[jillybean]

First from tonight's team game.

---

[mike777]

Dbl

[P_Marlowe]

I agree, X.

You dont want to hear 4S from p, and 5C should show 5+ clubs.

[apollo1201]

A difficult case. We would need Mike analysis.

What do we know?

Partner promised 5+ S and 10+ HCP so I do not think we are in a FP situation. N initial pass makes it likely, though, that partner has more than that and will bid again. But we should bid our hand and not partner s.

What do our calls mean?

5C should probably show at least 5 cards, 5D likely requires a stronger suit but at least it has no holes. Both very unilateral calls.

4NT, 64 minors or BW with S trumps? We cannot really confirm S in a forcing way should we have a different hand.

X is values but it is 100% penalties? Pass is nothing to say, usually flattish weakish.

None of that suits us well…

What are we making?

Partner rates to be 6133, 6124, 6223, 5134 or 5233 (the worst case, the sg H opposite is not 100% guaranteed at these vulnerabilities). Depending on honor structure and strength, contracts from 4S to 6m are real possibilities, while 4HX would usually not score more.

Yeah, could be 1100 with all finesses working compared to a lay down 6m not findable in real life. Sth like S to A, SQ covered and ruffed, DQ forcing K from dummy to partner who cashes SJ and we find the CQ, no one ruffing our 5 minor tricks, and the HA being the 9th trick.

If we pass, we will be a bit nervous when partner bids 4S (could be the best spot with a 6-cd sequence or a 7-bagger). If they bid 5 of any minor, we will raise to 5 hoping to manage it. If they X, we will tend to respect this.

So maybe pass leaves our options more open?

[jillybean]

I like your analysis. The only trouble is, after thinking this long and then passing, your are going to have TFD at your table.

[mike777]

 jillybean, on 2026-July-11, 07:43, said:

I like your analysis. The only trouble is, after thinking this long and then passing, your are going to have TFD at your table.

Ten seconds

Don't have spades, not two suited, mediocre D

So I guess my options are pass or double.

I got two Aces, opponents bid on garbage at favorable vul.

Excellent point about ten seconds going by very fast at the table. Bidding in tempo is difficult

[jillybean]

10 is a BIT for me

[apollo1201]

 jillybean, on 2026-July-11, 08:07, said:

10 is a BIT for me

Hihi funny as I had written then erased after taking so long to think I have now end played myself into Xing🤣🤣

After a stop card I believe 10secs is not a long thought process.

I need to take decisions quicker and not think of all possibilities and how to cope with them.

[jillybean]

Ah, yes the good old days when we had a stop card. I can think.

[mikeh]

I think it’s a difficult hand. While this is not a basic FP sequence, I think it has to be treated as one because we are red v white and the opps will rarely be making while we will often be stuck. It’s possible to treat this as different if RHO were an unpassed hand, but my own belief is that it’s best to treat these red v white preempts as creating a FP. Yes, you’ll get the occasional terrible result in 4H x making but bidding methods are rarely perfect and this is, imo, a price worth paying. Only at red v white.

So it’s a forcing pass situation. If your notes said as such…really good system notes will summarize your fp agreements, then I wouldn’t worry about how long you take to pass….it’s forcing so the hesitation doesn’t suggest that you’re on the heavy or the light side for that call: you might have been considering a bid or a double, and partner can’t tell which, and he’s never passing.

But if you are not on firm ground here, because you don’t have a clear agreement…just a hope….then a slow pass conveys information that you wanted to do something, which in turn tells partner he should strain to do something other than pass. And even if you have a firm agreement, unless you have system notes available to back you up, your opps may be quite annoyed and the TD quite sceptical.

Does that mean you shouldn’t take a long time and then pass? No! Not if you eventually decide to pass. It means that your hesitation imposes ethical obligations on partner. He’s still allowed to bid…it’s only if he has a minimum 2S bid that he should be passing if your pass was non forcing.

As for what I do at the table…I’d pass but I’d try to do it in tempo, bearing in mind that I ALWAYS pause any time this kind of bidding happens. That’s a very important point…if you always pause then you always have some time to think without giving away information partner is not supposed to have. I’d pause then pass even if I couldn’t prove my pass was forcing. If the TD rules against me, so be it. I’d have a clear conscience and my few regular partners are ethical players.

