spade fit, nor are you particularly anxious to play in a 4-4 spade fit unless partner is strong enough to reverse, and even then notrump might be better if he has h as something like ♠Kxxx ♥AKQxx ♦Ax ♣Qx. But change your hand to ♠xxxx ♥x ♦Axxx ♣Axxx so that your your hand is is not good for either notrump or hearts. It is worthwhile to hope for a spade fit—preferably 4-4, but possibly even even 4-3 at the part-score level. level. If partner opens a minor suit, suit, there is more reason to look for a spade fit, especially if your hand is unbalanced. Over 1♣ or 1♦ I would bid 1♠ with ♠xxxx ♥x ♦AJxxx ♣AQx, but with ♠AKJx ♥xxxx ♦AQ ♣KJx I think you should bid 1♠ rather than 1♥. You would rather play in spades than than in hearts, especially if if you get to slam, slam, when partner has has ♠Qxx ♥AJxx ♦KJxxx ♣A. There is another type of hand with which I would not respond with a weak four card card major. Suppose partner partner opens 1♦, RHO doubles, and you hold 8 | Marshall Miles
♠Kx ♥Qxxx ♦Qxx ♣J10xx. After a takeout double RHO is more likely than
partner to have have four hearts. If partner and I each have four four hearts, there there is a strong probability that the opponents have a 4-4 fit in in spades. If I bid 1♥, LHO may bid 1♠ with a marginal hand when he is too weak to bid 2 ♠. So I think the percentage bid is is 1NT, which which increases the chances of our buying the bid rather rather than selling out to 1♠ or 2♠.With this hand I might respond 1NT even if there is no takeout double, but the decision is closer, and I doubt that many players would do so.
DOES 1m 1♥ 1♠ SHOW FIVE SPADES? Most players players say that it does? I don’t agree. I think it should show show a good enough four card suit suit to play opposite opposite three to an honor. Suppose the bidding bidding starts 1♦ 1♥ ? and you hold ♠AQJx ♥xxxx ♦Jx ♣xxx. What is wrong with with bidding 1♠? If partner raises with ♠Kxx ♥xx ♦AKxxx ♣QJx, won’t you like to play 2♠? But the main reason reason for rejecting the negative negative double is that you don’t want to to encourage partner to to bid clubs or rebid diamonds. diamonds. A negative negative double should suggest more more than one place to play. If you had ♠Axxx ♥xx ♦Qxx ♣Kxxx, a negative double would would be ideal. If partner doesn’t doesn’t have spade support, you probably belong in diamonds or clubs—as high as the three level, if necessary. But bidding a good four card spade suit isn’t isn’t Bridge World World standard, later abbreviated abbreviated to BWS. Similarly, Similarly, suppose partner opens the bidding bidding with a minor and you hold ♠AKQx ♥xxxx ♦Kx ♣Jxx. Do you bid 1♥ or 1♠? I think it is clearly better to bid 1 ♠. Even if you have have a 4-4 heart fit, you probably belong in spades or notrump. And if partner does not have four hearts, you definitely definitely do not want to play in hearts. A few of my friends have been experimenting with transfer responses to 1♣ (which is is allowed in some club club games). 1♦ and 1♥ transfer to hearts and spades respectively, and 1♠ is like a forcing notrump; responder has enough to keep the bidding open but has no four card or longer major or a minor suit with a good hand and good suit. There is more to it than that, that, including a weak notrump notrump opening, but the peculiarity and the weakness, in my opinion, is the emphasis on showing a three card major major length immediately. immediately. If opener bids the major major suit transferred to at the one level, he shows three card “support” while bidding it at the two, three or four level shows four card “support.” But failure to accept the transfer (unless opener jumps to 2NT) denies three card support. I like the idea of showing three to an honor with a ruffing value, but cannot understand why the transfer should be accepted with something like ♠xxx ♥Qxx ♦AKx ♣AQ10x instead of bidding 1NT. (Remember, (Remember, a 1NT opening shows 12-14 12-14 HCP, so the delayed 1NT bid shows 15-17). 15-17). If responder needed to know opener’s opener’s major suit lengths after a 1NT rebid, rebid, he could use “New Minor Minor forcing” to ask. So if you want to try this approach (despite its being barred in most open events), I suggest
More Accurate Bidding | 9
you reject the compulsory bid with a three card suit, whether you have a ruffing value or not. Other players make transfer bids after a takeout double by their RHO. This has the advantage of giving giving you “two bids for one.” You can transfer to one suit and pass or transfer and and bid a new suit or some number number of notrump. I think this is a good idea. Although I mentioned using “New Minor Forcing,” I really don’t like it in its standard version. version. “Two-way New Minor Minor forcing” is better, better, but I like 2♣ forcing best of all. It doesn’t require require that you decide in advance whether whether to force to game or not, but it allows you to make up your mind as the bidding develops. This is the way it works: After 1♣ or 1♦ 1M, 1NT 2 ♣ is artificial and forcing (whether the opening bid was 1♣ or 1♦). Opener’s primary primary obligation is is to bid two of the other major if he has four. four. His secondary obligation obligation is to bid two of responder’s responder’s major if he has three—and three—and less than a super hand. Otherwise, Otherwise, he bids 2♦ with neither four of the other major nor three card support for responder’s major and a maximum. With three of responder’s major and a maximum, maximum, he bids 2NT! This leaves more room for further investigation than a jump raise when responder has a possible slam hand. That is the only rebid that distinguishes immediately immediately between a minimum minimum and a maximum. If, over a 2♦ rebid, responder bids two of his original major, it means that he had a skimpy game try, perhaps with a weak six card suit, and was was disappointed disappointed not to to find three-card three-card support. Now a 2NT 2NT bid by responder responder shows that he is is still somewhat interested interested in game but does not have a six six card suit. suit. 1m 1M, 1NT 3 of responder’s major is invitational with a good major suit. Another advantage advantage of playing playing 2♣ as new minor forcing is that it allows you to play in two of responder’s major with a six card suit and a minimum game try, while 1 ♣ 1M, 1NT 2♦, 2NT (to deny 3 card support of responder’s major or 4 of the other major) forces bidding to 3 of the major when responder holds a skimpy game game try with a six six card suit like ♠K10xxxx ♥Kx ♦K109x ♣x, which might might provide a good play play for ten ten tricks opposite 3 card support (♠QJx ♥Axx ♦Qxx ♣A10xx) but would provide a poor play for 9 tricks opposite ♠xx ♥AQx ♦Axx ♣Kxxxx.
RESPONDING TO 1NT AND 2NT The following section section is probably the least least important in this book. When you look for an eight card major fit and bid the appropriate number of notrumps if you don’t find it, you will do almost as well as you would with a more complicated and scientific approach. approach. That is especially especially true if you play mostly mostly in weak matchpoint events. events. Sometimes you get to 3NT when when you really belong belong in 5♣ or 5♦, but the opponents don’t find the best opening lead or the right defense and you score 430 for a better than average score while the scientists are +400 at 5m. 10 | Marshall Miles
This happens often enough that you just about come out even with the scientists at matchpoin matchpoints. ts. You are comfortable using your usual methods; there is no likelihood of forgetting forgetting some gadget and playing playing in a 3-2 or 3-1 fit. But, in case you are willing to put forth the t he effort to learn it, I will set forth what I think is theoretically best, especially at imps. imps. My assumption is that you you are playing a 1517 point range since that is the the most common range. I like weak notrumps notrumps (1214), or weak non-vul and strong vul, but only when they fit in well with the rest of the system we are playing. The Walsh responses to 1NT included 2♠ as minor suit Stayman. That is the way I played for m many any years, but I now prefer four-suit four-suit transfers. A 2♠ response purportedly purportedly shows clubs and a 2NT response response shows diamonds. diamonds. There are two main reasons reasons for Jacoby transfers to to a major. (1) The stronger hand usually becomes declarer, avoiding a lead through his tenaces, and concealing the stronger hand from the defenders makes their defense more difficult; (2) You are able to get two bids for the price price of one. Since the transfer transfer bid is forcing, you can transfer to a major and pass; transfer to a major and raise, transfer to a major and bid notrump, giving partner a choice, and transfer transfer to a major major and bid a minor, minor, usually when interested interested in a slam. To some extent, the same same reasons apply to transfers to a minor, although the first reason is less important: the final contract is usually in notrump rather than a minor, and would be declared by opener anyway. After a transfer to to a major, opener bids the major major at least 95% of the time; that does not apply to a transfer to a minor. Why did I say that a 2 ♠ response purportedly response purportedly shows clubs? It is because the 2♠ bid is also used as a range-finder. If opener has a minimum minimum for his bid (15 points or a bad 16), he bids 2NT. That is a way to for responder to invite invite 3NT without disclosing disclosing opener’s distribution. distribution. Playing the old (Walsh) (Walsh) way, a 2NT response was a transfer to clubs, showing either a weak hand with clubs, or a strong three-suited three-suited hand. So the only way to invite invite 3NT was to bid 2♣ (Stayman), (Stayman), followed by 2NT. But opener had to show his his major if he had one, and that made the defense easier, both on opening lead and later in the hand. Playing the new way, the defenders know that responder probably has no four card major (unless he has 4-3-3-3 distribution) but they don’t know opener’s distribution. Whether opener opener rebids 2NT 2NT or 3♣, if responder makes any call except pass or 3NT, he confirms that his 2♠ bid showed clubs. clubs. The 2NT 2NT response definitely definitely shows diamonds, diamonds, but again, opener has options. 3♣ by opener shows an average minus hand for diamonds and 3♦ shows an average plus hand. So, if responder has ♠xx ♥Q10x ♦AJ9xxx ♣10x, he can bid 2NT followed by 3NT over a 3♦ bid or bid 3♦ over a less encouraging 3♣ bid. With diamonds and clubs reversed, responder could bid 3NT over o ver 1NT 2♠, 3♣, or bid 3♣ over 1NT 2♠, 2NT. In other words, the transfer to a minor doesn’t have to show either forcing, invitational invitational or sign-off values. values. It could show any of the three. three. After transferring to a minor, what should it mean if responder bids a major suit?
More Accurate Bidding | 11
Would you expect that to be a four card major (along with his five or six card minor)? No, because with with a four card major and values for for game or slam, responder would have started started with Stayman. Stayman. A minor fit would only be investigated investigated after no major fit was found (usually when a slam was likely, or at least possible). Thus, 1NT 1NT 2NT, 3♦ 3♠ would show a singleton or void in spades, the way most people people play. And perhaps that is the best way way to play since partner is less less likely to forget forget if you always always show a singleton singleton in sequences like this. But, as you will soon discover, I think it worthwhile worthwhile in many sequences sequences to bid the major or minor suit or singleton (depending (depending upon the circumstances) circumstances) which you do NOT hold. Sometimes Sometimes it is to make the strong hand declarer; declarer; if it is to show a singleton, it is to avoid a lead-directing double or the opportunity to make a lead-directing double, so that opening leader can draw an inference from failure to double. Many experts play 1NT p 3♥ or 3♠ to show a singleton, usually with 31-5-4, 1-3-4-5, etc. etc. distribution. This is a good sequence to to bid hearts to show a singleton spade and spades to show a singleton heart—to make it more dangerous for the opponents to double or not double double for a lead. Of course, opener must must alert the substitute bid. Some players respond 3♥ to show an invitational invitational 5-5 in the majors and 3♠ to show a forcing 5-5 in the majors. majors. I played that way for a while, while, but I don’t like it because it took away the means of telling partner about a singleton in a major. I don’t know whose idea it it was originally, originally, but Alex Kolesnik introduced introduced me to the following following treatment. treatment. 1NT p 3♣ is described at 5-card Stayman. Opener shows his five five card major if he has one. Usually he doesn’t, in which case he bids 3♦. Then, 3♥ showed an invitational 5-5 in the majors and 3♠ showed a forcing 5-5. There was a chance of having having the player with with the weaker hand as declarer, but at least it solved a descriptive problem since Smolen took care of the 5-4’s in the majors and it allowed immediate 3♥ and 3♠ bids to show a singleton (in whichever suit you agreed upon up on in advance). Since four-suit transfers allow you to show either minor immediately (or almost immediately) and 3♣ was your gadget bid to show 5-5 in the majors, either invitational or forcing, you can’t use 3 ♣ to show a weak or invitational hand with both minors. minors. 1NT p 3♦ shows at least 5-5 in the minors and is forcing. With 5-4 or 4-5 in the minors and 3-1 in the majors, you bid your three card major; with with or 2-2-4-5 or 2-2-5-4 you can transfer transfer to the longer minor minor and bid the four card minor next time time (with a slammish slammish hand). With weak 5-5 5-5 or 5-4 hands in the minors, you will probably pass 1NT. If the uncontested bidding has gone 1NT 2♦, 2♥ 3♣ (or 3♦), most people play this this sequence as showing showing an interest in slam. I think it is is possible, and in fact, desirable, to play this as forcing for one round and invitational invitational to game, enough for game but searching for the best game, game, or a slam try—any of the three possibilities. possibilities. Suppose you (responder) hold ♠x ♥AQxxx ♦Qxxxx ♣xx. Whether you belong in game depends upon how well opener fits your two suits.
12 | Marshall Miles
Opposite ♠Axx ♥Kxx ♦KJx ♣Axxx—only 15 points— you definitely belong in game. With a poorer fitting fitting hand, even the three level may be in danger. How can opener tell what to to do unless he knows your approximate approximate distribution? Once opener knows that his partner has two specific suits, it is easy for him to tell how well the hands fit. My suggestion is that that he show how well he likes likes his hand in steps. With ♠KQx ♥Jx ♦AJx ♣KJ10xx his high cards are poorly placed opposite a red two-suiter, and he would make the cheapest bid (3♥) over 3♦, which describes his hand whether whether responder is interested interested in game or slam. slam. With ♠KQx ♥Kxx ♦Jxxx ♣AKx he would bid 3♠ to show show an average+ hand. hand. He nd should tend to be conservative conservative if the 2 step would force to game. Change the king of clubs to the king of diamonds and he would bid 4♣ to show a good hand, and with ♠Axx ♥Kxx ♦AQx ♣Axxx or he would would bid 4♦ to show a super hand. (With a maximum and four hearts he would have jumped to 3♥ or bid a new suit to show a doubleton in that suit and a maximum raise of hearts on the previous p revious round). 1NT 2♦, 2♠/3♣/3♦ shows four card heart support, a maximum raise, and a doubleton in the suit opener rebid. rebid. This information information could be crucial for getting to the right game or slam, and is worthwhile, even though it gives information to the opponents. There are other sequences in which I think step responses would be helpful. When one hand has many many features he would like like to show, but doesn’t have the room to show all of them at a safe level, and when a strong balanced hand is opposite a known distributional hand, step responses by the balanced hand are the solution. When the balanced balanced hand only knows one of his partner’s partner’s suits, he uses only three steps. He can’t be as certain which cards will be good, and three steps leaves more room for cue bidding. The Dallas Aces introduced the following treatment many years ago: 1NT 2♣, 2M ? 4♣ was Roman Keycard Gerber and 4♦ showed a balanced invitation to slam in the major major bid by opener. The latter left little room for cue bidding, but the main main advantage of bidding bidding 4♦ rather than raising to five of the major was that it avoids the risk of down one with bad breaks when opener planned to reject the slam try. try. If the bidding bidding started 1NT 2♣, 2♥ ?, and responder had ♠x ♥KQxx ♦AQxxx ♣Kxx or ♠QJx ♥AQxx ♦x ♣AJ10xx he could bid 3♠ to say he had a singleton or void somewhere and an interest in a heart slam. Opener was obligated to bid 3NT (the cheapest bid in this sequence) to let responder show where where his shortage shortage was. Similarly, Similarly, 1NT 2♣, 2♠ 3♥ (a three bid in the other major) major) would show the same sort of hand in in support of spades. There was no need for either three-level three-level bid to be natural since, with both majors, opener would bid hearts first, and after a 4-4 (or 5-4) major suit was found, there was no need to look for a fit in in the other major. Since opener bids hearts first first with both majors, 1NT 2♣, 2♥ 3NT shows that responder has four spades since there was no reason for him to bid Stayman without either major—not if he was strong enough to bid game. But responder might might have only an invitational invitational hand, so 1NT 2♣, 2♥ 2♠ showed a hand like ♠Qxxx ♥Kx ♦Kxxx ♣J10x. That led to More Accurate Bidding | 13
the silly rule (in my opinion) that when the bidding is over, opener has to alert the opponents that responder might or might not hold a four card major and leads to penalties for failure failure to alert. alert. The reason for calling calling it a silly silly rule rule is that Stayman Stayman asks opener whether he has a four card major; it does not announce that he has one himself, although an inference can be drawn in certain sequences but not in others. Besides, the defender on lead can ask. 1NT 2♣, 2♦ 2♥ is called Garbage Stayman. Stayman. Responder shows a hand too weak to invite game, something like ♠KJxx ♥Qxxxx ♦xx ♣xx, perhaps even ♠QJ10x ♥Q10xx ♦x ♣xxxx. Opener is expected to pass unless he has three spades and two hearts. Bidding Stayman Stayman with the latter hand is somewhat somewhat of a gamble. You usually gain if you you find a major fit fit and lose if you don’t. don’t. It would would be safer to bid that way with a singleton singleton club since you you could pass a 2♦ rebid. Suppose you hold ♠J10xxx ♥QJxx ♦x ♣xxx. I would like to bid bid Stayman, Stayman, and rebid 2♠ if partner bids 2 ♦. This is the sequence sequence most likely to result result in a plus score. But most players players treat this sequence as invitational invitational because they consider consider game bidding more important than part-score bidding. So they would skip Stayman and just respond 2♥, transferring to spades. What should 1NT, 2 ♣, 2♦ or 2♥, 2♠ mean? It is a very mild invitation to game with at least a five card spade suit, like ♠AQxxx ♥x ♦Q10x ♣xxxx or ♠K10xxxx ♥xx ♦QJxx ♣x. Responder may or may not have hearts hearts as a second suit. Responder’s hand is usually unbalanced for this sequence. sequence. With 5-3-3-2 5-3-3-2 distribution, he doesn’t want to give up the advantage of letting the strong hand be declarer. What does 4NT mean mean in the following following sequence? 1NT 2♣, 2♥ 4NT? It should be natural, not Blackwood. Blackwood. Responder may have ♠KQxx ♥Ax ♦KJxx ♣K10x. He bid Stayman Stayman in in the hope of finding a spade fit. fit. When he didn’t, he bid 4NT, invitational invitational (opposite (opposite a 15-17 point notrump). notrump). Your system should cater to this interpretation since you will have the hands for a natural 4NT at least five times as often as for a Blackwood Blackwood bid. Besides, if responder responder has the rare hand (like ♠KQx ♥AQxx ♦KQJxx ♣x) where all he needs to know about is controls, he could bid 4♣ (Roman Keycard Gerber) over 2♥. How about 1NT 2 ♦, 2♥ 4NT? Again 4NT should be natural, natural, based on frequency, frequency, even if there were no way to ask about controls. controls. But if responder has ♠x ♥AQJxxx ♦KQJxx ♣x, he could bid 4♦ (Texas), which forces opener to bid 4♥. Then 4NT would would be RKCB, so you can have your cake and eat it too.
14 | Marshall Miles
THE OPPONENTS DOUBLE A TRANSFER BID OR STAYMAN The bidding starts: You LHO 1NT pass ? *transfer to hearts
Partner 2♦ *
RHO dbl
Your diamond holding is immaterial. immaterial. If you have fewer than three hearts, hearts, you should pass. If LHO passes, passes, what should partner (responder) (responder) do with the the following hands? (a) ♠xx ♥Jxxxx ♦x ♣AJ10xx. He should should bid bid 3♣, which is non-forcing and non-invitational. non-invitational. Even though this raises the bidding bidding to the three level, level, 3♣ should have a better play than 2♥ when partner has a doubleton heart. (b) ♠Ax ♥KJ10xx ♦x ♣Q109xx. He should redouble, redouble, which asks you to bid 2♥. He will bid 3♣ next round, which is forcing after the redouble, and the bidding will will continue normally. normally. It is conceivable conceivable that with with a misfit and bad breaks you won’t make whatever game you get to, but with this good a hand, you should force to game. (c) ♠xx ♥QJ10xxx ♦xx ♣Jxx. Again he will will redouble to make make you bid 2♥. There is no advantage advantage to his being being declarer. Obviously he plans plans to pass 2♥. (d) ♠Qx ♥J10xxxx ♦Kx ♣Jxx. This time time he will bid 2♥. If a diamond diamond is led his king will win win a trick. If not, he may have time time to establish a discard. Suppose an opponent doubles a Stayman Stayman response, presumably presumably for a lead. It would be foolhardy to disregard the warning and play 3NT without a club stopper in either your or partner’s partner’s hand. Some people play that if opener bids a major, he guarantees at least one club club stopper. Others play that a pass guarantees a club stopper and responder can redouble to ask opener to make his normal rebid, having already guaranteed guaranteed a stopper. The important important thing is for you and your partner to reach an an agreement, whatever it it might be. The following following procedure seems logical to to me: With no club stopper, opener opener should bid his major, major, if he has one, or 2♥ if he has both majors—just as he would do if the Stayman response had not been doubled. If he has no major suit suit and no club stopper, he should bid 2♦. If responder has a sure club stopper (not Kx or Qxx which which probably won’t be a stopper if led through), he can bid 2NT or 3NT, but he should take a pessimistic pessimistic view with only a single single stopper and without a long suit, suit, which he hopes to run. I realize this makes no provision for when both hands have a partial stopper (like
More Accurate Bidding | 15
Qx opposite Jxx), but a 3NT contract is seldom makeable with only a single stopper anyway. If opener has a double double stopper in in clubs he should redouble. redouble. And he should assume that AJx or KJx or Q10xx are all double stoppers, with the missing honors in the doubler’s hand. Some players play that the redouble suggests playing in 2♣ redoubled (perhaps with ♣Q109x(x), but I don’t think you will want to play in 2♣ redoubled often enough enough to make this treatment worthwhile. If the bidding has gone 1NT p 2♣ dbl, 2♥ (showing four hearts and a club stopper) and responder has four spades, he can bid 2♠, invitational, or 3NT (probably with “help” in clubs, such as ♣J10x). Responding to 2NT is more more difficult than responding responding to 1NT. There is less room below the 3NT level for responder to describe his hand, and it isn’t practical to use four suit transfers. transfers. 3♣ is still Stayman, and 3♦ and 3♥ are still transfers. 3♠ can either show some sort of minor suit hand or be a transfer to 3NT. I worked out my own system in which 3♣ is Puppet P uppet Stayman (with my own variations); 3NT by responder showed 4-4 in the majors, and if responder just wanted to to raise to 3NT, 3NT, he could either either bid 3♠ to transfer to 3NT or bid 3 ♣, planning to sign off off in 3NT whatever opener rebid. But the biggest problem problem was that it was impossible to bid Smolen below the 3NT level. The same thing is true in standard versions of Puppet Stayman. Stayman. So, if you show a Smolen type of hand and opener has two of your five card suit and three of your four card suit, you might get to a 5-2 fit at the four level—which level—which is probably OK with AQxxx opposite Kx, but not so good with Qxxxx opposite Ax (or, horrors, two small) Smolen works much better when you can bid it at the three level (2NT 3♣, 3♦ 3♥/3♠) since you you can play 3NT if there is no eight eight card major fit. fit. I assume you you know what Smolen is: after 1NT 1NT 2♣, 2♦ or 2NT 3♣, 3♦ responder bids his four card major to show five five of the other. The purpose of Smolen Smolen is to make opener the declarer when you discover a fit in either major. But if the 3♦ bid merely says, “I don’t have a 5 card major,” a 3♥ or 3♠ bid by responder says, “I have four of the other major.” It does not say, “I have four of the major I just bid and five of the other major.” There are pros and cons to playing playing Puppet Stayman. Stayman. It allows opener to show a five card major. major. It doesn’t allow you you to play Smolen without without risking getting past 3NT with with no assurance of an eight eight card major major fit. fit. But if you you decide to play Puppet Stayman, Stayman, I think my way is better better than the usual way. The 3NT response to Stayman shows four of both majors. It could show 5-4 or 4-5 in the majors. It is my belief that that you should not show a major with with 4-3-3-3 distribution. If opener also has 4-3-3-3 4-3-3-3 distribution, you can usually make the same number of tricks tricks in notrump as in a trump trump contract. If opener has 4-4-3-2 4-4-3-2 or 5-3-3-2 distribution, you often gain a trick to play in the eight card major, but not always. Sometimes you can make make one more trick in notrump notrump when the suit is weak.
16 | Marshall Miles
Sometimes Sometimes it is easier to take nine tricks at notrump then ten tricks in a major. The main disadvantage of bidding Stayman with 4-3-3-3 distribution is that it forces opener to show his distribution, which helps the opponents both on opening lead and later in the hand. In standard standard Puppet Puppet Stayman, Stayman, if opener has one four card major, he will bid 3♦. Presumably responder has a four card major, or he wouldn’t wouldn’t have bid Stayman, so he bids the major major he doesn’t have. If opener now bids 3NT, the opponents know which major both opener and responder hold, which helps them on the opening o pening lead and later in the play of the hand. My suggestion suggestion is for for opener to to bid 3♦ over a 3♣ response whenever he doesn’t have a five card major. major. Then if responder bids the the major he doesn’t hold, and if opener bids 3NT, the opponents o pponents don’t know whether opener has the other major or neither major. major. They know slightly slightly less about opener’s distribution distribution than they would after a standard standard Puppet sequence. There is also another advantage advantage to opener’s automatic 3♦ bid (when (when he doesn’t have a five card major). major). Suppose responder holds ♠Jxx ♥xxx ♦109xxxx ♣x. Unless opener has ♦AKx or four diamonds, the six card diamond suit may be worthless at notrump, but worth several tricks in a diamond part-score contract. Most of the time you will get an excellent score by passing the 3♦ bid. But if opener shows a five five card major, major, responder can happily pass opener’s major bid. For that matter, matter, opener will usually do well in in a major contract if he has a five five card major. It is probably a good gamble for responder to bid 3 ♣ even with less ideal distribution, like ♠Jx ♥xxx ♦98xxxxx ♣x, gambling that opener doesn’t have five spades.
