Ian Galletti is a experienced bridge director and teacher. He is often asked questions about all aspects of bridge from the laws to bidding and play. This clinic
publishes some of these questions and Ian's answers. If you have a question (they are all anonymous), please email Ian at iangalletti@btinternet.com.

Note.  Pair numbers have been removed and rows changed to preserve anonymity …

A fascinating hand, another one of the 635,013,559,600 possibilities that one’s bidding system needs to be able to deal with and, like many others, is a good test of the efficiency of your chosen system. First. What should West open? Once there would have been no hesitation because of the Principle of Preparedness, defined by Ely Culbertson in his Contract Bridge Complete which stated that you bid the higher of touching suits because then you could bid the lower one next time without reversing. More recently, it has been realised that if one had a balanced hand “no voids or singletons and not more than one doubleton” and held a hand that was outside the ranges of ones opening NT bids then the next bid would/should be NTs at the appropriate level. So the advice was changed for hands containing 2 x 4-card majors. Therefore with 2 x 4-card majors one bids the lower ranked (Hearts) suit because if partner had 4+ Spades then they would bid it at the one level, before bidding a 5+-card minor at the 2 level, and the 4+-4+ major suit fit would be found immediately. This led to players wondering if the idea worked for majors why would it not also work for minors? And because there is no reason why it shouldn’t, this has become modern bidding practice for many. So the advice nowadays is that “with a balanced hand outside of an opening NT bidding range then one should open the lower of 2 x 4-card suits of the same rank but if they are of different ranks then open the major suit.” So, on this occasion West was following modern advice to open 1♣ with their 15 HCP and 2 x minor suits.

Now, let’s turn to North with their 15 HCP and a void in Clubs, the opened suit. North has 3 biddable suits and should show them all and an opening bid with a simple takeout double. There really is no other choice, as North needs to discover whether their partner has a fit for any of their suits though some “experts” advise that it should deny a five-card major that could he bid at the one level. Indeed if East had bid 1♦ as once taught then North would have no other choice than bid 1♠ to compete. At least one North did bid 1♠ with his/her suit quality of only 7. The suit quality test for overcalling, is as follows: “add the number of honours in a suit but do not count the knave unless a higher honour is also held, to the number of cards in the suit” The total, in this case “7”, is the level to which one is advised not to overcall above without support from partner.

Continuing to East’s hand. This has 4-card support for partner’s Clubs and should, after North’s double, pre-empt the bidding to the highest possible level. The common rule about this, the consensus, is that one should bid to one level above that which the hand warrants ie, in this case East would normally pass but after the double should bid 2♣, thereby depriving South of an entire level of bidding. In this case South with only 6 HCP, albeit in the suit declared, would have been effectively silenced. Again, if East had bid 1♦ rather than 1♣ then West would have been unable to co-operate and would have been well advised to Pass and South would have had a dilemma: to Pass or bid 1NT over partner’s possibly weak overcall …

Interesting to report that on one of the occasions that North did decide to overcall 1♠, that South chose to pass, with his/her 6 HCP in Clubs, in the hope that the opponents would rescue and West duly did this by bidding 1NT, to show their balanced 15+ HCP, including a “stop” in Spades. This was an excellent opportunity to punish West severely because they were unable to make any contract, let alone 1NT but North chose to rescue them by rebidding 2 Spades despite a suit quality of only 7, that allowed the weaker opponents to get a “top” when North failed to make the nearly impossible contract! It is well worth remembering that an overcall could be made with a weak hand and good suit quality but a double should always show either a good or a strong hand of one of two types. Therefore a double should show either 1. Opening bid values with shortage in the suit opened (at most a doubleton) and support (at least three cards) for the other three suits. It should deny a five-card major that could he bid at the one level. Or, 2. Since the common acceptance of a jump overcall as “weak” the strong jump overcall of the past also needs to be shown with double: as a hand that is too strong for any other action, perhaps a balanced hand of 19 or more points, or a distributional hand with 18 or more points or the equivalent, too strong for an overcall

So what should the North that had overcalled do after East’s 1NT bid? If he/she wished to continue competing then the correct answer would be to bid Hearts, their other suit with a suit quality of 7, to give their partner a choice. The Norths that had doubled had an easier choice, as they simply had to double again? This would run around to South who would be forced to make a choice of 3 possible bids: Pass, 2♥ or 2NT. The least attractive of these is 2NT with only 6HCP opposite North’s advertised 15/16 HCP and shortage of Clubs. Indeed after both opponent’s had bid Clubs it was unlikely that North had any and would therefore be a communication problem in trying to reach South’s Clubs from North’s hand! The Pass possibility would have needed a Club lead from North to be effective but North was unable to lead a Club, so, the best answer would have been 2♥, as requested, and that is where the contract should have died for a top. It was interesting to look at the traveller, that showed that only 2 NSs reached the par Heart contract and 3 incorrectly arrived in 2♠ and two of those were allowed to make the theoretically unmakeable contract …

One of the others in 2♠ arrived there by first doubling the 1♣ opener but then making the mistake of bidding 2♠ over EWs 2♣ rather than simply repeating the TO double, to force South to respond after their initial pass.

Dealer S, EW vul, Contract 1♠ by South, opening lead 6C.

This, on first sight, mundane hand from a meeting of the St Julian’s BC is full of opportunities to learn about how to play Bridge: Bidding, choice of opening lead and declarer play.

The bidding should have been straightforward and was at most tables. Dealer was South and opened a natural 1♠  with their 17 HCP and this was largely passed out but those playing a strong Club would have opened it 1♣, forcing for one round and also, some Norths might have counted their 10s as ½ HCP to make a total of 6 HCP and bid a natural 1NT but all ended in a S contract.

The traveller (above) showed that most pairs (7 out of 9) sensibly stopped in 1♠  but one bid 2♠ and another ended in 4♠, possibly after a strong Club sequence. The Bridge Solver analyses shows that on perfect play and defence, 8 tricks should be available to NS in ♥, ♠ or NT and 8 tricks to EW in ♦, with their 4-4 card fit in that suit. However, the traveller also showed that 3 Souths only made 6 tricks, two made 7, one made 9 and one other made 10.

