“Stromin Norman” Gath, affectionately known in Rochester, N.Y. bridge circles as the “Mad Rhino”, was a friend of mine for years before we realized that we both played bridge. Bad health took him down about 2 years ago, but he went out like a warrior on his shield, in touch with his bridge friends until the very end. Norm was a real Renaissance man with interests in everything from music, to antiques, to coins, to the stock market, Persian rugs, golf, bridge and more.
If Norm thought your bridge was within the “salvageable” range, he would send you his two favorite bridge books. Dee Brown’s “Two over One in a Nutshell”, a 2”x 3” miniature book covering all you need to know about 2/1 and “4 Suit Transfers”, a 32 page monograph by Ann Reese. What, you didn’t get them? That is not good! Mine contain a personal thanks and endorsement from the Rhino himself. Well, needless to say, I couldn’t go into this 4 Suit Transfer blog without a tear in my eye for the great Rhino and a bunch of pleasant memories.
Four Suit Transfers operate after partner has opened 1 No Trump. The first of the 2 transfers are actually just Jacoby Transfers with 5 card major suits which everybody understands today. According to “4 suit transfers” a super acceptance of a Jacoby Transfers (a jump in the transferred suit) shows 4 card support for the major, a maximum hand and at least one doubleton. Marty Bergen makes a super accept on little more than 4 card support for the major, since he has 9 trump and is properly aligned with the Law of Total Tricks. You can look in my recent blog archive for a post on “Super Accepts” that discusses this issue. The other two transfers are transfers to minor suits. Almost everybody in duplicate bridge has some system to transfer or relay the 1 No Trump opener to a minor suit.
One system for dealing with hands dominated by minor suits is Minor Suit Stayman. The actionable bid over 1 No Trump is 2 spades and it shows responder with 9+ minor suit cards, minimally 5-4 and 9+ hcps. There are detailed rebids by opener to show hand strength and distribution with the object of bidding game or slam in a minor suit or no trump. The bidding sequences are very specific and for me have never been easy to remember. Since this is not a post about Minor Suit Stayman, I will leave you to do your own research if you are interested.
Another popular system for minor suited hands is to agree that the response of 2 spades over 1 No Trump relays opener to 3 clubs, and from there responder sets the contract in either clubs by passing or bids 3 diamonds to play. The big advantage of this system is its simplicity. Easy to remember and hard to go wrong in the bidding, but other than “right siding” the hand so that opener becomes declarer, it doesn’t accomplish much. In his last newsletter Larry Cohen talks about “truck driver” bids. Bids that show no imagination and do not serve to further define either hand, using a sledge hammer where a scalpel might have been more appropriate. In these relays, opener does not know what suit you want to play in so it is difficult for him to offer any constructive help. You have turned opener into a relay robot and you are masterminding the hand. How good can that be?
When using 4 Suit Transfers the sequence 1NT/2 spades transfers opener to clubs. The sequence 1NT/2NT transfers opener to diamonds. Responder could have four different types of minor suit hands:
Transfer and Pass: x, xx, xxxx, QJTxxxx. If responder passes 1NT, opener will probably be playing the contract out of his own hand, never getting to the dummy. If you have never done that, take it from me that the contract is down 2 or 3. The hand rates to play better in 3 clubs, so bid 2 spades to transfer to clubs and pass.
Invitational: xx, xx, AJTxxx xxx. With 15-17 no trump openers, I usually figure partner for 3 ½ quick tricks. If opener holds Kxx of diamonds, we are surely favorites to make 3NT even though responder holds only 5 hcps. Responder bids 2NT transferring opener to diamonds. Note that in between 2NT and 3 diamonds, there is an unused bid of 3 clubs. In 4 Suit Transfers, opener’s bid of 3 clubs in this sequence (rather than 3 diamonds) is a ‘super acceptance” showing 3 card support with one of the top three honors in diamonds or 4 card diamond support. If opener has Kxx in diamonds he bids 3 clubs, and responder with new information bids 3 NT rather than 3 diamonds. Suppose opener held AQ, Axxx, Kxx, Axxx (17 hcps). Although the combined hands hold only 22 hcps, the no trump game makes most of the time. Perfect fit? Of course, I made it up, but it didn’t have to fit this well to have a good play for 3NT.