SOME GADGET BIDS With neither side vulnerable partner opens 3♣, next hand passes, and you hold ♠AKxx ♥AJxx ♦x ♣Jxxx. What call do you you make? make? Change your hand to ♠AKJx ♥AQxx ♦x ♣Kxxx. What call call do you make? It is very very unlikely, unlikely, when you open 3♣, that you belong belong in diamonds. So, why not play 3♦ as an artificial relay bid? If partner bids 3 ♥ and you bid 4♣ he will know that you are inviting him to 5♣ if he has something like ♠xx ♥x ♦J10x ♣AJ10xxxx, but to pass with the same high cards and 2-2-2-7 2-2-2-7 distribution. distribution. Or when his clubs are headed headed by the Q10 or even the A10. And if 3♣ p 3♦ p, 3♥ p 4♣ invites 5♣, then 3♣ p 3♦ p, 3♥ p 5♣ must invite 6♣. Partner would interpret an immediate raise to 4 ♣ as continuing the preempt, and 5♣ would just be to play (and possibly a further preempt). The 3♦ bid can also be used for another purpose. Suppose, primarily primarily at matchpoints, that responder has ♠Ax ♥KQJ10xxx ♦Q10x ♣x. A 3♥ response would be forcing, and would probably lead to 4♥, down one, but 3♦ has three ways to gain. (1) 3♥ probably has as much chance to make as does 3♣, and it will score better if it makes; (2) it makes it more dangerous for the opponents to enter the bidding; (3) it might lead to a successful sacrifice if the opponents get to More Accurate Bidding | 17
4♠. You could even stop in 3♠ with ♠KQJ10xxx ♥Ax ♦Q10x ♣x by using the following sequence: 3♣ 3♦, 3♥ 3♠, pass. A 4♣ bid over an opening 3♦ bid has fewer ways to gain, but it it can be used to invite game game or slam in diamonds. 3♣ 3♥ would be a transfer to spades, and, at least, invitational.
MINISPLINTERS I like Minisplinters. Minisplinters. A bid of of 3♠ over partner’s 1♥ bid or 3NT over his 1 ♠ bid shows a splinter, but a hand somewhat somewhat weaker than than an ordinary splinter. splinter. For example, over 1♥ you could bid 3♠ with ♠Q10xx ♥Qxxx ♦ — ♣AJxxx. This hand is strong enough to make game opposite a minimum opening and a good fit (like ♠KJx ♥AKxxx ♦xxx ♣Qx or ♠AKxx ♥Axxxx ♦xxx ♣x), so you don’t want to risk stopping short of of game. However, if opener has substantial substantial extra values and a good fit, you may be cold cold for a slam. If opener has a good hand, he makes the cheapest bid, asking asking his partner to show where his shortage is. If opener has an average or minimum minimum hand, he simply bids four of his major. The opponents know that responder has a shortage somewhere, and that opener doesn’t have an exceptionally strong hand, but that doesn’t help them much, either on opening lead or later later in the hand. A hand I can remember remember from actual play is the following: following: ♠AKxxx ♥QJxx ♦AJ9 ♣A opposite ♠QJ10xxx ♥ — partnership was playing a strong strong club system, everyone everyone ♦Kxxx ♣xxx. Unless the partnership opened 1♠ and responder raised to 4♠. With a singleton, singleton, rather rather than a void in hearts, responder would would need at least another queen queen for his bid. bid. Opener was tempted to bid more, but there was no safety at the five level or room to investigate. This was a good hand for a minisplinter. minisplinter. Responder has almost almost as good an offensive hand as ♠QJ10xxx ♥A ♦Kxx ♣xxx, which is worth an ordinary splinter, and it would be very easy to get to a slam after 1 ♠ —3NT. Some players objected to calling this a minisplinter since most minisplinters minisplinters are not forcing to game. game. Since a reverse reverse by opener is forcing forcing for one round, a jump reverse can be played played as a minisplinter. If the bidding goes 1♣ p 1♠ p, what would you bid with the following hand? ♠AQxx ♥x ♦KQx ♣K109xx? I would would probably probably bid 3♠, if playing Bridge World standard, but I prefer a 3♥ bid. That way, partner partne r could bid game with ♠Kxxxx ♥Jxx ♦xx ♣QJx, but attempt to sign off with ♠Kxxxx ♥KQx ♦xx ♣xxx. With typical four card support, a singleton and about 17 high card points, responder can splinter at the four level. level. With a super hand, like like ♠KQxx ♥x ♦AKx ♣AKJxx, opener can bid 3♥, planning to make a diamond diamond cue bid next round, In other words, words, 3♥ can be either weaker or stronger than a 4♥ bid. Some players prefer to jump to 4♥ to show a void rather rather than make my suggested distinction. distinction. 3♥ shows a limit raise or better just as a cue bid after an overcall (1♥ 2♦ (by LHO) 3♦ shows a limit raise or better.
18 | Marshall Miles
THE MINI-ROMAN 2♦ OPENING Most of my bids bids are designed to find out what contract contract our side belongs in, rather than nuisance bids to interfere interfere with the opponents’ opponents’ bidding. I like Flannery (purportedly showing showing 4-5 or occasionally 4-6 in the majors with a hand too weak to reverse). I will explain explain how Flannery works in another another page or so , but I am willing to give it up to play the mini-Roman 2♦, which gives difficult problems to the opponents with little little risk by our side. I don’t know who start started ed this convention, but Jim and Corinne Corinne Kirkham introduced introduced it in our area. An opening 2♦ bid shows 4=1=4=4 or 1=4=4=4 distribution (always with both minors) and 10-13 points. Rarely you might hold 4-0 4-0 in the majors with a five five card minor. Typically, responder bids his major suit at the two level, and opener passes if that is his suit and “corrects” if if that is his singleton. singleton. It is dangerous for the opponents opponents to compete. If they have a minor suit, they know opener has four cards in it; if if they have a major suit, that may be opener’s suit, and if they find an eight card major fit, they know the suit will split split 4-1. Of course, there are complications complications when responder has a good hand, like ♠AQxx ♥AQxx ♦K10x ♣xx. That is probably enough for game, game, although the queen of one of the the majors will will be a dubious card. So responder will will bid 2NT to find out which which major his partner has. Since everyone will know opener’s distribution, it is desirable for his hand to be dummy. With a minimum minimum opening (usually 10-11), he bids 3♣ to say he has hearts and 3♦ to say he has spades. With a maximum maximum opening he bids the major he does not have. Suppose responder holds ♠xxxx ♥KQxx ♦AJx ♣J10xx. If opener’s suit is spades, the hands are very unlikely to make game. game. You would have weak trumps and a misfit misfit in hearts. hearts. So you should bid 2♠. If partner has spades, he will pass, and 2♠ is where you belong. But if he has hearts, the hands will fit spectacularly well. Over 2♠ he will either bid a minor suit or 2NT (you need to discuss in advance which rebid shows the better hand), and you will jump to 4♥. Change your clubs to four small and you would raise to 3♥. Suppose responder has ♠Jxxxx ♥KJx ♦Jxx ♣Qx. This hand is too too weak for game no matter matter which major partner has. has. You should bid 2♥. If partner partner has spades, spades, he will will bid them, them, and you will happily pass. pass. If he has hearts, you you would much rather play in in a 4-3 heart fit at the two level than in a 4-3 or 4-2 minor fit at the three level. So you bid 2♥. You would have no problem with 3-4 or 3-5 in the majors. majors. You simply bid 2♥, and if partner has spades, he will correct to 2♠. And with ♠Jxxx ♥Qxx ♦KJxx ♣Qx you will bid 2 ♠, If partner doesn’t have spades, he would bid either either 2NT or 3♣ (never 3♦ since you might have clubs as a second suit), and you would correct to 3♦. If the opponents overcall, a double is for penalty. You assume, if they bid a major, it is the major that partner p artner does not have.
More Accurate Bidding | 19
FLANNERY If you play a forcing or semi-forcing 1NT response, you have a problem when you hold 4-5-2-2 4-5-2-2 distribution. If partner responds 1NT to your 1♥ opening, what do you bid? Roth-Stone recommended recommended rebidding 2♥, which works fairly well when you hold a good suit like ♥AKQ10x but not so well with ♥Qxxxx. (You can also get in trouble with Flannery with a weak heart suit, but at least you are offering partner an alternative alternative in spades). Most players (not playing Flannery) rebid 2♣ over a 1NT response with a doubleton, and that possibility makes it dangerous for responder to pass with ♠Kxx ♥xx ♦Qxxx ♣Jxxx, even though he would like to. Flannery avoids that problem. problem. Among other things it makes it unnecessary to respond 1♠ with four small spades, which opener might raise with ♠Qxx. Some Flannery Flannery players play that a 1♠ response guarantees at least five spades. I don’t think that it should, should, but it should show at least least a good enough four card suit that you don’t mind being raised with three to an honor (and a singleton heart). A typical Flannery opening is something like ♠AJxx ♥KQxxx ♦Kx ♣xx. You would prefer stronger stronger hearts, perhaps ♥KQ109x or ♥AKJxx in case partner bids 2♥ with a worthless doubleton, but when the distribution and honor hon or strength fall within within the limits, if you are going to open, you have to bid 2♦. Some players insist on opening quite light, which creates a very wide range (9 or 10 to a bad 16) but that doesn’t appeal to me, especially opposite opposite a passed hand. rd th With ♠Qxxx ♥KJxxx ♦Ax ♣xx, if I open in 3 or 4 position, I would bid 1♥. That way, if partner wants to invite game with with 10 or 1l points, we can stop at 2♥ by using Drury. Drury. If I open 2♦, he can’t invite game in hearts without getting us to the three level. A 2♠ response is obviously non-forcing and non-invitational. non-invitational. Responder can pass 2♦ with something like ♠Jx ♥x ♦KJ98xx ♣Qxxx, and 3♣ should also also be non-forcing. A 4♥ or 4♠ contract is to play (a rare case where fast arrival makes sense), and a 2NT response is forcing and artificial. If opener has 31 in the minors, most players, including me, bid the three card suit, which enables responder to tell how well well the hands fit. With 2-2 in the majors, majors, I like the following treatment: 3♥ says, “If you are inviting 4 ♥, you should pass because I don’t have a good hand for hearts (perhaps ♠AKJx ♥Qxxxx ♦Kx ♣xx), although, if you now bid 3♠ I may possibly raise.” 3♠ says, “If you are inviting 3♠, you should pass because I have a poor hand for spades, perhaps ♠Jxxx ♥AKQxx ♦KJ ♣xx, but if you are inviting 4♥, I have a good hand for you.” After bidding 2NT, a minor suit is forcing, and a slam try. My personal choice is to play that a 3 ♥ or 3♠ response to 2♦ is a natural slam try (but asks opener to show his distribution distribution rather than his controls). controls). It sets the trump trump suit and may be followed by RKCB RKCB after finding out what opener’s opener’s distribution distribution is. Some of my partners think that that 2♦ 3♥ or 3♠ should be preemptive, preemptive, and sometimes such a bid would work out well, but I don’t think that we would often need a preempt at the
20 | Marshall Miles
three level when we have both majors (and, if so, we could just bid 4♥ or 4♠, which would usually be where we wanted to play, but could be a preempt). While opener usually usually has 4-5 in in the majors, he could have 4-6. 4-6. But he has to have a minimum hand to do that, usually with a weak heart suit. ♠AKxx ♥Q10xxxx ♦x ♣Qx is ideal, but ♠Axxx ♥AKJxxx ♦xx ♣x is much too strong, since ♠Kx ♥xxxx ♦AKx ♣Qxxx and similar hands are enough for slam, and it wouldn’t occur to responder to try for it. Incidentally, Incidentally, the standard defense against Flannery is to double 2♦ or a 2♥ or 2♠ response with a balanced strong notrump notrump hand. Partner, with with a smattering of strength and three or more of the opponent’s suit, can pass for penalty or double if opener bids bids a suit. With a notrump notrump hand based on a heart heart stopper and a hopefully running minor one would overcall overcall 2NT. An overcall in any suit but hearts is natural, natural, but dangerous. Frequently the Flannery hand has the majors and the responding responding hand has the minors. The offensive misfit misfit provides good hands for defense. I suggested “pass or correct” after 2 ♦ 2NT when playing Flannery. “Pass or correct” has many many other applications. applications. It is used routinely by pairs who play multi (where an opening 2♦ bid shows a weak two bid bid in either major). major). 2♦ p 2♠ says, “If your your suit is spades, I am not interested in game. If your suit is hearts, my hand is worth an invitation (at least) to game. This would be the appropriate response with ♠x ♥Kxx ♦AQxxx ♣Axxx. If the bidding started started as follows: 1♠ p 2♦ 3♣, 3♥ p 4♣ p, ?, ? , responder could have a slam try for either major—something like ♠Kxx ♥Kx ♦Axxxxx ♣Ax or ♠x ♥KQxx ♦AKxxxxx ♣x. If opener has ♠Qxxxx ♥AQJxx ♦KJ ♣x, he should bid 4♠ to say, “If you have a good hand in support of spades. I don’t like my hand very much. If you have a good hand in support of hearts, hearts, I like my hand.” With ♠AKJxx ♥Qxxxx ♦Qx ♣x opener would bid 4♥ to say, “If you are thinking about a slam in hearts, hearts, I don’t like my hand. If you correct to spades, spades, I might or might not bid more.” Most of the bidding discussed in the last few paragraphs is fairly standard in our area, but now comes the part where I am almost alone in my treatments. I don’t understand the logic in the way most others others play. play. Our unopposed bidding starts 1♣ 1♠, 2♠. More often than not opener has four four card spade support, but sometim sometimes es only three. If responder now now bids 3♣, is it forcing? If he bids 3♥ or 3♦, what does that that mean? If responder has has a weak hand, he should pass 2♠ since raising the bidding level may not result in a better contract—perhaps 3♠ instead of 2♠ —any further bid shows an interest interest in game. game. But should 3♣ be forcing? forcing? I don’t think so. If we we don’t have an eight card major fit, 3♣ should be a safer contract than 3♠. If opener doesn’t have four spades, he should have four or more more clubs. If opener does have have four spades, he should bid either 3♠ or 4♠, depending on how strong strong his hand is. What about a 3♥ or 3♦ bid by opener? Some people contend that it shows four or or more spades and and is sort of a help-suit game or slam try. Others show steps. The cheapest bid shows More Accurate Bidding | 21
3 card support with a minimum; the next bid shows 3 card support with a maximum; the next bid shows 4 card support with a minimum; a jump to 4♠ shows 4 card support with a maximum. maximum. This treatment treatment doesn’t make sense to me. If we don’t have an eight card major fit, we may or may not have a game; if we have a game, it is probably in notrump. Whether we belong in notrump notrump depends upon where our cards are located. located. If opener has two small small and responder has two small of the same suit or even Ax, we are better off in 3 ♠ than in 2NT or 3NT; if opener is strong in one unbid suit and responder is strong in the other, we may belong in 3NT, especially when responder has opening opening bid values. values. So if responder bids where his side values are, opener can tell whether they belong in notrump or not. Surely this this makes better sense than having having responder show whether he has minimum or maximum without regard for where his values are located. Consequently, Consequently, when the bidding goes 1♣ 1♠, 2♠ 3♦ or 3♥, it should mean either than responder is interested in slam (which he will show by his bid next round) OR that he has only three card spade support and is showing where most of his side strength strength is located. For slam bidding bidding it helps to know how well well the hands fit, but at the game level the increased accuracy does not no t usually compensate for the cost of giving out information to the opponents about declarer’s hand when you know that you have an 8+ card major fit.
THE KAPLAN INTERCHANGE Edgar Kaplan made made the following recommendation: recommendation: When partner opens 1♥ in first or second position, responder should bid 1♠ to show a forcing notrump response and 1NT to show a 1♠ response—and it is obviously forcing. forcing. The main purpose of this recommendation recommendation is to minimize minimize the necessity for opener to rebid rebid a three card minor. The secondary purpose purpose is to allow opener to play 1NT, which a forcing 1NT response would prevent, and a semi-forcing semi-forcing 1NT response would usually prevent. A third purpose in to allow opener opener to play the hand whether the the final contract is spades or notrump. The latter is one of the advantages of playing transfer responses to 1NT or 2NT. Playing standard, if the uncontested bidding starts 1♥ 1NT, 2♣ or 2♦ and responder has a weak hand, like ♠Qxx ♥Jx ♦Qxxx ♣Qxxx or ♠Axx ♥xx ♦Qxxx ♣10xxx he would like to pass if opener has a four card suit for his bid, but since he may have three, responder responder usually takes a false preference preference to 2♥. If playing the Kaplan Kaplan Interchange responder responder can afford to pass since with a 1♠ response (equivalent to a 1NT response in BWS), opener would rebid 1NT rather than 2♣ with ♠KJ ♥K10xxx ♦AJx ♣Qxx, and the minor rebid would show four or more, perhaps ♠Kx ♥Axxxx ♦xx AJxx. Some players players say that when they are playing Flannery Flannery responder needs five spades to bid 1♠ since with 4-5 in the majors, opener would would bid Flannery unless unless he was strong enough for a reverse. reverse. I said that I thought he could bid bid a good four card suit. The situation is similar similar 22 | Marshall Miles
when playing the Kaplan Kaplan interchange. Some players players say that the 1NT response, showing spades, requires a 5 card spade suit, while I think a good four card suit is sufficient. It is harder for the opponents opponents to defend defend when when the the dummy dummy has ♠AQ10x and declarer may or may not have four card support, the bidding having gone 1H 1NT, 2S pass. Why did I say the Kaplan Kaplan interchange is in effect when when nd the 1♥ bid was made in first or 2 position (rather than in all positions)? If rd opener has opened light, especially in 3 position, with ♠Qxx ♥AKxxx ♦xx ♣Q10x, he would like to pass a 1♠ response if it showed spades and a 1NT response if it was natural. And there is is no reason reason to bid a 3 card minor. minor. It looks looks as though everyone should be playing the Kaplan interchange, especially if they are also playing Flannery. Flannery. However, it has two two faults, one of which is unavoidable and the other caused by the ACBL. The inevitable fault is that when the bidding is 1♥ 1NT (showing spades), if opener has 2-5-3-3 distribution and a minimum minimum opening, he still has to bid a 3 card minor. minor. But this is only when responder has a spade response, response, which is less than 1/3 of the time. time. At least 2/3 of the time time his only suit will be a minor (but too weak to bid it), and even if he had four bad spades, he won’t show them, so occasionally, rather than frequently, opener will have to bid a 3 card minor. The big problem is that unlike relay responses to 1NT and 2NT, the ACBL considers this a mid-chart convention since many players are not familiar familiar with it. And why is that? that? Because it hasn’t been allowed allowed in most events. events. If the same logic had been applied years ago, Jacoby relays over a notrump opening wouldn’t have been permitted permitted when Oswald Jacoby suggested suggested them. I don’t see why this convention is not allowed when Michaels over a major and various defenses to notrump and strong strong club openings are are permitted. permitted. And if you can’t can’t use a convention except in events where no pair or team has less than so many points, you may forget it when you are allowed to use it.
RUBENS ADVANCES OF OVERCALLS Suppose RHO opens the bidding with a minor suit, and you overcall 1♥. The next hand passes and partner bids a third suit. Do you play his bid as (1) forcing, forcing, (2) non-forcing but constructive, or (3) simply non-forcing? You have to check the proper box on your convention card so that the opponents will know what you are doing. Each treatment treatment has advantages advantages and disadvantages. Jeff Rubens, the editor of the Bridge World, World, has suggested a better better solution. His solution is not applicable to every sequence, but it works well when it is applicable and costs nothing when it isn’t. To digress for a moment, why do we play transfer bids after partner opens 1NT or 2NT? 2NT? There are are two reasons: reasons: First, we like the strong hand to to be declarer to protect our tenaces tenaces and to make the defense defense more difficult. difficult. Second, and more important, important, transfer bids give give us two bids for the price of one. We can transfer to where we we want partner to play, play, and pass. We can transfer and raise. More Accurate Bidding | 23
We can transfer and bid notrump to give g ive partner a choice of contacts, and we can transfer and and bid a new suit. Rubens advances work basically basically the same way. way. But there are two main main differences. First, they they are only available in certain sequences sequences (but when they are not available, available, we are no worse off off than before). Second, partner does not have to accept the transfer. Suppose the opening bid was 1♣ and partner overcalls 1 ♠. The first transfer bid is in the opponent’s suit. 2♣ transfers to diamonds; 2♦ transfers to hearts, and 2♥ transfers to spades (showing a better hand than simply bidding 2♠). Similar to transfers transfers over notrump, after after transferring transferring you can pass, raise partner’s suit, suit, bid a new suit or notrump to give give partner a choice. choice. The closer partner’s overcall overcall was to opener’s opener’s suit, the fewer transfer transfer bids are available. available. If the opening bid were 1♥ and partner overcalled 2♦, 2♥ would transfer to spades, 2♠ would transfer to clubs, and 3♣ would transfer to diamonds, the latter showing a better hand than a simple raise to 3♦. But if if the opening bid was 1♥, and partner overcalled 1♠, you would have only 2♥ as a transfer to spades, showing a better hand than just bidding 2♠. It makes makes no difference difference whether whether we call bidding 2♥ a transfer or a cue bid. The transfers apply apply when the overcall was was at the two level, level, so long as it was not a skip bid. Thus 1♠ 2♦ p 2♠ transfers to clubs and 3♣ shows a good raise of diamonds. But the main difference between transfers over notrump and Rubens advances of overcalls, is that the overcaller is not compelled to accept the transfer, and frequently, rather than rarely, the person accepting the transfer may may jump to a higher level. level. If you were not playing playing transfers, and if you overcalled a 1♣ bid with 1♠ and partner bid 2♥ in an effort to play in hearts, you would rebid 2♠ with ♠AKJ10xx ♥x ♦Qx ♣J10xx rather than pass 2♥. If, playing playing transfers, transfers, he bid 2♦ in an attempt to transfer you to hearts and you held ♠AQxxx ♥Kxx ♦x ♣Kxxx, you would bid 3♥ or 4♥, just as you would have done over 2♥ if not playing Rubens advances. The transfers apply whether the the responder makes a negative double or passes. passes. What do you do when the transfers transfers are not available? available? Suppose the bidding bidding goes 1♦ 1♥ p ? Neither 1♠ nor 2♣ is a transfer bid since transfers start with 2 ♦. So neither 1♠ nor 2♣ is forcing. If you want to force, you you have to bid 2♠ or 3♣, both of which are forcing for one round. If the bidding bidding had gone 1♣ 1♠ p 3♥, the latter bid should be preemptive, something like ♠xx ♥KQJxxxx ♦xx ♣xx, since if partner had a good hand, he would have transferred to 2♥ and raised. If the bidding has gone 1♣ 1♠ dbl 2♣, what would you bid with ♠AKQJxx ♥x ♦Qxxx ♣Jx? I think you you should bid 4♠! You will will have have a finesse for game if partner has as little as ♠xx ♥Jxx ♦AJ10xx ♣xxx, and if the diamond finesse is off, or the diamonds are split 3-1, the opponents are probably cold for 4♥. I probably would would have passed with the weaker hand if if responder had passed, but once he makes makes a negative double, you hope to indicate indicate a lead for for partner and possibly suggest a sacrifice. Surprisingly, Surprisingly, you may be cold cold for a game when when your side has less than half the high high card points. The opponents may may also be cold for
24 | Marshall Miles
game since each side has a double double fit. You have an advantage if you you get there first—before first—before the opponents find their fit.
LEBENSOHL There are some sequences sequences which have a very wide wide range. For example, the the bidding starts 1♥ pass 2♥ dbl, pass ? Since you don’t like to let the opponents play at the two level after after finding a fit, fit, you often strain strain to compete, compete, but the doubler can be quite strong or fairly weak. weak. Not only can his range be great, but his partner may hold four points or ♠KJxx ♥xx ♦Axxx ♣Qxx. With the latter hand should he jump to show a much much better hand than he might might have held? I think most players would say “no,” on the theory that after an opening bid and a response, there shouldn’t be many high card points left, and trying for game is against the odds. However, after after a light opening and a response on almost almost nothing, you could easily be missing a game. Even more difficult difficult is the problem after 2♥ dbl pass pass ? Partner of the doubler could could hold 15 points or 3 points. There is also the problem of whether to jump in a minor, which would by-pass 3NT, your most likely game, if you hold ♠xxx ♥Ax ♦KQxxx ♣Qxx or ♠Kx ♥xx ♦AKJxx ♣xxxx. The basic idea idea of Lebensohl is to play a 2NT 2NT response as artificial, artificial, usually transferring to 3♣, after which most suit bids show a weak hand (6 working points or less), and a direct bid at the cheapest level shows something like 7-11 points, which which is a very wide range. If the partner of the doubler is is fortunate enough to hold a major suit with a good hand, the bidding could go 2♥ dbl p 2NT, p 3 ♣ p 3♠, or 2♥ dbl p 3♠. Which sequence is stronger? I think the usual agreement is to play that 2NT starts the weaker of the sequences and is invitational while while the direct jump to the three level is forcing.
DOUBLES When I started to to play bridge, the rules were simpler. simpler. One of a suit, double by the the next hand, was a takeout double. double. Also one of a suit, pass, pass dbl was a takeout double. Practically every other double was for penalty. penalty. Now, in addition to takeout doubles, we have negative doubles, support doubles, maximal doubles, lead-directing lead-directing doubles, etc. Sometimes a double merely merely shows extra values values after you have already shown your distribution. distribution. For example, example, 1♣ 1♥ p p, 2♣ dbl , with ♠Qxx ♥AKJxx ♦AJx ♣xx. Make this hand about a king stronger, stronger, and you you would double as your first call, since a double followed by a bid shows a stronger hand than a bid followed by a double. Even doubles of notrump contracts which always used to be for penalty may have artificial meanings like a major and a longer minor (Woolsey), (Woolsey), or the rounded suits or the pointed pointed suits, etc. Most
More Accurate Bidding | 25
players treat treat 1NT 2♣ dbl as “Stayman” unless 2♣ showed the majors. I used to think that after a notrump opening, showing a balanced hand with a narrow range of points, responder’s responder’s double of an overcall should be for penalty. Opener has already described his hand, and responder has a better knowledge of the combined strength and fit than opener does, and he might like to penalize the opponents’ indiscretion. indiscretion. However, However, most players now play the double for for takeout in an effort to contest the part-score on the theory that hands to contest the partscore occur more more frequently than good penalty doubles. And when you you have a good penalty double, you often can do just as well by bidding and making 3NT. The way the opponents get doubled is usually that one hand, with extra high card strength and shortage in the opponent’s suit, doubles for takeout and his partner passes for penalties penalties with strength strength in the opponent’s opponent’s suit. Or occasionally his partner passes because because he has no suit suit to bid other than than a suit bid by the opponents, opponents, and he hopes his partner partner is strong enough defensively defensively to set the the contract. I used to play that a double, doub le, sitting over the opponent’s suit was usually for penalty, and under the opponent’s suit was for takeout, but that rule hardly applies at the present time time since there are so many exceptions exceptions which I shall mention shortly. shortly. If the bidding goes 1♦ p 1♠ 2♥, p p ?, responder responder should double double with ♠A10xxx ♥xx ♦Axx ♣Qxx. Opener couldn’t double 2♥ for penalty since it would be a support double, so responder doubles with extra values, hoping his partner can leave it in, and if not, that his side can make a part-score contract in something. Perhaps in spades if opener has ♠KQ ♥Jxx ♦KQx ♣Kxxxx. Responder doesn’t expect opener to have three spades, since if he did, he probably he probably would have made a support double. Some players would automatically make a support double o r redouble with three spades, but I wouldn’t with ♠Jxx ♥KQx ♦Kxx ♣KJxx since I don’t like my hand for spades and prefer to defend if partner elects to pass. Support doubles only apply through 2♥, and only when responder bids a major. If the bidding had gone 1♣ p 1♦ 1♥, ? with a balanced balanced hand too weak to open 1NT (and without four spades), opener should pass unless un less he has a double stopper in hearts. A double would show a hand hand strong enough to rebid 2NT, except except that opener is lacking a heart stopper. For example, ♠AQx ♥Jx ♦AKx ♣Axxxx. Traditionally, Traditionally, 1♣ p 1♦ 1♠, dbl is supposed to show four hearts with close to a minimum hand, although if the partners are playing Walsh style, there isn’t much need to show hearts if responder responder didn’t bid them himself. himself. So perhaps this sequence should show the same kind of hand as double of 1♥ showed: 18 or 19 points but with with no stopper in spades. spades. This makes better better sense than a western western style style cue bid to make partner bid notrump notrump if he has a stopper. It leaves more room room for responder to bid when he is very very weak. Even 26 points between between the two hands may not be enough for game with a single stopper in the opponent’s suit and no long suit to take tricks with (like ♠Jxx ♥Axx ♦Q10xx ♣xxx). With this hand partner should be pleased pleased to stop in in 1NT. With the added added queen of clubs clubs responder should bid 2NT or 3NT. Game should make easily easily if opener has a good five card club suit, perhaps even if he doesn’t. d oesn’t.