Bridge solver, like the reader has the benefit of seeing all four hands and so can carry out a “double-dummy” analyses but what would you have led from the West hand against a Spade contract? The singleton 6♣ looks attractive but is one of the 6 opening leads that allows South to make 9 tricks! In this case, a 4th highest lead of either a ♥ or a ♦ is best to hold Declarer to 8 tricks. Indeed, any Diamond would have done and any ♥ except the A would also have worked but would not have allowed partner to use the “Rule of 11” to calculate that declarer had 4 x ♥s and to use that information to help him/her to defend effectively. As it was, 8 of the Wests led the 6♣ and the 9th led the 3♥ and therefore 8 of the declarer’s should have made 9 tricks. So why didn’t 6 of them? And how did the 9th manage to make 10 tricks? That is a question I would love to have the answer to …

Those that failed to make 9 tricks after the 6♣ lead^* almost certainly failed to draw trumps immediately and thus allowed EW to make 4 trump/spade tricks with a Club and Heart “cross ruff” to make 7 tricks for the defence and defeat even 1♠! Try it and see …

* Using the “Rule of 11”, as declarer, one could work out that 6♣ was not a 4th highest lead because there were 5 cards higher than the 6 in the NS hands alone and E would have produced another (3rd hand plays high) if S had not wrongly played the K♣ and 11 – 6 = 5. So the 6♣ was probably a singleton or doubleton. QED

I would recommend that you use Bridge Solver: http://www.bridgesolver.co.uk/ which is a free interactive bridge hand analyser by John Goacher, utilising Bo Haglund's well known double dummy solver module.

Try the Solver with this hand here

Question: You have stated that you don't like Roman Keycard Blackwood. What do you prefer?

Ian answers:
Yes, I am not a fan of RKCB because it only works properly when Spades are trumps!  When modified to 1430 it sort of works with a Heart suit but it is never satisfactory when a minor suit is the agreed trumps. I prefer "Kickback":

Assuming agreed suit is Spades (if instead Hearts, lower all quoted bids one place; if diamonds two places; if clubs 3 places), then:
[1] Originator of the slam investigation bids 4NT (Suit immediately above the agreed suit), and responder bids:
5♣ to show 0 or 3 Keycards (KCs)
5♦ to show 1 or 4 KCs
5♥ to show 2 KCs and the Spade Queen (SQ)
5♠ to show 2 KCs but no SQ.

[2] After a 5♣ or 5♦ reply as at [1], the originator may enquire about responder's holding:
[a] of the SQ & number of other Ks (OKs), by bidding 5♥, to which responder's possible replies are as follows:
[i] 5♠, saying no SQ and nothing about any OKs
[ii] 5NT, saying "SQ yes" but no OKs
[iii] 6♣, saying "SQ yes" & 1 OKs
[iv] 6♦, saying "SQ yes" & 2 OKs
[v] 6♥, saying "SQ yes" & 3 OKs; or
[b] if only interested about possession of OKs, by bidding 5NT, to which responder's replies are the same as normal Blackwood, in steps, as follows:
[i] 6♣ saying "no".
[ii] 6♦ saying "one".
[iii] 6♥ saying "two".
[iv] 6♠ saying "three" (here, repeating the trump suit has no negative quality).

Question:

What are the responses to a weak NT (12-14 HCP)?

Ian answers:

The majority of the World's Bridge players use a strong NT, usually 15- 17, because they have a paranoid fear of being doubled in a weak NT. So, if you are going to adopt a weak NT, as most British players do these days, then you need to learn to cope with all the possible responses, especially when doubled.
First, as responder, do not be tempted to disturb a weak NT with a balanced hand of less that 10 HCP. Simply pass. However, with an unbalanced hand then one should make a “weak take out” into the 5+ card suit in the hope that this will play better.
If one has graduated to "Stayman & Transfers" then the first learnt response would have been "2♣", the Stayman convention, with one or both major suits and 11+ HCP hoping to find a fit in one of the majors and if that quest should fail then one bids NTs at the appropriate level, as follows:
2NT with 11/12 HCP,
3NT with 13-18 HCP,
4NT with 19-20 (asking opener to bid 6NT with a maximum else Pass),
5NT with 23-24 (asking opener to bid 7NT with a maximum else 6NT),
6NT.with 21-22, and
7NT with 25-28.

These ranges are all calculated using simple arithmetic. Another alternative is to use the Gerber 4♣ convention to ask the 1NT opener for the number of Aces he/she holds. The responses are 4♦ = 0 or 4, 4♥ = 1, 4♠ = 2 and 4NT=3. A subsequent bid of 5♣ asks opener for the number of Ks he/she holds.
The second responses learnt would be "red suit transfers" where the response of 2♦ would be a transfer to 2♥ and 2♥ would be a transfer to 2♠. Opener must complete the transfer without question or hesitation, unless the opponents make an overcall! The transfer could be made on anything from 0 HCP upwards and has the big advantage that responder then has another bid to allow him/her to describe their hand further. So, now to the answer to the question about how to make a weak take out into Clubs, or Diamonds, when playing Stayman?

If you are playing Stayman but not playing transfers then all you can do is to bid 2♣ (Stayman) followed by a rebid of 3♣ to say that your first bid was not Stayman after all but a weak TO into Clubs. Stayman in this case would be called “non promisory” ie not promising a major suit ...
However, if you are playing transfers, then there are several different common ways of showing a weak minor suit. These are as follows: First: "4-suit transfers", one of the first was created by the Marx-Sharples partnership, where a 2♠ response is a transfer to Clubs and 2NT is a transfer to Diamonds. The gap between the transfer bid and the reply enables the opener to say whether he/she likes or dislikes the suit of the transfer by “breaking the transfer”. For example, after a 2♠ response the NT bidder could bid 2N, instead of completing the transfer to Clubs, to show that he/she had a good fit for Clubs, suggesting 3NT may be a good bet! Whereas, if he/she completes the transfer he/she is signing off. Some modern partnerships reverse the meaning of breaking the transfer but I see no advantage in doing this. Tony Forrester, in his Daily Telegraph column has suggested another 4-suit transfer Convention, in which 2NT retains its natural meaning but 2♠ is a transfer to 3♣ and 3♣ is a transfer to 3♦.
Second, the is the preferred way of the English Bridge Teacher's Association (EBTA), where a response of 2NT is a "relay" to Clubs and if responder's minor suit happens to be Diamonds then he/she simply corrects to 3♦. This choice leaves the spare "2♠" bid to be used as a multi bid to show either 11/12 HCP as a balanced 2NT limit bid or a hand of 18+ HCP, looking for a slam. Opener then responds by either signing off in 2NT with a weaker range or bidding his/her lowest 4/5-card suit with a stronger hand ...
Third, the way that seems to be used by the majority of players in the Sevenoaks area, is to bid 2♠ as a relay to 3♣, which could then be corrected to 3♦ if diamonds was the suit ... Please note the pedantic use of the word "relay" and not "transfer" in these 2 last cases. In these cases it is a relay because it is offering 2 suits and not just one."

