[mikeh]

We hold A1086 K6 Qx AQ632, none vul at mps and RHO opens in 3rd seat with 1♦.

We all want to bid, but what? Several players mentioned raptor with various degrees of longing (raptor uses, as I understand it, a 1N overcall to show 5+♣s and a 4 card major). Well, we wouldn't likely be seeing this problem if raptor were available, altho I suppose that we might be looking at the range that raptorees use.

A panel is never truly complete without an abstention, so, filling the role of Alvin Roth, we have Ritong, who abstains in protest against the lack of raptor. A man of integrity, he had to know that he was not going to score well for that choice

Those players who realized that abstention was not in the bidding box had to choose between 4 plausible calls, none of which were double. Double was mentioned by several, but only in the context of eliminating it due to the ♥ holding.

I entirely agree.

So what did our panel (sans Henri) choose?

Well, we get little guidance here because, for the only time in the entire poll, we do not get any agreement.

Fred: '1N: I can live with 2♣. I don't like P (too easy to get shut out) and I hate 1♠ (wrong suit and wrong strength for 4 card o'call)...1N has th advantage of coming close to describing my hand....even if we are off the entire ♦ suit, LHO may not lead one, and if they do run the suit, maybe I will take the rest of the tricks'

Justin: '2♣. I'm going to bid my long suit...I won't double with 2 ♥s and I don't like 1♠. I frequently o'call 4 card majors but here my suit is terrible, ill-suited for a moysian. I am awkwardly placed to show ♣s later (after 1♠)...1N is possible but a distortion...Passing is not for me...'

Frances: 'Pass. We know this won't garner many marks, and Frances (remember, this is really a joint effort between Frances and Jeffrey) foolishly makes a prediction that the majority vote will be for 1♠, which is actually our 5th choice, behind, in order, P, X, 1N, 2♣)

Jeffrey wins the argument: 1♠ tied for 3rd in the number of votes cast: only 4 of our 22 respondents bid 1♠, but, as a duo, they were bang-on in their prediction that Pass will fare poorly, in the marking if not in real life: it was no more, nor less, popular than 1♠.

Beto opted for 2♣, and did not even mention 1♠ as a possibility, regretting the lack of raptor and expressing his dislike of double.

Ben felt that double might work out, but he'd never do it, opting for 2♣ as well.

MikeRJ was the other commenting 2♣ bidder, and his comment, short tho it was, made pleasurable reading: '2♣. hating it'

2♣ was chosen by 8 of our voters, with 6 opting for Fred's choice of 1N:

helene_t, in a rare comment: '1N: only because of the scoring and vulnerability. Otherwise Pass'

Dwingo:"1N. I don't like the quality of my ♣ suit (for 2♣)...can't double...1N smallest lie... most practical bid'

Temp3600 was the only other vocal Passer: 'nothing else is tempting'

The 1♠ contingent was led by Ng:'it is important to compete aggressively for partscores, particularly with ♠s...if I bid 2♣, we may never find our ♠ partial, eg. 2♣ [3♦]... the quality of my ♠ suit is not ideal but enough for the fight'

Keylime bid 1♠, commenting only that he was NOT bidding 2♣.

Phil came close to echoing that sentiment:'1♠, I hate this (Ed. Yea!] I'm not overcalling 2♣ on this suit and I'm not passing either'

Anyone think he might be sold on 1N?

While 1♠ was not popular, it was commented on by all of its proponents:

Double: '1♠..against my instinct to overcall a mediorce 4 card suit...however...we have to get into the bidding...I do not like a 2♣ overcall on a ratty suit, and 1N, while ok on hcp, is very risky on Qx'

I sympathize with the dislike of the ♣ texture, but (to me) that suit looks relatively solid compared to that ♠ suit.

As for 1N, the more I look at it, the more I like it. Qx is surprisingly often a stopper anyway... sometimes declarer, with AKJ10xx and no side A, will put in the 10...that is, assuming LHO leads it...after all, opener will assume you hold Qxx.

Ng points out that we may miss ♠s if we bid ♣s, but the converse is also true. Furthermore, a point not made by any voter, over 1♠, LHO can negative double to bring ♥s into play...especially if he has a moderate red two-suiter. He has far more difficulty doing that over 2♣... he cannot usually afford to negative double with a modest hand and, say, 2=4=4=3 shape... because he cannot stand a high-level ♠ bid by partner.

