You say that the DK is “almost certainly” in W’s hand. Well, the only things in life that are certain are death and taxes, but W having the DK is a close third. S is missing 15 HCP, E has already showed up with the SQ, and W has no more than 5 spades. I rest my case.

Assuming E-W have partnership carding protocols, West should know who has the QS after the second round. Maybe better defense is to shift to a trump at Trick 3.

Not only would that a bit harder for declarer to place the defenders’ high cards, but it would also threaten second and third trump leads which would remove the chance of ruffing the fourth club in dummy.

Hi David, Folks,

I suppose if you try hard enough (and this is being ludicrously picky) there are 10 counts you could open 1st in hand at adverse e.g. AK108x xxxxx None QJ9. Mind you, South is not making 4H here unless a defender revokes. AK108x xxxx K Qxx / QJx would be another annoying possibility if West starts with a top spade, switches to a trump, takes the DK and then underleads his other top spade or just waits for declarer to try to cash the DA. All airborne bacon, though, at least for most of us….

That 2nd one isn’t a totally absurd option – 6-1 breaks lie well within TOCM’s twisted sample space of unfair probabilities. I’m occasionally reminded of a recent film called “It follows” although the consequences there are significantly worse than bad bridge results; cheer up Jim2, it could be worse, honestly!

On TOCM, aren’t there players who would double with (say) 1-5-3-4 (or even 2-5-2-4) hands but no great extra values and shift 2D to 2H? I’ve dozily forgotten the term for that approach, but it might be worth checking in any scratch partnership . Also, from yesterday, I’d be very interested in the article which is eventually produced.

regards,

Iain

Do keep in mind that everyone else benefits from TOCM ™ as things do tend to even out and so many of the outliers happen to moi.

That is, the rest of y’all will get more even and favorable distributions.

You’re welcome.

🙂

Hi David,

While always intending to answer in order of questions asked, I do take the liberty of checking each correspondent’s first asked, so will silently echo at least a bit of Iain’s rebuttal.

In addition, although in many respects, I’ve not been at the so-called high level table nearly as much in the last 10 years, but have at least tried to keep up with trends in good bridge with the deflation of what it takes to open the bidding (in any seat) and considerable might be the best word to describe it.

However to be truthful, that choice of bidding rather than passing, also applies to a responder while holding Qxx in a major bid by partner will almost always, he or she (while holding a side king) choose to bid rather than meekly pass.

While I am not overly impressed with these apparent changes, no doubt they enter the equation with judgment, while being declarer at many particular tables.

Nothing I say above directly (or even indirectly) contradicts your right-on analysis, only for all aspiring modern bridge players to keep up with trends and not be overly surprised to view former thought to be impossible layouts as now at least, barely possible, but in most cases, still unlikely.

IOW, look at the age of your opponents, before always making what used to be, close to 100% judgments.

On BWTA and following up on cue bidding from a day or two ago. Why would anyone cue bid spades unless they had 1-2 more tricks (Aces or Kings) and was looking at slam?

Hi Jim2,

While I hope, but not certain, that you mean by bridge protocols (while on defense), not meaning a relatively slow come on in spades while holding the Q (and certainly no desire for an unprotected switch) instead of a quicker come-on when holding only 2 small and a fervent desire to ruff the third one (in case partner does not hold the queen).

I certainly and firmly know that all three of you who answered are highly ethical and beyond suspicion when it comes to basic bridge ethics, but while it is no doubt, a much less desirable holding to hold Qxx rather than xx while holding otherwise worthless trump it still leaves me wondering how and why, while holding either of the two holdings not to give a positive signal to continue with the third one. although partner might have a particular holding he wants to switch to in spite of your signal, but then, chalk that up to just our game as we play it, rather than the possible different protocols of signalling ethically.

I’m commenting on the above only to suggest that even discussing this subject is more a red herring than a valid topic, especially with this specific group, but others reading may wonder about the choice of protocol as having a different meaning than the one to which I know you meant.

As to the discussion concerning TOCM TM, my alleged mind goes to the old saw, “they also serve who only stand and wait” (John Milton) and with your malady the best you can do is always play, defend and bid perfectly but never get rewards for your efforts, but who is to say, that you will not be able to rejoice in your performance in spite of not physically hearing the applause.