You will note that both these methods mean that when Diamonds are responder's suit then the wrong hand would be playing the contract ie the weak responder and not the NT opener, with his/her possibly unsupported honours and tenaces, Therefore the partnership could well end up making 1, or more, fewer tricks than if it was played the other way round because the opening lead would be "through" the opener's strength rather than "up to" it ... For this reason one of the "4-suit transfer" conventions may be a better choice than the conventions that simply have a "relay to the minors"?

Question: What are your thoughts on bridge timers?

Ian answers:

Question:
I am defending a 3N contract. Declarer has not played one suit (say, by trick 6). Should I introduce the suit (and risk exposing partner's stand alone K or Q) or wait (and risk not making the setting trick(s) that my partner has)?

Ian answers:

Question: What are your thoughts on reverse bidding?

Ian answers:
Recently I discussed “Bidding above the Barrier” and now I am going to discuss the very closely related subject of the “Reverse Bid” by the opening bidder.
A reverse bid is a rebid of a suit of higher rank than the opening bid and is therefore “above the barrier” and so must be strong, ie more than 16 HCP when a normal opener is considered to be 12 to 15 HCP.
When choosing which suit to open there are clear guidelines and one of these in normal methods is “length before strength” which could be rewritten more accurately as the longest suit first. With 2 equal length suits of 5+ cards one bids the higher ranking first without exception. With 2 x 4-cards suits one bids the major suit, if one of each rank, or the lower of 2 of the same rank and then rebids in NTs, at the appropriate level, unless partner supports or responds in your other suit.
Some would say that with two 4-card minor suits one should open with 1♦ but there is no real advantage in doing this if your rebid is going to be NT. Whereas opening 1♣ gives partner the opportunity to show a Diamond suit if he/she has one, so a minor suit fit should not be missed.

This is a very strong reason for responder to bid his/her 4-card suits up the line, especially if it would mean bidding a 4-card major suit at the one level before a longer minor at the two level. In other words to use a Canapé style, that the EBU states should be alerted (see EBU Blue Book). With 2 equal length suits of 5 cards or more, responder should bid the higher ranking suit first before showing the lower one next in accordance with the old Principle of Preparedness, that no longer applies to 4-card suit opening bids in modern bidding theory for the reasons given above.

Therefore, if partner bids 2 suits he/she should have a 2-suited unbalanced or semi balanced hand and a rebid of the suit opened would normally show a 6-card suit because with a balanced hand the distribution would be shown with a NT rebid and with 2 suits of 5+ & 4+ the rebid would be in the 2nd suit. So there are very few occasions when one would need to rebid a 5-card suit, even when playing 4-card majors. The bid of a second suit nearly always shows an unbalanced hand and usually promises that the opening suit is at least 5 cards long.. The exceptions are when opening 3 x 4-card suited hands but there are only three possible sequences of these using normal methods*, as follows:

1♣  - P - 1♦ - P 1♦ - P – 1♥ - P 1♥ - P - 2♣ - P

1♥ 1♠ 2♦

And it pays to be aware of the above …

*Bidding 3-suited hands using “normal methods”:

With red suit singleton open suit below singleton.

With black suit singleton open the middle suit.

So there is the rub, with 5 & 4 one should rebid the shorter suit to show the distribution but with <15HCP one should not bid “above the barrier” and therefore might have to suppress the shorter suit if it is higher ranking than the suit of the opening bid, unless partner should bid it, when supporting partner would no longer be a bid “above the barrier” per se. With 16+HCP and a 5-4 distribution with the shorter suit as the lower ranking, one should use a “high reverse” to show both the distribution and the extra strength eg 1♥ - P - 1♠ - P – 3♣ shows 5+♥ & 4+♣ with 16+ HCP. However, any kind of reverse is used to show distribution first but needs to be strong because it is a bid “above the barrier”.

* The art of bidding is used to describe accurately the distribution and strength of ones hand to partner. There are only 34 available bids between 1♣ and 3NT (the lowest available game contract) with which to do so. Therefore learn not to squander these with inaccurate or superfluous bids …

Question:
How should this hand be bid?

Bidding notes:
4NT - Roman keycard Blackwood
5♠ - 2 key cards and the Queen of trumps - oh dear!
6♥ - in a state of distress because it was now too late to return to 4♥

Ian answers:
There were several lessons to be learnt from this hand. The first is about the qualifications needed to bid “above the barrier” set by the 2 level bid of the opening suit. To bid above the barrier opener needs at least 16 HCP or “game going distributional values”, whereas bids below the barrier would show < 15 HCP.
This is because partner could bid at the one level with 6+ HCP and at the 2 level with 9+ so the extra 3 points, the equivalent of one trick, are normally needed to make a contract of 2NT or above opposite a minimum response. QED

The second lesson is about the flaws of Roman Keycard Blackwood (RKCB) when used with any suit other than Spades. In order for it to work with Hearts as well, it is better to reverse the first 2 replies and make them as follows: 5♣=1/4 and 5♦=0/3 often written as 1430 on a systems card. This is because with the likely holding of 1 KC by the responder, it is then possible to enquire about the trump Q with the rebid of 5♦ and still stop in 5♥. This would be impossible with the original 0/3 & 1/4 responses.

RKCB is also useless when looking for a minor suit slam because virtually any reply forces one to bid a slam so little point in making the enquiry! The answer is to use RKC Kickback/Redwood instead. Using this system one uses a jump to 4 of the suit immediately above the agreed suit to initiate the normal RKCB responses while still allowing one to stop at the 5-level.

The 3rd lesson is that North should have overcalled, so that NS could have ended in the par contract of 5♣x for a loss of only 500 as opposed to either 4♥  or 4♠ by EW earning 620. However, NS were let off the hook on this occasion because EW ended in an unmakeable slam – all because West bid above the barrier with an unsuitable hand for doing so and E was thereby tempted to use RKCB, as it was easy to visualise 12 tricks (6♥ tricks plus possibly 6♠ tricks alone) as long as all the suits were stopped. The 5♠ response to RKCB indicated that the slam was no longer possible because 2 x KCs were missing! Another flaw in using RKCB for the Heart suit!

A 4th key lesson, for Acol players, is the major suit agreement at the first available opportunity. As soon as West rebids his/her Hearts, showing 6 of them, there is no need for East to do anything else but support them with his/her 3-card fit, despite his/her 6-card Spade suit that simply becomes a potential source of tricks. This agreement of a major suit at the first opportunity is a very important principle of Acol bidding that is often flouted! The only exception to the rule is when one is going to make a delayed game raise after showing a good side suit and precisely 13-15 points or 7 losers. East does not know how many Spades East holds but does know that the partnership has at least 8 Hearts and probably 9, so needs to give West the good news. In this case, over the correct bid of 2♥, East would simply bid 4♥  to end the auction. QED.

