[inquiry]

First an introductory remark, I am going to use statements by MikeH and a hand he presented in two other threads in this Essay. Let me make sure a few things are clear. First, I appreciate Mike’s participation in those threads. Second, MikeH is a world class player, and as such he not only miles above me in playing ability, he has much much more experience than me, and as such his views will (and should) carry a lot more weight than mine. With that said, let’s begin.

The HAND.

In another thread, a world class player presented a pair of hands that he claimed “Ben’s” system would not be able to handle. Looking at the hands, he realized the “best” contract was 6H, but he incorrectly estimated that if I had them I (inquiry) would end up in 4♠, but that at least "he would play in 4♥". About 6♥’s he said, “I'm not suggesting that any method gets to the decent 6♥ (on the second hand), but I do know that I'd prefer the 10 card fit to the 8 card fit on that one and the 9 card fit to the 7 card fit on the first….. (and in the immediate post before this hand.. ) Please do not tell me your 'fix' for this.”

Since he didn’t want to hear “the fix” and since the thread was about opening 2♣ I just made a short reply to insure him that wouldn’t my auction, but I didn’t explain what it would be. But if I had, it would have shown how EASILY it is to get to 6♥ on not only the pair of hands he showed, but other related ones as well. The reason I didn’t post the auction is that 1) he wasn’t interested in what he calls my “kludges” and 2) the auction would have started on that hand with MisIry transfer, and was inappropriate for the thread that dealt with started with 2♣ (as he predicted I would open in his post).

Then, Mike read one of the threads on MisIry, and predictably, he didn’t like the MisIry kludge either. I will address a number of his complaints in the “complaints” about my presentation of MisIry in the challenge I make below, but the comment I want to focus on was the one where he said, “You ignore the reality that most top pairs are able to bid most strong 5-5 hands with considerable accuracy. Your method gains only on some unusual sub-sets of the strong 5-5 hands.”

The irony of his posting just one hand (so far) that would be related to MisIry contrasted with his comments that top pairs bid these with considerable accuracy was too much for me to ignore using the VERY hand he proposed and claimed (I think) that no (aka any) method could reach 6♥ was just too much to leave on the sideline. So now I just have to use his proposed hand to show how MisIry would be used on it.

The responder hand, in Mike’s post was this exciting collection.

Now imagine if it was allowed for your partner to tell you out loud, that he has at least 5H and at least 5S, and two loser, one in clubs, one hands can you imagine that you can make slam opposite?

---

You know that of the ♠AKQ, and ♥AKQ, your partner either has all six of these or he is missing just one. Why? Because if he only two losers, and at least one of those is in ♣’s, that statement HAS to be true. So if your partner is missing the heart Queen, you would want to be in slam. The truth of this statement is also obvious, I am sure you agree.

But what if your partner has all six of MAJOR top honors, is slam hopeless? No, slam can is a good shot if partner has Ax of diamonds. Why? Because if he has Ax of diamonds, the worse hand he can have is AKQxx AKQxx Ax x (he could have AKQJT AKQTx AQ K as his best). Against any of these possible hands where partner has two diamonds without the KING, you can reasonable hope to win 5♥, 5♠, 1♦ and a ♦ ruff in your hand.

So do you give up as finding out what you need to know is too complex (Mike’s “I'm not suggesting that any method gets to the decent 6♥ “) With MisIry, it is actually very easy to ask questions of opener in an effort to discover what you want to know. Let’s examine how this hand would be bid using using MisIry. To remind you, the MisIry auction would have started 2NT – 3♣ – 4♠ where 4♠ shows major two suiter, two losers, one in clubs.