Thanks much for your dedication to the game and to us, your pals.

Sorry, my “On TOCM” paragraph was meant to be BWTA; it has been one of those days.

Hi Iain,

All of your ramblings are worthwhile and each in their own way are worth considering.

Possibly overkill in just trying to learn and almost impossibly difficult to categorize, but nevertheless symbolic while trying to move up the bridge ladder, not likely to ever be on the tip of one’s tongue, but only representing the many difficulties in even just trying to visualize the entire 52 card layout.

Almost worth just a sigh, but probably better instead, a chuckle, likely even for people who were virtually born to being a very top player.

On yesterday’s query, I responded positively to his reference and will, of course, in the due course of time, keep you up with any interesting developments. If only something could lead to bridge in our USA schools, I would contribute more than I possibly could, just to have that chance for it to happen. Including me not to be around when and if, it could eventually happen.

However the day it would, no doubt, the sun would be shining the world over, I promise, and as of now, I have no connections anywhere.

Hi Ken,

Your post hits directly on a high-level concept, which to many would be just too difficult to either embrace or maybe only comprehend.

Regarding the BWTA, by the nature of the bidding up to that moment when South merely responds only 2 diamonds, he virtually has contributed two bits of information:

1. diamonds are his best suit.
2. he has fewer than 10 points (distribution,, togetherness of honors, and playing strength).

When next his partner now bids 2 hearts, signalling a good playable suit and perhaps 17-20 or its distributional equivalent and now awaits partner’s response.

South now, while possessing his exact hand, has 4 choices:

1. Pass (self-explanatory)
2. 3 hearts (a simple raise, simply asking partner to quantify his playing strength between pass, 4 hearts or possibly 3NT)
3. 2 spades (basically a 3 1/2 heart raise, but also for partner to ponder, e.g. another possible game (besides 4 hearts) available, more likely 3NT, s. QJxx, h. x, d. Kxxxx, c. QJx but even possibly 5 diamonds, s. QJxx, h. xx, KQJxxx c. x.
4. 4 hearts-also self explanatory.

IOW 2 spades is in no way slam interest. Consistent since how could a hand which only replied 2 diamonds (a minimum) now have slam interest? Thus, once limited the cue bid is only directed toward reaching the right game, exploring along the way. With the hand in today’s BWTA, the doubler ALWAYS understands that partner is just making his best bid possible, depending on the previous bidding.

Finally a 100% caveat! Once a partner makes a bad bid during the bidding, he will not likely survive reaching the best final contract unless he gets very lucky. Carelessness early is nothing less than horrible, but while attempting to aspire to greater things, this fact becomes mightily known to both partners, making them have much attention to detail and less interested in branching off into never, never land.

On the topic of bad bids, I had a hand in a sectional pairs game last weekend that I didn’t really like my bids at the time, and still haven’t figured out what I should have done. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Red against White, partner opened 1NT (12-14 HCP) in first seat. RHO overcalled 3S, and my hand was

— KJ108 AQ98x AQ9x

I bid 3NT concerned that 4 of either minor might be tough for partner to read. LHO bid 4S, passed back to me. I now tried 5NT and, to my surprise, everyone passed. Partner made it on a defensive error.

Partner’s hand: K9x Ax KJxx J108x.

The hand makes 6D and for TOCM fans who need practice, it also makes 6C despite an offside 5-0 club break.

Hi Ted,

Although I will suggest bidding your hand much differently, the final result with my bid will be horrible and yours may be OK.

With no reservation I will suggest that you bid 4 spades over RHO’s 3 spade intervention. Furthemore whichever suit my partner choose and it will probably be clubs I will raise to 6.

Along with Jim2 I will get my 5-0 break plus finesse not working and no doubt I will go down at least one trick and likely more.

However since your void is where you want it, your hands figure to fit well (and they do) but lady luck elsewhere has rained on your parade.

To make matters worse, I think the 4 spade cue bid is basically mandatory, since all your values are working. When Charles Goren many years ago suggested taking 12 tricks needed about 33 hcps, with this hand a fit is guaranteed with very few wasted hcps. However the result will not bear my choice favorably, and so it goes.

Good luck and thanks for writing.