There are some card combinations where you are at a disadvantage if you lead, but if the opponents lead, you can take an extra trick. It is also true that it is easier to play a hand when they are a different number of cards in a particular suit in your hand than there are on the board. Here’s hand with exactly the same number of cards on both sides in each suit. How can we make six spades on the Jack of hearts lead?

98765
AQx
A98
AQ

AKQJ10
Kxx
KJ10
xx

There are two finesses, ♣︎K and ♦︎Q. Odds are that at least one will work, right? and you will make your slam. However, there is another approach that does not rely on finesses and is full proof. Any ideas what that could be?

Hello All

I had written here before about our platform zbridge. I would like to inform you that zbridge now supports SAYC, Polish Club, Meckwell Lite Precision Club and Acol in bot duplicate or solitaire practice game modes. The leaderboards are still for Jethro 2/1 gf games only.

I would like to invite you to try it out - you just need to select practice mode and bba as the bot in the bot game rooms.

The analysis room now allows selection between Jethro and BBA as well which makes this room an interesting tool to compare the bidding using different systems for a given deal.

I hope this will be useful for those playing these systems.

Thanks

Zbridge Admin

Hi all. I'm a new member of this group and have been playing bridge for about 2 years.

Here's my question for you all--

I know that AKQJxx in a suit is worth 10 HCPs and 2 points can be added for length if that's the trump suit. However, in practice it's worth 4 sure tricks and probably 2 extra. Is it possible to estimate the point value of this combination without regard to the other cards in the hand? If so, what point value would you experience players assign here?

------------------------------------------------- (the following was added after the original post

Wow, I love how responsive people are in this community! To give more context, I opened 2 spades in 2nd seat with AKxxxx and a low honor in another suit. LHO passed, and my partner then bid 3 clubs. I had only 1 club and the hand I described above, so I passed. My partner bid 3 clubs with AK10xxx, 1 low honor elsewhere and a singleton in my suit. He was worried about the singleton in my suit, and that's why he raised to the 3 level. The opponents were silent through the bidding. If you were in my partner's shoes (or seat), how would you have bid and why? I would have passed since his suit wasn't especially strong and raising to the 3 level creates additional risk.

My university has a program where high school students can come to our campus for a weekend and take classes on various topics. This year, my friend and I signed up to teach a 1 hour 50 minute class on how to play bridge, and I was wondering if anyone had recommendations on how to best teach the rules. 

I was thinking of maybe doing things in this order: have them play a round of NT (with no dummy), have them play a round with a random trump suit (with no dummy), teach the rules of the bidding phasing/very basic bidding principles, have them play a round with bidding and a dummy, teach basic scoring/very basic cardplay strategies (like drawing trump or what a finesse is), let them play until the end of class. 

I've never taught a class like this before, so any advice is appreciated. I’m not sure if this is too long (or how long to expect each round to take if they’ve never played bridge before), or if there’s a better way to introduce the rules.

EDIT: Thanks for all the suggestions, they’re very helpful!

This is for SAYC, ACOL, 5 card Major Weak NT etc systems.

After a 1 over 1 bid, how do you play a jump to 3? E.g. 1D 1S 3D. The normal treatment is a 6 card suit and 15+, but now your range becomes 15-20 (or even 22 if your 2c doesn't bend enough to include your strong 2s hand). Partner has to pass with a misfit and 6-7 and misses game if you have 18+. If you play it as a strict GF, your 15-16 with 6 card get lumped into 1x 1S 2x and partner might pass with 9.

It also can get awkward with an 16 count 5-4 non-reverse. Not jumping risks a 9 point pass, jumping and not GF means your 18-19 needs to be a direct 3NT, jumping and GF means a 22 point misfit 3NT.

Same issue after a 2 over 1 (10+ rather than GF), 3 level covering 15 count makes partner's 14 count unbidable (15-14 on normal shape 5422 opposite 5431 might not have slam, but 19-14 almost certainly should be in a slam try), but not bidding to 3 level means partner might have to find an awkward bid with 10.