26 | Marshall Miles
I said that there are many exceptions to the double over the bidder being for penalty. For example, the bidding may go 1♦ 1♠ 2♥ 2♠, p p ? when you hold ♠Qx ♥AQxxx ♦K10 ♣Axxx. You can’t pass with this good a hand when you might belong in game in any of three suits or notrump. Bidding 3♣ is a possibility, but it suggests a more two-suited two-suited hand and you you don’t want a club raise with ♠Ax ♥K ♦AJ9xxx ♣Jxxx Bobby Wolff, Wolff, suggested a double with with ♠KQJxxx ♥xx ♦Ax ♣AQ10 in in the following following sequence: 1♣ 1♥ 1♠ 2♥, p p ? A double looks scary to me, but partner can tell by looking at this hand (with perhaps ♠Ax ♥Axx ♦Jxx ♣KJxxx) that you can’t have a penalty double of a suit that has been bid and supported. Later I will will suggest that when the opponents show a two-suited overcall, like Michaels or unusual notrump, a pass, followed by a double next round round be for penalty. penalty. Otherwise, low level doubles should should be for takeout. Following are are a few more more somewhat unusual doubling situations: situations: I already mentioned that doubling an opening bid, followed by bidding a suit later, shows a strong hand, especially when the suit is a major. The modern style is to show your distribution early and double later to show extra strength while a double followed by a suit bid is even stronger. But suppose RHO RHO opens 1♠ and you hold ♠x ♥AKJx ♦KQxxxx ♣Qx. If you have a game, game, it is is probably in hearts since you need eleven eleven tricks for a game in diamonds. diamonds. You don’t need a particularly strong hand to double, and if partner bids bids clubs, you you can correct to diamonds. What you were hoping for was a 2♥ response, which you would raise to 3♥. Partner doesn’t need much for game game if he has a fit (♠Jxxx ♥Q10xx ♦Ax ♣xxx), If your your long suit were hearts, you would just overcall 2♥, which bid covers a very wide range. You want to make your your heart bid before the opponents can preempt you. Partner can raise to 3♥ with a fairly weak hand, and he can cue bid 2♠ with a better raise. The double with so few points when you have four hearts and a long diamond suit, which you intend to bid if partner responds 2♣ is called an equal level conversion. conversion. If your minor suits suits were interchanged, a double double would be much more dangerous. dangerous. At imps I would risk risk it (and pass if partner bids 2♦) Or, instead of playing playing a cue-bid as Michaels Michaels (hearts and a minor), have have it show top and bottom. Any way you look at it, there there is danger in forcing the bidding to the three three level when partner may have a misfitting misfitting Yarborough. On the other hand, the opponents have trouble doubling for penalty when their trumps are divided, and the cue bid gives them problems with their own constructive bidding. Because of the possibili possibility ty of an equal level level conversion when when an overcaller has four hearts and a diamond suit, the partner of a 2♣ overcaller should be more inclined to risk a 2♥ bid than he would after a 2♦ overcall. I will discuss how to defend against two-suited overcalls very shortly. In the trial to select a team for the t he 2011 Bermuda Bowl an amusing hand was dealt (more amusing to one side than than to the other). These were the the four hands:
More Accurate Bidding | 27
♠Q9652 ♥975 ♦543 ♣94 ♠A ♥ K Q J 10 6 3 ♦ J 10 8 ♣ 10 7 2
♠ K 10 8 4 ♥2 ♦A976 ♣AQ65 ♠J73 ♥A84 ♦KQ2 ♣KJ83
West 2♥ pass dbl dbl
North pass 2♠ pass all pass
East pass pass pass
South dbl pass 2NT
The 2♥ bid was a “sound” “sound” weak two bid. bid. This one was really sound. But it wasn’t East East who doubled. doubled. It was was West. He knew his partner couldn’t play him for a better hand than he had, and if he couldn’t leave it in, he could bid 3♥ safely opposite West’s hand. hand. Ironically, Ironically, if South hadn’t doubled, his side side would have won 6 or 7 imps. If West hadn’t doubled, his side would have lost lost 4 imps for +300 vs +430. If South South hadn’t run run from 2♠ doubled he would have lost 9 imps, and 2NT doubled was down five five tricks for loss of 14 imps. imps. The interesting fact, fact, from our point of view is that West could double safely, knowing that his partner would not play him for more than he had, and he had a safe “out” if his partner didn’t have such a good defensive hand. There is another type of double, double, which I recommend. recommend. Suppose the bidding goes LHO 1♦
Partner 1♠
RHO 2♦
You ?
and you hold ♠Kxx ♥Axx ♦xx ♣Q10xxx or ♠xxx ♥AQxx ♦Ax ♣xxxx. These hands are both very good raises to 2♠ but slightly skimpy for a 3♠ bid (even if a jump raise raise were not preemptive). preemptive). You could bid 3♦, but you might be set in 3♠ if partner has a minimum minimum overcall or if you you get bad breaks. And it probably won’t be necessary to bid that high to buy the bid. Besides, if you you cue bid with this hand, what will you bid with a slightly stronger hand (the same hands plus one more spade or the ace of clubs clubs in place of the queen in the first first hand)? I like a double to show a good raise to to the cheapest level. Most players play a double to 28 | Marshall Miles
show the two unbid suits. But when they may may have 5-5, 4-4, 4-5 or 5-4 in the other two suits, it it is hard for partner to know what do. do. Should he rebid his own own mediocre suit or bid a three card suit, or pass with the most common 5-3-3-2 distribution? distribution? While I think think it is a good idea to play the double to to show a good raise to the two level, I think it is a very good idea to play the double to show a good raise at the three level. level. After 1♦ 1♠ 3♦ ? how often will you want to make partner choose which which new suit to bid at the three three level? I am sure sure that you would would like to make a “good raise” double at least five times as often as a “choose a new suit” double at the three level. level. The “good raise” double is is far safer than the “choose a new suit double.” You don’t have to worry about misfitting hands since a good raise double always shows a fit, and the only question is whether you belong in a game or a part-score. part-score. To take a worst-case worst-case example, suppose you are playing the “choose a suit” double and the bidding is 1♥ 1♠ 3♥ dbl, ? and the overcaller has ♠KJxxx ♥Kxxx ♦Kx ♣xx and his partner has 2-2-4-5 distribution. Should the overcaller pass the double, bid a minor (which one?) or rebid spades? I would pass, but not happily. Let’s discuss penalty penalty doubles. doubles. There are not many left. Usually, when the opponents play in a doubled contract, it is because you or your partner made some form of a takeout double double and the other left it in. Most penalty doubles are basically lead-directing lead-directing doubles. doubles. If the bidding bidding goes 1NT p 2♣ dbl. the doubler is suggesting a club lead against the final contract, con tract, perhaps with ♣KJ109x and an outside ace. ace. He is gambling that the opponents opponents can’t make 2♣ doubled or don’t have the kind of hand to try—and if they do, they probably could have made 3NT for a better score than they would get from 2♣ doubled, and making making +180 or +280 or +380 They have to redouble to get a good good score—unless they can’t make game. A double of a slam asks for an unusual lead (unless the slam bid is an obvious sacrifice). sacrifice). Some players say that a double of a slam asks for the lead lead of dummy’s first first bid suit, but I think an “unusual” lead is best. best. Often the doubler has a void and wants a ruff against slam in a suit. There is the possibility possibility of a run-out to notrump or another suit, but the opponents can usually tell from the bidding whether a successful successful run out is likely. likely. A double of 3NT usually asks asks for the lead of dummy’s first bid suit, but the following hand illustrates the possibility of an exception:
More Accurate Bidding | 29
♠AKQ9x ♥Q9xx ♦x ♣ Q 10 x ♠ J 10 x x ♥xx ♦xx ♣Kxxxx
♠xx ♥ A K J 10 x ♦ J 10 9 x ♣xx ♠xx ♥xx ♦AKQxxx ♣AJx
North 1♠ 2♥ pass
East pass pass dbl
South 2♦ 3NT all pass
West pass pass
I was East, and I thought a heart lead was the only chance to set the contract, so I doubled. That would normally normally suggest a spade lead, but I thought from the bidding that partner partner would have have four spades and and his spade holding would would be a clue to leading a heart instead. instead. At least the double would would tell him not to lead a club. It would would have been fun fun to take take the first first six tricks. tricks. It would be a great hand to write up if partner had led a heart to my ten and declarer hopped up with the ace of clubs at the second trick, followed by a finesse of the nine of spades at trick three. A series of plays like that that seldom occurs. occurs. Competitive bidding bidding is very aggressive. According to his writings, writings, Larry Cohen would almost as soon take an occasional 500 point penalty or be minus 670 as to let the opponents make 2♥ when he can make 2♠. But he is a sneaky devil and doesn’t often score -670 or even -200 as a result of his aggressive bidding, and at either either imps or matchpoints, matchpoints, he can afford to to get a bad board with with the same tactics which give him a good result more than twice as often. Kit Woolsey argues convincingly for close penalty doubles (or leave-ins of takeout doubles). I don’t compete as aggressively aggressively as either either of them, but I have a few suggestions and comm comments. ents. First, when when the opponents have a fit, you usually have a fit. When they open 1♥ and their partner raises to 2 ♥, or 1♦ p 1♥ p, 2♥ it is safer to reopen the bidding with either a bid or a double than when it goes 1♦ p 1♥ p, 1♠ p p ?, or even 1♦ p 1NT p, p ? In the latter latter sequences, the reason reason for the opponents’ pass may be a bad misfit. misfit. A misfit for them usually usually means a misfit for you. you. Second, it is tempting tempting to try to force the opponents one trick trick higher even when you don’t really really want to buy the bid. But when your hand is balanced, the opponents’ opponents’ hands tend to be balanced also, also, and neither side side can make as much as one would normally expect. You don’t want to be minus when 30 | Marshall Miles
you would have been plus by passing. passing. Occasionally you you have an opportunity to improve your your odds. With both sides sides vulnerable, you you bid 1♣ with ♠Axx ♥Axx ♦Qxx ♣Axxx and LHO overcalls 1NT. Partner doubles and the next hand bids 2♦, alerted as a transfer. transfer. The way I play, at both matchpoints and imps, is that I will double a 1NT overcall with almost any nine points, perhaps even a good eight. However, if partner pulls the double, I don’t guarantee further action. If our side has 20-21 points, split split 12-8 or 12-9, we have an advantage advantage over the opponents whose points points are split 16-4 or 16-3 16-3 or 17-2. We can get back and forth while the overcaller may be unable to reach his partner’s hand to take a finesse. With this this hand we may have an advantage of 23-17 in points but a disadvantage of 5 to 8 in the number of trumps, trumps, conceivably conceivably 4 to 9. But RHO has transferred to hearts, and if partner is short in hearts, we may not be able to set them in 2♥ doubled. On the other hand, we hate to let them escape. Even if partner has three three hearts, he may be afraid afraid that we have only one or two. two. So I think you should double 2♦ to show a good defensive hand including defense against hearts, the suit suit that is being transferred transferred to. You have a better defensive defensive hand against diamonds than against hearts, and even if they the y belong in diamonds, how will either of them know? And if the opponents make 2♦ doubled, it isn’t game. So you have almost nothing to lose by doubling and much to gain. With the hand I just mentioned, where the doubler had three of both unbid suits, there is really no risk risk in a double by opener. With three of the suit suit transferred to and a doubleton diamond, there is slightly more risk in doubling, but, as mentioned above, the opponents probably have no way of knowing how many diamonds each other has, so I would recommend a double with a good defensive hand and 3-3-2-5 distribution as well. As a general rule, if you could have doubled the opponents in the same denomination at an earlier round of bidding, but failed to do so, a double at the three or four level is for penalty. penalty. Usually such doubles should show that that you have a “surprise.” “surprise.” Suppose the bidding has gone 1♠ 3♠, 4NT 5♥, 6♠ and you hold ♠QJ108 behind the opening opening bidder. Quite likely the opponents belong in a slam, which they would make make if the trumps hadn’t split 4-0. The only risk is that they will run to another spot (like 6NT) and make it. it. But on this bidding, the chance of a successful runout is practically practically zero. But if both your your opponents have bid strongly, showing suits of their own, it would be foolish to double when the opponents could run to the other suit or notrump, and possibly make it. Usually, just setting a slam is enough to give you a good result, which is why most slam doubles, except in in a competitive competitive auction are lead-directing. lead-directing. Also why most penalty doubles of games or part-scores are because of a “surprise.” Following is a typical example: example: The bidding has gone gone as follows: follows:
More Accurate Bidding | 31
RHO 1♦ 2♥ 3♦ 4♥
You pass pass pass ?
LHO 1♥ 2NT 3♥
Partner pass pass pass
and you hold ♠AJ10 ♥x ♦KJx ♣Jxxxxx The hearts are apparently apparently splitting splitting 5-1, possibly 4-1. (Not everyone bids bids as I recommend). recommend). This was not a very confident auction since both opponents made bids which could be passed. passed. Declarer, for his 2NT bid, should have at least a doubleton diamond, and the diamond finesse isn’t going to work. This is the kind of hand where where declarer needs everything everything to work to make his contract, and he h e may be set two or o r three tricks if he misguesses. The next double is more questionable, but I think it is the “percentage” call. The uncontested uncontested bidding starts as follows: follows: 1NT 2♣, 2♦ 2NT, 2NT, 3NT. Sitting over the notrump opener with ♠xx ♥AQ9xx ♦10xx ♣xxx. I think you you should should double! Opener has denied a four four card major. Responder may or may may not have a four card major. If he doesn’t play four suit suit transfers, bidding Stayman Stayman may be the only way he can invite invite 3NT. So responder may may not have a four card major, and if he does, it is probably spades. spades. Only if he has both, are you you in trouble if you double. The opponents opponents “just barely” got to game Dummy probably has nine points or 8 with with a five card card suit. It would be dangerous dangerous to double if if the opponents could have 30 points between between them. Let’s make it it simple and assume that opener has 16, responder has 9, and partner has 9. 9/40 if the time LHO will hold the king of hearts and 31/40 of the time time opener or partner will will have the king, And if LHO has the doubleton king you can still get your four heart tricks if partner wins a trick and returns a heart. Partner is almost almost certain, with his nine points, points, to win a trick or two before declarer can take nine, and he will return a heart unless dummy has ♥Kxx or ♥Jxxx or ♥10xxx. So when your your double “works” “works” you will will get a great result at matchpoints matchpoints and a zero if it doesn’t. doesn’t. At imps you may gain gain 2, 5 or 7 imps or lose 4, 6 or 8. The former results results are far more likely. likely.
BIDS THAT SHOW TWO SUITS There are many ways to show two-suiters (besides bidding one suit and another the next time you you get a chance to make a call). The three most most common are the unusual notrump (which shows the two lower unbid suits), and the Michaels cue bid over a minor minor which shows shows the majors, majors, and the Michaels Michaels cue bid over a major which shows the other major and one of the the minors. A fourth way, somewhat less common, is to to cue bid a major to show the top and bottom bottom unbid suits. The latter covers the most difficult sequences, but can only be used approximately half as often as ordinary Michaels over a major since you can use it only onl y when you have the right minor—clubs. minor—clubs.
32 | Marshall Miles
Incidentally, when partner bids a Michaels cue bid, showing the other major and a minor, minor, how do you discover which minor minor he has? Many pairs bid bid notrump to ask partner to to identify his minor. minor. I have been convinced by several several of my partners that the notrump bid should show an invitational hand in the unbid major. When it goes 1 ♠ 2♠ p ? you need a way to bid 3♥ and stay there with a bad hand, and a way to invite partner to 4♥. Bidding 2NT with the invitational invitational hand is the logical way to do it. it. So how do you get to the right right minor minor suit? By “pass or correct.” If you you bid 3♣ partner can pass if he has clubs, and he can bid 3♦ if he has diamonds. There is more to it than that! Suppose it was your partner who cue bid 2♠ and you hold ♠Jxxxxx ♥Q ♦Ax ♣Qxxx Partner’s minor is probably diamonds, diamonds, and, if so, so, your best contract will will be 3♦. But if he has clubs, you have a very good hand, and you belong in clubs, quite likely 5♣. So you bid 3♦, hoping that partner will “correct” to 4 ♣ or 5♣. However, if you have ♠Kx ♥x ♦Q10x ♣AKxxxxx, partner’s minor must be diamonds, and you expect to make game if you are declarer (so that your spade holding can’t be led through), so you should bid 5♦. I am often horrified to see what some players will show a two-suited overcall with, like 1 ♦ 2♦ with ♠AJxx ♥Kxxx ♦xx ♣Qxx. I would would just pass with with this hand, but if I had to make a call, I’d far rather double than make a Michael bid. For one reason, reason, the double doesn’t doesn’t force the bidding to the two-level, two-level, so it is less likely to lead to a bad result—only if partner trusts you and properly bids too much with his hand. With favorable favorable vulnerability, vulnerability, I might overcall a heart opening with a Michaels bid with ♠KJ10xx ♥x ♦xx ♣Q109xx since, with little more than ♠Qxxx and the king of clubs, we might have a good sacrifice against 4♥. Change the clubs clubs to to ♣Q8xxx and I might bid 1♠, so as not to encourage a sacrifice in clubs, but we might have a good sacrifice in 4 ♠. But generally you need a better hand for a Michaels cue bid than for a one-level overall of a major because it forces the bidding higher higher and encourages partner to bid bid more. Many players play both an unusual notrump notrump and a Michaels Michaels bid as either either very good or very bad, and they simply overcall one of their suits (usually a major) with a medium hand. My personal preference preference is to play a continuous continuous range but avoid bidding with a bad bad hand. except with favorable favorable vulnerability. vulnerability. If you bid one suit, suit, instead of showing two by a single bid, the bidding level may be too high for you to risk showing the other suit, and it is safer to show your suits at a low level, than to wait for an ideal hand or to bid your second suit at a high level, after the opponents have described described their hands to each other. Suppose your RHO bids 1♥ and you hold ♠AKJx ♥xxx ♦x ♣KQxxx or ♠AK10x ♥x ♦xx ♣AJ9xxx. Not everyone sees it my way, but I would overcall 1 ♠. If we have a game, it is more likely to be in spades than clubs, clubs, and if I overcall 2♣, the bidding may be at the 4♥ level when it is my next turn to bid, and I’ll have no idea whether to show my spades at the four level. If the bidding stops at the two-level, two-level, like like 1♥ 1♠ 2♥ p, p ? partner probably probably has two two spades, which means that I probably probably have three spade tricks, counting a ruff, which is good for both offence and defense, and I More Accurate Bidding | 33
will bid 3♣. I just hope that partner doesn’t doesn’t assume I have longer spades than than clubs, and take me back to spades. spades. My rule is, that that if he couldn’t raise to 2♠ the previous round, he shouldn’t shouldn’t support spades later. Since most people don’t play that way, partner should alert, or I should alert if he passes. Let’s discuss how we should bid when our side opens the bidding and the opponents show a two-suiter. two-suiter. If we open the bidding and an opponent overcalls, overcalls, just showing that that suit, we we have discovered that it works works better to concentrate concentrate on finding what we can make make rather than how best to penalize penalize the opponents. That is why most doubles by responder primarily show offensive, rather than defensive, values. I think the same same thing should be true after after two-suited two-suited overcalls. overcalls. The “standard” treatment is to play that a double shows good defense against at least one of the suits shown by the unusual notrump or Michaels Michaels bid. If the next player bids one of the suits suits shown by by his partner’s partner’s initial bid, opener can double if he has a good three or four card holding in that suit; if he passes, responder will have a chance to double, but he is not allowed to pass. He has to do something, either bid or double—even if he doesn’t want to. Neither the cue cue bid of your partner's suit suit nor the 2NT bid bid is likely to be passed by the partner of the opponent opponent who made it, it, so I think a double by you you should show offensive values, values, just the same same as a negative double. If responder had defensive values he can pass, followed by a double at his next turn to bid. The delayed double is primarily primarily for penalty. penalty. This is just the opposite from from the way most people play. play. Incidentally, Incidentally, I follow the same scheme after after a takeout double by the opponents. An immediate immediate bid shows offensive values, while while if you pass and double later, later, it is primarily for for penalty--even though you failed failed to redouble (hoping you would get a chance to double at a higher level). Both sides are vulnerable at imps and the bidding starts: 1♦ dbl ?, what call would you make with ♠AJ862 ♥QJ62 ♦xx ♣Qx? Most players would bid 1♠; a few would redouble. I think both actions are wrong, wrong, although I have more more sympathy for the redouble than for the 1♠ bid. To me, this hand screams DEFENSE, DEFENSE, NOT OFFENSE. OFFENSE. If RHO had passed, you you would have no choice but to bid 1♠, and if partner had rebid 1NT. you would have no choice but to bid 2♥. It is very unlikely that that you would have got to game and made it. it. Now you know that game is almost impossible, because you are unlikely to have a good major fit, and if you do, the suit will will probably break badly for you. you. What can the opponents make? Possibly 2♣, probably not even even that. If partner has a second suit, it it is probably clubs. clubs. If LHO had ♦QJxx along with a weak four card club suit, he may bid 1NT instead of 2♣ (although the 1NT response is supposed to be constructive, like like 7-10 points). He may even bid a 3 card major major at the one-level with a weak hand. If he bids 2♣, which is passed around to you, you can double, with more to gain than to lose. lose. For one thing, someone someone may run from 2♣, even if is their best contract. contract. However, if you you had redoubled, LHO would have passed passed with only a four card club suit, and you would only have been able to double at the one-level. By passing, you may be able to double a major major at the two-level. two-level.
34 | Marshall Miles
My main point is that if your RHO makes a takeout double or a two-suited two-suited bid, and you pass, a later double by you is for penalty.