East explained the jump to 3♥  as showing the good quality of the Heart suit but this is not a good enough reason to bid above the barrier with only 12 HCP!

Question:
This was the bidding sequence: Other side opens 1♠. My partner overcalls 2♣, opposition raises opener's bid to 2♠.  We are vulnerable, but I have 3 cards and a Q or K or A in partner's suit, a doubleton and 4 points in outside suits. Should the decision to go to 3♣ be partner's, or mine?

Ian answers:
Partner has already stuck his/her neck out by bidding without knowing anything about your hand so the only way you could cooperate with him/her is to show your support with a bid of 3♣. He/she knew that you were vulnerable when they overcalled, so that consideration* has already been taken by your team and your RHO's bid of 2♠ is a weak bid,  Your partner's relatively strong hand is sitting over the opener's opening hand ... so it is a case for following the often given good advice:  "if in doubt, bid" ...

Question:
How do I bid this as North after South opens 2NT?

Ian answers:
The bidding is easy if you accept that HCP alone* is not a good way to evaluate a hand. The 5-card ♦ suit is worth an extra “length” point. 1 + 11 = 12. 12 + 21 (mid point of 20 to 22) = 33, which is sufficient for 6NT. So you could have just bid it or you could have tried 4NT quantitative that partner should convert to 6 with his/her 21 HCP. QED
Even with 11 HCP you should have bid 4NT quantitative in case partner has 22, if your 2NT range was 20 to 22. However, if you were playing Benji then 2NT could have been 20 to 21 HCP, as it would have been if you had been playing with me, in which case you would need to add your “length” point to warrant a 4NT quantitative …

*One should consider both length and distributional “points” when evaluating ones hand. One point for every card more than 4 in a suit to count as one “length” point, whether in NT or a suit contract but distributional points should only be added for a suit contract. With a suit fit with partner then one could add 1 for a doubleton, 3 for a singleton and 5 for a void but without a fit but an unbalanced hand unsuited for a NT contract then one could and should add 1 for a doubleton, 2 for a singleton and 3 for a void.

Question:
What is checkback?

Ian answers:
The checkback convention is a gadget used after a NT response by opener. It helps find the correct suit and level. I like to play an invitational variant:
After a sequence such as 1C - 1S - 1NT, with no opposition bidding, then a bid of 2C by responder is “Checkback”.
A 2C response asks the opener to describe his/her hand further.
Responder must have at least invitational values 8+ HCP*/8- “losers”.
Opener can then use bids at the 2 level to describe a hand at the lower end of the 1NT point range and bids at the 3-level to show hands at the higher end of the range. So, after the above sequence a response of 2H would show 4 hearts and 15 or a poor 16 HCP and a response of 3S would show a maximum and 3 card spade support etc.
This should enable responder to pick the right denomination and level.
With a minimum and 2 possible rebids, opener then bids the lower one or with nothing further to say, bids 2D.
With a maximum but nothing to say suit-wise, rebid 2NT.
It’s rather like Stayman, showing interest in the major suits.
Note. ALL invitational or better hands must go via Checkback after a 1NT rebid by opener. That means that any other 2nd bid by responder could be passed.

*HCP includes length points (1 or every card more than 4 in a suit) and distributional points (1 for a doubleton, 2 for a singleton and 3 for a void or 1,3&5 with a known fit).

Question:
When should I delay drawing trumps?

Ian answers:
This determination will be made when you create your plan before playing the first card from dummy. The reasons to delay drawing trumps are:

1 Too many quick losers that need to be dumped on winners from a suit outside trumps when the top trump is missing.
2 You need to ruff losers in the short trump suit hand.
3 You need trumps as entries to set up a long suit in dummy.
4 You need to enter dummy to finesse in the trump suit
5 You are likely to lose control because there is a bad trump split.
6 You want to draw trumps, but need more information as to how best to go about it
7 When you need to use all the trumps in both hands to make the contract on a cross ruff.

I recommend Chapter III of Card Play Technique or The Art of Being Lucky by Victor Mollo and Nico Gardener.

Question:

How should we have bid this hand and how should I have played 4H as declarer?

Ian answers:

The bidding at your table went: 1♠ from N, 2♥ from you, 2♠ from S then 4♥ from you, after 2 passes. 3♥s or ♣s (to show your 6-5 distribution) from you would have been enough. Partner would have put you back into ♥s if you had bid ♣s and 3♥s is where you should have rested.

According to both Deepfinesse™ http://www.deepfinesse.com/download.html and Dealmaster Pro™ http://dealmaster.com/, only 3♥ could be made by East or West on perfect defence- but NS could make 2♠. However, you bid 4♥ and after South’s lead of the K♠ you should have made 5♥ easily but don’t be too disheartened. The traveller showed that only one of the 3 Wests that bid 4♥ made the contract as they should have done on the 9♠ lead! All the others in ♥s only made 8 tricks, as you did and those in ♠s made either 7 or 8 tricks. To defeat 4♥ South would need to have led a trump, a low ♣ or any ♦ so any ♠ lead would have given the 4♥ contract to East.

When S led her K♠, believing, incorrectly*, that one should lead the highest of partner’s suit, you should have comfortably made 11 tricks because now you had only 2 losers, a Club and a Diamond. All you had to do was lose a Club and then trump 2 Clubs, set up a ♠ trick with a ruffing finesse and discard a ♦: 6+2+5=11 or. However, if North had led a trump when in with the A or K of ♣s then a Diamond finesse would have worked instead. However, even if the ♦ finesse had failed you would have still made 4♥x for a clear top, instead of a “bottom”! QED. There was absolutely no gain to be had from drawing trumps before you had used dummy’s trumps to trump 2 losing ♣s from your hand …

* When leading partner’s suit, my regular partner and I would choose the 3rd highest from 3 or more and the highest from either a doubleton or a touching honours eg KQx or QJx … Using the 3rd highest means that partner can calculate how many cards declarer would have higher than the card led, by using the Rule of 12. Remember the Rule of 11 works for a 4th highest lead and the Rule of 10 for a 5th highest lead.. In this case the lead of the 9♠ would show that declarer had no cards higher than the 9 in their hand because 12 – 9 = 3 and the QJ in dummy plus the A in one’s own hand would have accounted for all 3 cards higher than the 9 …

Question:

How should we have bid this hand and how should I have played 4S as declarer?