The option I would use here as responder is to bid 4NT over 4♠. This 4NT, as those of you who have read the MisIry thread know, shows a “second round” control in diamonds and “slam” interest. Now, you can see you don’t have a second round diamond control, but those reading about MisIry know the “miserable trick” where you can often magically treats some xx and xxx suits as a “distributional King” (or second round control). The term I use for this is “distributional” in quotes to make distinct from singletons (I will switch to calling this a “non-material” second round control, in honor of Ottik’s work on non-material squeeze, and because non-material control is easier to understand as a “cover” of this nature where you have neither the King nor a singleton). The point being is if the partner has Ax of diamonds, you WANT to be in slam. The truth of this statement is self evident. Because he will have AKQxx of spades or better (not longer, but he could have the Jack or the ten or both), and the AKQxx of hearts. Also, if partner has A of diamond and Ax of clubs, you will need to reach some slams as well. In fact, as responder with this hand, you have not yet given up on grand slam as we shall see.

♠AKQxx   ♥AKQxx   ♦Ax   ♣x 2NT-3♣-4♠-4NT-5♠-6♥-Pass. NOTES, 5♠=♦ king working (material or non-material version), I have both queens. This is the worse hand opener can have for 5♠.

♠AKQxx   ♥AKxxx   ♦AK   ♣x 2NT-3♣-4♠-4NT-5♣-5♦-5♠-6♥ NOTES, 5♣ Diamond control useless, but I am missing a major queen. 5♦ what queen (paradox responses). 5♠ missing ♥Q. Since ♥Q is a loser and opener has a club loser, his hand will be this one, or one of the following, AKQJT AKxxxx void Ax, AKQxx AKxxx void Kx, AKQxxx AKxxxx void x, etc. Of the possible hands, the worse holding is the ones with Kx of clubs, but then you can throw a club on partners spade.

♠AKxxx   ♥AKQxx   ♦AK   ♣x 2NT-3♣-4♠-4NT-5♣-5♦-5♥-PASS NOTES, 5♥ = paradox this time since I have ♥Q I bid 5♥. So opener is missing the ♠Q and a ♣ loser. Responder knows that slam is at best 50% (should partner have AKJxx of spades, and could have no play if partner has AKxxx so signoff is clearly best.

♠AKQxx   ♥KQxxx   ♦A   ♣Ax 2N-3C-4S-4N-5D-5H-Pass NOTES, 5♦ is checkback for non-material diamond king. 5♥ is both, yes, it was a non-material squeeze, and I was hoping to throw my diamonds away on your spades and then ruff your diamond loser, and I lack a sure trick or I would not have bid 5♥. Opener passes 5♥ as partner with ACE of clubs and Ace of hearts would have bid grand over 4♠ and with either of these cards will bid slam over 5D. Stop is easy (same auction if you were missing K of hearts, or A or K of spades).

♠AKQxx   ♥AKxxx   ♦A   ♣Kx NOTES 2NT-4♠-4NT-5♦-5♥– Pass. NOTES, This hand is similar to the last one. This time, however opener is stronger, and he knows partner has four hearts to bid this way with no top ♣, no top ♠, no top ♥, and no top ♦, he surely has five hearts, although Jxxx is possible. Which such a dearth of values, odds are he does have five hearts, and a bid of 6♥ would be the logical choice. In the off chance that partner has Jxxx maybe hearts are 2-2 or 3-1

♠AKQxx   ♥AKxxx   ♦A   ♣Ax NOTES 2NT-4♠-4NT-5♦-5♥-6♣ – 7♥ – Pass. NOTES, Same as last hand, but the club ACE changed for the king. Here, you will not pass 5♥. In fact, you will bid 6♣ looking for a “non-material” club value. This 6♣ bid shows five or six hearts to the AK (so heart Q is one loser), and Ax of clubs. A hand like this or similar one with diamond void. The grand slam is bid then, elementary my dear Watson.

♠AKQxx   ♥AQxxxx   ♦void   ♣Ax 2N-3C-4S-4N-5D-6C-7H-Pass NOTES, Same as last one. If you go with the belief that your partner has five hearts, the ask for “non-material” club here makes the same sense as it did last hand. Of course, if you don’t want to play in grand missing ♥Kx you can simply bid 6♥ or, possible pass (because you might lose a ♥ and a ♣ in that case.