Btw, while I agree that 5C should be 5+ clubs, I do not agree that 4N is 6=4/7=5 minors. There are sequences where that’s the case. Say (P) 1D (2H) x (4H) 4N. But after partner bids 2S, which has a higher low end strength than does double and shows longer spades than is promised by double, 4N should, imo, be keycard.

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2026-July-11, 08:07, said:

10 is a BIT for me

In theory you get 10 from the stop card, in practice it's more like 7 or 8. But still quite a lot of thought before opponent starts counting.
Not sure how it works if someone removed the stop cards.

[mikeh]

jillybean, on 2026-July-11, 08:21, said:

Ah, yes the good old days when we had a stop card. I can think.

If you believe you can’t think, you are very mistaken. You should develop the reflex of always pausing when your RHO jumps one or more levels. The only time I don’t hesitate is if both I and partner have each passed at least two or three times and RHO has jumped to what sounds like a final contract, on an auction in which I couldn’t possibly have a call.

The stop card was, unfortunately, susceptible to cheating. Some pairs would convey information about their hand by using or not using the stop card, and far too many players would ignore it anyway, or play act when they had no problem and be agonized when pausing with a problem. Imo, the majority of club level players are (usually unintentionally) very unethical. But that’s no reason for you to refuse to learn ethical behaviour. Always pause.

[jillybean]

This is now the OT

---

The ACBL took away our stop card due to misuse, UI. It has done nothing to stop the UI

Mike, I know that I can take the time to think in these situations.
If I do take the time (10 seconds) and pass, I don't have forcing pass agreements, any that I have had are not documented.
We are now in a very bad situation, a Director call could go against us.

All this is online, with highly ethical players so I have no worries here.
If I do get back into bridge where there is a possibility I'd be ruled against, I will make sure we have very comprehensive CC's. good point about your system notes & a reminder to have FP agreements.

[DavidKok]

I thought pass over 4♥ was the right choice, and it should not take 10 seconds to come to that conclusion. For me it's not a FP situation.

I have no idea what 5♠ is. It does not exist in my system. The only thing I know for sure is that it does not ask for a heart control - I have had too many '-100 into +650' results to play niche slam gadgets on misfit competitive auctions. Find a fit, stop in game or cut the knot but don't try a blame transfer, especially not without clear agreements. What do your system notes say 5♠ is?

[mikeh]

What do we bid with AKQJxxx xx Kx KQ?

Ok, having a hand that forces to slam if opener has a heart control will be extremely rare, but you tell me any other use that makes the least bit of sense.

I do agree with David that this use can lead to horrible results, but that would be due either to poor judgement or an unlucky lie of the cards. Refusing to play a particular gadget because it sometimes fails is pretty pessimistic, imo. The question is whether it gains sufficiently often (and sufficiently enough) to offset the inevitable occasional losses. If not, either it’s a bad gadget or one needs to tighten up the requirements.

The main danger, it seems to me, is that the 5S bidder may be overstating his hand because he doesn’t have 12 tricks opposite a minimum with a heart control but feels he’s too strong for 4S. Say AKQJxxx xx Ax Kx and even that has play

Preempts work. My motto, having pushed too aggressively in the past, is to ‘stay fixed’ unless I have what I think is a very high likelihood of slam opposite a minimum with a heart control.

Finally, and I’m sure David agrees, the fact that one comes to one’s decision over 4H quickly does NOT mean one shouldn’t take approximately 10 seconds before passing. Insta passes are amongst the most egregious ethical violations in the game in these situations, especially if pass is not forcing.

[DavidKok]

mikeh, on 2026-July-11, 10:26, said:

What do we bid with AKQJxxx xx Kx KQ?

Ok, having a hand that forces to slam if opener has a heart control will be extremely rare, but you tell me any other use that makes the least bit of sense.

I do agree with David that this use can lead to horrible results, but that would be due either to poor judgement or an unlucky lie of the cards. Refusing to play a particular gadget because it sometimes fails is pretty pessimistic, imo. The question is whether it gains sufficiently often (and sufficiently enough) to offset the inevitable occasional losses. If not, either it’s a bad gadget or one needs to tighten up the requirements.