My own preference (as hinted at above) is for the 2♣ call, and I am going to exercise my powers as both panel member and scorer to use that preference to award 2♣ the top score.... I am buttressed in this by the fact that, counting my vote, 2♣ was the top vote getter by a significant margin.

The scores:

2♣ 100
1N 90
P 70
1♠ 60
abstain 20

I'm not sure why I gave Henri any score at all: but he is a good guy and giving him zero just didn't feel right

As for the scoring between 1♠ and Pass: it is tough to explain. Each garnered the same number of votes, and the consensus clearly was in favour of action rather than passing. However, none of the expert panel chose 1♠ (altho as mentioned earlier, at least one set of responses was late through the virtual door and this argument may not have been available).

My scoring was influenced by the degree of (and rationales behind) the rejection of 1♠ by those who did consider it and reject it... in fairness, it is possible that I am reading more into this than appropriate. 1N fared especially well in the scoring because it wsa favourably mentioned as an alternative by other bidders: few seemed to have 1♠ as a second choice.

The vote breakdown:

2♣ 9, counting me
1N 6
P 4
1♠ 4
abstain 1


I am going to go over the 1st few hands, add in the latest votes, and provide a panel/total vote breakdown and then, perhaps late next week, tabulate all of the scores and announce winners, both panel and non-panel.

In the meantime, I want to thank you all for participating, including those who did not send me answers but who are reading the postings and (I hope) enjoying them as much as I have. This was a lot of fun.... and my only regret is that I may have left some posters feeling peeved/aggrieved at my comments, scores, or edited/paraphrased quotes.

Neither my time nor my limited keyboard skills allowed me to quote everyone, nor to set out even close to the full comments of those I did quote. But if you sent me comments, then you got quoted or paraphrased at least once!

[cherdano]

Mike, thanks a lot for choosing great problems and being moderator, and for being an excellent moderator, too!

[mike777]

Thank you Mike for all your hard work and comments. I enjoyed them.

2clubs, going to take a risk and bid my longest suit with 15 hcp. This looks like a middle of the road position. I have not seen Astro cuebids discussed in the forum so I hope this can add to the discussion.

"...For people who agree to play Astro cue bids, yes, a cue bid shows 4 of the lower ranking unbid major, and longer in the lower ranking unbid minor....

(1s)=2s shows 4hearts and longer clubs and
(1H)=2h shows 4spades and longer clubs

Also:

(1d)=2D shows 4 hearts and longer clubs..
(1c)=2C shows 4 hearts and longer diamonds...

These bids show good hands...hands you are comformtable being at the level you are forcing partner to bid to.
It works nicely to cover hands that cannot be handled nearly as well any other way.....While Micheals Cue bids are handy, they really aren't needed.


Whether we play Astro or not we can already handle the other combos (when you have the higher unbid major and higher unbid minor) by doubling.

1S - Double when you have 4 hearts and longer diamonds (converting clubs to diamonds at the equal level)
1H - Double when you have 4 spades and longer diamonds (converting clubs to diamonds at the equal level)
1D - Overcall 2C when you have 4 spades and longer clubs (intending to rebid 2S at your next turn -- similar to an equal level conversion)
1C - Overcall 1D when you have 4 spades and longer diamonds (intending to rebid spades at your next turn -- similar again to an equal level conversion)
Of course, over 1C or 1D, if you have 3 hearts, you'll likely want to make a take out double with 4 spades and the longer minor....."


Pass is not considered.

[inquiry]

I gave a really long comment on this hand. I probably should have joined ritong in abstaining in that I WANTED to bid RAPTOR. But I understand that this is not part of BBO advanced (technical the standard to use in these polls).

I will not post all of my comment (I bid for 2♣) but here is most of what I said...

Board 8...2♣. Sigh. Anything might work out well, even double (I would never double). 1♠ (ratty suit), 1NT (a tad shy), pass where we may not get antother chance, and 2♣ (a little short on suit quality and legnth). I normally play raptor so I can "bid" these hands. Not playing raptor, interesting enough, I would still would consider a natural 1NT overcall. It is just that this hand lacks the quality intermediates I like (I am not that concerned about my lack of a ♦ stopper). So as much as I am not thrilled with the bid, I will pull out 2♣ at the table. The advantage of 2♣ is that it "preempts" 1♥ and 1♠ bids by your lho... i just hope that is enough to make up for the lack of quality clubs.