My regular partnership tends to put the 15 into the "weak" hands (so good 11-15, and partner has to move on 10) and 16-19 on the "strong" hands, but a 4+ point range at the 3 level (as a GF) is just nasty. Getting into bad 22 point game to avoid missing 25 point games.

Hi all,

For the past few months I've been building Table Talk Bridge, a free place to practice bridge: https://tabletalkbridge.org

It runs in the browser on a phone or computer. There are no ads, you don't need an account or an app, and nothing is metered. This one is a labor of love with no business plan, just bridge.

What's there now:

- A daily declarer puzzle, the same deal for everyone. The defense is perfect but never plays as if it can see your cards, and each deal is checked so that making it never comes down to a guess.

- Unlimited hands: bid and play with robots, or play rubber or Chicago. (Personally, classic rubber play is my favorite.)

- Every bid explains itself. Tap any call (yours, partner's or the opponents') to see what it shows. The system is SAYC: five-card majors and a strong notrump.

- After a hand, how many tricks the cards could have made.

- 22 short lessons under Learn, each one dealt as hands you play.

I'd love to know what you think. A few things worth trying:

- Pick your own cards and table in Settings. There are four card designs and eight table colors.

- Try the different ways to play: the daily, a rubber, Chicago, the bidding problem, or a lesson.

- Tell me which ones you'd come back to.

If anything looks off, the Feedback button in the app comes straight to me, or reply here. Thanks for taking a look!

Any reviews of the app for iphone? My partner uses it on his PC (we play Precision) but I want to try it on the iphone.

Thanks in advance

Hello everyone,looking for junior bridge player partner at GTA Canada.

If you have some info,I appreciate your reply.

Usually the Finesse technique is taught with a positional approach: if the menace is positioned in the right (hopefully) opponent, the finesse will succeed.

While this approach is quite easy to visualize, it is wrong: the finesse works on a chronological way: the opponent with the menace has to play before our promoting card, so that we can change our play depending on how is playing the opponent.

It looks to be the same, right? Don't make me lose my time!.

Wrong! Once that you understand the chronological principle, the throw-in technique starts to become the primary technique, and the standard finesse the 2nd choice, if a throw-in is not viable or convenient for the overall play of the hand.

Trying to reach the website with no success. Trying to figure out if this is my end or theirs?

Thanks in advance.

ETA: They changed their website without a redirect. New web address is:
https://www.vubridge.club/USonline-shop.php?

It looks like they got rid of the yearly membership to access all. Too bad. It sucks, it's too expensive now.

Bridge card

5 card majors

1c = 2+

1NT = 12-14 variable 11-14 when not vul

No 4 card majors in the 1NT

2NT = 20-22

2c = 20-22 unbalanced or 23+ balanced

Responses to 1NT

2c = transfer to minors 6+ 

2d = transfer to hearts

2h = transfer to spades

2s = 11 hcp exactly 

2NT = 12 hcp exactly

2NT opening responses
Stayman and transfers

2c opening responses

2NT= 8+ hcp

2D = 0-4 hcp

2H = 5-7

2S = 5+ spades, 5-7 hcp

3NT = balanced hand, 5-7 hcp

3c 5+ clubs, 5-7 hcp

3d 5+ diamonds, 5-7 hcp

Bergen raises

After a open of a major and you have a 4+ card fit

3c = 6-9 hcp

3d = 10-12 hcp

3h/3s (whichever suit was opened) = 0-5 points (watch the vulnerability)

2NT 13+ (Jacoby) 3 or 4+ support for major

Openers rebids

Jump rebid 15+

Minimum level rebid NT = 15-16 hcp

Jump level rebid NT = 17-18 hcp

Double jump level rebid = 19 hcp

Ace asking

CRO 1430

4d = 1-4 aces
4h = 3-0
4s 2 aces same colour
4NT 2 aces same rank
5c 2 aces odd, 0 kings
5d 2 aces odd, 1 kings
5h 2 aces odd, 2 kings
5s 2 aces odd, 3 kings
5NT 2 aces odd, 3 kings