THE 1NT RESPONSE, FORCING OR SEMI-FORCING? In the Roth-Stone system a 1NT response to a major opening was forcing by a non-passed hand For many many years almost everyone everyone played played that way. way. Recently semi-forcing semi-forcing became more popular in most of the country, and Bridge World standard changed the 1NT response to semi-forcing. semi-forcing. I don’t know about the rest of the country, but in Southern California, almost no one has changed, and forcing is the rule, not the exception. exception. What are the pros and and cons? A semi-forcing response works best when opener has a minimum minimum (11- 13 points with with 5-3-3-2 distribution distribution or as few as 10 balanced with with some pairs!) The ability to pass 1NT is most desirable when the major suit is weak. If it were forcing, opener would have to rebid a three card minor (conceivably a two card minor with 4-5-2-2 distribution) and responder, with less than invitational values, will return to the the major with a doubleton. The 1NT response response could be made with as much as a bad 12 points, po ints, which allowed allowed the 11-13 point opening bidders to pass in a superior contract. Except at match-points match-points it it didn’t matter matter much when there was a combined total of 24 or 25 points, since two of a major was seldom in danger. When the notrump bid was was made with 6 to 8 points, two two of the major might be set when one notrump could be made. However, a major 5-2 fit is not always inferior. Sometimes it can be made when 1NT could be defeated. defeated. I think passing 1NT is is the percentage call, but not by much, when responder has 11 or a bad 12 points and a misfit. misfit. Opener could only pass 1NT with 11 to to 13 points and 5-3-3-2 distribution. distribution. He still had to rebid a three card minor on most 5-3-3-2 hands and a two card club suit when holding 4=5=2=2 distribution. distribution. The semi-forcing semi-forcing 1NT works best in a strong club club system. If most hands with 16 or more more points were opened 1♣, as in Precision, responder could afford to make limit raises with either three card or four card support. He would need more high cards for a three card limit limit raise than for a four card limit raise, and he might jump to four of a major with hands like ♠KQx ♥QJx ♦ — ♣Q10xxxxx since there was was little chance of missing missing a slam. More discipline and accuracy are required when opener can have a strong hand and slam is either probable probable or possible. Then it is especially important to know, among other things, whether responder has three card or four card support. There are several things things you lose when 1NT is not forcing. forcing. With hands like ♠K10x ♥x ♦AJxxx ♣J10xx you lose the ability to show a three card limit raise. You would hate to to bid either 1NT or 2♠ and have have partner pass. How do you show hands like ♠ — ♥QJxxx ♦Kxxx ♣Kxxx or ♠x ♥Qxxxx ♦AKxxxx ♣x when partner opens 1♠ and you may be cold for game in one of your suits, most likely hearts? Do you want want to risk a pass of 1NT? Or would you rather rather force to game with with a 2/l response? Suppose partner partner opens 1♥ and you hold ♠xx ♥Qxxxx More Accurate Bidding | 35
Larry Cohen or Marty Marty Bergen would would bid 3♥, but I think a ♦Jxxx ♣Jx. I suppose Larry 1NT response is quite effective if you are not playing the Kaplan interchange, which I will explain later, or 3 ♥ as preemptive. preemptive. Ironically, a 1NT response is, in effect, more preemptive preemptive than a raise to 2♥, since a single raise encourages competition while while a notrump response does not. If the next player player has a strong hand, he may stay out of o f the bidding, thinking his partner is marked with almost a Yarborough or with with no values outside of hearts. The opponents will misjudge misjudge the hand if they don’t know about your your heart support. In fact, if an opponent passes your forcing notrump, thinking he can tell what to do next round when he hears opener’s rebid, responder can pass if opener rebids 2♦, rather than taking a preference to hearts. hearts. Even if he takes takes a preference over a 2♣ rebid, the opponents don’t know whether responder has 9 or10 points with a doubleton heart or a preemptive raise. raise. The opponents may may get into the bidding, bidding, but their judgment is thrown off. Each partner thinks thinks his partner is reopening light, light, and they may play play in 2♠, making four, which is better for you than taking a doubled sacrifice over 4♠. I think most pairs who play a forcing notrump don’t take full advantage of it. Suppose responder holds ♠Qx ♥K10xx ♦AQx ♣Kxxx. If his partner opens 1♠, most players players will bid 3NT. If he had responded responded 1NT, forcing, forcing, his partner might might have rebid 2♥ and they would get to 4♥ or conceivably 6♥. Over 2♥ responder would bid 4♣ or 4♦ to show a fit, a control and a greatly improved hand because of the fit. Opener might hold ♠AKxxx ♥AQxx ♦Kxx ♣x. The 4♦ bid would not show a splinter, splinter, since after the 1NT response response he shouldn’t have a splinter (and a strong hand) hand) unless the “splinter” “splinter” is in spades. In the old days 1M 2NT, 3x 4NT showed 18 or 19 balanced points. Now that 2NT is usually usually played to show a strong balanced hand with four card trump support, responder can show the 18-19 point hand by responding respon ding 1NT followed by 4NT. Still another advantage of responding 1NT with game-forcing hands is that, with rare rare exceptions, a 2/l response will will show at least a 5 card suit. suit. If opener holds ♠Axx ♥AKQxx ♦x ♣Kxxx and his partner responds 2♣ to his 1♥ opening, he can take control of the bidding, perhaps with Blackwood, and not worry about responder’s holding ♠KQx ♥J10 ♦AQxx ♣Jxxx. What else can responder bid if 1NT is not forcing? Incidentally, Incidentally, I thought bidding a forcing notrump to avoid responding at the two level with a four card suit, was my original idea. Then I discovered that Mike Mike Lawrence Lawrence has been playing that way for about 20 years. There is another type of sequence which I don’t think should be forcing to game. game. What do you open with ♠AJxxxxx ♥xxx ♦x ♣Ax? In the 40’s and 50’s you would either pass or open 3♠. But a pass doesn’t appeal to most most players now. You don’t want to keep quiet during during the entire auction, auction, and it is safer and more obstructive to bid immediately at the one-level than at a higher level after the opponents have opened and responded. Unless there is a misfit, this hand will take more tricks than the usual more balanced opening, so you don’t want to open 36 | Marshall Miles
3♠ and miss game since the modern preemptive style of three bids, especially non-vulnerable, is something like ♠QJxxxxx ♥x ♦QJx ♣xx. Vulnerable, you need better suits and more playing strength, but not necessarily more high cards. But suppose, when you open 1♠, partner holds ♠x ♥Jxx ♦AKJxx ♣KQJx. He bids 2♦; you bid 2 ♠, and he bids 3♣. He has the the values for for his bidding, bidding, and expects to force to game, but you can’t come close to making a game with this misfit. So, when you bid 3♠, partner should pass. With this this hand you couldn’t even make game with a better spade suit, like ♠KQJxxxx except with a favorable lead, but with a spade suit as good as that, you should bid 4 ♠ over the 3♣ bid. When you, as opener, rebid the same suit twice at the minimum level, partner should be allowed to pass. This is my recommendation recommendation but it is not part of Bridge Bridge World standard. Bridge World standard provides that if responder makes a 2/l response and rebids the same suit next n ext time, the sequence is only invitational. That is the way I like to play. play. But many pairs pairs play 2/l 2/l unconditionally unconditionally forcing to game. So how do they invite game game with a single-suited single-suited hand? They jump immediately. immediately. Thus 1M p 3 of a lower ranking ranking suit is invitational. invitational. Why isn’t that just just as good? For one reason, you can no longer play strong jump shifts or Bergen raises of a major. If you don’t want to play either either of these conventions, there there is still a good reason for playing playing the traditional way. Suppose you hold ♠x ♥Kx ♦Jxx ♣AQ10xxxx, and partner opens 1♠. You respond 2♣ and he rebids 2♠, 2♥ or 2♦. You would like to bid 3♣ as invitational invitational rather than forcing. forcing. If partner has a singleton club, you are extremely unlikely to make game while if he has ♣Kx, you are almost almost a cinch to make make game. So you bid 3♣ invitational. If partner rebids 2NT, guaranteeing at least two clubs, you are bound to have a play for game, possibly a lay-down if he has the king of clubs or if the king of hearts is an entry and he has the ♣J. Now that opener’s opener’s rebid has improved improved your chances, you will raise to 3NT, probably either making it with an overtrick or down two, depending upon whether you can run the clubs. There are a few other sequences that I don’t think should be forcing to game after a 2/l response. response. First, in in order of importance, is when when the 2/l response was made after after an overcall or take-out double. After 1♥1♠ ? or 1M 1NT ?, or 1M 2m ?, for instance, you can’t afford to stay out of the bidding, just because you don’t have the values to make make game. While you don’t necessarily necessarily have to get to game, not everyone everyone agrees upon what bids are forcing, and to what level. After a notrump overcall a suit bid at the two level is non-forcing since with 9+ points you would normally double the notrump overcall (for penalty). My most frequent partner and I play play “Hamilton” “Hamilton” over a notrump notrump overcall. 2♣ shows a one-suiter; 2♦ shows the majors, and two of a major (other than a major partner has bid) shows that major and a minor. But by failing to double, we show that we are just competing for the part-score, part-score, not trying to get to to game. Except after a notrump notrump overcall, a new suit bid, including 2/l, is forcing for at least for one round except by a passed hand. By a passed hand, a 2/l bid (except (except for 2♥ over 1♠ or 2♣ — More Accurate Bidding | 37
Drury over a major) is less encouraging than a 1NT bid. The 1NT bid usually shows scattered strength while the 2/1 bid often shows a long suit and no support for any other other suit opener might might hold. After p p 1♠ p, 2♦ p ? unless opener opener has has a diamond fit fit or a good hand, he should usually usually pass. If opener rebids a new new suit, that should be forcing for one one round, and obviously a cue bid is forcing. forcing. But if opener rebids his own suit at the cheapest level, it is not forcing, nor is a 2NT bid. A raise of responder’s suit should not be forcing, although not everyone agrees. If the opponents enter the bidding after the 2/l bid is made, that doesn’t change the rules; only a rebid of the same suit is non-forcing. I am not sure whether my suggestion is part of Bridge World standard. The next sequence which I don’t believe should be forcing to game is a 2♣ response to a 1♦ opening. After a major major opening, a 1NT response is either forcing or almost forcing, so that allows responder to invite game without forcing to game. But there is no equivalent equivalent bid after a minor opening opening since a 1NT response is not forcing. In my younger days I often often resorted to bidding a three card major with an invitational hand, but I think that is too dangerous, especially with my partnership’s partnership’s propensity to to raise with three card support. So what should you do with ♠AK10 ♥x ♦Jxx ♣Qxxxxx? Bid 1NT with with a small singleton, raise raise to 2♦, even though you are playing inverted raises, or bid 2♣? And if if you bid 2♣, what are you you going to bid the the next round? If partner rebids 2♦, you are tempted to raise rather than rebid such a weak club suit, but according to the rules stated so far, that would would be forcing to game. There There is no good solution. My suggestion is to imagine that you are playing p laying in the 1940’s or early 1950’s and pass whenever you you feel like it, and let partner do likewise. Notrump bids and diamond bids can be passed. Some players have have adopted special bids after 1♦ 2♣, like 2♥ showing 4-4-4-1 distribution, 2♠ showing a good raise in clubs, 3♣ showing a bad raise in clubs (which could be passed); 2NT, bid by either hand, can be passed. passed. But nothing I know of can take care care of all all the problems. problems. So just give up on science and resort to your table feel. Maybe the opponents will will enter the bidding, which will help to solve your problems.
WOLFF SIGNOFF There is a general rule that when one hand makes a strong, but non-forcing, bid, if his partner bids bids anyway, the the partnership must must get to game. game. After 1♥ p1♠ p, 3♥ p ? responder is allowed to pass, but if he bids 3♠, for example, it is forcing. He may hold ♠KQJxxx ♥x ♦Qxx ♣Jxx, in which case 4♠ may play better than 4 ♥. This is true even if opener’s hearts are longer or stronger than responder’s spades. Usually, when both hands have long suits, responder can use opener’s hand better than opener can use use responder’s responder’s hand. Suppose that opener has ♠10x ♥AQJxxx ♦Axx ♣AQ. Playing in hearts, declarer declarer may be unable to get more more than one trick in spades after a first round hold-up. Also he may lose an extra trick in the heart suit.
38 | Marshall Miles
However, there is an exception to to the rule stated stated above: 1x p 1♠ p, 2NT ? or 1m p 1♥ p 2NT p, ?. Responder may pass, but if he rebids his major, major, it is forcing. No, we haven’t haven’t got to the exception exception yet. But if responder responder has something something like ♠QJxxxx ♥Jx ♦xx ♣Jxx his hand may be entirely worthless at notrump but probably worth worth three tricks tricks with spades as trumps. trumps. (I would have passed the opening bid, but I am in a minority). The way to stop in 3M, if not playing weak jump shifts, shifts, is to bid 3♣ over 2NT. According to most Wolff signoff players, this forces opener to bid 3♦, and if responder bids three of his major, opener must pass. Actually, 3♣ is either the beginning beginning of a sign-off sign-off or a slam try. If responder bids 3NT next round. it is is a mild slam slam try in opener’s minor while while bidding opener’s minor (and by-passing 3NT) is a stronger slam try in opener’s minor. Bidding three of the other major over 3 ♣ is a slam try in the other minor, perhaps ♠AQxxx ♥x ♦AJ10xx ♣J10 if the opening bid was 1♣. When the bidding goes 1m 1M, 2NT, 3 ♣ 3♦, 3NT responder may have only three card support for the minor, along with a ruffing value ( ♠Ax ♥Kxxxx ♦Kxx ♣Q10x or ♠Axxx ♥Axxxx ♦x ♣Kxx, but he might have four or five card support (♠xx ♥Kxxxx ♦x ♣AQxxx). Most people play that opener MUST bid 3♦ over 3♣ by responder, but I think if opener has a marginal hand, with three card support, he can bid three of responder’s major. Then, if responder has ♠K10xxxx ♥x ♦Q109x ♣xx , he can bid 4 ♠, while with a hopeless hand he can pass. This hand will not provide a good play for game opposite a doubleton (but with a doubleton opener probably probably would not have bid 3♠). To me, this is a much more more useful treatment than having a way to stop in 3♦. How often would would you want want to do that? If responder wants to check for opener’s o pener’s distribution in the majors, he bids 3♦ over 2NT. Opener’s first first priority is to bid three of of the unbid major with with a four card length; that way opener will always be declarer unless the final contract is 3♠ or 4♠. His second priority priority is to show show three card support support for responder’s responder’s major. Otherwise he bids 3NT. Most players jump to four of responder’s responde r’s major major with three card support and a maximum I recommend a cue bid to show three card support for responder’s major and a maximum. This leaves more bidding room if responder has an interest in slam. After 1♦ p 1♠ p, 2NT ?, when should responder bid 3♠ and when should he bid 4♠? By now you you know how I feel about fast arrival; I don’t like it. it. 4♠ should have a specific meaning: It says, “I have a marginal slam try, but my trumps are very good (like ♠KQJxxx or ♠AKQxxx). Don’t sign off if you you have a good hand but only two small trumps.” If responder has a good hand with nothing spectacular in trumps (♠KJ9xxx ♥Ax ♦A109 ♣xx) he bids 3♠, and if opener has ♠AQx ♥KQxx ♦KJx ♣Axx, he would cue bid and a slam would be reached. Take away one of responder’s aces, and he would still bid 3♠ over the 2NT rebid, but he would sign off in 4♠ whether opener cue bids or not.
More Accurate Bidding | 39
MORE TRANSFERS Assume that partner opens one of a suit and the next hand makes a takeout double. Many players like bidding a new suit to be a transfer transfer bid. bid. This has the usual advantages of transfer bids. Opener probably has a better hand than than responder, so there is an advantage advantage in his being the declarer. declarer. But the main advantage is the usual: it give you two two bids for the price of one. You can transfer transfer and pass, transfer and raise, raise, transfer and bid a new suit suit or notrump, etc. etc. If partner has opened 1♦, you can bid 1♥ to transfer to spades, 1 ♠ to transfer to notrump, 1NT to transfer to clubs and 2♣ to transfer to diamonds (showing a better hand than raising to 2♦). Partner does not have have to accept the the transfer, but usually he will. The bid that is is left left out is hearts. hearts. How to you you show hearts? By redoubling. This treatment treatment is designed to find the best offensive offensive contract for your side. side. By giving up the redouble to show good defense you could occasionally lose the opportunity for a big penalty, but I think the the change is well worth worth while. And if opener has exceptionally good support for the suit responder is showing by his transfer bid, you can jump in it (since partner may be planning to pass your bid with KJ10xx of the suit he has shown, and nothing else—perhaps mostly to indicate a lead). You may recall that when when the opponents overcall with with an unusual notump or Michaels type of bid and you pass and double later, the double is for penalty. I suggest playing the same same way after you pass the takeout double double and double later.
SLAM BIDDING The foundation for good slam bidding is accurate bidding below the game level. If the hands are balanced, with no long suits, usually 33 points are enough for slam. Each extra card in a long suit may may be worth an extra trick trick or about 3 points, and it may be worth worth nothing. On an average, it is worth worth at least one extra point. But when you have only 31 or 32 points, the opponents have 8 or 9 which could include two aces. If you have 30 points with with a long, running suit and mostly mostly aces and kings, and no jacks, that may be sufficient. With ♠AKQxxx ♥Axx ♦Kx ♣Qx opposite ♠xxx ♥KQx ♦Axx ♣Kxxx only a 4-0 spade break or an extremely extremely unlikely ruff could defeat you in a slam. But change opener’s hand to ♠AKQxxx ♥QJ ♦KQJ ♣Jx (one more point) or change responder’s hand to ♠xx ♥QJx ♦AQJx ♣Qxxx and your chances are not nearly nearly as good. The hand with the the long suit should show it, for two two reasons. The degree of fit in the long suit may make a big difference (There is almost no chance if the long suit doesn’t run (a 32% possibility), since even if the opponents fail to take their two two club tricks tricks off the top, you will still still need the heart finesse. Fast tricks are are better than slow tricks tricks Likewise, with ♠Ax ♥KQJxxx ♦Qxx ♣xx, after 1♣ 1♥, 2NT ? responder should rebid his hearts before raising to 4NT, so that opener will know that
40 | Marshall Miles
♠KQx ♥Axx ♦Kxx ♣AKxx is better than ♠KJx ♥Jx ♦KJ10 ♣AKQJx. If you remember what I said under the section on Wolff signoffs, you might jump to 4♥
with the responding hand shown shown above. You have strong trumps and a marginal marginal slam try. The only reason why you might might not use the sequence with a jump jump in hearts is that at matchpoints you can probably take the same number of tricks in notrump as in hearts. There is an important principle principle in slam bidding which most of the world seems to disregard. disregard. Suppose opener has ♠AKQJxxx ♥AQx ♦KQJ ♣ —. If responder has the king of hearts and the ace of diamonds, they belong in a grand slam. If responder has one of of those two two cards, they they belong in a small small slam. slam. At worst it will require a finesse if responder has the ace of diamonds, and if he also has the jack of hearts, it will be cold, and there is a chance for a ruff if responder has a singleton or, more likely, likely, a doubleton heart. There are ways for for opener to find out about those two key cards, but no matter how well he describes his hand, it will be hard for responder responder to determine determine what to do. Consequently, Consequently, the weaker hand should show what he has (perhaps in response to the strong hand’s enquiries), and the strong strong hand should place the contract. contract. But in BWS the requirements for a “positive” response are so rigid, that responder is forced to bid 2♦ about 90% of the time. That gives gives opener lots lots of room to describe his hand so that responder can place the contract or strongly participate participate in the final decision. Ironically, Ironically, it will often be easier to get to a grand slam when you belong there, than than to a small small slam since if you have enough enough strength and controls controls for at least a small small slam, you can afford to investigate all the possibilities. If you have a borderline decision whether to investigate the possibilities of a small slam. you don’t want to risk a set at the five level if you discover that partner has wasted values opposite opposite your singleton or void. However, I think think it is easier to get to a good small slam or stay stay out of a bad slam when the first response gives opener a rough idea of the likelihood of slam as compared with playing an almost automatic 2♦ response. I play that 2 ♦ DENIES two kings or seven points including an ace or eight points including a king, and 2♥ SHOWS two kings or seven points including an ace or o r eight points including a king—and no biddable five card or longer suit. 2♠, 3♣ and 3♦ all show a biddable suit with a positive response. 2NT shows a positive positive response with with at least five hearts. In In the Blue team Club, where the strong opening was 1♣, responder could show how many controls he had up to six (counting an ace as one and a king as two), but it is not practical to use the same system system over 2♣ because it takes up too much bidding room. The players players who show controls over over 2♣ usually show just less than 2, 2, and 3 or more. My solution solution was to try to split the responses responses to show less than an even chance for slam or better better than an even chance. No matter what what approach you use, it won’t always always work. Or you might have have to risk being set at the five level to investigate investigate your chances fully. But here are some of the good things that that can happen when you use my suggestions.
More Accurate Bidding | 41
You open 2♣ with ♠AKQJxx ♥AQJ9 ♦x ♣KQ and partner bids 2♦. You bid 2♠ and he bids 2NT. You KNOW that you don’t belong in a slam. slam. There are three key cards outstanding— ♥K and the two minor aces, and partner can’t have two of them. The best you can hope for is a finesse for slam, and it is possible that your your ♥9 could be a loser. Partner can’t even have a singleton heart with four spades and a minor ace, since with those cards, he would have splintered in hearts after having having denied a positive positive response. So, you might as well use the good old “fast arrival” and jump to 4♠. As you can tell, I am broad minded and willing willing to use it on the rare occasions when it it is appropriate. There is no reason to show your heart suit, which would tell the opponents to save four hearts to the ten as you run your spades. (or all but one). This time opener holds ♠AKx ♥AQx ♦AQ10xx ♣KJ and responder holds ♠xxx ♥Kx ♦Kxxx ♣Qxxx. The bidding bidding might might go 2♣ 2♥, 3♦ 4♦, 6♦. If responder had made a semi-automatic semi-automatic 2♦ bid, and opener had rebid 2NT, showing 22-24 points, responder would be too weak to invite a slam, but once responder made a positive response, opener could risk a 3♦ bid bid since even if responder was declarer in 3NT, it should probably be safe. Opener: ♠Kxx ♥AKJxxx ♦AKQx ♣ — Responder: ♠AQx ♥10xx ♦xx ♣Qxxxx The bidding bidding might might go: 2♣ 2♥, 3♥ 3♠, 4♦ 5♥, 6♥. If responder had had a good spade suit, he would have responded 2♠ instead of 2♥ with the same high cards. But with a heart fit and a ruffing value, he could bid where most of his high cards were, then jump in hearts when he heard that opener’s second suit was diamonds, for which he had a ruffing value. Suppose opener bids 2♣ with AKJxxx of a major suit and he finds out that an ace in another suit is missing. missing. If responder has bid notrump notrump when opener first bid his long suit, suit, the odds are that there is a trump trump loser. If opener had AKQxxx of his long suit, he would bid a slam. With a weaker suit like like AKJxxx or AK109xx, he would not bid bid a slam if the suit has never never been raised. This is an initial decision that opener should make, not responder. However, depending on how the bidding has gone up to this point, responder might make a further raise with the singleton or doubleton queen of trumps, which his partner doesn’t know about. It seems strange to me that strong jump shifts in an uncontested auction are no longer very popular, even though they are still part of Bridge World standard. The most frequent frequent argument against them is that the opportunity to use weak jump shifts arises much more frequently than the opportunity to use strong jump shifts, shifts, and it is not economical to to adopt sequences which which are great when when they occur, but which seldom seldom occur. occur. There are two counterarguments: counterarguments: At least at rubber bridge or imps, a system that improves slam bidding has much more to gain that a system that improves part-score part-score bidding. And the solution may be to to
42 | Marshall Miles
modify your requirements for strong jump shifts so that they are used more frequently. Paul Soloway suggested suggested certain changes that improved improved the efficiency efficiency of strong jump shifts, shifts, but somewhat limited limited their use. I have been playing them as he suggested, with one or two exceptions, but think it is time to loosen up the requirements. requirements. First, I will describe describe how Paul played them. They could be used on three types of hands: (1) when responder had a strong strong single suiter; (2) (2) with a strong balanced or semi-balanced hand; (3) with four card support for partner’s suit. The basic requirement requirement is that they be strong enough for for a slam opposite a minimum or near-minimum near-minimum opening provided the hands fit. fit. I would estimate estimate that, at least the way I played them, 70% of my strong jump shifts were with a four card fit for partner’s suit; 20% were with strong one-suiters; and 10% were for strong balanced balanced hands. They worked worked extremely well when we had these these requirements, requirements, but we didn’t get to use them very very often. I think Paul required at least a five card suit to to jump in, while I did did not. If partner opened 1♦, I would jump shift with both ♠AKxxx ♥x ♦KJxx ♣Axx and ♠AKxx ♥x ♦KJxxx ♣Axx. That gave me many more more strong jump shifts than other people people had. If our final contract was a diamond diamond slam, I thought both hands were nearly nearly equal. I also played that, unless unless opener had an unusual unusual hand, he should should make the the cheapest bid (artificially), (artificially), which would allow responder to show what type of hand he had before we passed the 3NT level. level. What was “unusual”? “unusual”? When my original original suit was very strong, like AQJxxx or KQJxxx; or with a strong second suit (♠xx ♥x ♦AQxxx ♣AK10xx); or Qxxx Qxxx or better in responder’s responder’s suit. suit. Over 1♦ 2♠, I could raise to 3♠ with ♠Qxxx ♥Ax ♦Axxx ♣Kxx or ♠AJxx ♥Kxxx ♦Kxx ♣Qx. The second part of Soloway jump shifts was that when the jump shift was based upon a 4 card (or longer) fit with opener’s suit, responder would show that support by raising opener’s suit on the next round if he had a balanced hand, but with a singleton in one of the unbid suits, suits, responder would bid the singleton. singleton. After 1♦ 2♠, 2NT ? responder would bid 3♥ with ♠AQJxx ♥x ♦Qxxx ♣KQx. Opener had easily enough to bid a slam with ♠Kx ♥xxx ♦AKxxx ♣Axx or ♠x ♥Qxxx ♦AKxxx ♣Axx. Responder must must have good enough cards cards in the black suits suits to have no losers losers there. If the two hands were were ♠x ♥KQx ♦Kxxxx ♣KQxx opposite ♠AKJxx ♥x ♦QJxx ♣Axx, 3NT could be defeated if both the ace of hearts and ace of diamonds were in the wrong spots, but usually, you discover, before passing the 3NT level, whether whether slam is unlikely, and if if 3NT would be better (here it would be worse at imps or rubber bridge, but better at matchpoints). Here are the modifications of the original Soloway jump shifts that I suggest. (1) When the jump shift is based upon a fit for opener’s minor bid, the jump shift can be made with a four card suit. (2) After a strong jump shift, opener should make the cheapest bid, artificially, artificially, unless he has an unusual hand. Over 1♦ 2♥, he would bid 2♠.