Ian answers:

According to both Deepfinesse™ http://www.deepfinesse.com/download.html and Dealmaster Pro™ http://dealmaster.com/, the only game contract is 4♠-by East or West and both 3NT and 5♣ go 1 down. So, after partner’s old fashioned 2NT bid your 4♠ was perfectly correct and you should have made it!

When S underled her A♥ you should have comfortably made 11 tricks because you no longer had a ♥ loser, so your “losers” were reduced to only 2: A Club and a Spade … All you had to do was draw trumps (losing one in the process) and lose a Club to set up the Club suit for 4 tricks to go with your K♥ (gifted to you on the opening lead) + 5 Spade tricks. 4+1+5=11. QED There was absolutely no gain to be had from using your long Spades in hand to trump losers in dummy that could have simply been thrown away on your long Spades – if you still had them! Instead you allowed North to make 2 trump tricks unnecessarily.

West’s 2NT was old fashioned because as Eric Crowhurst wrote In his classic “Precision Bidding in Acol”: the “Acol 2NT”, showing a balanced hand of 11-12 HCP, as “one of the least satisfactory parts of the original Acol system … As the bid is allotted such a precise meaning, it is difficult to imagine that anything could possibly go wrong with it.” However, he continues that in practice the direct 2NT response should be avoided like the plague … Both the Baron 2NT (Balanced 16+ HCP) and the Jacoby 2NT (4-card support for opener’s major suit and 13+HCP) responses are a much better use for this space wasting bid.

As it was, West had a perfectly good hand with which to respond 2♦ (5-card suit and 10 HCP over a 1♠ opener) and this should have been the choice, then, over East’s correct rebid of 3♣ (showing an unbalanced hand of ♠s and ♣s), West should have bid 3♥, “fourth suit forcing” to ask for a ♥ stop for 3NT! East should then have had no difficulty in bidding 4♠ with the splendid 6-5 hand (“5-5 come alive” is good advice and with 6-5 this is even more true)

Question:

Could you comment on this hand please?

Ian answers:

According to both Deepfinesse™ http://www.deepfinesse.com/download.html and Dealmaster Pro™ http://dealmaster.com/, the optimum contract is 4♠ -by North or South +1 but 4♥ and 3NT , just making are also possible. So NS should be in game but no one bid it on the night!

How should 4♠ be bid by NS after West opens with 1NT (balanced 12-14)?

South with his/her balanced nondescript 13 HCP is fairly helpless, whatever convention the partnership are using as a defence to 1NT but after East’s “Pass” North might “protect” or “balance” with his/her two major suits and 11 HCP semi balanced hand and pairs 1, 3, 11, 12 & 13 clearly did so but ended in only a 2 level contract. 3 of them in Spades and 2 in Hearts. Two of those in Spades (by South) made the possible 11 tricks but those in ♥s (by North) only made 9/10 tricks.

The Norths that ended in 2♥s clearly must have overcalled “2♥” and been left there, unsurprisingly but it looks as if those in 2♠ by S must have used a takeout convention such as Landy (the one I recommend) where a bid of 2♣ is used to show 4/5 cards in the major suits. The Souths must have tamely bid 2♠ despite their hands of “opening” strength instead of the 4♠ “limit bid” that their hands were clearly worth!

So this hand is an excellent example of the benefits of using Landy as a defence to a weak 1NT opener and responding with a “limit bid” to partner’s openers or overcalls when one has a “fit”.

Incidentally, a Google search of “Defences to 1NT” produces nearly 80 of them, including Landy … so take your pick.

This hand is also a good example of how disruptive the weak NT can be if you do not have a good way to counter it and reach the contract that should be yours. Interestingly, the 5 pairs left in their 1NT all went down 4 tricks for a loss of 400 undoubled. This would have been – 1100 if they had been doubled but neither N nor S had the kind of hand that could sensibly double though, using Landy, or a similar convention, they should have reached 4♠  and made 11 tricks for +650 …

Question:

How should E/W bid this?

Ian answers:

Optimum Contract: 4♠-by West but EW could also make 5♣  and 3NT …
How should 4♠ be bid?

First, should West pre-empt 3♠? Consider the Rule of 1,2 & 3 that advises that it would not pay to go down doubled by more than 1 trick if one was vul v non v (200), 2 tricks if either both vul (500) or non vul (300) and 3 if non vul v vul (500) if the opponents could make game (+300 if not vul or +500 if vul).

In this case W was non v v Vul so could afford to go 3 down doubled for -500 if the opponents could make game (contract score +500 so at least +600). However the hand only has 4 Playing Tricks ie 4 x Spade tricks so – 4 in 3♠ which would be – 800 if doubled (ouch!), so it would not be a wise to open 3♠ though if playing weak 2s then 2♠ (-500 if doubled) would be OK.

North should not open the bidding unless playing a mini NT (even when vulnerable) so it should be two passes round to East with his/her 21 HCP unbalanced hand unsuitable for any kind of 2 level opener! Therefore probably best to open 1♣ that would be passed around to West with their 7-card Spade suit with 4HCP plus 3 length points and possibly 2 distributional points (for the singleton ♦) making a total of 9 points, so now certainly worth a bid of 1♠ to which East would now bid 2♦ to show the unbalanced hand with the strength to bid above the “barrier” of 2♣ ie to “reverse”.

West now knowing that partner has a “strong” hand with at least 5-4 in ♣s & ♦s could punt 4♠ to show no interest in any other suit at the game level, which East should wisely pass. Spades needs to be trumps in order to give any kind of trick taking capability to the West hand. It is lucky that the opposing Hearts are favourably placed so that 4♠  is unbeatable …

Question:

What is a goulash?

Ian answers:

Question:

Why can't I do a goulash deal?

Ian answers:

It is illegal. The Law is quite clear and though amended in 2007 remains strict, as follows:

Question:

Why do you need to make the opening lead face downwards and ask "any questions?

Ian answers:

Question:

What is an EBU 20b?

Ian answers:

3 A                   General

3 B                   Types of system cards

1. The tournament organiser or TD may allow the use of a simplified system card, such as the front of an EBU scorecard, if the partnership’s methods are simple enough to be adequately described in this form
2. The EBU 20B system card is the standard EBU card. An old style EBU20A may also be used.

I would urge anyone who plays Duplicate Bridge to download a blank EBU 20b to fill in with their regular partners to help them develop good partnership understandings.  I have 15 different ones in my EBU 20b folder to cover all those I regularly play with (except 2 that I have given up on as they are incorrigible!)

