[kereru67]

One that I particularly dislike is repeating a 5-card suit over a NT response. That's contracting for 1 more trick in a suit your partner hasn't even supported and probably has a doubleton (or even a singleton). 5 card suits are not special.

[DavidKok]

That's a common mistake. Running to the five card suit is a winner on average, especially if your agree that hands with a singleton are not balanced. Disliking your partner's smart decisions is not ideal. Calling it 'the worst bidding habit' even less so.

[kereru67]

DavidKok, on 2026-April-30, 00:04, said:

That's a common mistake. Running to the five card suit is a winner on average, especially if your agree that hands with a singleton are not balanced. Disliking your partner's smart decisions is not ideal. Calling it 'the worst bidding habit' even less so.

Oh there are worse habits than that for sure, like inappropriate use of Blackwood and Gerber......

I stand by my dislike of repeating a 5-card suit in response to NT. Too often, people repeat a mediocre 5-card suit with a 5-3-3-2 pattern, find partner with a doubleton or singleton, and go down on a hand where 1NT would have made. Sometimes you have to bid 1NT with a singleton in partner's suit because your hand isn't strong enough for a 2-level bid. In systems where 1NT is a 1-round force such as 2/1 (not usually played at my club), the correct rebid is a 3-card minor.

[DavidKok]

Sorry, I only now understood your point. I was thinking of a rebid by responder, over opener's 1NT rebid. I agree with not volunteering the already shown 5 card suit on 1M-1NT.

[P_Marlowe]

kereru67, on 2026-April-29, 23:52, said:

One that I particularly dislike is repeating a 5-card suit over a NT response. That's contracting for 1 more trick in a suit your partner hasn't even supported and probably has a doubleton (or even a singleton). 5 card suits are not special.

Sometimes it is systemic, if you play forcing NT, rebidding your 5 carder is the / may be the agreed default option.

I have a bigger problem with partners, that deviate regular from partnership agreements because of some hunch, a cow
was flying by, something like this.
As it is, I have no issue agreeing to wild stuff, but if you say, NO I AM NEVER DOING THAT CRAZY, just to do it later,
I am ..., this is basically lack of tactical discipline.

The things you mentioned are actions done by player at beginning level, ..., a common problem is, bidding out of fear,
running towards NT, because they dont have a fit for p, not passing openers minor opening because of shortness.

[kereru67]

P_Marlowe, on 2026-April-30, 02:44, said:

Sometimes it is systemic, if you play forcing NT, rebidding your 5 carder is the / may be the agreed default option.

I have a bigger problem with partners, that deviate regular from partnership agreements because of some hunch, a cow
was flying by, something like this.
As it is, I have no issue agreeing to wild stuff, but if you say, NO I AM NEVER DOING THAT CRAZY, just to do it later,
I am ..., this is basically lack of tactical discipline.

The things you mentioned are actions done by player at beginning level, ..., a common problem is, bidding out of fear,
running towards NT, because they dont have a fit for p, not passing openers minor opening because of shortness.

Yes running to NT is never a good solution to a misfit. Just pass and stop digging when you're in a hole. Maybe the oppoinents will make a bid and volunteer to be the ones who go down instead.

[mike777]

Probably my worst habit is not better controlling my emotions. I feel like I am controlling 90 percent, unfortunately to partners it feels closer to zero.

I don't disagree that the result, showing frustration, does not seem to improve our game.

[jillybean]

Repeating the same values and ignoring the truth that I have a brilliant partner.

[awm]

One I've seen from bridge students is doubling the opponents' opening "to show an opening hand" regardless of distribution. Yes, I know the Italian Blue Team used to bid like this back in the day -- they were also (almost surely) abusing UI to distinguish the hand type, and the bridge students do much the same!

[awm]

Another one I'll mention is not knowing when to open with notrump and when to open one of a suit.

A lot of beginners seem afraid to open 1NT (or 2NT) and have come up with all sorts of reasons like not opening notrump with a small doubleton or with a five card minor, leading to bad results when they can't properly show the strength of their hand.

However, a lot of intermediates seem to pivot in the opposite direction, opening notrump with singletons or 5-4 in the majors. This sometimes pays off in the short term because intermediates have often spent a long time learning their methods after partner opens 1NT and really don't know how to bid properly after partner opens one of a suit. They may even have seen experts bid like this (typically either trying to "turn the hands" when playing with a weak client, or because of suit quality concerns that the intermediates simply don't understand). In the long run, learning how to bid over partner's one of a suit opening (and convincing partner to do the same) will serve these players better than bashing notrump on unbalanced hands, but it's often a block that takes some time to pass.

[bluenikki]

kereru67, on 2026-April-29, 23:52, said:

One that I particularly dislike is repeating a 5-card suit over a NT response. That's contracting for 1 more trick in a suit your partner hasn't even supported and probably has a doubleton (or even a singleton). 5 card suits are not special.

The one that bewilders me is 1X - 1Y - 3/4Y with way way inadequate value.

[pescetom]

mike777, on 2026-April-30, 08:02, said:

Probably my worst habit is not better controlling my emotions. I feel like I am controlling 90 percent, unfortunately to partners it feels closer to zero.

Me too and this a dual problem... it can push you towards an irrational decision, but also result in involuntary UI.
This is closely linked to f2f issues and one of the many reasons I prefer an electronic interface.

[pescetom]

awm, on 2026-April-30, 09:32, said:

One I've seen from bridge students is doubling the opponents' opening "to show an opening hand" regardless of distribution. Yes, I know the Italian Blue Team used to bid like this back in the day -- they were also (almost surely) abusing UI to distinguish the hand type, and the bridge students do much the same!

This is still widespread at lower levels in Italy and even at higher levels there is more emphasis on strength than on distribution.
It is only rarely (and certainly not automatically) associated with abuse of UI, although arguably not a good idea.
The irony is that if you employ an agreement that shows more precise distribution you are accused of misleading your opponents on strength and also end up on the cutting edge of WBF inspired alert regulations (can a double of a major promise 4 cards in the other major, even if the whole country says yes).

[kereru67]

I believe the modern style is to open 1NT on some 5-4-2-2 distributions that would be awkward to bid otherwise, yes? But I wouldn't with a singleton, even a singleton Ace in a 4-4-4-1 hand. No system caters to every scenario and sometimes you have to decide which small lie to tell. That's the whole philosophy behind 3-card minor openings after all.

I agree with Jillybean about repeating your values. Your partner heard you the first time, so don't bid again unless you have new information, or unless your partner makes a forcing bid. And by "repeating your values", I include voluntarily repeating mediocre 5-card suits with no additional values. Even if you're playing a 4-card major system, only repeat a 5-card suit if forced to.

[apollo1201]

Worst bidding habit that I see at the club on weaker players is jumping to show points and thinking it is forcing.

Or the reverse, compaining to partner I had 6 points what could I do (well, Kxxxx Qxx Jxx xx probably deserved 2S when it started 1m X 1NT now your turn).

A bad plying habit is immediately shifting to the preference suit shown by partner when signaling. It is only an indication not a command to play.

[blackshoe]

Playing a poor system (e.g. Standard American) because partner is unwilling to change.

[jillybean]

Continuing to play with a partner who insists on playing Standard American

[pescetom]

Playing with a partner who can't be bothered to RTFM (but finds time to play 10 hours a week)

[kereru67]

So what's so terrible about Standard American? I know 2/1 is technically better but it's also more difficult to learn. Standard American is a good workhorse when you're starting out.

[thepossum]

I'm just here to observe