Game Values: AQx. xx, AQTxxx, xx. With 12 hcps, responder bids 2NT (a transfer to diamonds) showing his diamond suit and a distributional hand. If opener takes the transfer to 3 diamonds, responder bids 3NT showing game values. Opener apparently does not have Kxx in diamonds, but the hand is good enough to play in 3NT in any event. If opener shows Kxx in diamonds by bidding 3 clubs, responder would be rethinking his options.
Slam Interest: Axx, x, Kxx, AKxxxx (14 hcps). Assume opener holds Kxx, Ax, AQxxx, Qxx (15 hcps.). The bidding goes 1NT/ 2s (transfer to clubs) 2NT (super accept for clubs) 4c (ace of clubs – 3 clubs would be to play) 4d (ace of diamonds) 4h (ace of hearts) 6NT. If clubs split 3-1 or 2-2 and diamonds split 3-2 it will make 7 No Trump.
Notice how useful it can be to find a solid minor suit that will produce 6 tricks. One of Max Hardy’s favorite sayings was “fits take tricks.” Fits are only found through good communication. Four suit transfers with super acceptances permit this. Relays are just one man shows.
It should be noted that the super acceptance can be flip-flopped so that taking the in-between bid could say “no super accept” and bidding the transfer suit could say “super accept.” If you decide to do this, the opening one no trump bidder will be declaring the hand when he has a super acceptance and responder will be playing the hand when there is no super accept. There is no compelling evidence that one treatment is better than the other. Just reach agreement with your partner and stick to it.
You may have rejected this idea already saying “I don’t want to give up my 2 no trump invitational bid just to occasionally transfer to diamonds.” Good point, neither do I, but there is no need to give up anything. If you have whatever you consider an invitational 2 no trump hand, just bid 2 clubs (Stayman), even if you have no 4 card major. Opener will make some response representing his holding in majors, but no matter what he bids, if you don’t find a major fit you now bid 2 No Trump!!! This delayed 2NT is invitational and partner should alert at this point that you may not have a 4 card major.
By using the wide variety of bids that are available to us we are able to cover all situations. Four Suit Transfers are not a substitute for judgment, but they are calculated to provide you with information on which your judgment can be based. Did I get this right Norm?
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Opener Rebid Choices After 1NT Forcing
Many of my readers, like myself, are still stuck in the depths of “Intermediatesville” trying to get better as we learn from our mistakes. Some wag once wrote that in order for something to become a habit, you have to do it correctly 19 times. It is hard to find anything in bridge that you can do correctly 19 times other than pass, and even pass has its own problems. So it doesn’t hurt for us to reinforce basics one in a while. Here are some thoughts about responding to 1NT forcing bids.
Most duplicate players today play the 1NT response to one of a major as forcing for one round by an unpassed hand. That means that opener has to come up with one more bid. On a good day you will be delighted to come up with another bid reflecting your 6 card suit or extra values, on a bad day you will have some less appealing choices to make and wonder why you ever made this bid forcing. How about a little quick review? Music maestro!!
1. If you rebid your major suit, it shows a suit that is 6 cards in length and has no significant extras. A jump in the major suit shows 6 good cards in the bid major and 16+ hcps, but is non- forcing.
2. If the hand is 5233, you rebid your lower ranking 3 card minor.
3. If you opened 1 heart, a 2 spade rebid is still a reverse and shows 16+ hcps. Why is it a reverse? Because partner must now go to the 3 level to take a preference for your original suit. Don’t confuse this with 2/1 sequences where most players do not play reverses as showing extra values, just hand shape.
4. If you make a jump shift, it promises a hand of about 19 hcps or shape with equivalent playing strength. Definitely forcing!
5. A raise to 2NT shows a balanced hand of about18-19 hcps and almost forcing; pass it at your peril. Have a back up partner. If you're playing with your spouse, it is forcing!
Those were supposed to be easy choices, and reading this blog post counts as one of the 19 repetitions. With the basics behind you, take shot at these: You open 1 heart, your partner responds 1NT, your bid Syd! Remember that Max Hardy is looking over your shoulder from that big bridge table in the sky. Honk if you don't like it Max.