Question: How would you bid this hand? I was sitting East and doubled 2♦ for take out after a sequence of 1♦ - Pass - 2♦ 

Ian answers:

Your double of 2♦, if agreed with partner as “takeout” would seem to have been the best way for EW to reach a ♥ contract. However, it all depends upon what your “Take out double” agreement is? The EBU Teacher’s association advocates TO doubles up to 2♠  but there are many others who would raise this upper limit to 3♦ s or higher or even remove the upper limit altogether. What do you have on your copy of the EBU 20b?

After a TO x by you, West, with 8 “losers” should have been happy to bid 3♥, a limit bid based on the assumption that you had opened the ♥ suit with your double, which you should have been happy to raise to 4♥ QED.

If your double had instead been based on a single suited game going hand that would have once been bid with a “jump bid”, then you would have shown this by bidding your own suit next. Because “jump bids” are now almost universally treated as weak 6-card suits one needs to find an alternative way of showing strong single suited hands and an initial “double” has been chosen as that route, as a multi-function bid. However, even if that was the case, the ♥ suit would probably have been a better choice because weak hand are almost useless as trick providers unless their long suits are trumps and partner would only need to have 2 cards in the suit to reach the sought after 8-card trump suit fit …

The East hand also qualifies for a Ghestem style bid to show a hand of 2 x 5-card suits with a wish to compete. My partner and I use 3♣ in this situation to show Spades and the “other minor” so if the opening bid had been 1♣ our jump to 3♣ would have shown Spades and Diamonds … However, if we had used such a bid on this occasion I am not at all sure where we would have ended up! Over partner’s 3♣ bid I would probably have ignored both his suits and bid my 6-card ♥ suit that would only have needed 2 ♥s in his hand to have been the best contract for our side but there is no guarantee that he/she would have understood this. As it was he would have had excellent support for my suit and should have therefore bid 4♥ with his splendid hand, disappointed in the fact that he was not declarer in one of his 2 advertised suits!

As it was, your double should have been rewarded with a good ♥ contract, for which you had said that you had support with what should have been understood as a TO double.

Question:

Could you please comment on this hand in a 3NT contract played by East making 8 tricks?

Ian answers:

The first mistake made by declarer (E), was calling for the play the ♣A on South’s’s opening lead of the ♣6, instead of using the Rule of 7 and holding up for 2 rounds (7 – 5 (the number of Clubs in the two hands) =2) in order to cut the
communications between the opponent’s hands. If East had done so he would have only made 4NT instead of the 11 tricks that were there for the taking,- if East had played for North to have had the ♦ entry, eg K♦ doubleton (or trebleton for that matter!) and a doubleton Club.

So, after making the poor play of the ♣A, East then compounded the error by failing to set up the partnership’s main asset of a 9-card ♦ suit! If a partnership has 9 cards in a suit then the opponents can only have 4 and these could be split 3:1 (49.74%); 2:2 (40.7%) or 4:0 for only 9.57% of the time. In simplistic terms remember the rule of “8 ever, 9 never” for taking a finesse for a missing Q, presuming a probable 2:2 split, which if followed by East, holding the ♦A (first round control), would have given, if West held the ♦ entry for the opposition and no remaining ♣ to communicate with partner: 5 ♦  tricks to be added to 5 x ♠  tricks (as the cards lay), 1 x ♥  trick and a ♣  trick for a total of 12 tricks(!) except that the Rule of 7 meant there was a need for the deliberate loss of 2 ♣  tricks and furthermore, a ♦  trick would need to be lost to set up the ♦s, if they were split 2:2 (40.7%). So, only 10 tricks could have been safely made for an outright “top”.

A gambler might have made 11 tricks if he/she had played North for a doubleton ♣ ! However, a pessimist fearing that South might hold the opponent’s Diamond entry (about 6% chance) might have simply taken the 8 top tricks available to them: 5 Spades (if the Jack was to fall within 3 tricks) plus a further 3 Aces) for a “bottom” anyway!

Question:

How do I bid the following hand as West after my partner has opened 1D?

Ian answers:

With 15 HCP and a 7 card ♥  suit, giving you another 3 “distributional” points, you have a strong hand of 18 points.  Generally speaking “weak” hands are less than 11 HCP (very weak are less than 6 HCP), “moderate” hands are 12 to 15 HCP and “strong” hands are 16+ HCP but “distribution” points should be added to these for a total point count. 

Question:

I played two hands last week with > 20 points that were balanced with a 5 card major. What is a good way to find if we have a fit?

Ian answers:

Question:

What defence do you recommend over 1NT?

Ian answers:

Question:

What are your thoughts on this hand?

Ian Answers:

Optimum Contract: 3NT-by South. West’s likely Lead: 4♠. Result: +1 according to DeepFinesse™

This hand was another of these simple looking hands that produced many different results on the night, from 2♥  through 2NT, 3♣  and 3♥  to 3NT.

Interestingly the two Norths in 2NT made the 10 tricks that were available on a small Spade lead but the 2 in the correct contract of 3NT went 2 and 1 down respectively!

It is very difficult to see how one could bid 3NT playing Acol but if South were to open 1♥  and then incorrectly bid 1NT (as one did!) over North's 1♠  then North could reasonably bid 3NT expecting South to hold the promised 15/16HCP ... This should lead to an easy top for a contract that is impossible to bid using normal Acol methods.

However, that night, the actual top for NS was 2♥  by South making 11 tricks but S should not have rebid 2♥  with only a 5-card suit and should not have made more than 9 tricks on best defence!

Andrew Robson would probably advise South to open 1NT with his/her balanced 12 HCP and a disciplined North would pass with his/her balanced 10 HCP! So playing modern Acol the correct contract would have been 1NT making 9 tricks against best defence, a contract that no one found on the night!

So this hand exposed bad bidding, bad declarer play and bad defence and confirmed Bob Hamman’s claim that “The best play badly and the rest worse”.

If you would like to improve both your declarer and defender card play techniques then I would urge you to obtain a copy of: “Card Play Technique or The Art of Being Lucky” by Nico Gardener & Victor Mollo and then study it ... At the end of each chapter there is both a summary of the chapter and a quiz on the contents and therefore you don’t necessarily have to read the chapter!

Question:

How does one use Gerber?

Ian answers:

Question:

If you win the opening lead and wish to return partner's suit, or you don't win the opening lead but wish to return partner's suit later in the hand - which card should you return?

Ian answers:

Question:

If a table forgets to arrow switch on the first hand (of 2, 3, or more board matches) should they arrow switch for the remaining boards in that round, or play the complete round in the incorrect orientation?