♠KQxxx   ♥AKQxx   ♦AK   ♣x 2N-3C-4S-4N-5H-Pass, No danger bidding 5H. If partner has ♠A or ♣A he will carry on to slam. Throw out the stop warning. This includes all hand with top club loser and missing AK of either major suits.

♠AKQxx   ♥AKQxx   ♦void   ♣Kxx 2N-3C-4S-4N-5H-Pass, A fairly good slam missed here, and change clubs to Axx, then a great Grand slam is missed. But those “MisIry people who choose to show a “non-material” club instead of a non-material diamond by bidding 5♣ over 4♠ will get to slam on the first one, and grand slam on the second one. I prefer the “non-material” diamond ask, as it simplifies asking for the ♥Queen.

♠AKQxx   ♥AQxxxx   ♦A   ♣x 2N-3C-4S-4N-5H-Pass, ok, ok, no matter rather you start with non-material 4NT or non-material 5C, MisIry will not get you to all slams, there is still room for improvement I guess.

As a fun exercise, consider the auction if responder's ♠ and ♣ holding were reversed. The hint is now that non-material 4NT will get you to slam if opener can use the ♦ ruff, or if either queen major queen is missing. Not to mention the slams that were biddable above. I hope you found this amazing, or interesting, or amusing. Amazing perhaps, because of the type of information you can seek and find. Interesting, because of the varieties of ways slams and grand slams pop up out of nowhere. Or at least amusing (what Ron called “fun” in another thread. Or amusing due the juxtaposition of Mike’s presenting the hand and double dummy implied no way to bid the slam, and his comment that “top pairs bid most 5-5 hands accurately” then he shows one that he (world class) can’t even see a logical way to bid it to slam.

Criticisms:
Before we get to the challenge, let me predict what the critics are on this post, based on past comments.

1) The first one is that transfer preempts when weak disadvantage you. I agree, I would never play transfer preempt without a second meaning, as here.

2) I “cherry-picked” the hand (implying that I choose this hand that highlight the advantage of my method). Richard has used this multiple times. I have tried to take approaches where I don’t select the hands. I took every hand played in ACBL tourneys one week (picking the WEEK before the hands were played). Richard said I cherry picked them. I then took all hands played on April 1, 2005 (posted on my blog, some here), Richard said I cherrypicked them. Then I took all hands played by Richard on BBO (his side or other with the strong misIry). He said I cherry picketed them. So it is a no-brainer he will complain about that I cherry picked this one too, despite it being used by someone to allegedly show the weakness of my system, when in fact it shows the strength (in my view) of my method.

3) Some will say that I made these auctions up to explain the existing hand and the auctions would not go this way (despite I have rules already stated in another thread on "looking for distributional queens" (missing queens in openers hand), and "distrubutional kings" (the non-material king of diamonds and in some places the non-material king of clubs discussed above).

4) However, a fair complaint, of sorts, is that the hands from OKB and BBO were bid by ((er, how should I phrase this? )) less than expert and experienced partnerships. This is true, and it goes directly to MikeH’s comment that most 5-5 hands are bid accurately by experts. This is of course true, EXPERTS BID ALMOST ALL HANDS accurately (q.e.d.) But I do disagree with the concept that I “ignored that most bid them correctly.” I choose BridgeBrowser as a tool to find the hands, because it can search tens of millions of played hands in just a few minutes to find ones that fit the shape/strength requirement needed to examine the convention. However, while this was the only way I could find LOTS of hands to examine, in hindsight showing what the results of the found hands at the tables WAS A MISTAKE. My selection of hands was never meant to say, “see only way to bid this hand right is to use MisIry”. I went out of my way (see cherry picking topic above) to use Bridge Browser in a way to suggest that I wasn’t “cherry picking” hand that work with MisIry and ignoring the ones that don’t. I wanted to show the good and the bad, not the difference between table results and the convention, but just if the convention “worked”. I wanted the presentation to be fair. Several people, however, have focused on the quality of the other bidders, which was not the reason for the exercise. Now on this pair of hands, mike might well suggest that this hand is an example of the few hands that maybe this convention would do better on the current expert standard (and Richard could show us Moscito relay no doubt). I will accept however that maybe this hand is that "rare 5-5" that mikeh talked about that disadvantages standard expert methods. Maybe it is just funny coincidence that the hand he selected is so extraordinarily rare, and that is it. But that leads to the challenge....