(i) KJxx, AQxxx, Jx, Qx
(ii) K4, AQJT9x, 5, QJ43
(iii) K4, QJ7643, 5, AQJ3
(iv) K4, AKQJ63, Q7, J95
On hand (i) you have 4 spades but to bid them would be a reverse – not with 13 hcps! In 2/1 game force, it is not systemically correct to rebid your 5 card heart suit, so you “suck it up” and bid 2 clubs. The rule says you bid your best 2 card minor and hope for the best. Somehow this often works out.
On hand (ii) you have a 6 card heart suit which is rebiddable, but also a 4 card club suit you could show. Note that hand (iii) has the same feature. How do you decide whether to show the club suit or just rebid your hearts? There is another rule for this. Here is the standard: Opener will only show the 4 card suit when the 6 card suit is not solid enough to play against a singleton. Opener bids 2 hearts with hand (ii) and 2 clubs with hand (iii). If you are responder and have a singleton in openers major (which happens with alarming frequency), it is important to understand the implication of opener rebidding a second suit. Opener is telling you that he does not have a 6 card major, or if he does it is not good enough to play against a single in your hand. If you have a single in opener’s major, you have 12 cards in the other suits. Remember opener’s bid of a new suit at the 2 level does not show extra values nor is it forcing, so you can pass, and with 4144 that may be the best thing to do. These situations come under the “catch all” that “sometimes you just gotta do what you gotta do.”
Hand (iv) is even more twisted. I would guess many readers would bid 3 hearts over 1NT forcing. You are not going to like that match point choice if the hand makes both 4NT and 4 spades. Opener should rebid 3NT showing 16-18 hcps, solid hearts, and no single or void. This asks responder to pass if his hand is balanced and otherwise correct to 4 hearts.
If you don’t like my analysis, the specimen hands or the responses send an e-mail to maxhardy@bridgeinheaven.god Be patient, he may not respond immediately. It may be more productive to write to me at tsolberg@tampabay.rr.com. If you are on my blog notice list, do not use the “reply” button unless you want the entire list to read your comments.
Most duplicate players today play the 1NT response to one of a major as forcing for one round by an unpassed hand. That means that opener has to come up with one more bid. On a good day you will be delighted to come up with another bid reflecting your 6 card suit or extra values, on a bad day you will have some less appealing choices to make and wonder why you ever made this bid forcing. How about a little quick review? Music maestro!!
1. If you rebid your major suit, it shows a suit that is 6 cards in length and has no significant extras. A jump in the major suit shows 6 good cards in the bid major and 16+ hcps, but is non- forcing.
2. If the hand is 5233, you rebid your lower ranking 3 card minor.
3. If you opened 1 heart, a 2 spade rebid is still a reverse and shows 16+ hcps. Why is it a reverse? Because partner must now go to the 3 level to take a preference for your original suit. Don’t confuse this with 2/1 sequences where most players do not play reverses as showing extra values, just hand shape.
4. If you make a jump shift, it promises a hand of about 19 hcps or shape with equivalent playing strength. Definitely forcing!
5. A raise to 2NT shows a balanced hand of about18-19 hcps and almost forcing; pass it at your peril. Have a back up partner. If you're playing with your spouse, it is forcing!
Those were supposed to be easy choices, and reading this blog post counts as one of the 19 repetitions. With the basics behind you, take shot at these: You open 1 heart, your partner responds 1NT, your bid Syd! Remember that Max Hardy is looking over your shoulder from that big bridge table in the sky. Honk if you don't like it Max.
(i) KJxx, AQxxx, Jx, Qx
(ii) K4, AQJT9x, 5, QJ43
(iii) K4, QJ7643, 5, AQJ3
(iv) K4, AKQJ63, Q7, J95
On hand (i) you have 4 spades but to bid them would be a reverse – not with 13 hcps! In 2/1 game force, it is not systemically correct to rebid your 5 card heart suit, so you “suck it up” and bid 2 clubs. The rule says you bid your best 2 card minor and hope for the best. Somehow this often works out.