More Accurate Bidding | 43
(3) When the jump shift is based upon upo n a fit with partner’s major, it is permissible to to make a jump jump shift with only good three card support and a semi-balanced hand. That would allow allow you to to bid 3♣ with ♠AJx ♥KJx ♦xx ♣AKJxx over either 1♥ or 1♠. But with with a singleton singleton or void (AJx (AJx ♥Axxx ♦AQxxx ♣x) I think a 2♦ response to 1♠, followed by a splinter bid next round over either a 2♥ or 2♠ rebid would be a better description. It lets partner partner know that there may be a trump trump loser or that dummy may not be able to ruff all all of opener’s losers. Also, opposite the last example hand, you would have a remote chance to play in hearts, not just in spades. (4) Suppose the bidding goes 1♦ 2♥, 3♥ (showing at least ♥Qxxx—with lesser support, you you might show it on a later round). If the jump shift shift was based upon a fit for for opener’s suit, suit, responder should should still show the fit, either by bidding a new suit to show a singleton or by raising opener’s suit. What if opener has a one-suited one-suited hand or a strong balanced hand? In either case he should bid 3NT, 3NT, which is forcing. After bidding 3NT, 3NT, 4NT by opener would usually be an attempted signoff since responder is usually the captain because usually responder has the stronger hand. After the 3NT bid, presumably presumably responder’s responder’s suit is the agreed suit. Each hand cue bids first or second round controls, starting with his cheapest unless they find a suit with with no controls. Since one hand may cue bid with a king and the other hand has a singleton, there could still be two aces missing, so Key Card Blackwood can be used by responder. When a trump suit has been agreed upon, new suit bids, which force the auction to game, are usually slam tries, although in a competitive auction they may just show distribution, or where high cards are located so that partner will know what to do if there is more competition. competition. If the bidding goes 1♥ 2♥ 3♥ dbl, ? opener should bid 4♦ with ♠x ♥AKxxxx ♦KQJx ♣xx so that his partner will know what to do if the next hand bids 4 ♠. With diamond diamond length, he should probably probably compete to 5♥. With ♦Ax or ♦xx or with values in clubs or spade tricks, he should double. With a little little here and a little there, there, he should pass the decision around to his partner. But suppose the unopposed bidding is 1♠ 3♠, ? What should opener do with ♠AKJxx ♥Axxxx ♦Ax ♣x? Some players players would bid their cheapest cheapest control (4♣). Others would bid their their cheapest first round control control (4♦). I think you should bid 4♥, a help-suit slam try. try. Partner’s heart holding holding is almost more crucial crucial than his spade holding since you know he has four or more spades and at least a 50% play for no trump trump losers. You couldn’t possibly have a slam try without a first or second round control in either minor. This hand is worth only a single slam try. If partner bids bids 4♠, you will pass (despite the fact that ♠Q10xx ♥xx ♦Kxx ♣Axxx would give you a good play for slam; it is too dangerous to make a further try). try). Change opener’s opener’s hand to to ♠AKxxxx ♥Axxx ♦Ax ♣x, and I would 44 | Marshall Miles
risk a 5♠ bid over 4♠. The trouble with with cue bidding either either minor at this stage is that partner would worry worry about a control in the other minor. minor. When you don’t have room to show every control without forcing to slam, you often fail to cue bid either control. Partner should be able to tell, by looking at his own hand and listening to the bidding whether you you have no control or both remaining controls. Many players, if if they make a slam slam try, cue bid bid their cheapest control, control, and they each show controls up the line, but I would rather cue bid Kxxx than Ax. Admittedly, Admittedly, this is not a popular way to play, so you can take it or leave it. it. Hopefully you and your partner will agree to play the same way. Whatever methods you may use, the most important thing is to visualize partner’s probable probable hand. Most slam tries should be made made below the game game level since you hate to get to five five of a major, or 5NT, down one. one. That is why almost almost all 5NT bids should be forcing, rather than slam tries. tries. If it isn’t asking asking for kings after asking for aces with some form of Blackwood, it asks partner to choose a slam, and it should be obvious which which slams he can choose from. from. 5NT can be the grand slam force, but when only only one suit is in the running. When in doubt, assume it is asking for a choice of small slams. Getting back to the visualization process, the Four Aces who were, along with Culbertson, the top players in the early 1930’s (including Howard Schenken and Oswald Jacoby, the two best known to the current players) suggested this simple test. If you have a balanced hand with with one more ace than you need to bid a game, you have enough to make a slam try (not to bid a slam, but just to a try for slam). slam). With an unbalanced hand an extra king is enough. An even better better method, which is not popular since it requires more mental effort, is to visualize three hands partner might might have for his bidding. If two of them would give you a good play for slam, you can make a slam try. It would be even better to visualize 1000 or 10,000 hands, as a bridge program might do, but with the time constraints, three is the most you can do at the table. There are very few small slams where some some form of Blackwood is useful. Blackwood is mostly mostly useful for getting to grand slams. slams. Also for staying staying out of slams when you have plenty of playing strength strength but might be missing missing two controls. controls. Incidentally, Incidentally, you should never start a Blackwood sequence without deciding in advance what you are going to do over every response that partner might make—even if he might jump to the six level to show a void. void. If you hesitate, hesitate, in order to make up your mind, mind, probably because one control is missing and you might might or might not have a loser elsewhere, partner partner is barred. If he takes an optimistic optimistic view and you make a slam, slam, it will be taken away from you; if you are set, you will will get your actual score. You can’t win if a knowledgeable director is called. Usually it is a good idea to show support for partner’s suit as soon as you can, if your your bid is forcing. forcing. But not always! always! Suppose you you hold ♠ — ♥Qxxx ♦AKJxx ♣AK10x. Partner opens 1♠ and you bid 2♦, and he bids 2♥. What call would you make? make? Most players players would would bid 3♥, but I think that is wrong! If you bid 3♥ and partner bids 4♥, will you pass? I don’t think so. What call would you More Accurate Bidding | 45
make next? 5♣, probably. You may have have a good grand slam if partner holds ♠Qxxxx ♥AKJx ♦Qxx ♣x or a terrible small slam if he holds ♠AKJxx ♥Kxxx ♦x ♣Jxx. With the latter latter hand you you might not even make 5♥. It is not a matter matter of points; it is is a matter of how well the the hands fit. So how should you you bid this hand? In my opinion, you should bid 3♣ over partner’s 2♥ bid. As it happens, partner will take a preference to diamonds, (the blah bid) and you will then show your heart support. This sequence will will show a singleton singleton or void in spades. Realistically, you probably won’t get to 7♥, even when you belong there, but you will avoid an almost hopeless heart slam and you might get to 6♦ if opener has 54-4-0 distribution with which he should surely jump in diamonds over 3♣. He could jump in diamonds with with less, like Qxx. In general, a new suit suit bid is natural until the partnership partnership has found and agreed upon a trump suit. suit. After that, new suit bids tend to show controls. So if you want to show distribution, distribution, do it before agreeing upon a trump suit. This hand is similar to the last one. Who did something wrong? West ♠AQ10xx ♥AQxx ♦xx ♣xx West 1♠ 2♥ 4♥
East ♠ — ♥KJxx ♦AKxxx ♣Axxx
East 2♦ 3♥ 6♥
The bidding looks reasonable reasonable and it is the way many many pairs would have bid. Give West a minor suit queen (preferably in diamonds) instead of the queen.of spades and 6♥ would be fair or good. It is not until you you plan the play that you realize what a poor contract this this is. If East had shown his distribution distribution by bidding clubs clubs before supporting supporting hearts, West West would realize realize what a poor hand he has for the the bidding. He has no honors in in either of his partner’s suits, suits, and his partner has either a singleton or void void in spades. More likely it is a void since he took the trouble to describe his hand hand pattern before showing support. support. This is the way I think the bidding should have gone: 1♠ 2♦, 2♥ 3♣, 3♦ 5♥, pass. Maybe 4♥, instead of 5♥ would be enough, and without the jack of hearts, that is what I would have bid. The timing of your bids is very important. important. Suppose the unopposed bidding has gone as follows: follows: 1♥ 2♦, 2♥ 3♣, 3♦. At this this stage the 3♦ bid is almost meaningless meaningless except for negative inferences. inferences. Responder probably does not have a spade stopper, or he would would have rebid 3NT. That is not certain certain since 3NT would not have been forcing. Nor can you tell whether whether opener has five or six hearts since 2♥ was the fall-back, or “blah” bid. Suppose the bidding has gone 1♥ 2♦, 2♥ 3♣, 4♦. Now you know a lot more more about opener’s hand. He apparently has good diamond support, like ♦Qxx or better. And he should should have a six card heart heart suit. With only only five (like ♥AKJxx and ♦Qxx) he would have 46 | Marshall Miles
supported diamonds as his first rebid. He probably has no stopper in spades (or a very strong distributional distributional hand). hand). A typical hand for his bidding would be ♠xxx ♥AKJxxx ♦Q10x ♣K, and if responder had something like ♠J ♥Qx ♦AKJxx ♣AJxxx, he would probably bid 6♦ at imps or possibly po ssibly 6♥ at matchpoints. Note the jump to 4♦ to show good diamonds and a great fit, as distinguished from a 3♦ bid, the blah bid with possibly two small diamonds and not such a strong heart suit. (♠Qx ♥AKxxxx ♦xx ♣Q10x). What can opener opener do other other than give give a false preference? Rebid hearts again? Raise clubs with three? Ely Culbertson had a hand like the following in one of his books or newspaper columns. I can’t remember remember whether this hand was an opening opening bid or a response to one of a suit by his partner, but he had something like ♠QJ109xxxxx ♥ — ♦ — ♣AKQJ, and he recommended bidding 5♠, meaning, “I don’t care what else you have in your your hand. If you have no spade honor, honor, pass. With one spade honor, raise to six and with with two, bid seven.” I remember a Bridge World problem from long ago in which one hand opened 5♠ and his partner, holding something like ♠ — ♥AKQ ♦QJ109xxxx ♣AK should bid 7♦ since opener can hold only eleven spades, and the other two cards have to be the ace and king of diamonds. I suspect that the latter hand was not dealt at the table, but the principle is sound. When you only care about the holding in one suit, you should bid that suit rather than cue bid your singleton aces aces and voids. Of course, if your suit were a minor, opening 5♦ would not mean that you had all the tricks but the ace and king, so if you had something like ♠AKQJx ♥A ♦QJ109xxx ♣ — You should open open 2♣ and bid 5♦ over partner’s response, response, whatever it is. is. Incidentally, Incidentally, this reminds me of a hand I held about two years years after I started to play bridge. I held ♠ — ♥AKQJ10xxx ♦AKxx ♣A. Not a bad hand, at at rubber bridge bridge with my 150 honors! I opened 2♥ (before the days of weak two bids), rebid hearts next round, then 4♦ followed by 6♥. I hoped that if partner had had ♦QJx or ♦Qx with a couple of hearts, he would bid seven. I was down TWO! Partner held, among other things. two small hearts and ♦Jxx. I ruffed the spade lead and led a low diamond diamond toward the jack. (Nowadays, I’d I’d have to have a lot of respect for my opponents to think LHO might might duck with the queen). So I played the jack, losing losing to the singleton queen. I won the club return, cashed cashed one round of trumps and played played the ace of diamonds, hoping for either a 3-3 break or for the opponent with the long diamonds to hold the remaining remaining trump. But RHO ruffed and returned returned a trump with the result: result: down two! That didn’t bother me me because I thought I had played it right. right. Usually when you wish to invite a slam, and a preempt has forced you to guess at a high level, if you have already bid a suit, which presumably will be trumps, and you have only one bid available below the slam level, you should cue bid the opponents’ suit to tell him not to worry worry about it, it, but to look at the the rest of his hand. But you you shouldn’t apply this this principle principle rigidly. rigidly. Suppose you you open the bidding with 1♦ and LHO bids 4♥ and partner bids 5♠. Which hand would would you you rather have? ♠Jx ♥xx ♦AKQxx ♣AJxx or ♠Jx ♥x ♦KQJxxx ♣KQxx? If More Accurate Bidding | 47
partner had bid 5♥, you would think he was inviting 6♦ since you don’t know that he has a good spade suit. Do you really think think partner has eleven solid spades and two losing hearts? No, he probably probably has something like ♠AKQxxxx – ♦xx ♣J10xx. I think if his clubs were were headed by the the king, he would have have bid six, himself. Or, if he had a singleton heart, he would would need the ace of clubs for for his 5♠ bid.
KEY CARD BLACKWOOD Almost everyone everyone now plays some form of key card card Blackwood. In its original form 4NT was the asking asking bid. The first round controls controls were aces and the king of the agreed trump trump suit. 5♣ showed 0 or 3 controls; 5♦ showed 1 or 4 controls; 5♥ showed 2 controls; 5♠ showed 2 controls plus the queen of the trump suit, but if the responding hand knows that he and his partner have at least 10 trumps, he could show the queen whether whether he had it or not. For example, if if playing 5 card majors and partner opens 1♥ and later bids Blackwood, you would show the queen of hearts if you held ♥Jxxxx. 78% of the time time the the suit will will split 2-1, so the queen will drop. If partner had ♥AK10xx partner would pick up the queen 89% of the time since he would have a marked finesse after cashing the ace if the ace if the void was on his his left. If the response to to 4NT was 5♣ or 5♦. The cheapest bid other than the agreed suit (hearts in this case) would ask about the queen of trumps. Any response response other than 6♥ would guarantee the queen (or 10 card length), but the response should show any other o ther value such as an unbid king, provided it was was below the six six level in the the trump suit. A 5NT response response asks for specific kings. Whether you you should show the king of spades, when the agreed trump suit is hearts, depends up the sequence and your bidding judgment. Suppose that prior to the 4NT 4NT bid either hand had splintered splintered in diamonds. You would not show the king of diamonds in your response because it would usually be a dubious value. But you could bid bid 6♦ in response to a 5NT bid to show the king of spades (the only king that you couldn’t show directly without forcing the bidding to seven (or (or possibly 6NT). 6NT). Suppose, when partner bids bids Blackwood, you you have a void. The customary treatment is to jump to the six level in your void to show one control and to bid 5NT to show 2 controls and a void. void. There are two bad things things that can happen if you play this way. First, it it may prevent partner from from asking about the queen of trumps (if you bid 6 ♦ when his suit is hearts), and it may prevent you from asking about kings in other suits. suits. Neither problem is is likely to arise, arise, but I prefer a different type of responses. With no controls, you you show 0 controls, (The void void may not be valuable to partner since he had the ace and king of the suit you are void in, and he might be missing missing two controls). If you are almost certain certain that you belong in at least a small slam, slam, your bid 5NT to show 1 or 3 controls (out of a possible 4). (Partner (Partner can now bid 6♣ to ask about the queen of trumps). You respond 6♣ to show 2 or almost impossible 4 controls and a void, and partner can 48 | Marshall Miles
bid 6♦ to ask about the queen of trumps. As you will soon be informed, the agreed suit is usually a major for partner to be bidding 4NT, so this response won’t take you past the 6 level. level. A 6♦ bid shows 2 controls plus the queen of trumps. These responses do not identify identify the void, but you will almost always know which it is: the opponents’ suit if they have bid, the suit you have splintered in, probably not the suit responder holds a singleton or void in, etc. I said that when partner bids 4NT, the agreed suit is probably a major. Why is that? When the agreed suit suit is clubs, it is often often unsafe to bid 4NT as Blackwood since the wrong response may force the bidding too high, and even if the first response doesn’t, it may be too dangerous to bid 5NT to enquire about kings. The danger is not quite quite as great when the agreed suit suit is diamonds, but there is still the danger that the original response or a later response to 5NT will pass the safe level. level. Consequently there should be some some other bid to start start a Blackwood enquiry when when the agreed trump suit is a minor. minor. There are at least two two possible solutions: solutions: One is to bid the the cheapest suit where you couldn’t couldn’t possibly want to play in as the Blackwood Blackwood asking bid. The other is to bid four of the the agreed minor minor as the asking bid. Both treatments treatments have hazards. The main main trouble with the first way is that if you bid a suit that one of you has bid b efore, it could be to show delayed delayed support or an offer offer of an alternate alternate contract. contract. Perhaps a 5-2 trump fit at the four level would be a safer contract that five of the agreed minor. Or perhaps partner wants it to be a cue bid (or “telling” bid rather than an “asking” bid). The risk in playing the second second way is that you may want want to make a natural bid (either to show support or as a cue bid) in partner’s suit or to show extra length or strength in your your own suit. There should be no confusion confusion in sequences like 1♣ p 2♣ p, 4♣ or 1♦ p 2♦ p, 4♦ where responder’s first bid was an inverted raise. raise. Nor should there there be any confusion when the uncontested uncontested bidding goes 1♥ 2♣, 4♣ or 1♠ 2♦, 3♦ 4♦. Four of a minor, just like 5NT, is such an unlikely final contract to choose in an uncontested auction that these sequences should be reserved for Blackwood. Blackwood. But when it it goes 1♠ 2♣, 2♥ 3♥, 4♣, I think the 4♣ bid just finishes opener’s o pener’s attempt to show his distribution. So when either partner jumps partner jumps to four of a minor or has previously bid the suit naturally, then 4♣ should be Blackwood. The responses should should be 0 or 3, 1 or 4, 2 without, and 2 with the queen. queen. In case there could be any ambiguity, it is better better to get along without a Blackwood Blackwood bid. You could also bid 4NT if it is is clearly Blackwood and you can stand any response. My partner hand I had a disaster disaster recently. recently. He opened 1♠ and, playing the Unbalanced diamond system, I bid 2♣, which is the only 2/1 response that is forcing to game (other 2/1 2/1 responses are forcing, but not not to game). Partner bid 2♥ and I bid 3♣. He rebid 3♥ and I bid 4NT. He showed 2 controls controls and I bid 7NT,missing 7NT,missing the ace of hearts. He thought hearts was was the agreed suit and I thought clubs was the agreed suit, and he counted the king of hearts as a control. Anyway, we decided that I should have bid 4♣ over 3♥ as key card Blackwood for clubs. After he responds to 4♣, I think the cheapest bid (other than clubs) is
More Accurate Bidding | 49
asking about specific kings, and the next to cheapest bid asks about the queen q ueen of our minor (or 10 card combined combined length. When our suit is a major, major, so that 4NT is the Blackwood ask, the cheapest suit bid asks about the queen of trumps, while 5NT asks for specific specific kings. That is the the traditional traditional way to play. A bid of six six of the major shows possession of the queen of trumps or belief that you and partner have ten trumps. But if you have a king you haven’t been able to show yet, you can bid that king provided that you you have the queen of trumps or extra extra length. And if you don’t have an unshown king, but have an extra value such as the queen of partner’s suit suit or extra length length in your own, own, you can bid 5NT 5NT to say, “Not only do we have no trump loser, loser, but I like my hand.” However, I think think that we should play the opposite opposite over a minor minor (the cheapest bid asking about kings, and the next bid asking about trumps) since since it leaves more more room to show show any king (other than in the trump suit since the king of trumps is now considered considered an ace). You don’t need much room to say whether whether or not you have the queen or extra length. length. There is one last complication, complication, suggested by Eddie Eddie Kantar: When your agreed suit is is a major, it is better to use 1430 responses when the stronger hand asks and the weaker hand replies. The first first step shows shows 1 or 4 rather than than 0 or 3. Partner is more likely to want to enquire about the queen when you show one control (by bidding 5♣) than when you have no control (by bidding 5♦). The cheapest bid allows opener room to bid 5♦ to ask about the queen. queen. Are all of these complications complications necessary? Perhaps, since these bids bids occur so seldom, it is is not worth the mental mental effort. But if they do come up and you bid a hopeless slam slam or fail to reach a lay-down slam, you wish that you had come to some agreement with partner to avoid avoid a calamity. Some player switch switch the meanings of 4♠ and 4NT when their suit is is hearts. I think this is more more prone to cause mistakes and misunderstandings misunderstandings than the procedures I have just discussed.
REVERSES The Bridge Encyclopedia defines a reverse as an “unforced rebid at the level of two or more in a higher ranking suit than that bid originally—usually originally—usually a strengthshowing bid.” I suppose that is as good a short definition as any, although “unforced rebid” is best defined defined by examples. 1♣ p 1♥ 1♠, 2♥ is not an “unforced rebid” within the intended intended meaning. It is true that opener is not forced forced to rebid, but 2♥ is not a reverse and it does not necessarily show more strength than 1♣ p 1♥ p, 2♥, which is also not a reverse. reverse. In the 1940’s and 1950’s Roth, Stone Stone and Goren all played that a 2♥ bid in the first sequence showed substantial extra values, but no one plays that way any more. more. It is better to to show support before the opponents can preempt you. 1♦ p 1♥ 2♣, 2♠ is technically a reverse since opener could have passed, but he doesn’t need much much more than a minimum. minimum. In planning his bidding, he thought he could rebid rebid 1♠ over a 1♥ response, and he wasn’t
50 | Marshall Miles
expecting to have to show substantial substantial extra values with passing as his only alternative. Is the 2♠ bid forcing? I don’t know whether there there is a standard agreement. He could cue bid clubs to be sure of forcing, forcing, but that gives no clue to his distribution. Opener shouldn’t bid a new suit with a bare minimum, minimum, and situations like this are one reason for lowering the standard notrump opening from 16-18 to 15-17. Opener might have have opened 1NT with balanced 15-17 point hands. So a 2♠ bid should show a pretty good hand or a fair unbalanced hand. 1♦ 2♣ 2♥ p, 2♠ is not a reverse, reverse, and it does not show extra values. Opener was going to bid 1♠ over a 1♥ response, and it is responder who has shown extra values. Opener is forced to to bid, and what else can he bid with ♠AKxx ♥xx ♦KQxx ♣xxx? I am not accustomed to calling 1♠ pass 2♥ pass, 3♦ a reverse, but I think it it should show more more than minimum minimum values, even if 2♥ is forcing to game, since with a minimum opening bid, opener could rebid 2♠ as the “nothing” bid. The alternative alternative is to play that a spade rebid shows 6+ spades. Some Some players bid that way, way, and with ♠AQxxx ♥Qx ♦Qxxx ♣Qx they would bid 3♦. Admittedly, Admittedly, no rebid is desirable, but my preference is for a 2NT rebid despite having no stopper in clubs. Perhaps with ♠Kx ♥xxx ♦Jx ♣AKJxxx and two small in dummy, RHO may duck to preserve an entry. A reverse by responder is forcing to game. The biggest problem is how to bid after a reverse reverse by opener. Suppose the uncontested bidding starts 1♦ 1♠, 2♥ ? and responder holds ♠KJxx ♥xxx ♦Jxx ♣Jxx. He has only a four card spade suit, suit, less than adequate adequate support for for a four card heart suit, no stopper in in the only unbid suit and a very very weak hand. Reverses by the opening bidder bidder are forcing forcing and promise promise a rebid, so what can responder do? Bidding 3♦ appears to be the best solution, but a 3♦ bid is forcing (since opener promises a rebid). rebid). And why is 3♦ forcing? Because responder might hold ♠KJxx ♥Qxx ♦Kxxx ♣xx, and he doesn’t want to bid 4♦ to show a fair hand, since that would take the partnership past 3NT, which which is likely to be the best, if not the only makeable, game. Responder has three weak bids available, all of which are warnings that he may pass opener’s rebid. rebid. The three rebids by responder responder are (1) a minimum rebid of his own suit; (2) bidding 2NT; and (3) bidding the unbid suit if it is i s cheaper than bidding opener’s original original suit at the three-level. three-level. In a sequence like like this, where both 2NT and 3♣ are available, 2NT should show a stopper in the unbid suit, and bidding the unbid suit suit should deny a stopper. Since 2NT shows a stopper, opener opener is slightly more likely to raise 2NT to 3NT than to bid 3NT over 3♣. If opener has something like ♠Q ♥AKx ♦AKQxxxx ♣xx, he may bid 2♥ over 1♠ with a three card heart suit as the least of evils and plan to rebid 3NT if responder shows a club stopper. stopper. What should should responder rebid rebid with ♠xxxxx ♥Qxx ♦xx ♣K10x after 1♦ 1♠, 2♥? Some players would rebid rebid 2♠ with a five f ive card suit, no matter how weak it might might be. I think it should should show at least ♠Q10xxx. With ♠Kx ♥AKQx ♦AQ10xxx ♣x opener might raise a 2♠ rebid to 3♠, which would be a
More Accurate Bidding | 51
very poor contract opposite ♠Jxxxx ♥Jx ♦Kx ♣xxxx, and greatly inferior to 3♦, which would be reached after a 3 ♣ rebid. Discussing reverses opens up the question of what to do in other forcing situations with or opposite a weak weak hand. 1♣ p 1♥ p, 2♠ is forcing to game. What should responder do with ♠xxx ♥Qxxxx ♦Qxx ♣Qx? Returning partner to his original suit is is the best choice and least committal committal bid. I call it a “blah” bid. 1♥ p 2♦ p, ? With ♠Ax ♥KQxxx ♦Qx ♣Qxxx, or ♠x ♥AKxxx ♦xxx ♣KJ10x, 2♥ (rebidding your known five card suit) is the least misleading bid. Since it is also the cheapest bid, it makes it easier than any other bid, for partner to describe his hand. Similarly, Similarly, after 1♥ p 2♦ p, 2♥ p 3♣, p ?, 3♦ is the blah bid with ♦Jx AKJxx ♦Qx ♣J10xx since you hate to bid beyond the 3NT level with this weak a hand (nor do I consider this hand a compulsory opening bid). The following hand hand is from Bobby Wolff’s Wolff’s newspaper column. column. The bidding goes 1♥ by you, 2♦ by LHO, 2♠ by partner, partner, pass by RHO. What call would you make with ♠xx ♥AJ963 ♦xxx ♣AKx? I suppose you could rebid 3♥ as the blah bid, but unlike one of the hands just discussed, it is not the cheapest bid. Nor will hearts play well well opposite a doubleton. doubleton. He recommends recommends a 3♣ bid, and I agree that that it is the the least of evils. evils. If partner bids bids 3♥, I don’t know whether that should be forcing, but I would gamble on a pass; I am just glad that he didn’t raise clubs, which which I would would also pass. I could pass a 3♠ bid with a clear conscience. Since partner’s 2♠ bid was made in competition, he should jump to game or cue bid on the next round if he clearly has the values to make game. Suppose you hold ♠AKQx ♥xx ♦Axxx ♣xxx. You open the bidding with 1♦ and rebid 1♠ over partner’s 1♥ response. response. He then then bids 2♣. What to you bid? With a doubleton heart honor, you might take a false preference to 2♥. With ♦AKQx and weak spades you would bid 2♦. With as much as ♣J10x you should bid 2NT. That might combine with partner’s queen (if (if he had it) to be a club stopper. But with your actual hand I think you should rebid 2♠. Theoretically, you could be showing six diamonds and five spades, but I don’t think partner should count on you for that. If he is also stuck for a bid, he might bid 3♠ with ♠J10x.(his best bid if you really have 5-6 in diamonds and spades), and you will reluctantly bid 3NT. Perhaps you can make 3NT without a club stopper if partner has ♠Jxx ♥AKxx ♦KQ ♣xxxx.