CHALLENGE
To investigate the implications of MikeH’s comment about hands using BridgeBrowser will not cut it. There simply isn’t enough top-class events in the database (Stephen you listening?) It is too much work for one person to shift though thousands of expert hands manually to find such hands (which is why I used Bridgebrowser), so here is the challenge. I would appreciate it if any forum member who happens to notice a strong 2 suited hand that fits the MisIry requirement in expert play (Vugraph, books, tourney bulletins, etc) to post those hand here with the results of the bidding. Of course, don’t wait for one that the pro’s do badly on, post all of them. Feel free to post ones from “expert bidding contest” as well. This is the only way I can figure out how to address the comment from MikeH and others about the “quality” of the bidders (when in fact, I never really care about that, but rather if the MisIry method itself works). But I suspect some will find the comparison (good or bad) interesting.

Thanks for listening,

ben.

[whereagles]

I'd love to help, but I don't have the time. Still, my main criticism to these openings is that the transfer preempt is far easier to defend than the natural one.

[han]

OK, I'm going to take up the challenge. Whether this is going to be useful remains to be seen, but I'm going to write about every hand that has something to do with MisIry that comes up in a Bridge World. Most likely nobody will learn from this but me, when I have to figure out the MisIry auctions.

The ony thing that I don't plan to do is comment on the negative inferences that MisIry gives. Although this might be the main reason for playing MisIry, I can't imagine saying anything sensible about it here.

I'll start with January 2003 BW, the same issue that I quoted Bart Bramley from in the previous MisIry thread.

Page 8

Scoring: IMP

---

In the Spingold, both South's opened 3C, both North's jumped to 5C, and both East's doubled. What would you do with the west hand? One player bid 5H, which went down 2 doubled for 300. The other passed, and they set 5C doubled 2 tricks for 500.

Playing MisIry, South would open 2NT, and north would have a tough decision. It is not unlikely that partner has the majors, and in this case you might have a spade slam. If you do jump to 5C, East-West will have the same problem as above. If you bid 3C or 4C then East-West should theoretically have an easier time, but it is hard to predict what would happen.

Page 10

Scoring: IMP

---

Still in the finals of the Spingold, the first north-south pair got to 4NT after a very scientific auction. Not a great spot, but when hearts broke it made exactly. The other pair had a quick 2/1 auction to 6NT. North played all out (first a club to the nine and then a strip squeeze) and made it! Still, both pairs clearly had great difficulty with this strong 2-suiter. How would MisIry do?

2NT - 3C (don't preempt when both opponents have passed, besides, you can see that partner has a 2-suiter)
3H - ??

3H shows at least 5-5 in hearts and spades, and exactly 4 losers. South possibly covers up to 5 (!) losers but there is no fit. I'm pretty sure that I would bid 3NT, expecting partner to correct to a major only with great distribution (in which case I will act again). This hand is easier with MisIry imo

Page 19

Board 4 of the swiss match, one of the opponents opens 3S with a solid 1-suiter without much on the side. Ben and I play 3H as any solid one-suiter without an ace or king on the side, a gadget that should work significantly better than gambling 3NT when it comes up. I don't see how you could play something similar without either giving up a hearts or spades preempt or playing transfer preempts.