On hand (ii) you have a 6 card heart suit which is rebiddable, but also a 4 card club suit you could show. Note that hand (iii) has the same feature. How do you decide whether to show the club suit or just rebid your hearts? There is another rule for this. Here is the standard: Opener will only show the 4 card suit when the 6 card suit is not solid enough to play against a singleton. Opener bids 2 hearts with hand (ii) and 2 clubs with hand (iii). If you are responder and have a singleton in openers major (which happens with alarming frequency), it is important to understand the implication of opener rebidding a second suit. Opener is telling you that he does not have a 6 card major, or if he does it is not good enough to play against a single in your hand. If you have a single in opener’s major, you have 12 cards in the other suits. Remember opener’s bid of a new suit at the 2 level does not show extra values nor is it forcing, so you can pass, and with 4144 that may be the best thing to do. These situations come under the “catch all” that “sometimes you just gotta do what you gotta do.”
Hand (iv) is even more twisted. I would guess many readers would bid 3 hearts over 1NT forcing. You are not going to like that match point choice if the hand makes both 4NT and 4 spades. Opener should rebid 3NT showing 16-18 hcps, solid hearts, and no single or void. This asks responder to pass if his hand is balanced and otherwise correct to 4 hearts.
If you don’t like my analysis, the specimen hands or the responses send an e-mail to maxhardy@bridgeinheaven.god Be patient, he may not respond immediately. It may be more productive to write to me at tsolberg@tampabay.rr.com. If you are on my blog notice list, do not use the “reply” button unless you want the entire list to read your comments.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Tommy Passes 5th Grade Math but Flunks Match Point Duplicate
I got comments from all over the world on my 7NT adventure. Some suggested a competency hearing and some that I find a new hobby where I won’t disturb others. One person suggested that my math solutions are an insult to 5th graders; they are well beyond that stuff. Seems like just yesterday I was there learning long division!!
Another group of commentators suggested that the contract of 7NT was poor math in itself, since it was far from the best contract in a match point game. I don’t disagree with that but I have my justifications. First, I did say that it was the last board of the day. Second, we were a little desperate and things had not been going our way. Third, when I was learning bridge I played all the Swiss Teams and Knockouts I could find in a rush to life master. I love match points, but sometimes my IMP mentality gets the best of me. Finally, if I had not bid 7NT with that hand, my partner Howard Christ would have pouted for a week. You don’t want to go there.
Still, any way you cut it, 7NT may not be the best match point contract. One of the premier players in the Ocala Duplicate Bridge Club, Cliff Garing, told me a long ago that in club games it is not practical to bid Grand Slams, since some in the field will fail to get to slam, some will go down trying to make 7 and 6 of anything bid and made will, over time, reward you with an average plus.
My sometimes partner, Mike Spitulnik, is a heavy weight bridge thinker from Rochester, New York. Mike is a multiple Ace of Clubs winner and had the distinction of becoming a life master, as well as bronze and silver on the same day. Mike felt that the contract was aggressive, but deserving. He believes that in a high quality field several aggressive bidding pairs will be in 7NT and the important thing is not to separate yourself from those teams if that’s where you want to be. He points out that taking the clubs and hearts early hoping to lure opponents into a mistake is sheer folly since it won’t fool anybody and at the same time exposes the contract to being down 2 instead of down 1 if the spade suit does not work out. His point is well taken, and substantiated by the fact that I never saw a spade sluff.
Jon Shuster, a bridge expert and author from Gainesville, also took issue with the bidding of the contract. He believes that if you want to play an aggressive 7 contract, 7 diamonds is much safer than 7NT and that standard bidding with responder showing both spades and diamonds will enable you to find the 8 card diamond fit. It is a risk reward situation. If you accept Mike’s argument that strong aggressive bidders will be in 7 NT, then 7 diamonds is going to cost some match points. The trade off is that when diamonds are 3-2 (about two thirds of the time) you will be able to ruff the third spade. Even if diamonds are 4-1 (which they were) you get a spade ruff if opponent’s spades are 4-2 and the person with short spades does not have the long diamond. Jon has a PhD in medical statistics, so I am sure all these alternate chances support his view. But where is the romance in 7 diamonds and how can you write a blog about that?