The main danger, it seems to me, is that the 5S bidder may be overstating his hand because he doesn’t have 12 tricks opposite a minimum with a heart control but feels he’s too strong for 4S. Say AKQJxxx xx Ax Kx and even that has play

I think this is too narrow a target, and the risk of partner overstating the hand is too large. I'd rather not have the gadget. Of course I am not 'refusing to play a particular gadget because it sometimes fails', I am refusing to play it because it loses more than it gains. It's a bad gadget.
On the example hand we also want opener to move to 6 with two minor suit aces and a second round heart control, so you're already giving something up by committing to this route too.
Actually I was going to wonder if partner needs at least 3 key cards for this 5♠ bid, so that we should be pushing to the 7-level if we trust partner to have their bid. However, I stand by my point: those hands are so rare, I'd rather give up on them and not have the 5 stupid mistakes for every 1 miracle slam.

[mikeh]

DavidKok, on 2026-July-11, 10:32, said:

I think this is too narrow a target, and the risk of partner overstating the hand is too large. I'd rather not have the gadget. Of course I am not 'refusing to play a particular gadget because it sometimes fails', I am refusing to play it because it loses more than it gains. It's a bad gadget.
On the example hand we also want opener to move to 6 with two minor suit aces and a second round heart control, so you're already giving something up by committing to this route too.
Actually I was going to wonder if partner needs at least 3 key cards for this 5♠ bid, so that we should be pushing to the 7-level if we trust partner to have their bid. However, I stand by my point: those hands are so rare, I'd rather give up on them and not have the 5 stupid mistakes for every 1 miracle slam.

You dislike kickback because, when you’ve played it, partner drives you too high or something else goes wrong, such as a forget or confusion over whether it’s applicable. You don’t like 5S because, it seems, your partner overuses it, again getting you too high.

I’m seeing a pattern here. Me? If my regular partner and I have those sorts of issues, we have a serious discussion and agree upon firm parameters. Thus we know when our bids are kickback and we know that when we make a bid such as 5S here we are odds on for a slam opposite a non-fitting minimum with a heart control.

We design our methods on the assumption that we won’t ***** them up. If a sequence seems too error-prone or is otherwise ineffective, we would change the method.

Btw, if you think that 5S is too infrequent, if used as I suggest, surely your view of 5S….suggesting interest in 7…is even less likely. Of course, if I had a good hand in context, say xx Ax AKxxx QJxx, I’d bid 6H over 5S. Actually, 6D is better than 6H…it has to show the heart ace…without it we’d have no business showing the diamond ace.

Edit: my comments are not intended to be critical. It’s important that one be comfort with one’s methods and our comfort level is always going to be influenced by experience, and (more importantly) there are very few treatments that are ‘demonstrably’ the ‘correct’ way to play a sequence. It’s possible that I spend too much time, as an amateur player, discussing system and style with my regular partner. Indeed, I don’t play kickback with anyone else because of the problems David identified.

[mycroft]

I love forcing pass agreements. I'm not sure this would be one (but I can absolutely understand Mike's argument that it "has to be FP, even if not defined as such in the notes, from simple bridge math").

But one of the reasons I love FP agreements is that when the TD is called on "she hesitated and he bid", the response is "per our agreement, pass is forcing and says 'I don't know whether to double or go on'. The hesitation says 'I really don't know whether to double or go on'." and let the TD rule with that information.

One of the problems with "gotta be FP in context, from simple bridge math", of course, is that the counterargument is "Simple bridge math says this pass has to be forcing. But thinking about it for a long time makes it *really clear* that passing this out isn't right. And since it *isn't* in their detailed notes..."

But yet again, I point out that the skip bid "expectation" is for *your benefit*. The proper response, provided you can back it up, to "she hesitated and he bid", is "she always does. It was a skip bid." (I'll also point out that the skip bid expectation is for the skipper's side's benefit, too - provided their partner does, in fact, spend the "expected pause" thinking, and not "staring at the pauser impatiently and with obvious frustration, then after the call, *now* starting to think about what to do", like frequently happens).

I hope that I would be able to figure out at the table that partner should never let this sit undoubled, partner will work that out too, and pass is my best call, in my 10 seconds. I might not be good enough.

[jillybean]

5♠? I am guessing as much as you are. That was bid at the OT, as noted when I posted the auction.

I didn't pass or double

---

Yes, I should have had 5♣