USING A CONVENTION FOR OTHER THAN ITS NORMAL USE Partner opens a weak notrump notrump (12-14 HCP) at imps. imps. What call would would you make with ♠x ♥Jx ♦J10x ♣AKJxxxx? You probably belong in 3NT, but the opponents may be able to set 3NT 3NT if they guess what to to lead. Since your shortest shortest suit is spades, that is the most likely opening lead, and also the lead most likely to set you. Is there a way to show your singleton singleton spade and let partner partner avoid a notrump contract without a spade stopper (or possibly with ♠Ax or ♠Axx)? Yes, 52 | Marshall Miles
by bidding 3♥, but that is supposed to show 1-3-4-5 or 1-3-5-4 distribution. If partner has an unsuitable unsuitable spade holding, holding, he will usually bid 4♣ (or possibly 4♥ with a good four card suit to suggest a 4♥ contract on a 4-3 4-3 fit). No bid is guaranteed to work, but if partner bids 3NT despite the warning, 3NT should be your best contract. If he bids 4♣ or 3♥, you will bid 5 ♣. When this hand was dealt, opener bid 3♥ with ♠10xx ♥AKJx ♦K109 ♣Qxx. With the ♦Q favorably placed, responder made 5♣ while his opponents at the other table were down two in 3NT. LHO opens 2♥; partner doubles and next hand passes. What would you you bid with ♠AKJxxx ♥Jx ♦Kxx ♣Kx? With that spade holding, holding, you would bid 4♠, even if you had no other values. values. So a 4♠ bid is inadequate. inadequate. In a bidding panel, with a similar similar hand, most of the panelists panelists bid 5♠. This bid showed extra values and denied denied a control control in hearts. hearts. But does 5♠ suggest or demand a 6♠ bid if the doubler has a first or second round round heart control? What should he call with with ♠Qxxx ♥Kx ♦Qxx ♣AQJx? Or a similar similar hand with the minors minors reversed? reversed? You would like to invite invite a slam but not force to a slam this this time. There will be hands like ♠AKJxxxx ♥xx ♦AQJx ♣ — with which which you would like like to force to slam slam if partner has a heart heart control, so so there should be a way to force force and a way to invite. Do you remember any sequences in which a bid could have two, virtually opposite meanings, meanings, depending on the follow-up? follow-up? Like 1♦ 1♠, 2NT 3♣ which was the beginning of a Wolff signoff or a slam slam try? Or 1♣ 1♠, 3♥, which is either a skimpy limit raise including a heart splinter, like ♠Qxxx ♥x ♦AKxxx ♣KJx, or is exceptionally strong, like ♠KQxx ♥x ♦AKQJx ♣A10x? With the latter hand you planned to raise to 4♠ if partner bids 3 ♠, and to cue bid 5♣ or bid Blackwood if he jumps to 4 ♠. So, 2♥ dbl p 2NT, p 3 ♣ p 4♠ should show a better or worse worse hand than jumping jumping to 4♠ directly. You can cover cover more situations if you play the cheaper artificial bid (which partner can’t pass) shows the worst or the best hand and save the middle middle sequence to show the middle middle strength hand. If partner bids something something other than the the expected 3♣ over 2NT, like 3♦ with ♠Kxxx ♥x ♦AKQJxx ♣Ax or 3NT with ♠AKx ♥KJx ♦xx ♣AKQxx, bidding 2NT first gives gives opener a chance to show extra values. values. That is what I recommend, recommend, with ♠AKJxxx ♥Jx ♦Kxx ♣Kx, intending, if he bids 3♣, to jump to 4♠. At matchpoints, neither side vulnerable, you hold ♠A8 ♥AQ5 ♦AQ543 ♣1087. Partner opens 1♣ and RHO overcalls 1 ♦, What is your call? In a bidding panel most most of the panelists panelists bid a simple simple 3NT. Anything else else seemed like like too much of a gamble. A few passed, hoping for a reopening reopening double and a three trick set. But your diamond spots are so poor that that you are likely to to win only two tricks in diamonds. diamonds. Can you be confident that partner partner will reopen with with a double and that you can set the contract contract three tricks? tricks? And are you sure that you can’t make a slam? What you would would really like to know is whether whether partner has substantial extra values, values, either in high cards (unlikely) (unlikely) or in distribution. distribution. How can you find find out? I think a negative double is the the best way. way. A negative double implies good support for one or both majors, which you don’t have, but so what? More Accurate Bidding | 53
You don’t intend to play this hand in a major, but in notrump, almost regardless of what partner bids. Only the level is is in doubt. If you double and he has ♠Kxx ♥Kxx ♦x ♣AKJxxx, partner will probably bid 3 ♣ and you you will bid 6NT. If he has ♠KQJx ♥Kxx ♦x ♣KQJxx, partner will bid 2♠, and again you will bid 6NT. If partner bids 2♣ and you cue bid 2♦ and he bids 3♣, he surely has at least six clubs, perhaps seven to the ace-queen or ace-jack plus another couple of honors somewhere, and again you probably belong in a slam, either 6♣ or 6NT. It is only when partner has a balanced hand, like 4=3=2=4 distribution, distribution, that you are likely to come up short. Remember, when when all you really need to know is whether whether partner has a minimum minimum or better hand, a negative negative double is often the best way way to find out. Suppose partner opens 1♠ in third or fourth position and you hold ♠AK ♥xx ♦J10xxx ♣Kxxx. What call would would you make? I think think you should bid 2♣ (Reverse Drury). Drury). Normally a Drury bid bid shows at least three card support support for partner’s major major and close to a maximum for for a passed hand. I think the ace-king doubleton is at least as good trump support as three small, or even three to the queen. Even if partner likes likes to open four card majors majors opposite a passed hand (which I don’t), he is not likely to do it with a bad suit, so he almost surely has five or more. more. If partner has a sub-minimum sub-minimum opening bid, 2♠ is probably a better contract than 1NT or 2♦, and if he has a good hand and bids game, ga me, he may be surprised, but not disappointed when you lay this hand down. The next hand tests both opener’s and responder’s imagination and confidence in each other. It occurred at a national pair pair event in Honolulu, and many of you have heard about it since it made quite an impression at the time, with write-ups in various places. You are playing weak notrumps (12-14 points in all positions). Since solid minors make make you think of notrump, notrump, especially at matchpoints, you pass with ♠ — ♥xx ♦AKQJxxxxx ♣xx. Partner opens 1NT in rd 3 position and RHO passes. passes. What call do you make? make? My partner partner actually bid 6NT, which left me me scratching my head in perplexity. perplexity. Perhaps partner had two cards stuck together, and he didn’t see an ace, but it seems that he would need to overlook two aces to account for this bidding. bidding. What could I do except pass? pass? As it happens, I had three bare aces and nothing else, but that was just what I needed to take 12 tricks. Since I try, but not always always succeed, to to bid scientifically, scientifically, I wondered whether there was was a better way to to bid this hand. Since just playing playing the hand in notrump would normally give us a good result (from partner’s point of view), should he have risked risked our advantage by gambling gambling on a slam? We were almost a cinch to take 10 or 11 tricks at notrump, which would beat all the pairs p airs in diamonds unless they bid and made a slam. Perhaps he should have just raised to 3NT. That would not have worked particularly particularly well this time since most most pairs opened 5♦ and many were raised raised to six. From his point of view view I would need either three aces or A, AK, AK, K, in any order, to have a cinch for 6NT. 6NT. There are other hands that might make six with a favorable lead, like AK A, and no control in the remaining suit, but I think the odds for bidding and making a slam are quite a bit below 50%. Consequently, it might might be right to settle for a notrump notrump game 54 | Marshall Miles
with overtrick(s). overtrick(s). If you want the best of both worlds, you you might raise 1NT to 4NT. Since there is no balanced hand with which one can invite a slam opposite a balanced 12-14 points points after failing failing to open the bidding, bidding, responder must must have a solid nine card suit. Or at least least solid opposite opposite a doubleton. That is what partner should figure you for if you you bid 4NT. Best of all, if partner partner passes because he can’t figure out what you have, you are probably in the right contract. The next hand may look rather dull compared with the last few, and it did d id not lead to success, but I liked liked my partner’s partner’s bid. I opened 1♥ with ♠Kx ♥KQ10xx ♦xx ♣KQJx in third position. LHO overcalled 1 ♠. Partner and I were playing the Unbalanced Unbalanced Diamond Diamond in which we can, can, and usually do, open a strong club with 15 or more more points. Partner had ♠Axx ♥Axxx ♦xx ♣98xx. He has close to a limit raise if playing BWS, which he could show by bidding 2♠ but how likely is is a game opposite a non-club opener? opener? And 3♥ tends to be preemptive. Does.he even have have a limit raise opposite a non-club non-club opening? So he made a negative double and the next hand raised to 2♠. I bid 3♣, and over a pass on my left, partner bid 3♥. What could could this mean? And why why didn’t he raise hearts right away? I thought he was making an invitational bid, weaker than 2♠, but I feared feared that my ♠K was not carrying full weight (unless a spade was led), so I passed. I was more pleased with with my partner than he was with with me when I made four. I liked his imaginative imaginative weak invitation. invitation. Players often forget that a 5-2 fit in a major is often the best contract available. For example, the bidding goes pass, pass 1♠ 3♥, ? You hold ♠Qx ♥xx ♦A9xxx ♣KQ10x. What call call do you make? Most players players would make a negative double. I’ll admit admit that bid could turn out best if you you find an eight or nine card minor fit. fit. However opener’s most likely distribution is 5-3-3-2. If partner partner has 5=3=2=3 distribution, distribution, should he pass, bid 4♣ or 3♠? For that matter, should partner make a negative double double or pass? Is there assurance assurance that your your side can rd make any contract contract at the four level? If partner has opened light in 3 position, it is usually because because he has a good spade spade suit. I don’t see much much point in opening a hand like ♠Jxxxx ♥KJx ♦Jx ♣A10x since game is very unlikely and you don’t want a spade lead if the opponents play the hand. Bidding 3♠ over 3♥ is fairly safe. Even if you run into a spade stack, stack, a double by RHO is not clearly clearly for penalty, and you you are less likely likely to be doubled for penalty at the the three level than at the four level or to have a double left left in at the three level. level. Partner doesn’t have to to have a subnormal opening bid just because he is in in third position. position. You could easily have a game. I think that it is quite quite likely that both sides can make make a contract at the three level, and if only one side can, it still pays to bid. So I think 3♠ is your best bid. LHO opens 1♥ and partner bids 1♠ at matchpoints. If next hand passes, what should you bid with ♠95 ♥6 ♦A7543 ♣AQ754? Your clubs clubs are stronger than your diamonds, but if you bid 2♣ and opener rebids 2♥, you can’t very well bid diamonds next round. Most people would would bid one minor minor or the other, but I think your best bid is 2♠. This bid gives partner partner another chance if if he had a strong strong More Accurate Bidding | 55
overcall. . You could easily easily belong in in 4♠ opposite ♠AKxxxx ♥xxx ♦Kx ♣Kx or somewhat worse. worse. Your poor trump trump support is balanced by your high card points. points. You also have a singleton heart heart as a stopper. You can probably ruff one heart, pull two rounds of trumps, and make make ten or 11 tricks. tricks. Nor do you necessarily necessarily need a six card spade suit. ♠AKQxx or ♠AKJ10x might easily be enough (with a little more on the side). side). We have been told that two two small is not adequate trump trump support for a suit that hasn’t been rebid; we forget that side tricks can compensate for poor trumps. Suppose you bid two of a minor minor and play it there, or 2♦ followed by 3♣ next round. At matchpoints, matchpoints, would you rather play a part-score in a 5-2 fit in a minor rather than in a major? Or possibly a 5-3 minor fit at the three level?—especially when partner’s major is often stronger than your minor and a raise of the major offers your side a better chance to get to a making game? What if partner has overcalled overcalled a four card major? major? That is possible, but that that probably happens less less than one time time in ten, and it would be unusual for for his less than one time in ten to coincide with your raise with two card support, which happens much much less frequently than one time in ten. You have have to play the the odds and not be afraid of o f your own shadow.
TESTING YOUR BIDDING JUDGMENT Now for several several hands that test test your bidding judgment. judgment. It is easy to overlook factors which you should take into consideration. RHO opens 2♥ and you hold ♠x ♥AJ96 ♦KQx ♣KQJ10x. What call do you make? A majority majority of the panelists bid 3♣, which is a nice, safe bid. “Let partner partner get his spade spade bid out of his system, and I can then bid 3NT,” 3NT,” one panelist said. said. I disagree about waiting waiting for partner to bid spades. First you should add your your points to the points RHO has shown. He probably has 5-10, or an average of 7 or 8. 8. If you you and RHO have a total of 23-24 points, that leaves 8+ points on an average for each of the other two players. 24+ points for your your side, including four probable probable club tricks tricks plus at least least two stoppers in RHO’s suit should gives you an adequate play for game unless the opponents run the spade suit against you. So I think you you should bid 2NT. West will probably probab ly lead his own suit, hearts. From his point of view, you you might have a long suit with a single stopper stopper in hearts. Can he fail to lead from from example, with an ace or king on the side? side? He is probably going ♥KQ10xxx, for example, to lead a heart. You might have had a single single stopper in hearts, not a possible possible triple stopper; he has no idea idea who has the spades (usually (usually not his partner). Unless he has good spades (better than your partner’s), there is not much reason to lead them. Partner tends to be forgiving forgiving if you lead his suit suit against notrump even if another lead would have worked better. better. Why shouldn’t shouldn’t partner’s spades be as good as, or better than, LHO’s? LHO’s? If they both have spades, partner’s spades are behind LHO’s. So why should should you wait for partner to bid spades (or anything anything else). With about 7 or 8 points and no stopper in hearts, he is not likely to
56 | Marshall Miles
introduce a suit of his own with something like ♠Qxxxx ♥xx ♦AJxx xx when you failed to make a takeout double. You open 1♣ with ♠AKJx ♥x ♦xx ♣AKQJxx; LHO and partner pass, and RHO bids 1♥. What is is your your call? call? I think you you should bid 2♠. All you need from partner is four spades to the queen or five small spades to have an excellent play for game. game. Your jump shows shows an interest in game, even even though partner couldn’t keep the bidding open over 1♣. And if partner doesn’t have have spade support, don’t you think nine tricks at clubs will will be safe? You would have to be very unlucky to be down one. And if you are, your opponents can probably make three or four hearts. Often an exceptionally good major holding blinds you to the merits of another contract. You open open 1♥ with ♠QJx ♥AKQJxxx ♦Q ♣Jx. Next hand bids 1♠, and partner partner doubles. doubles. What call would would you make? I think think you should bid 2NT! Partner should have the minors pretty pretty well stopped. What do you you think LHO is going to lead lead against a notrump contract? Almost surely surely a spade. Give partner something something like ♠xxx ♥x ♦AJ10x ♣Q10xxx and LHO something like ♠AK98x ♥xx ♦xx ♣Axxx, and you will make 3NT with a low spade lead, while 4♥ would be down two. Of course, if partner has a better hand, you may be able to make game in either notrump or hearts. Psychologically, Psychologically, I think a 2NT rebid will work better than a 3NT bid. The latter is often bid with a solid suit, a stopper in theirs, and not much of anything else. The opening leader is more likely to try to cash his tricks off the top if he thinks you have a long, running suit. And if partner passes 2NT, that is probably your best contract. The next hand is similar. similar. You open 1♥ with ♠Qxx ♥AKQJxx ♦Axx ♣Q. LHO overcalls 1♠, which is passed around around to you. With this hand I would (and did) rebid 1NT, which usually shows a balanced b alanced hand with18 or 19 points (too strong to open 1NT). Partner raised to 2NT with ♠Jxx ♥xx ♦KJx ♣J10xxx and I bid 3NT, while 4♥ can be defeated with a spade ruff. The last two hands remind me of an embarrassing hand when I allowed myself to be stolen blind. Vulnerable against not, at imps, I opened 1♥ with ♠KJx ♥KQJ108 ♦AKJ ♣108. LHO overcalled 1♠; partner passed, and RHO bid 2♦. What should I bid? I thought that I was slightly too weak weak to to open 2NT, and with both opponents bidding, partner wasn’t likely to hold much—so I passed. Partner had something like ♠10xx ♥xx ♦10xx ♣AQxxx, and with a diamond lead we were cold for 10 tricks tricks at notrump. RHO, had almost almost nothing but queen sixth of diamonds, and was, was, in effect, psyching. What I should have thought was that I was probably going to get a diamond lead, in which case I would win three diamond tricks, four heart tricks, and probably a spade trick even if partner had almost a Yarborough. So I wouldn’t be sticki sticking ng my neck out very far to to bid 2NT, and because of the vulnerability, vulnerability, the opponents might be trying to steal from us. The next two hands illustrate illustrate the same principle. principle. Just because you are vulnerable at imps is no reason to disregard the odds. Partner opens 1♥; you More Accurate Bidding | 57
respond 1♠ and he rebids 2♥. What call would you make with with ♠AK109x ♥x ♦KJ653 ♣xx? If partner has ♠xx ♥KQJ10xx ♦Ax ♣Axx you would have a good play for 4♥. But take away his his jack-ten of hearts and he would have a very very poor play for ten tricks and no cinch cinch for nine. Change his hand to ♠x ♥Q10xxxx ♦AQ ♣Kxxx and even 3♥ would not be safe. Theoretically, Theoretically, you need a 37 ½ % play for game game to bid it—more than that when even an invitation invitation to game may result in a negative score, or when you might be set more than one trick. trick. In the long long run, you you will do better to pass. I assume, if you make another bid, it would be 3♦. If so, what would would partner bid with something like ♠xx ♥AQxxxx ♦Ax ♣Kxx? Probably 3NT, which which will will require a 3-3 break in hearts or diamonds plus a finesse, and you have to decide which suit to try to establish for the bulk of your tricks since you won’t have time to try for both. Bidding 3NT is likely to result in a two two trick set. set. Suppose the bidding goes 1♣ 1♠, 2♣ ? and you hold ♠J1098x ♥Axx ♦KQxx ♣x. You are not even sure partner can make 2♣ with bad breaks, and getting to, and making game, is very unlikely. So you should pass now at the safest level. A plus score will often gain 5 imps since many of your competitors keep hoping for miracles. Partners often say, “I knew that you would need just the right hand for game plus a little luck, but vulnerable, vulnerable, I had to try for for it.” Why? Let us suppose that you you have a 30% chance to have a 50% play for for game. If so, your overall chances chances are 15%. That is not nearly enough.
DON’T PUT ALL YOUR EGGS IN ONE BASKET RHO opens the bidding with 1♣. What call call do you make make with ♠AJ972 ♥AKJ10 ♦x ♣Axx? Many players would overcall 1♠, which I think is a poor bid. In the first place, you you are too strong. Will partner keep the the bidding open with ♠Qxx ♥Qxx ♦Jxxxx ♣xx? Perhaps you would, would, but I wouldn’t, wouldn’t, at least least not if I were vulnerable. It is true, that when you are vulnerable, you should bid lower percentage games than when not vulnerable, but if you raise with the latter hand, it is not with hope of making game, merely making it more difficult for the opponents to get to game. You can argue that partner might might jump in diamonds if you you make a takeout double. Yes, that is a possibility, possibility, although if he bids 2♦, he has a good hand, and you may still make a game—most likely 4♠. If he bids 3♦, you have enough high cards to give him a play for it. But if he has as little little as ♠xx ♥xxxxx ♦xxxx ♣xx, you have about a 40% play for for game in hearts. hearts. If you double and and partner bids 1♥, you should not let the bidding stop short of 4♥ My partner and I got to 6♥ and made it, which which was a surprising, but pleasing, pleasing, result. The most likely continuation after a double is 1♦ by partner and 1♠ by you. And if opener rebids 2♣, you shouldn’t mind bidding 2♠. You still might might get to a good game. game.
58 | Marshall Miles
You open 1♣ with ♠AKx ♥J9x ♦x ♣AK10862, and partner responds 1♥. What would you you rebid? Most players players on a bidding bidding panel chose 3♣, but I think that is wrong. Your clubs are not particularly particularly strong, strong, and if partner has something like ♠xxx ♥A10xxx ♦AJxx ♣x, you would prefer to play in 4♥ rather than 3NT. How can you tell tell which contract is is best? best? By bidding bidding 1♠! 1♠ is not forcing, but responder has to have a very weak hand to pass. If partner bids 1NT, you will bid 2♥. There is a danger that he will will insist upon playing playing in spades, but even if he does, spades may be your best contract. contract. If he raises to to 2♠ and you bid 3♥, he will probably bid 3NT or 4♥, whichever is your best contract. If you play in a 4-3 fit, you normally choose the contract where you can ruff with the three card holding. Here is another hand where you clearly belong in a 4-3 4-3 major fit. Partner opens 1♣ and you respond 1♥ with ♠QJx ♥AKJx ♦Jxxxx ♣x. Your LHO bids 2♣, which is is passed around to you. You bid 2♦, LHO passes, partner bids 2 ♠ and RHO passes. What call call would would you make make now? You would would have had a greater problem if LHO had stayed out of the bidding, but since he wants to help you, let him do it. it. It would not be fair to accuse him of a stupid mistake mistake since he probably needs a club lead to have have any chance of setting setting 3NT, and he doesn’t know, if 3NT becomes the final contact, who is going to be on lead. If partner has a single stopper in clubs, you you probably belong in spades with with a 4-3 fit. Even if partner has three three hearts, you you prefer to play in spades, the suit suit whose three card holding will first first be forced to ruff. If he has no stopper in his own suit, suit, you definitely belong in spades. Whether partner partner has ♠AKxx ♥xx ♦AQx ♣xxxx or ♠A109x ♥xx ♦KQx ♣Axxx, you belong in 4♠. And if partner has a double double stopper in clubs, he should bid 3NT, allowing you to insist upon spades if you have four. If you had 4-4-4-1, and intended to bid both majors, you you probably would have bid spades first. Opener: ♠xx ♥AQJx ♦KQxx ♣Jxx
Responder: ♠xx ♥Kx ♦AJxxx ♣Axxx
This is a hand from long ago as closely closely as I can remember remember it. I was playing with with Eddie Kantar and our teammates teammates were Bob Hamman Hamman and Joe Bechely. Bechely. We were playing in a board-a-match board-a-match team of four, long before before we had even heard heard of imps. imps. Eddie and I got too high in spades and and were doubled and set 300 points. points. I didn’t see how our teammates teammates could possibly save save us on this board—but they did! The bidding was 1♥ by Bob (and he would probably make the same bid today), 2 ♦ by Joe, 3♦ by Bob, 3♥ by Joe; 4♥ by Bob. All they needed was a 4-3 4-3 break in trumps, which which they got. If the opponents had played played three rounds of spades, Bob could ruff in the dummy and make five! I am not suggesting that we go back back to four card major openings, but you can see that they sometimes work quite well. You hold ♠109xx ♥J10xx ♦AK9 ♣Kx. LHO opens 3♦ at imps. Partner doubles. You are are vulnerable vulnerable vs not. What call do you you make? make? You should resist the temptation temptation to cue bid and get to your 4-4 4-4 major fit. For one More Accurate Bidding | 59
reason, the suit you choose to play in may break very badly (4-1 or even 5-0). That is often the case after after a preempt. For another reason, reason, partner may not have a four card major. He actually held 3=3=2=5 3=3=2=5 distribution distribution with 17 points and can make ten tricks at either clubs or notrump, but even if you had a 4-4 major fit, or two such fits, you might take only nine tricks if you guess to bid the badly breaking major (or (or the only 4-4 4-4 major fit, when the suit breaks badly). At imps you want to bid the game least likely to go down. You are dealer with ♠AQ9xxx ♥Kx ♦AKx ♣Ax. What is your your opening bid? I think you you should bid 2NT. That is what you would bid with with the same same high cards and 4-3-3-3 or 5-3-3-2 5-3-3-2 distribution. Isn’t the sixth spade an asset asset rather than a liability? Perhaps you should open 2♣ and rebid 2NT although that t hat usually shows 22-24 22-24 points. But I think it is a mistake to to open 1♠. You might might miss a game if partner has the king of spades and nothing but a jack and ten on the side, but an equally good reason is that that your king of hearts hearts is protected protected if you are are the declarer. If you open 1♠, partner’s most likely response is 1NT since he is not likely to be strong enough to make make a two-over-one response. Most of the time time it won’t matter who declarer is, but when it does matter, you would hate to have RHO lead a heart through your your king. There are not many hands with with which you could make 4♠ but not 3NT, played by you. Neither vulnerable, vulnerable, imps. You hold ♠Kx ♥K98xx ♦AKxx ♣Jx. The uncontested bidding goes 1♦ by partner, 1♥ by you, 2♦ by partner. What call call do you make? You have a fairly close close choice, and you could have a slam in diamonds if partner has the perfect hand—something like ♠AQx ♥x ♦Qxxxxxx ♣Ax or ♠AJx ♥Qx ♦J10xxxxx ♣A but, if so, it will be hard to bid. The closer question is whether you should bid 2♠, 3NT, 4♦ or 5♦. This was a problem in the Australian Australian Bridge magazine. magazine. 17 panelists panelists chose 2♠, and only two, including me, chose 3NT. I can hardly say that 3NT was clearly better better when players like Larry Cohen, Eddie Kantar, Eric Kokish, Mike Lawrence, Frank Stewart and Zia chose 2♠. (There were also excellent excellent players on the panel from from other countries). countries). I think that 5♦ would be the best and safest bid, which no one chose, if you would be declarer declarer but one danger of bidding 2♠, 3♣ or 5♦, is that partner would play the hand. He had ♠xx ♥A ♦QJ10xxx ♣Axxx, and if he is declarer, leading the queen of spades, which would be the normal lead, sets both 5♦ and 3NT. By guarding against playing in 3NT without a club stopper, you run the risk of getting to game game without a sure sure spade stopper. You know that you you have a positional stopper in spades. Partner may or may not have a positional stopper stopper in clubs, where you have a tiny bit of help (opposite ♣Qxx or even ♣10xxx). There was a hand from the Bridge World almost 50 years ago that illustrated illustrated two themes: the necessity of visualizing visualizing what partner must must have, just from the opponents’ bidding, and the necessity of declaring from the right direction. At matchpoints, both sides vulnerable, the bidding has gone 1♥ p 2♥ ? and you hold ♠KJ109 ♥K5 ♦AQJ7 ♣AQ10. The bidding bidding panels in those days days were quite large, and 20 out of 57 panelists voted to bid 2♠. Unless someone was 60 | Marshall Miles
psyching, which was more common common then than now, now, partner should should have almost a Yarborough, and you figured to be able to gain a couple of tricks by your being declarer.