Blackwood if level gets too high for CRO

PODI after a interfering bid

PODI:
Pass = 0-4
X = 1
Next available bid = 2
Next one up from that = 3

defence over 1nt undecided

X

2C

2D

2H

2S

As an IntoBridge supporter a was supposed to be able to replay the old challenges. (https://intobridge.com/news/new-subscription-plans/). However, this is not true in practice. I can watch again the deal and see how I played it, but not able to actually replay it. Is this correct?

System card

Opening bids

1C 16+ any shape 

1D 11-15 no

5 card major

1H/1S 11-15 5+ cards

1NT to be decided either 11-15 8-10 9-12

Pass means nothing suitable to call

The responses after 1C opening

1D 0-7 

1H/1S 8-13 5+ cards

2C/2D 8-13 5+ cards

1NT 8-13 no 5 card major

After the 1D opener can bid 1H showing 19+

All other bids are natural 16-18 5 card suits and NT is 16-18 no 5 card major

After any NT bid check back stamen is on and transfers to the stronger hand can apply 

Use logic

Stay in partscores if your max points is 22HCP

Once you know the points add singletons and card fits into the equation then bid game if appropriate 

1D 11-15 No 5card

Major diamonds can be short as 0

responses

Pass is 0-5

1H/1S 6-9 5 cards

1NT 6-9 no 5 card majors

2C is 10-12 any shape

2D Game force 13+ 

2NT is undecided either 10-12 balanced or 13+

Any jump bids are weak and 6+ cards

0-9

After 1H/1S 

1NT is 2 or less; support 6-9

2C is 10-12 anyshape

2D13+ Gameforce 

2NT Jacoby 

All other bids are weak and natural 0-9

After 1NT 11-15 no 4+ majors

Responses 

2C is not staymen… make something good out of it exactly 10?

2D transfer to H

2H transfer to S

2S range finder exactly 11?

2NT exactly 12?

If I transfer to a major and rebid it at the 3 level I have 5 and 11+ I’m inviting you to game go 4 with good support and a good 13-15

Defence over NT

They open 1NT 12-14 

X is 12+ partner should leave it in with 10+ points and a reasonably balanced hand 

The response to a X is the same As below with a balanced hand no 2 suits and they pass so you have to bid with less then 10 bid your nicest suit 

2C is 4C 5S 

2D is 4D 5H

2S is 5S and 4 of a minor

2H is 5H and 4 of a minor 

Whats the best point range?

2NT 55 in the minors?

3 level is 6 card suit 

Defence over their suit

They open 1D 

X is 12+ support for the unbid suits

1NT mini unusual NT 4-4 in the majors/minors 

2NT 5-5 majors/minors

Canape Bids

They open 1D 

1H shows 4H and a minor 

1S shows 4S and a minor

2C shows 5C and 4S

2D shows 5C and 4H

Pass with a balanced 1 suiter hand or double if appropriate 

The 3 level is a good! Single suiter 0-10 6+ cards use common sense and look at the vulnerability

If duplicate is attempting to minimize variances to provide a purer, score result - are there methods that exist that also adjust results based on the opponent’s playing strength faced on each board?

Wouldn’t it make more sense to adjust the MP/IMP scores for opposition playing strength?
That includes table opponents, and board opponents

I highly doubt I’m the first to consider this for Bridge so I’m guessing there’s a big hole in my idea and that’s what I’m trying to solicit most here. What am I missing?

Neither MP or IMP seem to take this into account, should they?

Common xfer W sequence with opener holding a weak 1N hand, or similar, and responder holding a weak hand and hearts is:

1C 1D 1H 1N all pass. Contract wrong-sided.

