2Macchiato

Most normal people would be passing 2N through weakness. Therefore 3D is very much forcing - partner can easily co-operate with a cue bid. Alternatively 2N as a strong (18-19 balanced) fit raise (good honour support) and 3N as a value bid with no ambition in diamonds (e.g. xxx/xx/Jx types) balanced 18-19 is perfectly reasonable agreement.

Partner has gone out of his way to avoid 3N and 3-4H - game seems to be the extent of your ambition but 5D played by you also not so wonderful. Partner should have something like ?24? shape. Since there's no reason to assume that partner has some wonderful, perfect hand the priority must be to find a good spot. 4H looks a reasonable shout. If you tell me 6D is making 4H is unlikely to be a disaster. Partner could have made a different call in support of Diamonds (3S/4C) and hasn't. 5-2 (probably) Heart fit won't be the worst thing you've ever landed in.

Well - since you are the first and only contributor you might as well take the acclaim. I did indeed lead the J of Spades and dummy hit with this: Kxx JTx xxx Kxxx Partner encourages (small) as declarer wins with Q and advances Q of clubs. You naturally take this and continue with 9 of spades. Partner rapidly takes 4 spades tricks (ATxxx) and, after some thought (with you signalling count and (painlessly) throwing 3 of your 4 hearts - plays a diamond (Kxxx) - you wrap up 4 Spades, 4 Diamonds and the 2 aces for 2200 and 19 imps. As it happens there's no losing decision - declarer is one off at best on the wrong lead against our making 2D contract!

Sure, it's Hearts or Hearts and a Minor - and the partnership has no penalty double. Go peacefully into the night?

[hv=d=e&v=e&s=sj9h7542daj83ca43]133|100|Scoring: IMPs (Teams of 4) 1NT - X* - P** - P XX+ - P - P++ - P 1NT - 12/14 * Hearts or Hearts and a Minor ** Demands Redouble + Perforce ++ Presumably some points and no reason to run from 1Nxx [/hv] Over to you! Partner has chosen to pass (at favourable) and we know RHO has a weak NT 12-14 and LHO has a few points - one presumes - at red to green.

First 4 bids fine. 3S is OK but since partner has now committed to game (he didn't bid 2S/2N/3D or 3H) 3D is better. You can follow up with 4S later to totally pattern out your hand (surely consistent with a 3460 shape having (a) reversed (b.) bid the 4 card side suit and (c.) shown latent spade support for a potential 4c holding in partner's hand. So, over 3D you might reason partner could: 1. Reluctantly support your hearts 2. Bid 3N (a reasonable assumption) 3. Raise the Diamonds (he might have more than a doubleton, or here an excellent Qx) I like 4D now from partner - this gives you room to move forward - you surely only have 3 black cards and he holds at least 2 controls. You should reach a good 6D contract (but, given his J ♥ 6NT is the top spot... in all probability a simple 6D over your 4H cue is enough.

You want a Rant - here goes - some random partners actions: (from some time ago in BBO) 1 no oppos bidding... 2c me - 2h - 2n - partner PASSES having made a positive!!! - 4h cold 2 no oppos bidding... 1C-1D-2N-6N .. just the 13 count for partner's 2n - so clearly my 16 count wasn't enough - 2 down (can be more) 3 Partner in 4H... 1S - 2H - 2S - 4H.. is cold for 1 off.. so opps take top spade, play trump then..ak club (yes - great!).. now what? ruff your clubs high, play trump (and 3rd trump if 3-1) to ace and claim perhaps? No.. he plays a Diamond... and quietly concedes down 1 then... 4 how about (self as dealer): 1s 2c p 2d p 2n p 3d p 4d 4h!!!! (wtf!!) 5d x (seems sensible AJS h to lead.. ♦KTxx Kx c) p 5h!!!!!!! someone doubled i didnt wait to see the carnage and what's this 4H-5H on you ask? xxx QTxxxx void Jxxx 5 or.. 1h p p 1s p 2s p 3s p 4s.. just the 16 pts opposite my 11.. making an absolute hash of the 2 hands, locking himself in hand, it's totally cold - or it was!!!!! 6 partner leads 9 from QJ9.. any sensible lead from any other suit beats 4h.. makes up 2 7 this one might take some surpassing.. 2h weak.. p (just)3h 5c p p 5h!!!!!!!!! (vulnerable) p p 5s x 6c p p x totally cold 11 imps given away with gay abandon

