Leaderboard

My favourite result was Zia and Chemla allowing my partner and I to play in 2♠ with a combined 15 count and a 10 card fit. You can't do better than all the matchpoints.

At the end of the auction East should tell the opponents that West should have alerted 2♠. I would call the tournament director for them but would not say anything else as the auction may be re-opened by the TD. West must take care not to take advantage of the unauthorised information (being told they have misbid). This means continuing to bid as if they'd opened a weak 2♦. I suspect most pairs play 2♠ as natural and either forcing or constructive. So it depends what West would do opposite such a hand. If West has spade support but has rebid 3♦ denying such support, this is very likely to be changed and may incur a PP. However if West's normal call is 3♦ then it will be fine. Probably not but the TD should investigate. The problem with regular partnerships is that they often read partner's behaviour correctly in these situations: the fact that 3♦ is anti-systemic gives them 'proof' of the misbid. However this never happens when 2♠ is correctly alerted but 3♦ is bid: now they argue that partner has an unexpected version of the 2♦. So I always sceptical about such arguments when it benefits the offending pair.

Never the 8 of diamonds. I don’t mind second highest from xxxx but I’m one of those, to whom David referred, who treat 10xxx as Hxxx. Even if I didn’t, the 8 is too big a card to simply throw away At the table (with screens or online, so I’m not conveying info to partner) I’d ask whether they have agreements about the length promised by 3C (for me, 3+) and what a 3D bid by south would have meant, over 3C. At imps, I think I’d lead a spade as the best chance of beating the contract. I’d like to have K108x but I don’t, so I’ll just hope partner has good spots, plus at least the queen. It’s unlikely, if the opps are competent, that south has five spades. 3N prevents opener from bidding 4S with say 3=5=1=4 shape (imo, anyway). On a good day, partner has AQx and declarer Jxxx, and we can not only cash four tricks but also force two discards from dummy before declarer knows how the round suits break. At mps, I think the spade too risky. While I think it most likely to lead to a plus, I also think it’s most likely to blow a trick…those thoughts are not contradictory. They simply reflect the high variance I accord to the lead of a spade So at mps I’ll try to make the ‘normal’ lead, which is, I think, a low diamond. Definitely not a club, btw. Not merely because I’ll never be able to lead another but also because there are too many holdings on which we blow a trick and/or a tempo, plus once discovers we led a stiff (which may happen as early as trick 2), a good declarer may be able to infer our lead problem. And, of course, we have the likely unenviable task of finding a non-fatal discard.