MINOR RAISES Most experts play inverted minor raises, but there are different ways to play them. Some play a single raise forcing to game and a jump in the other o ther minor as an invitational raise. raise. Most play that a single raise raise shows a limit raise raise or better, which is Bridge World World standard. Since it might be be better, it has to be forcing for one round. Almost no one plays inverted inverted minor raises raises in competition but some players play inverted raises by a passed hand, which which does not appeal to me. The disadvantage of inverted raises is that there is no good bid to take the place of an ordinary raise. raise. What can you do when partner opens opens 1♦ and you hold ♠x ♥QJx would probably bid 1NT, but I don’t like it. One reason is ♦Axxx ♣xxxxx? I would that I prefer partner partner to be declarer if we we play in a notrump contract. Nor do I like a 3♦ bid with so little offense and so much defense (it might persuade partner to take a phantom sacrifice). sacrifice). Inverted raises raises are worthwhile worthwhile despites these problems when responder can have anything from 10 to 20 points. points. It saves saves bidding space to investigate games and slam, but when you are a passed hand you probably have no more than 12 or 13 points, counting something for distribution, and a jump shift in the other minor to show a distributional limit raise and a jump in opener’s minor to show a good hand for notrump (maybe ♦KQxxxx and an ace or king) are sufficient to describe your hand. Sometimes the bidding will indicate that two of the suits are your biggest worry. Suppose you open a minor and partner, partner, playing inverted inverted raises, supports you at the two level. Almost surely, surely, he doesn’t have a four card or longer major major suit. If he has a second suit, suit, it will be the other minor. minor. If opener has a fairly balanced hand, the best chance for game is 3NT. 3NT. The best chance for the defenders is to establish establish and cash tricks in a major. major. The usual procedure by opener, if he has a balanced hand, is to bid 2NT or 3NT when he has a stopper in both majors and not worry about the other minor. minor. With a stopper in one major, he bids that major at the two level, which allows responder to bid 2NT or 3NT when he has a stopper in the other major. There are other sequences in which which you adopt the the same general approach. For example, if the bidding goes 1♣ 2♣ or 1♦ 2♦ (Michaels) by the opponents, showing the majors, again you don’t worry about the other minor if you have a balanced hand. If you bid a major, major, you are showing a stopper. If you have a very strong or unbalanced hand, you may bid a new suit, either major or minor, and make another strong bid later, but until you do, partner will assume that you have the major you bid stopped, stopped, but not the other. However, consistent with with the comment about not putting all your eggs in one basket, you may do something slightly different. You open with with a weak notrump and LHO bids 2♥, which is
More Accurate Bidding | 61
alerted as showing showing both majors. Partner bids 2♠, presumably showing a spade stopper but denying denying a heart stopper. Suppose you hold ♠Ax ♥Axx ♦Kxxx ♣Kxxx. Perhaps partner has something something like like ♠Kxx ♥xx ♦AQxxxx ♣Qx. If so, it doesn’t matter matter whether your your hearts are are headed by the the ace, king or QJ. You are hoping to win the heart trick sooner or later and and cash the next eight tricks. tricks. It is better when you have a double stopper or potential double stopper in hearts (provided you don’t have to lose the lead to RHO) like ♥KQx ♥KJx ♥Q109x ♣Kxx or ♥AJ10, etc. In all these cases you probably belong in 3NT, either because the double stopper gives you time to establish nine tricks, even if you have to lose the lead, or because you have too many losers off the top to make five of a minor. But if responder holds ♠Kxx ♥x ♦QJxxx ♣AQxx, you belong in diamonds (six, (six, in fact), not in notrump. notrump. My partner and I had a similar similar hand recently, and I thought he (opener) should have bid 3♥, rather than 3NT—just in case I had a singleton singleton heart or possibly a worthless doubleton.. doubleton.. This sequence had not been discussed in advance, but I believe opener should think of this possibility and responder should figure out what opener intended the cue bid to mean—it showed the ace as distinguished from a slower stopper or a double stopper—which was more important than showing maximum or minimum. What call would you make as dealer with ♠ — ♥KQ10xx ♦Ax ♣QJxxxx? Some players always open the longer suit with 6-5 distribution, but I think they should make an exception with with this hand. What is is your most most likely game? I think it is 4♥, not 5♣. If you open 1♣, partner’s most likely response is 1 ♠. You will bid 2♥ next round, and partner p artner will probably bid 2♠ or 3♠, and, to be consistent, you will bid 3♥ or 4♥, which gets you awfully high if this is a complete misfit. It is quite likely that your LHO LHO will overcall some number of spades, which makes makes matters matters worse. You may be cold cold for 4♥, so you almost have to bid hearts at a dangerously dangerously high level. level. However, if you you open 1♥, you may be able to show clubs at the two or three level without jumping or reversing. It always puzzles me when most of the world plays basic sequences differently different ly from me. Am I crazy, or is the rest of the world crazy? Suppose partner opens the bidding with 1♠ and you you respond 1NT. When he rebids rebids 2♥, if you have a very weak hand with two spades and three hearts (like ♠Jx ♥Qxx ♦Qxxx ♣Qxxx) you may pass, since if you bid 2♠ partner might bid again, but give you something like ♠Qx ♥Kxx ♦Axxx ♣xxxx, and you would take a false preference to spades spades for two reasons: (1) He has 5-4 5-4 in the majors majors more often often than not, and if so, a 5-2 trump suit usually plays pla ys better than the 4-3 trump suit. (2) You have a good hand for the bidding, and you want to give him a chance to make a further bid. If partner has 5-5 in the majors, he may bid 3♥ which you would gladly raise to 4♥. With 5-4-2-2 5-4-2-2 and about 17 points, points, you would would rebid 2NT or 3♠. With 3-1 in in the minors, and extra values, you you could bid your three three card minor and partner can revalue revalue his hand, based on the degree of fit. fit. Why not adopt a similar procedure procedure for stronger hands? After a 2/l response you you know that you are going to get to game unless responder rebids his suit, but you still have 62 | Marshall Miles
the problem of getting getting to the best game. There is still room for further investigation. Suppose you hold ♠K10 ♥Qxx ♦Axx ♣KJxxx and the uncontested bidding starts: 1♠ 2♣, 2♥ ?, why not bid 2♠? The bidding isn’t over yet. If partner has 5-5 in the majors, majors, he can bid 3♥ and you will raise him to 4♥. If he has three three clubs and a singleton diamond diamond he will bid 3♣. Perhaps knowing about your distribution will enable him to bid or invite a slam in clubs. You can draw an inference that he has only a single stopper in diamonds since, with a double stopper he probably would have bid 2NT over 2♥ especially if he had only a doubleton spade. With ♦Qxx or ♦Kxx he can bid a belated 3NT to give you a choice of contracts. contracts. With a single stopper in diamonds responder can bid 3NT, while while if he had three three spades, he would bid 3♠, still giving opener a choice of contracts. contracts. Change responder’s responder’s hand to ♠K10 ♥Qxx ♦Jx ♣AK10xxx. Instead of bidding 3♦ over 2♥ to force partner to bid 3NT with a diamond stopper, perhaps with ♠AQJxx ♥KJxx ♦Ax ♣xx, why not 1♠ 2♣, 2♥ 2♠, 3♠ 4♠. Over 2♠ responder would have bid 2NT with a doubleton spade and a diamond stopper or potential stopper, like ♦Q10x. In other words, 2♠ by responder is the “blah” bid. Usually responder has three three card support, but not always. But most of the players in in the U.S., and probably elsewhere, if they hold ♠K10 ♥Qxx ♦Jxx ♣AK10xx, would refuse to bid 2♠; they they would bid 3♦, the so-called Western cue bid, or “fourth suit forcing,” asking partner to bid notrump with a diamond diamond stopper. That way they they would get to to 3NT opposite ♠AQJxx ♥KJxx ♦Ax ♣xx. I have decided the rest of the world is crazy and only I am sane.
PLAYING IN THE “OPPONENTS’ SUIT” When the opponents make a natural bid (not a transfer bid or a forcing club, for example) and you bid their suit either immediately or later, your bid is usually a cue bid or a conventional conventional bid of some kind. However, if if the opponents open a three card suit, or a weak four card suit, it is conceivable that you want to play in that suit. Or if they respond in a very weak suit at the one-level, one-level, you may want to play in that suit. suit. Today, the most most frequent short or weak-suit opening bid is in a minor since most players play that an opening bid in a major shows at least a five card suit. Today the most frequent frequent weak suit response is a major, which which might be made with four small. Consequently 1m by RHO, three of the the same minor minor by you, should be natural and primarily preemptive—like preemptive—like ♠x ♥xx ♦QJxx ♣KJ109xx or ♠xx ♥Q ♦KQJxxxx ♣K10x. Add an ace to the latter hand, where you might might belong in a game, and you should pass, not caring if the opponents want to play there, and you can jump to the three level in the long minor the next time it is your turn to bid. Perhaps partner can can bid and make make 3NT. When the bidding bidding goes 1x p 1M ?, More Accurate Bidding | 63
bidding the same same major at the two, three or four levels is natural. After 1♦ p 1♠ ? you might bid 2♠ with ♠KQ10xxx ♥xx ♦xx ♣AKx or ♠AQJ10x ♥Kxx ♦x ♣QJxx. I read somewhere somewhere that Kit Woolsey Woolsey would also bid it with with a weaker, semi-preemptive semi-preemptive hand. It is futile to make make a trap pass, hoping the opponents will will get to a higher spade spade contract, contract, which you could could double. With ♠KQJ10xx ♥xx ♦x ♣AKQx I think you are strong enough to bid 3♠. It is unlikely that your RHO has more than four spades. Since most players require a five card suit to open a major, it isn’t practical to treat 1♣ 3♣ and 1♠ 3♠ the same way. way. A jump in the the opponent’s major says that you have a long solid suit, some cards on the side and enough to make (or gamble on) 3NT if partner partner has a stopper stopper in the major. major. If not, he should should bid 4♣, and you can correct to diamonds if that is the suit you were relying upon for the balance of your tricks. Based on hands in the Bridge World panels, it seems that about 70% of the experts play that when the bidding goes: Opener 1♣ pass
You 1♥ 2♣
Responder pass
Partner 1♠
1♣ 2♠
1♥ 3♣
1♠
pass
or
the 2♣ or 3♣ bid is a cue bid, bid, but I disagree disagree with that interpretation. You and partner know enough about each other’s hands that you you don’t need a cue bid. bid. Playing as the top 30% of better players do, for the first sequence you might hold something like ♠x ♥AQxxx ♦Kx ♣KQ109x or ♠x ♥AKQx ♦xx ♣AJ98xx. You wanted to get your heart bid in while you safely could since you don’t need much for a game if partner has four four or five hearts. Since he obviously doesn’t have have a good heart fit, you prefer to play it in clubs. For the second sequence, sequence, to bid voluntarily to the three level by yourself, you need a good hand with good clubs, something like ♠ — ♥AKxxx ♦Kx ♣QJ98xx. If you held ♠Kx ♥AQxxx ♦Kx ♣Jxxx, you would raise partner to 2♠ since he normally has at least a good five card spade suit to bid his major major rather than leave you you in yours, and with the ♦AJ doubleton, you would raise to 3♠. In a sequence sequence like this, this, partner shouldn’t take you back to hearts since your clubs must be longer or better, or both. The previous comments about playing in the opponents’ suit were concerned with doing so when their their bid purportedly was was natural. Some players, players, including me when I play my own system, the Unbalanced Diamond, treat a diamond opening as completely completely artificial. artificial. In this system the diamond diamond opening can be based on a diamond suit, a club suit, or both, and an opening diamond bid could be could be made with with a void in diamonds. diamonds. All Precision Precision players may may open 1♦ with a doubleton, and some may may even open with a void. Especially, Especially, when the bid can 64 | Marshall Miles
be made with with a singleton or void in diamonds, diamonds, I think a 2♦ overcall should be natural. The defense which my partner and I suggest to to the opponents is to play that 2♦ is natural; 2♥ shows both majors (at least 5-5), and 2NT shows a very strong hand with 5-5 or better in the majors, like ♠AQJxx ♥KQJxx ♦x ♣Ax. If you just overcalled 2♥, partner would pass with ♠Kx ♥xxx ♦xxxxx ♣Kxx. All that you give up is a preempt preempt at the two level in hearts. hearts. I think, when playing against Precision players whose 2♦ bid can be made with a singleton or void, you should play the same way. way. If “It can be short” means means that it can be as few as two, it is a close decision whether to play the same way or to treat the 1♦ bid as natural. You should agree with with partner in advance so that you you will both know what your bids mean. Psyching has lost favor in the last 50 5 0 years and seldom occurs these days. I mean, for example, bidding what you believe b elieve will be your opponents’ suit to cause confusion. But it still occurs occasionally. occasionally. The two most common situations are as follows: 1♣ by LHO, dbl by partner, 1♥ or 1♠ with something like ♠xx ♥xxx ♦Qxx ♣Kxxxx by RHO. RHO. The standard defense is to double for penalty to keep your your suit from being stolen. Bob Hamman knew that the Italian Italian team he was playing against treated doubles in this situation as negative, and by bidding a major, major, he stole the suit (and a game). game). The Italians Italians immediately immediately changed their system so so that doubles were for penalty. penalty. But some players are unaware unaware of the fact that is standard standard defense. The other situation situation is after partner preempts. preempts. 3♦ p 3♥ with something like ♠Jxxxx ♥xx ♦KQxx ♣xx. The opponents almost surely belong in a game or slam slam in hearts. A double in this situati situation on by the next player is for for penalty, not takeout. That is the way for exposing the psyche; 4♥ immediately by the opponents would be a powerful takeout takeout bid. He needs to double first. There are various defenses to a strong club, such as Crash, recommended by Kit Woolsey, Woolsey, and Mathe, Mathe, recommended recommended by Lew Mathe. Although they cause confusion when bid before a natural bid, they are are not psyches. CRASH means means that a double of an artificial artificial 1♣ opening shows two two suits of the the same Color, Color, like spades and clubs; 1♦ shows two suits of he same Rank (majors or minors) and 1NT shows two suits of the the same Shape (pointed suits suits or rounded suits). suits). Other players play in similar fashion fashion with modifications modifications of their their own. There are two two types of defenses to a strong club club opening. One is to bid your suit or show two two specific suits. “Mathe” is the simplist with a double showing the majors and notrump showing the minors and partner, with a fit can jump the bidding when he knows of the fit, taking away bidding room from the strong club bidder and his partner. The other is to to cause confusion as to what suits suits or type of hand the club bidder has before he gets a chance to show his suit or suits. suits.
More Accurate Bidding | 65
MORE COMPETITIVE BIDDING Some players are very conservative or “sound” in making an overcall or takeout double, but quite aggressive aggressive in reopening the bidding. In my opinion, light light initial bids, especially especially at the one level, level, are less less dangerous than reopening reopening bids. To penalize you, you, responder has to risk a pass with with a good hand, and opener has to to double. For responder responder to pass pass with a good hand involves involves three three risks: (1) that opener will pass; (2) that he will bid something so mething else, after which it may be hard for responder to express his values; (3) that the penalty from a doubled contract may be less than the bonus from bidding and making game. Suppose your RHO opens the bidding 1♦. With which, which, if any, any, of the following following hands would you you overcall? And when would the v vulnerability ulnerability or form of scoring (imps or matchpoints) affect your decision? (a) ♠AJ6 ♥K8743 ♦7 ♣J976 (b) ♠K10954 ♥7 ♦J8 ♣Q9865 (c) ♠63 ♥AKJ73 ♦7642 ♣Q6 (d) ♠63 ♥AKJ73 ♦763 ♣Q64 (e) ♠8 ♥AKJ8 ♦KJ95 ♣J1065 (f) ♠A8 ♥AQ106 ♦7 ♣K87543 With (a) I think you should overcall except at unfavorable vulnerability, vulnerability, perhaps even with unfavorable unfavorable vulnerability. Generally, the the hand that is short in the opponents’ suit is the the one that should take aggressive aggressive action. It is far safer safer to bid at the one level than to wait wait and take action later. Suppose the strength strength is approximately evenly divided. You have 9 points; points; your partner has 10; opener has 14 and responder has 7. Give partner ♠975 ♥A102 ♦J843 ♣KQ3. Opener has 4=2=5=2 distribution. distribution. Despite the opponents having having 21 points to your 19 you can probably make eight eight tricks in hearts. If you overcall, overcall, responder will pass and partner will will raise to 2♥. Perhaps, double dummy, the opponents could make 3♦, but they are are not likely to to get there. You may observe that the hands fit well; if partner is weaker weaker you may be down one, but that will still still be a good result. result. If partner had one more more heart and one less spade, you you might take two two more tricks, tricks, and the opponents could also take more tricks. The bidding would probably go 1♦ 1♥ 1♠ 2♦, 2♠ p p 3♥, p p p. If partner doesn’t have heart support, he will pass and you will will get the normal result, whatever that that is. With (b) an overcall will interfere with the opponents’ bidding, and they may not get to their best contract. And with favorable vulnerability vulnerability your side side will have a good sacrifice most most of the time when partner has four four spades. Obviously an overcall is dangerous—not that anything bad is likely to happen at the one level, but partner may bid too much, and you may be down 800 as a sacrifice, or 200 in an undoubled contract when the opponents have no game or were not going to get to game. So I only recommend recommend an overcall with favorable favorable
66 | Marshall Miles
vulnerability. vulnerability. And I think, if if the opponents had opened 1♥, a 2♥ bid would be too dangerous since it could lead to an 800 point sacrifice in 5♣. With (c), nothing bad is likely to happen to you regardless of vulnerability—but vulnerability—but it is close. All it is likely to accomplish is to get a heart lead lead from partner (which (which he might make anyway). anyway). So I would only risk it if if not vulnerable. With (d) the risk is slightly slightly greater than with with (c), and an overcall is is not likely to interfere with the opponents’ bidding, so I recommend a pass regardless of vulnerability—but vulnerability—but it is is close. I am not worried about being being badly beaten in 1♥, but in a higher heart contract contract if partner competes. competes. With (e) the danger of overcalling is that partner may take a sacrifice when I have lots of defense with my diamond diamond holding behind the opener. So I would pass. With (f) (f) I want to make my heart overcall before the bidding gets gets too high. This hand has a lot of playing strength strength if partner has four or more hearts. hearts. But the decision is close since a 2♣ overcall might keep LHO from bidding spades, and it is likely that I will get a chance to show hearts hearts later. But should I risk bidding hearts hearts at the three or four level? There are similar similar problems problems with takeout doubles. doubles. Should you double a 1♣ bid with ♠AJxx ♥QJxx ♦Q10xx ♣x? I have no strong feelings for or against. Would you you double a diamond opening bid with ♠AJ10x ♥QJ10x ♦Kxx ♣Jx (and gamble that partner won’t bid clubs)? Again, I think the pros and cons are about equal. What action action would you take take over a 1♦ bid by RHO with ♠AQ10x ♥x ♦AQx ♣Kxxxx? Many players players would would pass, expecting expecting the bidding bidding to go 1♥ on your left, pass, 2♥ on your right, in which case, you have a clear-cut double. I agree that this is the the most likely continuation, continuation, but sometimes sometimes the bidding goes differently. differently. Perhaps Perhaps 1♦ p 2♥ (weak)p p Now a reopening bid bid could be made with with a much weaker hand. Are you going to raise whatever whatever partner bids? Opener might have a balanced hand with 18 points. points. Isn’t this this more dangerous than overcalling 1♠? And you would be completely completely stymied stymied if the the bidding were to go 1♦ p 3♦ (weak) p, p or 1♦ p 1NT p, 2♦.
REOPENING BIDS I think this is the most most controversial issue issue in bridge. Everyone agrees that when when the opponents stop bidding, it it is frequently right right for you to reopen the bidding. It may be right because you expect values from partner because the opponents quit bidding, and you you think you can make make something your your way. Or you suspect that the opponents can make their bid, and you hope to push them one higher, where you will have a better chance to set them, and even if you can’t make your bid, the penalty will will be less than the score they will will make by playing the hand. So the controversy is not whether you believe in reopening the bidding in certain sequences. It is how frequently you should do it. More Accurate Bidding | 67
Larry Cohen and Marty Bergen and their partners are the most aggressive reopeners I know of. There may be others just as aggressive, but since they don’t write books, I don’t know who they are. Larry and Marty hate to let the opponents play in two two of their suit suit after a raise. raise. They have various various tactics and treatments treatments such as OBAR bids to prevent the opponents from playing contracts at the two level after an o pening bid and raise. Not only do they they reopen optimistically optimistically after after 1♥ p 2♥ p, p ? AND 1 ♦ p 1♠ p, 2♠ p p ? but they "pre-reopen" after 1♥ p 2♥ ? in a live auction with with shortage in the opponents' suit. When the opponents find an eight card suit at the two level, you or your partner (whichever has shortage) MUST compete. That is an exaggeration, but only slight. It looks dangerous to compete in a live auction, when the opponents might have a game or slam, but once they find a fit, if they have extra values they tend to bid it, not knowing whether they can set you for more than the value of their game or slam. They only tend to double for penalty when they have a suit stacked against you or when they doubt that they can make a game. Ironically, I can’t can’t remember the the vulnerability, vulnerability, which was definitely material, or how it turned out—whether I didn’t bid when it would have worked or my partner made a bid that I disapproved disappro ved of, (whether it worked or not is immaterial). Anyway, this was was it. The bidding was 1♥ p 2♥ ? And the next player player had ♠J1098xx ♥KQ8 ♦xx ♣Qx. Should the person holding holding this hand bid 2♠? I didn’t didn’t think think so, and and still don’t, but I no longer feel so strongly strongly about it. You can’t tell whether whether the opponents are going to bid more more by themselves, or how strong partner is. AS I recall, partner took a sacrifice against 4♠ with the singleton jack of hearts, when we had two trump tricks and two other tricks. Another factor is that if they bid more, partner may lead the doubleton king of spades or a small spade from the king-third, which which may cost a defensive trick. trick. The heart holding looks better better for defense than offense. If declarer declarer has ♥AJ9xx opposite three small, he might finesse the nine, losing losing to partner’s ten. ten. On the other hand, if the the player holding this hand was not vulnerable, he could be set two tricks and still get a good score if not doubled. We had another similar similar sequence recently. This time time we were vulnerable. My same partner had the doubleton king of the opponents’ suit in front of the opening bidder and 7 other scattered points and made an OBAR type of double. I guess I was supposed supposed to pass, no matter what what I had, when the opponents bid at the three level, but I competed further with a good suit and good distribution, distribution, for minus 200, which probably would have worked if partner’s partner’s king were in another suit. Perhaps I am prejudiced prejudiced against OBAR because because I don’t know how to play it. That is what my partner said. said. When the bidding goes something something like like this: 1♦ 1♠ pass pass, ? some players reopen the bidding almost almost regardless is is what they have, have, usually with with a double. They might even double with ♠Qxx ♥Kxxx ♦AJxx ♣Kx or ♠KJ ♥Axx close to minimum minimum openings and they look worse now ♦KQxx ♣Jxxx. These are close than they did in the beginning. It is very unlikely unlikely that partner has a trap pass when you hold this sort of holding holding in the opponent’s suit. At least, when you hold a singleton in the opponent’s opponent’s suit, you have two two chances to gain. Partner 68 | Marshall Miles
might have enough for a penalty pass, and he might have a decent suit of his own (but not a good enough hand to bid it at the two level, which would be forcing). And he is not likely to have a good heart suit, with which he might have made a negative double. The opponents sometimes rely on you to keep the bidding open. They might overcall 2♣ with ♠AJxx ♥Ax ♦x ♣AKJxxx, planning to bid spades next round. (I think they should double dou ble and bid clubs next round,(unless partner bids spades) even if it is at the three level, level, over either either 2♦ passed around to you or a heart bid by LHO and a raise to 2♥ by RHO). They are recklessly optimistic in some sequences and extremely worried about making a takeout double without support for all unbid suits. suits. I would be more worried worried than they about missing missing a spade game by making a simple overcall when partner has h as ♠Qxxxx ♥xx ♦Qxxx ♣Qx and the opponents fail to keep the bidding open for you. There is another type of reopening reopening bid. An opponent opens opens the bidding and his partner passes. If the opening bid was a preempt preempt (weak two bid or three three or four of a suit), many players bid or double very optimistically, always figuring that their partner has a stack in the suit and is just drooling while he waits for you to double. I am not that optimistic. optimistic. Why shouldn’t your RHO RHO have the the balance of power but passed because of a misfit? I wait until I have a good enough hand so that, if the balance of strength is almost equally divided between partner and RHO, we have a game. game. Or if partner has a third third of the outstanding strength strength we will make our bid or be down only one. Suppose LHO has 6 points and I have 16, balanced. That leaves 18 points to be divided divided between partner partner and RHO. If I have a good long suit, 7 or 8 points from partner may be enough for a game (or a penalty pass with with strength in LHO’s suit). suit). So I would double or bid a suit suit and hope for the best. With a good long suit, I might bid with a little little less, but not much. Unless game is somewhat somewhat likely, bidding bidding is not worth the risk. There is an exception exception to my last statement. statement. If the opponents open a weak two bid in hearts or diamonds (yes, there are still players who play weak two bids in diamonds), if you have a weak two bid in a higher ranking suit, you can bid it. With that exception I don’t reopen with 9 or 10 points, assuming that my partner is trap-passing trap-passing with 15 or so. If my RHO opens one of a suit, suit, which is passed around to me, it is worthwhile worthwhile to compete compete for the part-score. At this level there there is less risk than at the three or four four level. However, there is a substantial substantial risk when LHO has bid 1♠ and I hold a singleton singleton or doubleton doubleton heart. Where are the the hearts? If partner has them, he is probably p robably weak or he would have h ave overcalled or doubled. If opener has them, he may rebid 2♥ and his partner, with ♠x ♥Kxxxx ♦Jxx ♣xxxx, may raise raise to game. Let’s say I have a notrump type of hand (not necessarily with a stopper in the opponent’s suit), I can bid 1NT with 11-15 points over a minor minor or 12-16 points over a major. major. If I don’t have a stopper, perhaps partner will. will. The reason for for the slightly different range is that with 15 or more points I can double and probably and probably rebid 1NT over partner’s bid of one of a major but probably have to rebid 2NT over 2 of a minor if I want to bid notrump. Most notrump bids have have ranges of 3 points, like 12-14 or 15-17. 15-17. If the range is 5 points like 11-15 11-15 or 12-16, an invitation invitation may may result in a minus score when when the More Accurate Bidding | 69
notrump bidder is at the bottom of his h is range, or missing game when he is at the top. Bobby Wolff has suggested suggested a solution, solution, which which helps sometimes. With or without a 4 card major, the partner of the notrump bidder bids 2♣ as a form of Stayman. With the bottom bottom 2 points the notrump bidder bidder bids 2♦. If 11-12 points is not enough for game, his partner bids a 4 card major at the 2 level or bids 2NT without a 4 card major. major. With the next 2 points (13 or 14 if the range was 11-15) he makes his natural bid at the 2 level—2 of his major if he has a 4 card major, 2NT otherwise, and at the very top of his range, bids 3 of a major or 3NT. The same progression applies if the range was 12-16, except that you start one point higher.
70 | Marshall Miles
HANDS TO TEST YOUR BIDDING JUDGMENT You may have seen some of the following hands before or very similar ones if you read my prior book It’s book It’s Your Call . But they were good hands to illustrate illustrate a point, and I give give a fuller explanation explanation of my reasons in this book.
1.
Both sides vulnerable, imps
You 1♥ ?
Opponent 4♠
Partner dbl
Opponent pass
What call do you make with ♠ – ♥AQ7543 ♦Kx ♣Q7654?
2. Neither vulnerable, vulnerable, matchpoints matchpoints You 1♥ ?
Opponent 2♣
Partner 2♠
Opponent pass
What call do you make with ♠ – ♥AK876 ♦1053 ♣K10843?
3.
Opponents vulnerable, matchpoints
Opponent 1♦
You ?
Opponent
Partner
What call do you make with ♠AKQ10762 ♥A84 ♦J105 ♣ – ? How do you plan to follow up with this hand?
4.
Both vulnerable, imps
Opponent 1♠
You ?
Opponent
Partner
What call do you make with ♠8 ♥5 ♦KQJ63 ♣AKQJ106?
More Accurate Bidding | 71
5.
Both vulnerable, imps
Opponent 2♥
Partner pass
Opponent 4♥
You ?
What call do you make with ♠AQ108 ♥Jx ♦A ♣KQ9653?
6.
Both vulnerable, imps
Opponent 1♠
Partner pass
Opponent 2♠
You ?
What call do you make with ♠ – ♥AQ652 ♦A10832 ♣A74?
7. North-South vulnerable, vulnerable, imps imps Opponent 3♣
Partner 3♦
Opponent pass
You ?
What call do you make with ♠A1052 ♥AK62 ♦83 ♣1052?
