[jillybean]

BBO Bridge, no agreements

---

[P_Marlowe]

4H?

[helene_t]

I tad strong for 4♥ I think. Maybe 3♦ first.

With David I play transfer responses to this double which is nice when you want to make a forcing bid showing hearts. Playing standard methods I think 3♦ followed by 4♥ is adequate, should show a mild slam try and that is what I have.

[HardVector]

3♦, planning to rebid 4♥. 3♠ from partner after the 3♦ bid is going to put me into the tank, however. It would be nice to have a better agreement so I could bid 3♥ as forcing then raise 3♠ to 4 (which would show my hand perfectly), but with no agreement, you're going to have to guess.

[P_Marlowe]

helene_t, on 2025-June-16, 13:05, said:

I tad strong for 4♥ I think. Maybe 3♦ first.

With David I play transfer responses to this double which is nice when you want to make a forcing bid showing hearts. Playing standard methods I think 3♦ followed by 4♥ is adequate, should show a mild slam try and that is what I have.

The only problem I have with 3D is the "no agreements" part of the original post.
The problem is, if I have no agreements, I have no idea, what p is telling me, how he takes
my subsequent bids. But I agree, I am quite heavy for the 4H bid.

[Huibertus]

Assuming it's only EW that have no agreements and 2♦ is weak in ♦ I'm tempted to bid 6♥. Surely X is takeout even without agreement. So 6♥ will either be cold, be down or be depending on the lead. I realize this is optimistic without any cooperation from partner, but without agreements we don't know how to get the information we need anyway, so let's not give the opponents any too.

[Cyberyeti]

helene_t, on 2025-June-16, 13:05, said:

I tad strong for 4♥ I think. Maybe 3♦ first.

With David I play transfer responses to this double which is nice when you want to make a forcing bid showing hearts. Playing standard methods I think 3♦ followed by 4♥ is adequate, should show a mild slam try and that is what I have.

With no agreements 3♦ may work, even with minimal agreements I agree to play leb here

[mike777]

Where are the diamonds?
Did I mix some in with my hearts?
I can't imagine stopping short of 6H
I guess I will start with 3D
7c or 7Nt or 7H are still on the table

[hrothgar]

Complicated hand

Partner rates to have a NT oriented hand that is too strong for a direct NT overcall.

We could easily make 7
We might have trouble in 6 if partner has wasted values in Diamonds and short hearts.

I don't see much alternative to 3♦

The real question is what to rebid after the expected 3N

[jillybean]

I assume after 3♦ West would bid 3nt

I bid 6♥ and found partner with 4144, fortunately the right cards and heart split.

---

Lead 7♠

[mikeh]

Firstly, bridge is always a bit of a guessing game when one lacks relevant agreements

Secondly, many players, at least in NA, play lebensohl over a double of a weak 2M and I suspect that almost all of them play it over a weak 2D.

But most players don’t have good agreements in connection with lebensohl. Here’s a question for lebensohl players to ask their partners: after the double of 2D, what is the difference between 2N then 3H over the presumed 3C, on the one hand, and an immediate 3H on the other?

The same issue arrives after (2H ) x (P) ….. 2N then 3S should convey a different meaning than a jump to 3S.

The answer depends on agreements. I play that a jump to 3 of a suit is forcing, and going through 2N is invitational, but other agreements are plausible.

So for me this is trivial. I bid a forcing 3H.

Absent an agreement, one just bids 3D then one’s next move depends on partner’s bid. Certainly, one is thinking slam or grand.

Btw, the double is an incredibly stupid call. Why not 2N? That is accurate on strength and on diamond values, and the only ‘lie’ is that one has a stiff heart Queen. A holding of xx is perfectly permissible for 2N, and if partner insists on hearts, the stiff Queen is almost surely at least as useful as xx would be. Doubling for takeout with 4=1=4=4 is stupid. The hand isn’t good enough to double then bid notrump…not to mention having no source of tricks.

Ok, the double worked out when partner guessed to bid 6H and everything broke. Bad players see that the action worked so conclude that the action was correct. Improving players are embarrassed that, this time, the silly action worked and resolve to try to be better next time. Good players sigh and, if they didn’t already know, conclude that West is a weak player.

[jillybean]

helene_t, on 2025-June-16, 13:05, said:

I tad strong for 4♥ I think. Maybe 3♦ first.

