[Miron]

1: 2♠, but i hate it. To strong fot 3♦.
2: 3♦, better then double.
3: 4♦, 3NT is error imho
4: 3♣, 2♠ are for ♥ in our methods...
5: 4NT asking for 5 aces (or 4 if 4♦ is void)
6: 4♠
7: 2♣
8: ♠2

[Miron]

Thanks for posting such a nice problems. I'll give it to my partners and see what they'll do.

[Codo]

1. 2 Spade

2. pass if I have no ELC and if ELC had been possible, this had been no problem.
I would hate to pass but I would hate any other bid even more. Game is unlikely, but we can still run into serious trouble if rho has a fair hand.

3. 3 NT, okay, so I will make the error, I will get killed and blasted to space. But otoh, my pd is there too. He will bid 4 Heart with 1534 or 4 clubs with 1345 and we won´t reach a silly contract opposite his 1525 hand :-)
If he really has the ace of diamonds, it is quite likely, that 9 tricks will roll home. But maybe not 11. If he has nothing, any approach will fail.

4. pass any other bid is forward going.

5. 4 NT

6. 4 Spade what else?

7. Had pd openend 1 Heart with 4-4 in the majors? I think so, so my 2 Heart bid is safe. If he raises me, we surely have a Spade fit, else we find out if we have one or if NT is the right strain.

8. 2 of club. Second chocie ace of Heart. But this can blow tricks too. After all, an expert east may find out, that you lead an unsupported ace for a reason?
So he will expect you to be quite poor or quite rich and will find out quickly, what will be the case.

[paulg]

I think problem 2 is the most difficult and Mike's post is helpful in pointing out the pro's and con's although we may draw different conclusions.

Although I don't normally play ELC, the one place where I believe it is most useful is after balancing doubles of preempts. This hand is 'fortunate' to have other viable options, but flexibility is key when balancing at this level.

Paul

[keylime]

1. 3D, since I might get dropped at 2. Part of me wants to raise clubs but that could get passed out too.

2. This is not good. Pard's inaction is rather damning. I pass. Double is bad because if RHO has a reasonable hand with no fit the hammer is coming. I hope the 3S bidding card is missing. I applaud my friend's Phil courage of bidding 3H on 7-x-x-x-x, but it's not poker bud, it's bridge. lol

3. 4D. For the love of all things decent NOT 3NT. Get hearts out of the picture immediately.

4. Where do they get these things....pass. Why bid 2S?

5. Assuming pard is full bodied. I'll take the dive and bid six direct. Will not KC due to lack of club control (which concerns me little here).

6. We hold HHx of hearts and pard is doing nothing. Pass it around in tempo.

7. I raise on this hand and I play 4 card majors these days. Swedish 2NT please. In natural system, 2C.

8. High diamond. Leading away the club feels wrong, and I'm not touching hearts or spades.

REALLY good hands - thanks Roland

[whereagles]

mikeh, on Sep 28 2006, 09:57 PM, said:

Double: if partner bids 2N lebensohl, we are screwed. We sure can't bid 3♣: he'll likely pass it. We can't bid 3 red, since that shows a hand utterly unlike what we hold

Well, equal level correction fixes this problem Without ELC I probably wouldn't double.

[Apollo81]

cardsharp, on Sep 29 2006, 03:27 AM, said:

I think problem 2 is the most difficult ....

Agree.

[Flame]

whereagles, on Sep 29 2006, 03:53 AM, said:

mikeh, on Sep 28 2006, 09:57 PM, said:

Double: if partner bids 2N lebensohl, we are screwed. We sure can't bid 3♣: he'll likely pass it. We can't bid 3 red, since that shows a hand utterly unlike what we hold

Well, equal level correction fixes this problem Without ELC I probably wouldn't double.

I thought over 2 openings, equal level is the std and there is no supper double.

[mikeh]

Flame, on Sep 29 2006, 12:52 PM, said:

whereagles, on Sep 29 2006, 03:53 AM, said:

mikeh, on Sep 28 2006, 09:57 PM, said:

Double: if partner bids 2N lebensohl, we are screwed. We sure can't bid 3♣: he'll likely pass it. We can't bid 3 red, since that shows a hand utterly unlike what we hold

Well, equal level correction fixes this problem Without ELC I probably wouldn't double.

I thought over 2 openings, equal level is the std and there is no supper double.

Not where I come from

It is true that ELC affords an easier solution on this board if we have the tool available and so long as partner does not go nuts with 6 or 7 ♣ and a moderate hand.

But I truly dislike ELC even after weak 2 bids. It is insane (in my view) in direct seat, when one can expect responder to often bounce, leaving partner either forced to pass when you have 1=4=4=4, or turning a plus into a minus when you were 2=4=6=1.

It is less insane in balance seat for two reasons: the first is that the opps are not going to further the preempt after this start, and the second is that partner is less likely to bid an inconvenient number of ♣s given that he passed originally. However, the possibility that one plays ELC will cause partner NOT to bid aggressively with long ♣ even when we hold ♣s: what the devotees of tools like ELC usually ignore or downplay are the consequences when our double is 'normal' but partner has to fear it is ELC.

[whereagles]

Well, ELC allows for more flexibility on the double. It works quite ok when you can correct clubs to diams or hearts to spades. Heck, that's why it's called equal level correction