My high math consultant is Janice Barnes. I thought for sure that this nice technical analysis of play probabilities would appeal to her. Janice seemed pleased that I finally used the terms “probability” and “odds” in the correct context, but expressed some doubt about whether, with all the variable factors, any math can be practically applied at the table. Janice says that she would far prefer to be a bridge savant who just looks at a dummy and knows all the correct plays instinctively. Dream on Janice, wouldn’t we all? The downside is that those players often forget their partner’s first name.
I am not giving up on the Law of Vacant Places although it seems to be a hard sell to my readers. I am going to rename it Tommy’s Law of Empty Spaces and give it one more try in my next post. Good ideas rarely take without repeating. Jean Rene Vernes wrote about the Law of Total Tricks in the June, 1969 Bridge World, Marty Bergen wrote about it again in 1979, but it was not until Larry Cohen wrote “To Bid or Not to Bid” in 1992” that duplicate players actually started to widely apply it. That’s because Larry discussed "the Law" in a language that common folks could understand. Let’s see if I am up to that standard.
Another group of commentators suggested that the contract of 7NT was poor math in itself, since it was far from the best contract in a match point game. I don’t disagree with that but I have my justifications. First, I did say that it was the last board of the day. Second, we were a little desperate and things had not been going our way. Third, when I was learning bridge I played all the Swiss Teams and Knockouts I could find in a rush to life master. I love match points, but sometimes my IMP mentality gets the best of me. Finally, if I had not bid 7NT with that hand, my partner Howard Christ would have pouted for a week. You don’t want to go there.
Still, any way you cut it, 7NT may not be the best match point contract. One of the premier players in the Ocala Duplicate Bridge Club, Cliff Garing, told me a long ago that in club games it is not practical to bid Grand Slams, since some in the field will fail to get to slam, some will go down trying to make 7 and 6 of anything bid and made will, over time, reward you with an average plus.
My sometimes partner, Mike Spitulnik, is a heavy weight bridge thinker from Rochester, New York. Mike is a multiple Ace of Clubs winner and had the distinction of becoming a life master, as well as bronze and silver on the same day. Mike felt that the contract was aggressive, but deserving. He believes that in a high quality field several aggressive bidding pairs will be in 7NT and the important thing is not to separate yourself from those teams if that’s where you want to be. He points out that taking the clubs and hearts early hoping to lure opponents into a mistake is sheer folly since it won’t fool anybody and at the same time exposes the contract to being down 2 instead of down 1 if the spade suit does not work out. His point is well taken, and substantiated by the fact that I never saw a spade sluff.
Jon Shuster, a bridge expert and author from Gainesville, also took issue with the bidding of the contract. He believes that if you want to play an aggressive 7 contract, 7 diamonds is much safer than 7NT and that standard bidding with responder showing both spades and diamonds will enable you to find the 8 card diamond fit. It is a risk reward situation. If you accept Mike’s argument that strong aggressive bidders will be in 7 NT, then 7 diamonds is going to cost some match points. The trade off is that when diamonds are 3-2 (about two thirds of the time) you will be able to ruff the third spade. Even if diamonds are 4-1 (which they were) you get a spade ruff if opponent’s spades are 4-2 and the person with short spades does not have the long diamond. Jon has a PhD in medical statistics, so I am sure all these alternate chances support his view. But where is the romance in 7 diamonds and how can you write a blog about that?
My high math consultant is Janice Barnes. I thought for sure that this nice technical analysis of play probabilities would appeal to her. Janice seemed pleased that I finally used the terms “probability” and “odds” in the correct context, but expressed some doubt about whether, with all the variable factors, any math can be practically applied at the table. Janice says that she would far prefer to be a bridge savant who just looks at a dummy and knows all the correct plays instinctively. Dream on Janice, wouldn’t we all? The downside is that those players often forget their partner’s first name.
I am not giving up on the Law of Vacant Places although it seems to be a hard sell to my readers. I am going to rename it Tommy’s Law of Empty Spaces and give it one more try in my next post. Good ideas rarely take without repeating. Jean Rene Vernes wrote about the Law of Total Tricks in the June, 1969 Bridge World, Marty Bergen wrote about it again in 1979, but it was not until Larry Cohen wrote “To Bid or Not to Bid” in 1992” that duplicate players actually started to widely apply it. That’s because Larry discussed "the Law" in a language that common folks could understand. Let’s see if I am up to that standard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