A lot of these problems regarding the appropriateness of cue bidding and splinters evaporate if you agree that - in principle - you should splinter (and co-operate) with good controls and decent trumps. In other words don't over commit to the 5 level and beyond without the (semblance) of controls in your hand. I'm advocating that, if you have a great 17 count but only one ace you shouldn't be acting too quickly to proceed to the 5 level and, by the same measure, if you have a poor trump holding you end up at the 5 level (or heaven help you, beyond that) with the opponents holding (at least) 2 of the 3 big trump cards. I would never splinter without at least some (if not most) of these features and would expect a good partner to readily cooperate if he or she also held like for like features - rapidly signing off when this does not apply (unless they are forced into cooperation by a second effort). Similarly I would advocate never bidding 1M-4M on side suit controls - it should be reserved for control poor hands of moderate - even poor - counts (in the manner of the TNT raise). Obviously there are no golden rules but the presence of side suit controls is vital to give partner the opportunity to go beyond game. With this in mind partner will only rarely proceed over 1 M - 4 M and only then on an exceptional control rich hand - or one with a significant source of tricks (6-5 shape for example).

Stayman works if you hear 2 ♥ and to a lesser extent 2 ♠ - but is horrible over 2 ♦ Best decide where you think the hand belongs - Clubs IMO - and transfer accordingly.

Just do something sensible. 3N is not sensible. Double emphasises your heart / diamond holding (you have to cope with the awkward 4 ♣ response. I'd bear in mind that 3 ♠ is liable to be weak and gives you a problem. Obviously you can solve this with Pass (timid), 3N (risky), Double (noting that partner had an opportunity to bid already) - that's pretty much it (unless you fancy 4 ♥ !) I'd be inclined to Double.

I'm sure 4-6 GF isn't a problem. If someone can enlighten me as to the extra value to a system Keri offers (or Gladiator for that matter) then I'm willing to listen and suggest it can or should already there for any established partnership in any given situation - whether it be some form of Lebensohl (or similar) in competition - or various Stayman sequences with continuations (to give but 2 examples). Bridge is not (an exact) science - you show what you have and partner can react accordingly.

Excellent point And for those who play Exclusion how about the switch back from partner: 3S ♠ Splinter 3N - Asking bid - 4 ♣ singleton (or King) - all other bids RKCB with a VOID guaranteed.

1. Can you guarantee 5 ♥? Probably not if partner has the worst kind of hand (points in Spades for example) 2. Should you use RKCB (or any Blackwood (except Voidwood) with a void? undoubtedly NO So, start with 3 ♠ - clearly a splinter (control - potentially a void) and see what partner says - clearly you are hoping for 4 ♣ since a club lead might result in establishing a club winner for the defence to go with the putative trump winner. Partner may - on the other hand - have excellent spades to pitch your club losers (we will assume some early entry to his hand via trump or diamond ruff. Your priority must be however to get some co-operation from partner. It's possible partner may have nothing to add at all - or even at this stage (good trumps nothing else) - so you should probably consider a 2nd effort - 3 ♠ 4♥ 5 ♥ will force him to address the quality of his trumps for slam.

So, partner opens 1N - everything for me revolves around the use of the (semi-vacant) 2 ♠ response. Once you determine what you are comfortable with: one (or more) from: Raise to 2N / Baron / Clubs (weak or strong with 2N/3C options) / either minor weak or strong.. Then you know what the rest of your system requirements will be and can accommodate for example 4 Maj 6 Minor (weak or otherwise) into your agreed responses. I see no particular reason to abandon relatively standard Stayman (promissory or otherwise) and (at least 2 Suit) Transfers and continuations simply to cater for those 1 in 2000 hands Bridge is hard enough at times without resource to complex memory checks! And good point Blackshoe :P

2 ♦ correct - 3 ♠ incorrect Michaels is, ideally 55 (but obviously sometimes 65/56 (66 if you're really lucky) - 54/45 for the adventurous. In any event I believe it's best served for hands with < 12 and > 15/16 points (and with those in between it's often right to pattern the hand out and bid the 2 suits (higher one first). Since partner had the weaker end of the Michaels bid he had nothing further to contribute to the bidding - even if acknowledging your 'free-ish' bid and his inclination to say 'I have a maximum passed hand partner' . Had the 'responder' had more he could have invited (by bidding 3S) or forced by bidding 3 ♦ etc - on other occasions. I agree partner could have opened. Given his failure to do so he is already limited in any event. If 4 ♠ is making this strikes me as a Post Mortem argument - since your moderate (albeit complementary) values can scarcely be known to partner at the time of his 3 ♠ bid. Get in and Get Out - for me you have to have a pretty unusual or strong hand to justify a 2nd bite. It's the responder (to the Michael's bid) who makes the decisions - and of course will depend on a) your prospects b.) the cost of 3s failing and c) the potential to persuade the opponents to bid a making game I have a great deal of sympathy for the 'BID 4S' brigade after the (extremely poor) 3S bid tho. Any subsequent downside in the final result will be from the first bad bid - which is 3S IMO.

Sorry, Keri does nothing for me. Amuses me why people think it's so good!