Ian answers:

You should arrow switch the remaining boards in that round. You will have caused your scorer some inconvenience but attempting to play the boards in the correct designated direction helps to make the movement more balanced.
There is a very useful guide on the EBU website that explains the mathematics behind arrow switching and the calculaton that determines the number of rounds to switch. http://www.ebu.co.uk/documents/media/bridge-movements-the-maths.pdf

A rough and ready rule is to switch about one eighth of the boards in a Mitchell type movement.

Question:

How would you bid this hand? At our table East opened 1♦ 

Ian answers:

The first thought that comes to mind is the Rule of 2 & 3 that recommends that when you pre-empt you should have sufficient “playing tricks” to avoid going down more than 2 tricks if vulnerable (Vul) or 3 tricks if non vulnerable (NV), both of which would cost you 500 points if doubled versus opponent’s presumed game level contract that would score the game trick score (100+) +500 if Vul or +300 NV. Thus simple arithmetic shows that it is more profitable to sacrifice with a score of -500 than allow an opponent to score more than 600 points in a game contract … However, this is too simplistic and why I advocate the “Rule of 1,2 &3” for Duplicate Bridge or the Rule of 1,2,3 &4 for Rubber Bridge depending upon the relative vulnerabilities. In duplicate there are only 2 game scores, either 300 NV or 500 Vul so when NV v Vul you could profit from going down 3 doubled but if vul v NV then you could only afford to go 1 down doubled or 200 v 400+. However when both are Vul or NV then one could afford to be 2 down or 500 v 600 or 300 v 400.

How should it be bid? East has, if you are optimistic, 6 playing tricks and therefore because NV v Vul could afford to go 3 down doubled if the opponents have a game hand [and are good enough to bid it], which is not at all certain, so as first in hand it would probably be best to pass and see what happens because you are also in danger of pre-empting your own partner! However, if one is unable to resist bidding then 3♦  would be best and partner, knowing the Rule of 1,2 & 3, will know that with only 2 tricks (2 x As), to keep quiet and expect to go one down as 6+2=8! Moreover, you would miss the better scoring 2NT contract.

East could have argued for his 1♦  bid as follows: There were 9HCP, 3 x “length” points for 3 cards beyond 4 in ♦s plus 2 x “distributional” points for the singleton making a total of 14 points, QED. He could also have justified his bid using the “Rule of 19”, often used by better players, instead of the normal “Rule of 20” as recommended by the EBU. However, in both of the above he should then have had to insist on ♦s as trumps because unless they were the above two arguments would be invalid, unless partner had a “fit” for the ♦s and “stops” in the other suits when a NT contract might have been OK.

By the way, I processed the hand by Dealmaster™ (www.dealmaster.com/download.htm) (Note: the website appears to be offline at the moment) for analyses. The result was that the only makeable contracts for EW were either 3♦  or 2NT whereas NS could make no more than 1♠!

Question:

Should I only  use transfers on weak hands?

Ian answers:

I use transfers up to 15 HCP and sometime above because the opening lead up to the typical weak NT is usually worth at least one extra trick. The Weak NT is an excellent pre-emptive bid that makes life difficult for opponents, as they need to start competing at the 2 level, and easy for partner, who is immediately aware that he/she is sitting opposite 12-14 HCP of rubbish! Take the extreme cases of 4 x Ks = 12 HCP but "8 losers" or 3 x As = 12 HCP (9 losers!) which are both, even if you were to give the hands a couple of knaves, in my opinion, perfect 1NT openers.  Indeed, I would recommend that one reserved a weak NT opener for a hand of at least 8 "losers" and open a suit with a more robust 7 or less "loser" hand of the same strength ...  I know that one should not really count "losers" until after a fit has been found with partner but I find the Losing Trick Count useful as one of the many ways of assessing the potential of any hand, at any stage.

Question:

Can I pre-empt after a 1NT opening?

Ian answers:

My simple answer is "yes" but we are entering a minefield of partnership misunderstanding.

Question:

This board produced many different bids and results but seems a very simple hand. Here is the traveller:

What would be your analysis?

Ian answers:

There were many bidding and playing lessons to be learnt by both declarer and defender from a very simple looking hand! Absolutely fascinating.
It is a perfect example of when to use Stayman in Doubt (SID) to bid 3NT rather than the discovered 4-card major, a convention that I would not expect many of our members (OBC or St J's) to know or use!

From Double Dummy analysis (http://www.dealmaster.com/download.htm) it can be seen that 3 or 4 NT bid by N and making 10 tricks is the best possible result but how does one reach it and then make it?

Bidding.

Acol: The natural Acol sequence is as follows: S opens 1NT (12-14 HCP balanced) and with no opposition bidding, N should respond 2C (Stayman with his/her 2 x 4-card majors) and then convert S’s rebid of 2 H to 4 H. QED. However, that would miss the optimum contract of 3NT by N, unless NS were playing Stayman in Doubt (SID) when N, with his mediocre H holding might suggest to S that 3NT may be the better place to be after all, by bidding 3D (SID). South would look at his/her poor 12 HCP hand and agree that one less trick might be a better place to be and therefore sign off in 3NT. Bingo! The SID convention, like other conventions, is not constrained to Acol and could just as easily be used with other bidding systems though difficult, on this hand, if playing a strong NT and 5-card majors …

Ns that were not playing Stayman would have no choice but to respond 3NT to S’s 1NT and would have found themselves in the best contract for South but not the best possible contract! Because most Es would have led the S6 and that would have given S 10 tricks.

Play:

Against 3NT most Es would have led the S6, 4th highest of longest suit, and made it very easy for S to make the contract with an overtrick! DeepFinesse™ (http://www.deepfinesse.com/download.html), a program that has the advantage of being able to see all the hands, would have chosen the better lead of C3 to hold the contract to 9 tricks.

What does prevent S from making even 9 tricks is what I call the “Whist drive” mentality. This is the mentality that drives declarer’s to take all their immediately available tricks leaving the field wide open for the defenders to take all the remaining tricks,- so as to easily defeat them! Eg, in the above layout. Taking the first trick with the SK and then immediately leading over to the SA to start setting up the opponent’s Spade suit for them, instead of setting about to set up one’s own suit(s)! In this case the Hs and Ds and later taking the marked finesse in Ss to make 3 x S tricks. This is usually because declarers are too frightened to lose the lead, instead of first making a plan.

Planning the Play

The bidding is over, the player on your left has led and Partner has laid his cards on the table. Before you even think of playing a card, study Dummy and your hand and make a plan. Develop the habit of remembering the Play Alphabet: No one should mind you taking time to plan as long as you play quickly once the plan is made.