8. Neither vulnerable, vulnerable, imps Opponent 2♠
Partner 3♦
Opponent pass
You ?
What call do you make with ♠Q8 ♥QJ93 ♦105 ♣KQJ73?
9.
Both vulnerable, imps
Opponent
Partner
Opponent 1♥
You ?
What call do you make with ♠Q3 ♥AKJ83 ♦K ♣KJ973?
72 | Marshall Miles
10. Both vulnerable, matchpoints You 1♣
pass 3♥ pass
Opponent 1NT dbl dbl pass
Partner 2♥ * 3♦ pass dbl
Opponent pass pass 3♠ all pass
*shows hearts and a minor What do you lead from ♠A965 ♥KQ6 ♦107 ♣K9xx?
11. North-South vulnerable, matchpoints Opponent 1♥
Partner pass
Opponent 2♥
You ?
What call do you make with ♠8 ♥K7 ♦K987543 ♣K104?
12. East-West vulnerable, imps West North East South pass 1♣ pass 1♠ 2♦ pass pass ? What call do you make with ♠Axxx ♥Jxx ♦Q1098 ♣Kx?
13. Neither vulnerable, vulnerable, imps West North East South pass pass pass 1♦ pass 1♥ pass ? What call do you make with ♠xx ♥Ax ♦AKQxxxxxx ♣ – ?
More Accurate Bidding | 73
14. North-South vulnerable, vulnerable, imps imps West North East South 1♣ pass 1♥ pass 2♦ pass ? What call do you make with ♠ – ♥A1074 ♦AJ6 ♣J108432?
15. Both vulnerable, matchpoints East South West North pass 1♦ pass 1NT 2♣ ? What call do you make with ♠Jx ♥AKQ86 ♦AKQ654 ♣ –?
16. Neither vulnerable, vulnerable, imps West North East South pass 1♠ 2♠* ?
*hearts and a minor.
What call with ♠xx ♥K10x ♦x ♣AQJxxxx
17. North-South vulnerable, vulnerable, imps imps You are playing the Unbalanced diamond (similar to Precision but 1♣ shows 15 points or more more and a response of 1M can be made made on a four card card suit and is not forcing to game) North East South West 1♣ 1♦ 1NT 2♥ 3♣ pass 3♠ pass 3NT pass ? What call do you make with ♠KJ ♥754 ♦Q10xx ♣K1042
74 | Marshall Miles
18. North-South vulnerable, vulnerable, imps imps You are playing Precision South West North East 1♣* pass 2♦** 4♠ ?
*16+, artificial **natural, 5+ diamonds, 9+ points
What call do you make with ♠AK ♥xx ♦AKxxx ♣Q109x?
19. Both vulnerable, matchpoints What call would you make as dealer d ealer with ♠AK10963 ♥K7 ♦AJ5 ♣AJ?
20. Both vulnerable, imps West North East South 2♦* dbl pass ?
*weak two bid
What call do you make with ♠QJ1074 ♥A5 ♦KJ109 ♣104?
21. North-South vulnerable, vulnerable, imps imps East South West North 2♠ ? What call do you make with ♠A ♥6 ♦KQJ10752 ♣KQJ7
22. North-South vulnerable, vulnerable, matchpoints matchpoints North East South West 1♠ 2♦ ? What call do you make with ♠KJ74 ♥AQ72 ♦K863 ♣10?
More Accurate Bidding | 75
23. Neither vulnerable, vulnerable, matchpoints matchpoints East South West North 3♥ ? What call do you make with ♠AQ ♥7 ♦AJ96532 ♣KQJ
24. Neither vulnerable, vulnerable, imps North East South West 1♣ pass 1♦ pass 2NT pass ? What call do you make with ♠A654 ♥AJ72 ♦AQJ10 ♣K?
25. Both vulnerable, imps South West North East 1♠ 2♥ 3♣ pass 3♠ pass 4♥ pass ? What call do you make with ♠KQJ1063 ♥J63 ♦KQ7 ♣5?
26. Neither vulnerable, vulnerable, imps West North East South 1♣ pass 1♥ pass 2♥ dbl pass ? What call do you make with ♠Q42 ♥962 ♦AK952 ♣92?
27.
West North East South 1♥ pass 2♣ pass 2♥ pass 2♠ pass ?
What call do you make with ♠107 ♥AQJ10742 ♦A8 ♣74?
76 | Marshall Miles
28.
South West North East 1♦ 1♥ dbl pass ?
What call do you make with ♠A65 ♥KJ102 ♦AK742 ♣Q?
29.
North East South South West 1♣ 1♥ 2♣ 2♥ pass pass ?
What call do you make with ♠A108 ♥9 ♦Q8764 ♣J852?
30.
South West North East 1♥ pass 2NT* pass 4♥ pass 4NT pass 5♥ pass 6♥ all pass
What do you lead from ♠1095 ♥Q ♦J9764 ♣A973?
More Accurate Bidding | 77
MY ANSWERS 1.
It is hard to believe, but a pass pass would result in an 1100 point set. set. Partner didn’t have to have any tricks in trumps, but he actually has three spade tricks, and we had four other winners. But I bid 5♣, which was down one. I think a 5♣ bid would be reasonable if I had something like ♣Q109xx or ♣QJxxx, but I figured to have two losers opposite most club holdings like ♣Axx or ♣Kxx. I think with with such a weak suit, suit, I should should have passed, expecting a one or two trick penalty. Declarer over preempted, and a 3♠ bid by him would have been more reasonable.
2.
Most people bid 2NT in a bidding panel and expressed their disgust with the opening 1♥ bid. I think it was reasonable in a strong club system. system. I passed a forcing bid bid because I figured that if I bid 2NT, that would just be the beginning of my my troubles. troubles. What should I do if partner rebid rebid 3♦ (which he would have have bid next) In the district district 23 panel no one else else passed, and one of the the panelists talked about how a pass would lose lose partner’s confidence, and he would be jumping to game game in the future, future, when he shouldn’t, to avoid being being dropped in a forcing forcing bid. In the district 22 panel three people passed. Incidentally 2♠ was the last makeable bid. I think losing partner’s partner’s confidence is an overstated overstated worry. He is going to bid correctly so that if there is a disaster, it won’t be HIS fault. Of course, if too many people hear hear about this hand, it might might become harder to get good teammates. teammates.
3.
I think a double, followed by a minimum bid in spades is the best way to describe this hand. Usually this this sequence will be based on more more high cards and fewer spades. spades. One of the panelists panelists said, “I hope no one is considering a notrump contract.” Well, I was. was. What if partner bids 2♣, followed by 2NT over my 2♠ bid? I would gladly raise to 3NT with my eight trick contribution. contribution. I would also raise raise to 3NT if he responded 1NT. 1NT. If partner can bid notrump either immediately or belatedly, we must have a diamond stopper, and I am more worried about a diamond ruff in a spade contract than that the opponents will run the club suit against us in a notrump contract.
4.
I think the best bid is 5♣, which was the bid made by our North opponent with this this hand. If his partner has an ace, 5♣ is probably cold. If he doesn’t have an ace, it is quite likely that East-West can make four of a major since any finesses finesses declarer takes will will work. I don’t know how to invite a game so that partner will bid it with an ace or reject it without an ace. It is very unlikely unlikely that the hand will make more more tricks in diamonds than in clubs. Ironically, Ironically, it can, because the opening leader leader had a
78 | Marshall Miles
singleton diamond, which was led by me. But my partner said he couldn’t believe that anyone would bid that way with this hand, so, upon winning the ace, he failed failed to give me a ruff. I tactfully said that I would have bid the same way as my opponent, and why would I lead a diamond if it were not a singleton? singleton? Especially since I never make an illogical illogical lead! He was was not convinced. convinced. Seriously, I think this is the type of hand where an effort to describe it is not likely to work. work. The opponents can use the bidding bidding space more effectively than your side can. And the defense and declarer play would be easier easier for the opponents if you you were able to show 5-6 distribution in the minors. 5.
If you have an eight card fit in both a major and a minor, it is usually easier to take ten tricks in in the major than eleven eleven tricks in the minor. Not always, by any means, means, but usually. What are the chances that partner will hold four or more more spades? West should hold six hearts hearts for his vulnerable weak two bid, while his partner probably holds four since he can’t be overloaded in high cards. cards. That suggests that West West is probably shorter in spades than is his partner, especially since he probably has three or four diamonds. If anyone has four or more more spades, it is probably RHO. But if RHO has four hearts and at least least four diamonds, diamonds, he is is not likely to hold hold four spades. So it seems seems as though neither opponent is likely to hold hold length in spades. spades. As it happens, partner partner has ♠J9xx ♥x ♦Kxxxxx ♣Jx, and if you play in clubs, you can’t get to the dummy to take the spade finesse, so you are cold for eleven tricks in spades and only ten tricks tricks in clubs. So I believe believe you should bid 4♠.
6.
This hand is from the Australian Bridge magazine where Larry Cohen was the guest director for for a bidding panel. A footnote to the problem problem said, “2NT shows the minors; 3♠ asks for a stopper; 4 ♦ shows diamonds and hearts,” but Larry thought thought the conditions were were wrong. He recommends 2NT to show any any two suiter. Playing that way would would allow him to balance or pre-balance by bidding 2NT when holding ♠xx ♥KJxxx ♦x ♣AJ9xx, expecting his partner to bid the cheapest suit where he could stand to play opposite a 5 card suit. He said, “Since my primary goal in life is to bump the opponents from 2♠ to 3♠, why not employ 2NT to maximum use for any two two suiter?” Horrors! He convinced convinced me, so I am recommending that approach to you.
7.
This is a miserable miserable situation. When partner overcalls, overcalls, I normally normally require a decent five card suit to to bid it or transfer to it. it. But I have too good hand to pass, and nothing nothing attractive to bid. Raising diamonds diamonds by-passes 3NT and both majors, so 3♥ looks like like the best choice. And it works since partner has ♠KQxx ♥Qx ♦AJ9xxx ♣x. He would bid 3♠, which you More Accurate Bidding | 79
would raise to 4♠. We are lucky that my hearts were better than my spades. Would I have bid 3♥ or 3♠ if my majors were interchanged and partner had ♥KQxx?. 8.
I can hardly believe it! 11 out of 20 panelists panelists for Australian Australian Bridge bid 3NT! One of them said that is what Marshall Miles would would do. That’s defamation! Sometimes Sometimes I bid notrump with a long, solid solid suit without a stopper. But to bid notrump notrump without a stopper AND no obvious source source of tricks even if partner turns up with a stopper is too wild a bid for me. If partner has something like ♠Kx and ♦AKQxxx and another high card, he should have have bid 3NT himself. If partner partner has ♦AKxxxx and a stopper in spades, why must he have the ace of clubs rather than the ace or king of hearts? And it is matchpoints, matchpoints, not vulnerable at imps, imps, besides. If partner has the ace ace of hearts, a spade stopper and a decent (but not running) diamond suit, the the heart finesse is not likely likely to work. Despite 11 votes for 3NT and 8 for a pass, the director gave 100 points for the pass and 90 for 3NT. I didn’t know know he was allowed allowed to do that, but I sympathize with with what he did. Lest you think I am insulting insulting Australian bridge players, players, I should point out that three of the panelists panelists who voted for 3NT were top American experts and there was one top Canadian expert. My opinion is not altered by being shown the actual hands: If anyone is going to bid notrump, I think it should be North. ♠A953 ♥ — ♦AQJ92 ♣A985 ♠ J 10 7 6 4 ♥AK8 ♦K74 ♣62
♠K2 ♥ 10 8 7 5 4 2 ♦863 ♣ 10 4 ♠Q8 ♥QJ93 ♦ 10 5 ♣KQJ73
Needless to say, say, West’s 2♠ bid was decidedly weird. 9.
A pass is reasonable since it looks as though the opponents o pponents are in the wrong spot, and if you give them a chance, they may find a better spot. In a bidding panel a lot of panelists chose 2♣, saying that it is often right to bid your your long suit. suit. But that bid does not appeal to me at all. It gives
80 | Marshall Miles
you little chance of getting to, and making, game and it gives up the chance for a sizable sizable penalty. I like bidding 1NT best of all. all. 10. You may have have wondered why I gave you a lead problem. It is because I considered it a bidding bidding problem. problem. This was the hand:
♠KJ2 ♥5 ♦AKQ5 ♣AQ965 ♠A965 ♥KQ4 ♦74 ♣ K 10 4 3
♠73 ♥ A J 10 7 6 2 ♦ J 10 8 3 2 ♣ — ♠ Q 10 8 4 ♥983 ♦96 ♣J872
Partner has shown at least 5-5 in the red suits, and he has doubled spades. Quite likely it is is because he is void in clubs. He can scarcely have have very much in high cards, cards, so he must be doubling for a lead. lead. If you had six clubs, you would have figured figured that out right away. away. With only four, it requires confidence to trust partner’s partner’s double. Anyway, you should lead lead a low club. Partner will will ruff and lead a heart to your your queen. You give him him another ruff, probably by leading the ♣10 and he returns another heart, forcing the dummy to ruff. ruff. No matter what declarer declarer does, he has to lose two more tricks tricks for minus minus 200. If you failed failed to lead a club club on opening lead, the play becomes complicated, but declarer should prevail if he cashes two high diamonds to remove a safe exit for declarer before giving up the lead to the ace of trumps. It is hard to visualize partner with a void in clubs when you have only four, but nothing else makes sense from the bidding. 11. This is a very close question, whether to bid 3♦ or not. In a bidding panel a slight majority majority bid 3♦ because they thought defending against 2♥ would probably give them anywhere from 20% to 35% of the matchpoints, so they had little little to to lose. lose. The fact fact that that partner had not not overcalled 1♠ was encouraging to some. some. Partner probably has length in spades, but perhaps only jack high with his high cards elsewhere.
More Accurate Bidding | 81
12. Obviously, you would like to double for penalty, but unfortunately, unfortunately, a double would not be for penalty, so the best you can do is to pass and hope for a two trick set. 13. Bid 6♦. If partner has as little as ♥KQxx and nothing else, you should make it unless unless a spade is led. Is there any any reason to expect a spade lead rather than a club lead? The fact that the opponents have not entered the bidding strongly suggests that partner partner has a better hand than either either opponent. A slam may be cold with with any lead, and it is very likely likely to make if a spade isn’t led. When a slam is probable probable but you have no way (or none that I can think of) to find out for sure whether you can make it or not, I think your best call is to bid slam directly, without giving the opponents a clue regarding your distribution or location of high cards. 14. One pair just jumped to 6♣ with ♠ — ♥A1074 ♦AJ6 ♣J108432, which seems to me me like a give-up give-up bid. It would be different if you you had interference and just had to guess what to do, but there is no reason to think the opponents will interfere if they haven’t already done so. If you bid 3♣, which is forcing, partner will bid 3 ♠, almost surely showing 3-14-5 distribution, and you can bid Blackwood to find out for sure about the ace of spades and either the king of spades or king of diamonds. diamonds. The other pair did start off that way, but cue bid 4♦ over 3♠ (big hand letting the weaker hand take control) control) instead of taking control control himself. Partner had ♠AKx ♥x ♦Qxxx ♣AKQxx. 15. This hand resembles hand 13. You may be cold for for a slam with any lead. You have an excellent excellent chance if a spade is not led. The club overcall increases increases your chances considerably. considerably. It is not likely, but partner partner could have had 3-3-2-5 3-3-2-5 or 3-3-1-6 distribution for for his 1NT bid. The overcall makes it very unlikely that partner has more clubs than diamonds, so partner’s partner’s distribution is probably probably 3-3-4-3. RHO probably has some high club honors for his overcall, which makes it less likely that he has one or two high spade honors. honors. Partner is fairly fairly likely to have the ace and king of spades. On this bidding, the odds are that LHO will will lead a club. You may argue argue that LHO knows knows you are expecting expecting a club lead, and you do, but that doesn’t mean that a club lead is either illogical or unlikely. You might have the doubleton doub leton ace, and leading something else could easily easily be wrong. You have an extra chance chance if a spade is is not led. Do you see it? You can pull pull the trumps trumps and run your hearts, hearts, discarding two spades from the the dummy! As it happens, dummy dummy is ♠Qxx ♥Jxx ♦Jxxx ♣Kxx. I kibitzed this this hand on the internet, internet, and South South did jump to 6♦, and he made made his contract. If he had tried tried to be scientific, scientific, and had bid and rebid his heart suit (perhaps hoping to find the ace-king
82 | Marshall Miles
of spades or two black aces), he probably would have been defeated by a spade lead. 16. Why not use your your opponent’s convention convention against him? him? RHO has shown shown hearts and a minor. minor. You know which which minor he has, but his partner partner doesn’t. You may be cold for 3NT with with any lead, or you may may have no play for 3NT with with any lead. lead. But you surely have a better chance to make it if a diamond is not led. I think you should bid 3NT directly. directly. Since LHO doesn’t know which minor his partner has, he will probably lead a heart, where you you have a sure stopper, stopper, possibly a double stopper. If partner has something something like ♠AKJxx ♥Jxx ♦A10x ♣xx. You may steal a game. Will RHO know to win the ace of hearts hearts and switch to to a diamond? Will he believe believe you bid 3NT 3NT with a singleton singleton small small in diamonds? 17. Perhaps you thought it unfair to use a strong club on this problem and the next one, but I have told you enough about the system for you to use your judgment. judgment. I thought it was safe to bid 3♠ since your 1NT bid should deny a four card major and presumably you are showing a spade stopper or value and denying a heart stopper. stopper. Partner interpreted interpreted your your bid that way. way. But should you pass or invite a slam by showing club support? I think partner’s partner’s 3♣ bid should show a six card (or longer) suit, since he would tend to raise raise your notrump bid with a somewhat balanced hand. Partner held ♠A10xx ♥AK ♦x AJ9xxx, and you are cold for 6♣ unless the clubs are 3-0, 3-0, and even then you will probably probably make it. If you show your club support, partner will bid 6 ♣. If he has two small diamonds (unlikely on this bidding), he should bid 4NT (natural). 18. Pass. If partner has a singleton or void in spades, your ♠AK won’t be particularly valuable valuable in diamonds. diamonds. Partner might might have something something like ♠x ♥QJx ♦QJxxxx ♣Axx or ♠ — ♥K109x ♦Q109xx ♣KJxx, in which case 4NT would be a better contract than 5♦. How can you hope to get to 4NT and play it there or at least least suggest 4NT as a final final contract? If you bid 4NT now, partner partner will probably interpret interpret it as Blackwood. Blackwood. If you you pass and bid diamonds diamonds next round, that would show a better hand than than bidding 5♦ right away. away. But if you you pass and partner doubles, doubles, I think think a 4NT bid should be natural. That is what I would hope for. for. 19. This and the following problem are both from 1964. I think you should bid 2NT, and 35 out of 58 panelists panelists made this this bid. Recently I used a similar hand in a bidding panel and less than half the panel approved of this bid, but I don’t understand why. Admittedly, Admittedl y, there is slightly more reason to open 2NT with with tenaces in three suits rather rather than just one. In both cases, if you you open 1♠, partner will probably be too weak for a 2/l More Accurate Bidding | 83
response, and will respond 1NT (if he bids at all). Usually I think modern bidding is greatly greatly superior to to the bidding half a century ago, but not in this case. 20. I think you should bid 3NT. Your diamond holding is great for notrump and terrible for spades, and you need one more trick for game in spades. Yet there were 27 votes for 4♠ and only 13 for 3NT. There were 17 votes for a pass, which is reasonable, if you are in doubt about being able to make make 4♠. The votes that that made no sense to to me were were 5♠ (when I have doubts about making four), and four panelists voted for a cue bid in diamonds to be followed by 4♠ as “the best way to invite a slam without going past game.” 21. I consider this this a three loser hand. I don’t worry worry about the ♣7 being a loser. The nice thing about about this hand is that the only winners partner can count on as being winners winners are the three aces. Frequently partner can’t tell what will be a winner and what won’t. In situations like this I bid one more trick than I can count on winning and expect partner to pass with one sure winner. With two sure winners winners I expect him to raise raise one trick, and with three sure winners winners I expect him to raise raise two tricks. In other words, if partner has the ace or king of trumps, I don’t expect him to raise a five of a minor bid to to six. And my assumption assumption is that an ace is a winner, even though it could be opposite opposite a void. Majors are are different. If you bid five of a major, partner will assume that you have 11 tricks in your own hand and can raise with one sure winner in trumps (An ace might be opposite a void and, unless the bidding indicates differently, I would assume that an ace of a five card or longer suit is not a winner). This hand is from from 1963. Almost everyone everyone played 4NT as Blackwood, as indicated by the panelists’ comments, while almost no one would today; it would show a minor two-suiter. 22. This hand was also also from 1963. 1963. The top vote went went to 2♥, while today almost no one would respond 2♥ over 1♠ (whether there was competition or not) not) with a four four card suit. I would make make a negative double, not because I am looking for a heart fit, but so that I can bid 4 ♠ next round, and partner will know it shows a good hand rather than a preempt, and it it might lead to to a slam. 23. This hand is also from 1963. The top vote was for a double, which which still looks best to me. It gives you a chance to get to 3NT 3NT or to make a penalty pass. It is unlikely that partner will bid more more than three or four spades, and if he does, you can bid 5♦, which I think should be natural rather than a cue bid. I don’t think a double would be popular popular today today because you have only two spades. 84 | Marshall Miles
24. The opponents have 3 or 4 points which, theoretically could include an ace or king. I think that is very unlikely, unlikely, but it can’t hurt to to bid Gerber. Everyone knows that 4♣ asks for aces. Most know that a subsequent 5♣ asks for kings since you might bid 4NT to play there if two aces were missing. As it happens, you have a 4-4 4-4 fit in both majors, which which you could find out about by bidding 3♦, but I think you are safer not to play in a suit. Partner’s hand is ♠KQJx ♥K10xx ♦Kx ♣AQx, so if you play in 7♥ you have to to guess who has the queen. queen. You might need three or four heart tricks, in which case you would have to guess who had the queen, but you would jeopardize the grand slam if you misguess the hearts despite 13 top tricks. 25. Perhaps we were just lucky since the 3 ♥ bid didn’t have to be a splinter, because we hadn’t shown a suit suit agreement. But it almost almost surely showed a heart control. I guessed what partner had in mind and bid 4NT, followed by a correction correction to 6♠ when partner responded 6♣, not intending it to show 2 aces and a void. When there is competition competition you may have to to guess what to do with little bidding room available below the 3NT level. Partner held ♠A ♥x ♦Axx ♣AK10xxxxx. We were cold cold for 6♣ also since the clubs split 2-2, but 6♠ was obviously obviously our best contract. If the opponents lead another heart, you have to ruff with the ace and hope the spades split no worse than 4-2. 4-2. If the opponents lead a trump trump at trick two, you can pull the trumps and establish the clubs with one ruff (if necessary). Consequently, it was a good slam. 26. In Bobby Wolff’s newspaper column he recommended a 4♦ bid, saying that partner must have a very good hand to come into a “live” auction, and you could easily easily have a game. game. I suppose partner could hold something like ♠A109x ♥x ♦Jxxxx ♣AKx. But he needs needs a perfect perfect fit to have a good play for game. If the belated double was was by Larry Cohen, he might have a much weaker hand than the one I just mentioned, and the double was an OBAR OBAR call. With the hand shown shown above, I would probably have overcalled 1♠, which might have shut out the heart suit, and is less risky than for partner to double later with something like ♠AJxx ♥Jx ♦QJxx ♣Kxx. 27. I think you should bid 4♥ since I don’t consider 3♥ as forcing. forcing. Even if I did, I would prefer to show partner, who is unlimited, that I have a good suit. Ironically, Ironically, one player player bid 4♥ and his partner, with ♠AKQx ♥K ♦Jxx ♣KQ10xx, passed, assuming that 4♥ was weaker than 3♥ (fast arrival), while at the other table, opener bid 3 ♥, which persuaded his partner to make make a slam try, try, but the final contract was 5♥ since the More Accurate Bidding | 85
responding hand was somewhat nervous about having only the singleton ♥K for trump trump support. Another example of what what is wrong with fast arrival. 28. Most of a bidding panel bid 2NT, which I think is the right bid but a slight stretch. stretch. I wouldn’t worry worry about having a singleton club after after partner’s negative negative double. He might might stretch to to double with 6 points and an unbid major, but should have at least 8 working points to compete with just the minors. 29. I would hate to sell out with this hand, but your clubs are not very good. When you could have made a negative double or bid spades at the onelevel, I think 2 ♠ should show a three card suit, and partner should not pass with fewer fewer than four spades. spades. The hand should play well when you can ruff with the three card suit. 30. Like hand 10, I consider this a bidding problem more than a lead problem. Declarer showed a minimum minimum opening bid without without a singleton or void. LHO knew from the the response to RKCB that the the queen of hearts was missing, along with an ace, so he probably would not have bid a slam unless he had five card heart support. He also needed at least second round control in the remaining suits—either a king or a singleton. singleton. So he should have either the king king or a singleton club. If he has the king of clubs, and either either he or his partner has the jack, but not the queen, your best chance to set the slam is to rd underlead your ace of clubs (and you might as well lead 3 best). Declarer had ♠Jx ♥AKxxx ♦Axx ♣Jxx, and dummy had ♠AKQx ♥J10xxx ♦KQ ♣Kx. If you had waited for declarer to lead clubs himself, he would have discarded two of his clubs on the spades— and wouldn’t have to guess who had the ace and who had he queen.
86 | Marshall Miles
ADVANCED ISBN 978-1-55494-515-3
ON THE CUTTING EDGE OF BIDDING Tis is not a book for beginners, and will not bore you with rehashing things you already know. know. Some of the topics are somewhat controversial, and as always Marshall Miles urges his own, often original, point of view. view. You may not be persuaded by everything he recommends, but perhaps you will adopt part of it, and it won’t won’t hurt you to discover how some other people play play,, even if you refuse to play that way yourself. Here are some of the topics discussed: • • • • • • • • • • • •
Game invitations after a raise of opener’s opener’s major Fast arrival and picture bids When the opponents double a transfer or Stayman Mini splinters Mini Roman 2 Te Kaplan Interchange Rubens advances of overcalls Ways W ays to show two-suiters Te Wolff signoff Inverted minors Playing in the opponents’ suit Balancing
As he often does, Miles ends this book with an ‘It’ ‘It’s Your Your Call’ bidding quiz, with detailed discussion of options and the rationale for his own choices.
(California), though now in his eighties, is still regarded as one of the world’s leading MARSHALL MILES
bidding theorists. theorists. His long and successful successful playing career includes a World Senior Teams Championship in 2004, and his book How to Win at Duplicate Bridge is is considered among the all-time classics on the game.
AN HONORS eBOOK FROM MASTER POINT PRESS