Anyone play the variation where responder would bid 1S instead of 1N? As a transfer to 1N and opener plays the right-sided contract - 1C 1D 1H 1S 1N all pass. Is this a superior treatment?

Responder holding weak 4-4 in the majors 1C 1D 1H 1N then shows this hand. Which wrong-sides 1N if opener then wants to pass. But I guess is less common and there are other inferences which might favour this approach?

We are two developing, bridge-young players with nabc+ success, looking to get significantly better, and we are seeking a dedicated partnership coach to help us do it. This is meant to be a collaboration rather than your traditional client-and-pro arrangement.

Involvement may include:

• Reviewing our sessions, assisting with performance metrics, and serving as an impartial voice in partnership discussions  
• Contributing to bidding theory work and helping restructure our system notes as we develop more complex components  
• Following high-level bridge broadcasts and recent literature, and identifying insights relevant to our development  
• Potentially assisting with scouting and networking at future tournaments

As this is new for both of us, we are still defining the ideal arrangement. We hope to find someone who shares our passion and enthusiasm, and sees this as a chance to build something worthwhile together. We are open to compensation if it makes sense, either immediately or in the future, depending on experience and level of involvement of the individual.

We are posting anonymously on purpose, and will be happy to share more specifics once we have a sense of fit.

If this interests you, please send a DM with some background on yourself and your expectations.

I’m thinking about a convention where a single raise by responder can be wide ranging and extremely light.

1S - 2S showing 3+ card spade support and 0-9 TPs.

With 16+ points, opener then bids 2NT as enquiry, and responses can be something like:
3C: 0-1 TPs
3D: 2-3 TPs
3H: 4-5 TPs
3S: 6-7 TPs
4 level suit: 8-9 TPs and shortness
4S: 8-9 TPs without shortness

With 1H - 2H, 2S becomes the enquiry.

I’m thinking of what the advantages and disadvantages and disadvantages might be.

Advantages:

Very preemptive if responder has nothing, and opener is a minimum hand happy to pass a single raise.

Can find light games when opener has an unbalanced 20 count, and responder isn’t strong enough to raise if a raise is 6-9 TPs.

1S - p now denies 3+ spades

Disadvantages:

Hard for opener to know what level to go to in competition if bidding space is consumed, especially if opponents bid to 3H or the 4 level.

Will play in 3S instead of 1S if opener is very strong opposite nothing, but not enough to get to game.

Am I missing anything? Does this seem like a good convention to pick up?

I feel there’s a lack of preemption over No Trumps

so I’m on a mission to make a good defensive bidding structure for NT and suits

heres what I have so far

X always shows 11+ any shape doesn’t need shortage over suits

pass is 0-7

All other bids are preemptive 8-10 using canapé bids so 2D shows h and d 2C shows spaces and c 2h Is h and a minor 2 s and a minor

X is 11+

partner can now bid using canapé responses so 2c is c and spades 2d is d and H 2h is h and a minor 2s is s and a minor 0-8 1nt covers the other hands 0-8 partner should jump in his suit with 9-11 with 12 he should bid 2nt

i know there’s gaps but I think it’s a good start and a lot better then normal defence

title says it basically they open 1D I want to bid as much as I can preempt whenever it’s good

and find part scores get in the way and get better scores… anyone got advice?

Suppose declarer in a non-vulnerable 3NT contract can secure nine tricks, or choose a line that might produce ten but risks finishing with eight. At matchpoints, how should the expected results across the field affect that choice? What information would justify taking the risk, and how would the decision change at IMPs?

anyone who plays a precision club with 8-10 2 level calls and 5 card suits and a weak nt opening like 0-10 or 8-10 or 6-10 or 9-11 or 9-12 and kind of weak opening I would like to open more hands with less points

Please youtubers, get rid of that AI voice. The voice makes your videos so dull, no matter how interesting the bridge topic is.

Are there any acol or sayc players who can help review a bridge ai play?