[hrothgar]

I was one of the (few people) who chose a 1♠ advance.

I couldn't stomache 2♣ with that weak a suit.

Double is out of the question with Kx in Hearts. I have no rebid over a 2♥ advance.

1NT seemed to suffer from too many flaws. The hand is understrength and I don't really have mcuh of a Diamond stop.

Pass seemed very problematic with this much strength and short Diamonds.

In general, one of my basic rules is that the "garbage" gets placed into low level bids. I prefer to distort my 1♠ overcall rather than compromise the integrity of 2♣ or 1NT. Admittedly, double is even "lower" than 1♠. Then again, double on Kx seems like much more of a distortion than 1♠ on AT86

I take comfort in the fact that Miles would have voted with me, if only he knew/cared about the existence of this forum.

[Double !]

As mikeh indicated, I, too, elected to overcall 1 spade. I am neither advocating nor rejecting my selection. However, there was more to my (ir)rationale than was presented. Yes, the suit ain't so great. (better than some I've seen from some people) I also mentioned the fact that the format was matchpoints where spades rule, and the possibility that, should I play in spades on an insecure trump suit, that the clubs suit might potentially act as a buffer against losing trump control. In addition (something I didn't previously mention), should the combined hands be best played in NT, it might be better being played from partner's hand, not mine, and it would be easier to get there if I bid 1S as opposed to 2C. Whatever I choose to bid with this hand, I want to get the two hands into the best scoring strain if it's feasible, to avoid telephone numbers on a possible part-score hand, and above all, try to get a plus-score. My partner is a passed hand, so I doubt that there are many bids that partner could make that would be embarrasing.

Whatever...................

DHL

[pclayton]

Mike, I considered 1N. I considered it a 3rd choice behind 1♠ and 2♣.

5-4's are suit oriented and I'd rather try to find a black suit. Furthermore, I have a very tenuous stopper, and we wrong side the NT if pard has something like KTx or J9xx.

2♣ is fine and I wouldn't object if my pard made the call, but the suit quality sucks and the 4-4 spades rate to get buried. But it leads to the simplest continautions.

1 level overcalls have very loose requirements for suit quality if the overall hand is good. Review the thread where we held a 3433 14 count and ♥KJ52; many advocated a 1♥ overcall, and this hand has a lot better playing strength.

What bothers me most about 1♠ are the various continuations, such as 2♦ and 2♥. I'll have a hard time later in the auction convincing my pard that I have only 4 spades.

[keylime]

I overcall 2♣ and often get bit for -300's or worse; that's why I stopped doing it. I chose 1 ♠ as well 'cause it might be hard for me to balance back into the auction and I tend to overcall any decent 4 card major before a side five card minor.

[whereagles]

Think I bid 2♣.

This would be a no-brainer for Marhall Miles: 1♠

[Echognome]

I also wanted to thank Mike for all the work he did. I don't think I scored very well on these, but they were very instructive. I didn't realize that comments were welcomed, so I will be more forthcoming next time. Then I can not only bid like a fool, I can sound like one!

[keylime]

Mike definitely deserves major kudos, no doubt.

The hand with the 6-4 minors has been excellent discussion material with the team. I'm looking forward to the next set.

[fred]

Thanks for your hard work, Mike, and for a job well done!

I also enjoyed these problems. The one problem that I thought was dud (problem 7) was apparently not seen as such by most of the other panelists so perhaps I was too harsh in my comments. I found the other 7 problems to be both challenging and interesting.

I have bitched about Raptor before. The fact that some Raptor fans opt to use it on this hand only serves to reinforce my opinion of this convention. Wouldn't you make the same Raptor overcall with the same distribution and roughly half this strength in high cards (and perhaps some extra texture in your long suits to make up for it)?

If yes, then please tell me how you expect your partner to have any clue as to what to bid most of the time (especially if your Raptor overcall does not identify which 4-card major you hold).

If it wasn't for the fact that I consider the natural 1NT overcall too important to give up, I could see that Raptor might be a reasonable alternative, but only if it is used ONLY with "obstructive" hands. Using Raptor with ONLY "constructive" hands (like this one) is surely wrong - such hands are not very common and there is usually a reasonable alternative when you have this much high card strength.