This gadget could be used with the hand that Bramley gives on page 29 (J97 AKQ8742 Q83 - ), but I think that the hand is not appropriate.

Challenge the champs hand 1, page 36

Scoring: MP

---

Both pairs got to 6S, which gets 4 points. Once again both pairs have great difficulty with the strong 2-suiter, but I guess that's why it is a challenge-the-champs-hand. The top spot is 4S (10 points). MisIry auction:

3D-3H
4D-4H
4NT-5C
5D-6S

I believe that this would have been the MisIry auction, very disappointing. 4D showed 5-5 in spades and diamonds with exactly 3 losers. 4H denied a heart control. 4NT said that only the ACE of clubs would be useful. 5C asks about the use of a distributional diamond queen. 5D says that this is useless. 6S is straighforward: 2 working covercards.

This is a succesful MisIry auction, but still 6S is not a good contract. Does this show the downside of losercounting when there is not a big fit??

Hand 3
Although the East hand is 5-5 in the majors, there are 5 losers and this is too much for MisIry. It should be easy to describe this hand though, because you can jump-shift without overstating your values. I wouldn't talk about negative inferences though.

Hand 4

Scoring: MP

---

If top pairs do so well with 2-suiters, why are 3 out of the first 4 Challenge the Champs hands two suiters? Perhaps this is just a coincidence. Both pairs get to 6D, in 4 and 5 rounds of bidding.

MisIry will most likely go:

3D-4H
4S-5H
6D

The auction to 6D is simple when east just bids 3H, but east should make sure to get to game at least. 4S shows spades and diamonds, at most 3 losers (not enough room) 5H denies a heart control (bit scary because you might be off 2 heart trick. Still, you are more likely thinking about a grand slam then about being to high. 6D shows that any club cover is useful (therefore must have a doubleton) and denies the need for a distributional diamond queen. Pass is easy.

Not an auction of beauty. Still, MisIry got there even when a lot of room was taken by responder's jump.

Fortunately for me there were no other MisIry hands during CTC, so 3 out of 4 was indeed a coincidence. No related hands later on either, so I'm done with BW January 2003.

[han]

I forgot to give a conclusion.

Although the Challenge the Champs pairs had some difficulty with the 2-suited hands, they did at least as well as MisIry would do on these 2 deals. One of the pairs had a good chance of staying out of slam on hand 1, but bid a "lazy" blackwood, according to the editor. With MisIry there is no chance imo.

It is almost impossible to judge exactly how well MisIry would have done on the real life hands where there is opposition bidding. Besides, there is so much randomness involved (like the 6NT making on the hand above, needing J10 of clubs onside, hearts 3-3 AND a correct guess in the endposition) that one would need a lot more data to say anything significant.

[inquiry]

Thanks Han. But I don't expect people to actively look for MisIry hands (be nice if they would), but just if you run across one.

On Hand 4, you got the auction wrong. You had responder bid 5♥, but remember, denial cue-bids are only at the four level (or 3♠ if available.There is no reason to bid a scary 5♥.. you can bid a safe, 5♣. Auction would be.

Hand 4

Scoring: MP

3D-4H-4S-5C-5S-6D, where
4S = 3 or 4 losers, 5C = cue-bid, 5S= either club working, i have both queens.

Note: that after jump to 4H, the penalty is you can't tell if partner has this hand, or same hand with singleton heart ACE, where grand is laydown.

---

MisIry will get you to some slams needing an both ACE on side and good trump split, like challenge the champ hand 1. Change the hand to Ax of hearts, not KT, and the slam is of course, much better, needing only fair trump split.

[han]

Oops, should have known that auction!

[han]

In the February 2003 issue, Jill Meyers makes a nice case for MisIry in strong club systems, although that may not be her intention:

Page 10

Scoring: IMP

---

This hand is trivial using MisIry, let's see what Jill says:

"Using a big club system, there is never a clear cut choice between a natural opening and one club when you have a hand with so much distribution when you have a hand with as much shape as this west holding. One spade gives the best chance to show both suit, but is somewhat of an underbid; one clubs shows the strength but is apt to be preempted, especially here as we were vul. against not.