Other pauses should only happen when you meet an unexpected or freak distribution, which makes you have to replan but remember, it doesn’t matter how long you wait your low cards won’t turn into aces but if you had planned well and played carefully then they could become winners. Learn the art of being lucky!

A. Assess the opening lead

Could it be the top of a sequence, the fourth highest (rule of 11?), a singleton and so on?

B. Bidding

Can you deduce anything from the Opponents’ bidding?

C. Count your tricks

How many obvious tricks are there? How many more do you need?

D. Dangers

Can the Opponents establish a suit of their own? Is there a danger of your long suit being trumped?

E. Entries

Can you get to and from your hand and Dummy? How are you going to preserve your communications?

F. Finesses

Are there any finesses to take? Can you avoid taking them by setting up a suit of your own for discards or by waiting for Opponents to lead that suit?

Once you have done the ABC check list, then:

[1] IN NO TRUMPS

[a] Count your certain tricks.

[b] See if you can establish a long suit of your own even if it means losing a couple of tricks in it. (It is no crime to lose a trick. Lose tricks when it suits you, not when it suits the opposition.)

[c] Is there any danger of the Opponents establishing a long suit against you? Don’t cash Aces and Kings in that suit ‑ the tricks won’t run away from you. Remember the Rule of 7.

[d] Look for finesses ‑ and ways of avoiding them, if possible.

Note: Do not lead out your aces and kings and hope for the best. Doing so tends to set up enough tricks for the ‘Opponents’ to enable them to defeat you.

[2] IN A SUIT CONTRACT

[a] Can you afford to draw Trumps? It is often best to do so but not always ...

[b] Or do you want to cross ruff? (Trump one suit in hand and another in Dummy.)

[c] Can you make tricks by ruffing with Trumps in dummy before drawing Trumps? (Trumps in your hand will make anyway so don’t waste them!)

[d] Can you establish a side suit either by driving out the high cards Opponents hold or by ruffing them?

[e] Count your tricks and losers again.

[f] Look for finesses and ways of avoiding them, for example by throwing in an Opponent when they have no choice but to lead into the tenace.

Do all that BEFORE PLAYING TO TRICK ONE. Make a plan, then try to follow it until you have acquired enough information either to be able to continue it or to modify it.

Learn to count the hand. That only involves counting to 13 four times. It is not necessary to remember how many cards of a suit have been played ‑ only how many are left and in which hand. It takes time to learn how to do this, but it makes the game much easier if you can master it.

Above all, do not rush to play to trick one; do not simply cash all your Aces and Kings. Remember that you do not have to make every single trick but having planned you should now be able to play quickly. The quicker you play the less time you have to forget what’s gone on before!

Question:

I played at my local club on Friday night, we had 5 full tables. As it was a special competition night we had to have a one winner movement.
We ended up playing a standard 5 table Mitchell, E/W adding 5 to their table number, and arrow switched the last 3 boards.
I understand the 3 boards arrow switch, it being roughly 1/8th of the total boards played as calculated by Manning.
This doesn't seem very easy to score. Don't most scoring programs store their movements
with a simple board set indicator, so all boards are assumed to be scored in the same orientation, i.e.
you can only arrow switch a complete round, not a partial round? This means you have to manually adjust the pairings, therefore making the scoring process
much more difficult and time consuming. Surely there must be a more suitable movement?

Ian answers:

Indeed there are several but the more vociferous members of some clubs are insistent that Mitchell movements are best and it is difficult to persuade them of the many benefits of  the family of  Howell movements!
I have considered the 5-table single winner possibilities and there are 3 of them I recommend.

1.  Straight 5 table Mitchell with 5 boards a round;

2.  One of 2 x 3/4 Howell movements of 8 rounds of 3 boards;

3. A 5-table hesitation Mitchell with 6 rounds of 4 boards.

My own preference is for the first of the 2 x 3/4 Howell choices where Pairs 1 & 9 start at Table 1 and there are 2 x stationary pairs but as this would be unpopular with some of the other members of your local club. For that club I would suggest they use the 5-table, 6 round hesitation Mitchell*.

*This movement in not available in Scorebridge as standard, but Ian has produced a Scorebridge format movement file if you wished to use it at your club. Contact him if you would like a copy and he will send it to you as an email attachment.

Question:

I'm a novice bridge player. What advice would you give to improve my results?

Ian answers:

Card play techniques play a far more important part in winning at duplicate Bridge than bidding systems though they are also important but less so, contrary to popular belief! 

I own more than 2 bridge shelf yards of Bridge books but Card Play Technique or the Art of Being Lucky is the one that has done the most to make me a good Bridge player and I would heartily commend it to you if you want to start making one more trick than anyone else.  It was written by Victor Mollo and Nico Gardener, as the Card Play technique text book for the London School of Bridge, where I did my EBU Teacher's Association (EBUTA) Bridge teaching course during 1981.  Nico was the owner and Victor one of his teachers and both were founder members of the Acol team that played for England.  Nico's daughter Nicola is still one of the English Lady's Team. 

Question:

How would you bid this hand? Several players at our club ended up in 3♦.

Ian answers:

Question:

When I play with a new partner I insist that they learn and use my obscure system and conventions. It is difficult to find anyone to partner me. What can I do?

Ian answers:

Most serious Bridge players play the system that is most common in their locality so that they are never short of partners.  Moreover, to understand what your opponents' bidding means, one should have a reasonable knowledge of their systems, otherwise one misses out on a lot of the nuances of their bidding.

Question:

I made a simple mistake in my play last night and I think I let down my partner. What can I do?

Ian answers:

To quote Bob Hammans, probably the best Bridge player that has ever lived: "The best play badly and the rest worse", so please take heart.

Also perhaps consider these words from Fred Gitelman.

From ‘Partnership Profile Fred Gitelman & George Mittelman in Bridge Magazine July 1998

Perhaps Fred [Gitelman]’s state of mind is best summed up by the following anecdote:

'The first time I played in the Cap Gemini, Michael Rosenberg, whom I greatly admire, made an uncharacteristic error in the play of a hand. Having never seen this happen before, I later asked Michael what had happened. I will never forget his response...
"Haven't you figured it out yet?" asked Michael.
"'What?" I asked.
"Nobody is any good at this game. The winners are just less bad."
I learned from this experience not to punish myself too much for stupid errors. All bridge players should know this: Even the best players make bad mistakes - it is OK if you do too - don't let it ruin your game - just go on to the next hand. Being able to get into this headspace is very important to playing the least badly that you can!'

Question:

Do you recommend any teaching tools available on the internet?

Ian answers: