Skip to Content

Bridge Matters

Dear uBidder,

You may have comments or questions about bridge related subjects such as bidding systems or our Star rating. Your opinion about uBid is important to us and all its users.

Please use our (support ticket) email address:

For bridge matters you can also use the Discuss board button in-app.

Thank you and Happy Bidding!
Team uBid 


Star rating

I don't know if it is correct or not, but my partner and I seem to get 2 stars always, although there are no suggested contracts for 3 stars...

Spel 143 sterren niet juist?

Altijd 1NT maar 3S kan down op een ruff, en toch krijgt 3S meer sterren dan 1NT.

Spel 11

Ik zie niet in waarom op dit spel 4 sch of 4 ha in de west hand goed zou zijn. Dat moet toch in oost zitten?

Spel 5

ik heb spel 5 in vrij korte tijd 2x geboden. Ik begrijp dat dat kan gebeuren. Wat me verbaasde is dat de waardering 2x totaal anders was. Ik bood met oscarrio en kreeg 3 sterren voor 4ha contract. Ik bood met bioberd en ontving 0 sterren voor 4harten omdat het in de verkeerde hand (?) zou zitten. Overigens was het in de "goede hand" ook maar 2 sterren. Of is dit meer een technisch issue?
Met vriendelijke groet,
Niek Brink

Deal 55

Can you please provide us with at least a basic bidding system for NS opps?
So far we assumed pretty basic 2/1 with weak 2D/H/S and strong 2C. This seems not to be the case.


brd 55

Dear Gabriele,

Yr assumption is correct, NS system is very basic. No Precision 2c whatsoever Smile. This specific board seems not consistent with that statement, because South is likely to have a Precision 2c opening indeed. We will discuss this with our editorial team. Thanks for letting us know!

Jan van Cleeff

Deal 124

Why does 4H score beter than 4S in deal 124? For both contracts to make HK needs to be in the right spot.


Deal 433


Giorgio and Wally did well here to reach 6D from the right side.

The 4S response to 2NT with only one key-card is however, in my opinion, a bit strange. I was expecting Giorgio and Wally to be playing:
- 4S direct : slam in Diamonds with 3 key-cards and a shortness (looking for 7)
- xfer to 3NT and then 4S : slamish in Diamonds with 2 key-cards
- xfer to 3NT and then 4D : slamish in Diamonds with 1 key-card (in Diamonds) + side King(s)

Admittedly, this scheme would have led to 6D from the wrong side; or 6NT (6NT is above 50% due to the possibility of a strip squeeze being present and detectable; but far less than Giorgio and Wally's 6D from the right side which is 100%).

Deal 140

My own standard for opening a 15 - 17 1NT with a 5-card Major includes :
Above all :
• 14 - 16 HCP
• 3 cards in the other Major
and then :
• 3-card Minor too hollow (x x x) to make a rebid on if partner responds 1S or 1NT to the alternative 1-of-a-Major opening

This hand suggests that another condition should be added :
• less than 6 control points (A=2, K=1)
(6 control points remain very desirable for a 14 - 16 HCP 1NT opening with a long ** Minor **)

A few simulations seem to confirm the validity of this additional condition : opening 1NT with a 5-card Major and 6 control points increases the number of cases where game or slam should be played in the Major rather than in NT.

Bidding system opps?

Which bidding system are the opps using? For example 2♡: weak with hearts, or Muiderberg?

Deal 140

Good bidding does not always get the best results.

Deal 140

Even if one sometimes opens 1NT with a five-card major – not my favorite treatment anyway, witness this hand why – I think it is gross with this control-rich, tenaceless, suit-oriented East hand which its small doubleton to boot. West cannot reasonably do anything but pass 1NT.

deal 136

I fail to see how 3NT is a better contact than 4H. With a diamond lead and the opps ducking the first trick you are always down with a 5-3 break or worse in the diamonds.
4H only is down in two very specific situations:
with South holding 3 clubs (which he'll have to lead) and AQ in diamonds
with South holding 4 clubs (again which he'll have to lead) and a red Ace.
I can be wrong of course, but to me the first seems more likely.

deal 136

Hi Erik,

Thanks for your comment.

You're only down in 3NT with a diamond lead and diamonds 5-3. Not so likely, because they have more spades and the one on lead can have 3 diamonds. The extra chance is that the diamonds will block.

4H is down in a lot more situations.

-hearts 4-1 and diamonds A and Q with south
-hearts 4-1 and wrong diamond guess
-singleton club lead and two aces in north
-club lead and singleton in north and two aces in south
-club lead and singleton in north, ace of trumps with south and wrong diamond guess


Thanks for the elaborate

Thanks for the elaborate reply. A solid argument.



Thank you for the observations regarding a number of games below.

I forwarded it to our editorial team.

Koos (uBid team)

Game 128

Why in game 128 does 7NT only get 2 stars? You have 13 top tricks regardless of how the suits break, all four aces and plenty of communication in multiple suits (unless I'm missing something).

That 7S only gets 2 stars is something I can understand if it's because in 7S you can go down if one of the minor suits breaks 6-0 and they get a ruff on the first trick, but in 7NT there is no such danger.

Game 128

You'll only get 3 stars for exceptional contracts. So on most of the boards 2 stars is the ultimate score.

Game 15

Each contract is shown twice in the least, once for East as declarer and once for West as declarer, instead of just showing the contract without a specific declarer.

Is there additional meaning behind this (like a contract in West is better or worse than a contract in East when it's named first)?

Game 15

It should only be shown twice if there's a difference in rating (stars). So no additional meaning, but a mistake of the hand rater.

Games 12, 13 and 14

And games 12, 13 and 14 also have this. All contracts are shown twice, once for West and once for East as declarer.

Games 12, 13 and 14

Same rater

Game 11

In game 11 only stars are awarded when West is declarer which seems weird because with a club lead it doesn't seem to matter which hand is declarer, and without a club lead it's actually East as declarer who has a finess option.

Is there some void taken into account that the NS hands have and we can't see or something like that? But still to award a star for 3S, 2S or even 1S in West but not in East seems steep.

Games 7 and 8

In games 7 and 8 a contract is better if West is declarer, but here too no stars at all for a contract in East seems a bit stingy.

Game 5

Same goes for game 5, only stars are awarded when West is declarer. Maybe I'm missing something but I'm not really seeing why it would matter who is declarer (unless the spades are 5-0 or something but the opponents never bid spades).

Game 5 and 7 up to 11

A mistake from the rater. I think every W(est) should be EW, because there are no significant differences in EW.

Game 130

On game 130 a 5C contract is worth a star, but that in the 5-1 fit (with the 5 card being a broken suit even and not a solid one). I think it should be 5D that gets the star, there you have a 5-3 fit.

Game 130

You're right. It should be 5D although 5D maybe doesn't even deserve a star, because you should be in 3NT.

hand 9

Bij hand 9 zijn er geen punten te verdienen voor contacten in West wat me wat overdreven lijkt. ..

hand 9

There are more boards with the same problem. See comment on boards 5 and 7 up to 11. We'll rerate these boards.

Brd 9

Hi Meike, we passed yr comment to our editorial team. The answer will be posted here in due time. Cheers, Jan.

Syndicate content