[skip]

I decided to open one club, and my worst nightmare ensued, three diamonds on my left, three hearts (natural, GF) by partner, five diamonds on my right. Any choice now could lead to disaster, and at an early stage of a set I find these decisions harder to make. I guessed to bid five spades and was very pleased to hear my partner raise to six.

[Chamaco]

Hannie, on Sep 4 2005, 05:50 PM, said:

In the February 2003 issue, Jill Meyers makes a nice case for MisIry in strong club systems, although that may not be her intention:

Page 10

Dealer: West Vul: EW Scoring: IMP

♠ A97653 ♥ 7 ♦ A ♣ AK1072 ♠ QJ82 ♥ AQ9654 ♦ K ♣ 98

This hand is trivial using MisIry, let's see what Jill says:

"Using a big club system, there is never a clear cut choice between a natural opening and one club when you have a hand with so much distribution when you have a hand with as much shape as this west holding. One spade gives the best chance to show both suit, but is somewhat of an underbid; one clubs shows the strength but is apt to be preempted, especially here as we were vul. against not.

[skip]

I decided to open one club, and my worst nightmare ensued, three diamonds on my left, three hearts (natural, GF) by partner, five diamonds on my right. Any choice now could lead to disaster, and at an early stage of a set I find these decisions harder to make. I guessed to bid five spades and was very pleased to hear my partner raise to six.

Nice !
I am glad it is becoming recognized the need, even in a strong Club sysrtem, to use specific openings for a 2-suiter.
Basically, I think that the principle that it would be redundant to use different bids for strong handtypes is somewhat biased (see Romex for instance).
Of course it does give up some preemptive tools, but the reward is porotecting our own methods from opps preemption, and making several other strong club sequences easier.

In the Precisioin version I am playing, I use 2S = generic touching 2-suiter, 4-4.5 losers AND 2NT = generic NON-touching 2suiter, 4-4.5 losers.

These 2suiters are usually 55 with 16-18 (but might be 65 with 13-15, same playing strength), that are hard to rebid when responder is weak.
Furthermore, the 2-suiter handtype is the most vulnerable to preempts when you do open strong Club., so taking the 2suiter out of the big club, protects your strong hands from opps preemptive actions, making it easier to bid (or penalize opps) when they do stick in.

[han]

good point Justin, I didn't think about that.

[inquiry]

Jlall, on Sep 4 2005, 02:54 PM, said:

Hannie, on Sep 4 2005, 01:02 AM, said:

Hand 4

Dealer: West Vul: Both Scoring: MP

♠ AKQ73 ♥ 6 ♦ KQJ105 ♣ 93 ♠ 8 ♥ QJ108 ♦ A92 ♣ AKQ87

MisIry will most likely go:

3D-4H
4S-5H
6D

So if the west hand was xx AKxxxxx xx xx MisIry would find 4H? That isn't very impressive. I cannot imagine not trying for slam opposite a 3H preempt red with the east hand.

Hi Justin,

MisIry would find 4♥ faultlessly. The "trick" to my suit hands when your partner opens MisIry is (as I explained before, but I admit it is long winding road) to bid your suit then rebid it. If partner "transfers" to your suit, as in this case, bid 3NT and when partner rebids to show his two suiter, then you "rebid" your suit. Thus, the hand you sho here, the auction would be....

3D - 3NT
4D - 4H
Pass

3NT = Pass/correct ... with weak hands and hearts, opener must pass
4D = two suiter, diamonds and spades, now 3-4 losers due to space taken up by 3NT
4H = This is MY suit and i am not interested in going on.

And Hannie, we had a couple of these hands in bidding practice so you should have known... :-)

[cherdano]

You misunderstood Ben. Jlall gave a hand for opener. The point is that if your partner opens 3♦ MisIry, and you have x QJTx Axx AKQxx, you have to try for slam opposite the weak hand, so you cannot bid 4♥.

Arend

[inquiry]

cherdano, on Sep 4 2005, 03:26 PM, said:

You misunderstood Ben. Jlall gave a hand for opener. The point is that if your partner opens 3♦ MisIry, and you have x QJTx Axx AKQxx, you have to try for slam opposite the weak hand, so you cannot bid 4♥.



Arend

Ok then, MisIry has a treatment for that situation as well.. A new suit by responder (instead of completing the transfer or jumping in transfer suit) is forcing. I was just trying to correct Hannie's use of a denial bid at the five level, and wasn't thinking about the hand.

So if responder in fact would bid 4♣ with the shown hand. This is forcing on opener. If opener has the WEAK hand, over 4♣ he completes his own transfer (only choice at the four level).

Note, the "forcing" new suit can be made with WEAK or STRONG hands. Typically with weak hands, it includes support for the "preempt suit" and long suit of own. The idea of long suit of own is to get out in your own suit should your partner have the strong hand with two suiter.

Here bidding 4♣ is an example of bidding a new suit with a strong hand. So opposite the hand justin suggested, the bidding would be 3D-4C-4H-6H. This is an example of with a strong hand.

Over 4♣ the auction here would be...

3D-4C-4S-5D-6D

Where

4S = 3 or 4 loser, ♦-♠ two suiter
5D = Strong hand (see why below) no ♥ control
6D

Why is 5D a strong hand? Because the only time you create a new suit (like 4C here) is when you are weak with long clubs and a heart fit (the maybe preempt suit), or when you are STRONG.

Here, having shown strong CLUBS, you will rebid 4NT as a ♥ cue-bid (with strong hand, you have already promised club values) (see note about responder not cuebidding in suit he has already shown). Opener with strong spades, strong diamonds, and hearts under control bids slam. Reverse openers club and heart suit, he passes 5♦. Surely the 4♣ bidder can be no weaker than he already is (AK or AQ of clubs, and Ace of diamonds.. and AQ of clubs and A of diamonds is probably not enough for 4♣).

[inquiry]

Back to Back hands in BRIDGE WORLD, vol 59, #10, July 1988, challenge the champs...

Scoring: MP


2!S = 10
2!C = 9
3!s = 6
3!C = 6

---

MisIry would end in 3!S, via,
--   Pass
3D   3D
3S   Pass

2C = ♦ preempt or Strong two suiter with ♥+♣ or ♠ + ♣
3D = pass/correct (after both opponents have passed, don't jump to 4♦
3S = black two suiter, 4 loser

One pair bid 3♠, the other bid 2♠

Scoring: MP


2!S = 10
2!C = 9
3!s = 6
3!C = 6

---

MisIry would end in 7♥ via MisIry Magic after a very short auction...

2NT - 3♣
3NT - 7♥
Pass

2NT = ♣ preempt or strong ♥+♠ or ♥+♦ two suiter
3♣ = pass/correct
3NT = ♥+♦ 2 suiter, 2nd round ♣ loser
7♥ = from your bid and my hand I know you have one of the following three hands....

♠A ♥AKQxx ♦AKxxx ♣xx
♠- ♥AKQxxx ♦AKxxx ♣xx
♠- ♥AKQxx ♦AKxxxx ♣xx

You can't have three clubs, since I hold ♦Q and ♣A, or that would be 4 loser. You must have two small clubs or else would not need 2nd round ♣, and you are missing ♦Q. You can have one or two red jacks. If you missing both red jacks, grand will 3-1 or 2-2 ♥ and 3-2 ♦...but you could have six diamonds or the ♦JACK

So for this contest, MisIry scored 16 pts on two handa. One expert partnership scored 16, the other scored 12.