With David I play transfer responses to this double which is nice when you want to make a forcing bid showing hearts. Playing standard methods I think 3♦ followed by 4♥ is adequate, should show a mild slam try and that is what I have.

Playing transfer responses do you transfer then bid diamonds?

Mike - congratulations to your team at the Sunday Swiss, Penticton. Any interesting hands?

[helene_t]

jillybean, on 2025-June-16, 20:49, said:

Playing transfer responses do you transfer then bid diamonds?

Yes but it is possible that opposite a simple accept (the transfer promises invitational strength or better so the accept shows a minimum) I just bid 4H.

With the actual hand (I wouldn't have doubled with the West hand but ok) W will bid 3NT and then I could bid 4♦. This is just a slam try with hearts it doesnt show the diamond shortage.

But I expect 19-20 or so with 2-3 hearts for the 3nt bid so I will probably drive to slam, I think 5♦ is exclusion here.

Trumps are 3-3 so we get awarded for West's undisciplined double.

[mw64ahw]

As mikeh says 2N seems reasonable, but now I'm pondering what I would do swapping the Q♥ for Q♣?
Perhaps X and now playing transfers 3♦-3N as per helene-t.
It's a fine differentiation between the two.

[Huibertus]

With East I probably would have done the same.

I would have passed the West hand and passed again when East reopens with a X, scoring +500 which beats all games. Should east keep it open by bidding ♥ we still have all options open but are in a better spot to prevent a slam dependent on a 3-3 break + no ♣ ruff trick 2, by not bidding it, or potentially by bidding 6♣.

[Cyberyeti]

(2♦)-X-P-2N (weak with clubs or any good hand, we play our lebensohl the other way round)
3N (too good versus weak with clubs to play 3♣)-

and now we're playing a heart slam as we don't play 5N pick a slam.

(2♦)-2N-P-3♦(transfer)
3♥-4♣

and now we're playing a club slam

[pescetom]

 Cyberyeti, on 2025-June-17, 05:06, said:

(2♦)-2N-P-3♦(transfer)
3♥-4♣

and now we're playing a club slam

I would have bid 3NT rather than complete the transfer, but now 4♣ follows anyway.

The fly in this ointment is how to reach club slam after the suit is introduced at 4 level. I've played at various times that:
- 4♦ is RKCB in clubs
- 4♦ is diamonds control in clubs
- 4♦ is an artificial cue agreeing clubs
- everything is natural and one just jumps to 6♣ (or corrects to hearts or NT).

Each has its pros and cons, but I'm curious about what others prefer here. The only agreement I would refuse to play is 4NT RKCB clubs, which is a SNAFU even with 1403 and no possible desire to play 4NT.

[Cyberyeti]

pescetom, on 2025-June-17, 06:14, said:

I would have bid 3NT rather than complete the transfer, but now 4♣ follows anyway.

The fly in this ointment is how to reach club slam after the suit is introduced at 4 level. I've played at various times that:
- 4♦ is RKCB in clubs
- 4♦ is diamonds control in clubs
- 4♦ is an artificial cue agreeing clubs
- everything is natural and one just jumps to 6♣ (or corrects to hearts or NT).

Each has its pros and cons, but I'm curious about what others prefer here. The only agreement I would refuse to play is 4NT RKCB clubs, which is a SNAFU even with 1403 and no possible desire to play 4NT.

We play 2N-3♦-3N showing heart support, so that's out, and we play 4♦ as kickback.

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2025-June-16, 20:49, said:

Playing transfer responses do you transfer then bid diamonds?

Mike - congratulations to your team at the Sunday Swiss, Penticton. Any interesting hands?

We had an amusing board against Mitch Dunitz….but amusing mainly because of a board against him and Mark Itabashi in the Pairs the day before.

So….you hold xx AQ109xxx Axx x. Red v white.
“
Itabashi, known for operating, opens 3S at favourable. Partner passed in tempo but his body language implied that he had something. I wasn’t counting seconds but I think his pause was about 10 seconds, which is what we aim for when an opp jumps (we pause every time even if the auction makes it clear that we have no problem, but in obvious cases we may pause only a few seconds).

Dunitz raises to 4S and it’s my turn.

Clearly 5H is very dangerous. One could easily go for 800 or more, if Dunitz was bidding to make, based on power, and even 500 will be a bad board.

But….you’re playing the best pair in the field. I’m not a fan of Itabashi and I’ve seen him misplay a hand against me a couple of years ago….but…he’s a fine player and far better than all but a handful of others in the field, so defending is unlikely to be better than average minus. Tye question isn’t whether 5H is the right action but whether one should talk oneself out of it because of the slight, but noticeable, ‘twitch’ by partner.

My approach, when I personally think that my action is clear, absent any possible UI, is to take the action and, if the opps are upset, let the TD deal with it. Otoh, if I think the action is marginal, I try to take the action least suggested by the UI.

I am sure I’d never pass….I doubt I’d pass against weak players but I’d never pass against two pros at mps. So I bid 5H.

Dummy was a good 1=2=5=5 and I made 6. Several pairs, including our teammates for the next day, reached the good slam….Itabashi had been operating with a good weak 2S bid, over which partner has enough to bid 3D.

Itabashi called the TD who returned some time later (during a later round) and said that she’d polled five players, none of whom bid 5H.

She accepted that partner would have reopened with 4N but said that 3 of the 5 polled would have bid 5D…..I assure yiu I would have I’d bid at mps.So we got a 6 mp penalty

Btw, Dunitz told me that he also would have bid 5H, as has literally every good player we’ve spoken to. I have no idea who the director polled, but the reality is that most directors don’t know how to play bridge at a high level and don’t know how to assess who is a bona fide expert rather than an ok player who plays a lot (and thus has lots of masterpoints)

The outcome was irrelevant….we finished 3rd and were a long way out of even second, while Itabashi and Dunitz didn’t do well.

So fast forward one day. We’re leading the event but it’s early. Dunitz has his client, Itabashi is with his at the other table.

White v red you pick up KQxx J98x Ax xxx. Two passes to you.

This is easy for me since we play 10-13 1N on this seat at these colours.

P (P) 1N (x) 3S (4H) to me.

Dunitz is on my left.

We play multi and partner is an aggressive player. 3S shows 6+ and is ‘to play’. That wouldn’t necessarily be ‘weak’ if he were not a passed hand….he could easily have 9-10 hcp unpassed since the purpose is to create pressure on hands where we are very unlikely to have game. The lack of a 2D opening suggests partner has an unusual hand, but otoh I have some defence and declarer is the weakest of the 4 players…so I broke tempo. I paused and passed…in hindsight a clear mistake and at the time a close decision.

Partner saved me by bidding 4S in the face of my BIT. Both Dunitz and I laughed out loud….I said ‘I knew Mitch would enjoy this’.

He bid 5H which fared poorly on the heart split…I didn’t double…it would have made with the heart 10 in Dunitz’s hand and diamonds broke 4-1…partner was Jxxxxx void KQxxx xx and 4S was cold.

We had a very enjoyable set. On one hand, Dunitz was dummy with good holdings in all suits. Partner won trick one and paused for thought. Dunitz, who hadn’t seen anyone’s hand other than his own, told Gord he ‘have to play a spade’…into Dunitz’s A10x. Gord switched to a low spade…I held xxxx so the 10 won.

Next hand, Dunitz is declarer and I’m in the tank about my switch. Dunitz took four cards from his hand, lay them face down and told me to pick one…I had to lead whichever suit I selected.

We won comfortably.

Dunitz is a really good guy….very good but also extremely pleasant to play against. He was gracious…he said afterwards that he’d never had so much fun while losing a match. I think he was awarded the ACBL sportsman award (not sure of the term…sportsman sounds somewhat sexist) and I see why.


Btw, my team also won the opening KO….but I was reduced to being the npc for the semis and final….I had some seizures and was hospitalized for a couple of days. Fortunately my friend, Ernie Tradewell, was available to fill in he and my partner, Gord McOrmond, had never played together (they knew each other in university 50 years ago and may have played a bit then). Ernie played great and ‘my’ team won….James (Jeopardy) Holzhauer- Piotr Klimowicz were the other pair).

As for me…no issues since getting out of hospital…having had a CT scan, an MRI, and ecg, an eeg and being almost drained of blood for blood tests….no diagnosis yet and Debbie had to do all of the drive home since I’m not supposed to drive pending diagnosis.

Further btw, Gord won three events….his third place with me, in the pairs, was his only failure, lol. That’s his second 3 win Regional in the last three years…not bad for a guy who plays at most 3-4 Regionals a year and often only two.

[hrothgar]

Hoping that medical issue turns out to be nothing