And using Raptor with BOTH obstructive and constructive hands just doesn't make any sense to me (because this will often force your poor partner into a situation in which he is faced with a guess that will lead to a disaster if he is wrong).

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[MikeRJ]

On the subject of whether to overcall 1S or 2C with 4 Spades and 5 clubs, I watched the following hand on BBO Viewgraph today (Camrose 2007, match 3, board 2)

KQJ4, 96, K2, KJ1076 2nd in hand, Vul vs Non Vul.

RHO opened 1D at all 6 tables. Five players chose to overcall 1S, only one (the Welsh player) overcalled 2C. On this hand the 4 card spade suit is very strong, so it is perhaps not surprising that teh clear majority was to overcall 1S.

The only player to come out alive was the 2C bidder.

LHO held A107653, Q7, Q, Q843. Over the 2C overcall he bid 2S. Over 1S all LHO's passed and eventually collected substantial penalties.

Mike

[pclayton]

Jlall, on Jan 6 2007, 09:27 AM, said:

These problems were g00t. Mikeh is g00t. Raptor sux0rz.

Great job Mike! Its a hassle doing all of this, and we all have lives outside of this.

While we have the interest, lets have another one of these. I don't want to wait another 8 months . Ben, I would volunteer for anything from the moderator to the gatherer.

I don't like Raptor either, but I don't think its the worst convention ever devised. If my pard really, really likes to play it, I'll play it under protest.

Take away a King from this hand, and Raptor would be useful.

[the hog]

Interesting: I think the Polish NT is an excellent convention. I have played it a long time and in a number of partnerships and have had excellent results with it. It does need a little more discipline than some of the proponents here are willing to accede to it. Both suits should have some texture, for example, and the range needs to be more strictly limited to say 10-14.

It is also far safer than overcalling with a 15-17 NT. (This is especially true when I read of some players on this forum downgrading their NT overcalls to ridiculous levels).

[mike777]

I was hoping to get some feedback on Astro cue bids on this hand.

[Gerben42]

Those abstaining I cannot understand. Either you have agreed a natural 1NT or a raptor 1NT, stick to it! If you use it constructively (like me) then this is the maximum and you cannot use it destructively.
OTOH if you like to bid it on weak hands, this hand cannot bid 1NT.

[ritong]

[QUOTE]Those abstaining I cannot understand.

ok, ok, i m done :-) can t leave gerben in the dark, so i suppose i have to explain my choice.
usually, an abstention in a bidding panel means : " i find this problem ridiculous, so i won t answer".( as i remember, it was alvin roth's speech, by the way )
i have way too much respect for ol'mike to think that way, as for any person who is brave enough to manage a bidding panel.
my abstention meant:" sorry, guys, since i play raptor for fifteen years, i am not confronted to these bidding situations for long, so my contribution to this particular hand debate would be too poor, i prefer leave it up to my colleagues."
i certainly understand that the function of a bidding panel is to try to answer the "unanswerable", in order to make things a bit easier, if possible, when these tough situations occur to the table.
it also has the function to create a friendly debate about bridge hands, and in my view it has not the function to establish some kind of ranking, so please mike, sleep peacefully, i do not care about my score :-)

now to the raptor itself.

i have to precise that i play it in matchpoints events and online. i can t afford to inflict a 10 imps swing to my teammates in real life when they cannot expect it, not mentioning that i have to offer the drinks afterwards

i have to precise , as it can be found in the post i wrote about it in this forum, that the range is 10/14. i hope you will accord to me that it is not exceedingly nebulous.

so, why do i like it?
a- it allows to enter the bidding with a relative accuracy when natural bidders are stuck.
b- it allows to find game contracts natural passers are done with, while i can t remember the last time i buried a game because of the non-available natural 1nt overcall, although it certainly happened once or twice.
c- it occupies the key 1nt spot at MPs,much more often than a natural 1nt overcall.
d- it brings back minors to life when needed.
e- farfie likes it.

i tried to make it very short, hope i did not bore you :-)

friendly henri.

[cherdano]

Henri, you forgot to tell us -- what do you bid with this hand if playing Raptor?

Arend