[inquiry]

BRIDGE WORLD, vol 51, #5, Feb 1980, page 11 covering the third quarter of the a match trying to determine who would play the ACES to represent the USA in the 1980 Olympiad.

Scoring: IMP

Article did not say if NS was vul, but EW was. Wold and Lair reached 6♣ after NS competed to 3♦. Rotman and Lawrence stopped in 4♠ after 1♠ opening and a forcing NT response with no competition (1S-1N-2C-4S-P)

---

MisIry Auction

3♣ - 3♦
3♠ - 5♦
6♣ - Pass

3♣ = ♦ preempt or strong two suiter with ♣ and a major
3♦ = Pass/correct
5♦ = ♥A, ♦Ace or ♦K, another "sure" cover
6♣ = either ♦ working (5♥ would have ask if ♦ACE as usual)
PASS = at MP I would bid 6♠, but my ♣JACK give me extra comfort in 5-3 fit.

West can even try for GRAND by bidding 5♥ over 5♦. This ask if ♦ control is ACE or KING. If partner signs off, it is the king. Opener then carries on to slam since king works. If responder bids slam, opener can shoot for grand slam, as, the two red aces, means the small ♦ can be thrown on ♥ACE. If responder signs off in 5♠ after opener ask about the ♦Ace, opener can raise to 6♠.

[inquiry]

Scoring: IMP

Gov BI Cup, Round Robin IXA, Sept 15, 2005
Netherlands verus USA

---

MisIry Auction
West North East South

 -     -     -     2NT
Pass   4♣   4♦   4♥
  5♦   ? ?


4♥ in competition here shows ♥/♠ two suiter, 3 or 4 losers

I would like to think north would bid 5♥ as a two way shot. Partner may have 3 losers where the ♠Q makes game, or with 4 losers, something might be finessable through the 4♦ bidder. Lacking that, 5♦ at this vul might make. Even if north simply passes 5♦, it is a good bet now that south would bid 5♥ like Muller did for the netherlands below

Netherlands...

-- -- -- 1♥
Ps 2♥ 3♦ 4♥
5♦ Ps Ps 5♥
Dbl all pass


USA
-- -- -- 1♥
Ps 1N 3♦ 3♠
3N 4♥ 4N All pass

4N (and 5D) come screaming home, 5♥ down one.. so Netherlands picked uo 11 imps. I particularily like the direct 2♥ raise by de Wijs. That is what I would have bid over 1♥ too, but then I do not play this raise as "constructive."

[Echognome]

On this last hand, why would North bump the auction when he "knows" that South has a strong 2-suiter with hearts? It's not likely that South has 6+ clubs and if he does, then North can compete later. It's not that it matters on the hand, but just trying to understand the rational.

[cherdano]

Playing unmodified MisIry, I also think that responder should be allowed to guess with almost no points and 5/6+cards in the preempt suit that opener has the strong variant. Maybe Ben is just bumping to not make it look like he is making life too easy for him in the example auctions.

Btw, I also think that MisIry preempts should be a little more disciplined, as it is a little harder for responder to bid constructively. So maybe almost no 6-card suits, at most one card outside etc.

Arend

[han]

I agree that there should be no bump on this hand, it is too unlikely that partner holds clubs. Of course with modified MisIry opener would bid 3D and there would be no such issue, as usual.

I think that giving up on 6-card preempts is too much to ask for Arend. I will start a rebellion if I can't preempt with xxx x xxx KQJ10xx.

[inquiry]

Echognome, on Sep 16 2005, 12:01 PM, said:

On this last hand, why would North bump the auction when he "knows" that South has a strong 2-suiter with hearts? It's not likely that South has 6+ clubs and if he does, then North can compete later. It's not that it matters on the hand, but just trying to understand the rational.

It is easier to take the sacrafice if the bidding starts... 2NT-P-3C-3D...

South would bid 3H (on schedule, with 4 losers). North will raise to 4♥ making the "sacrafice" by south even more clear cut given the nature of his hand.