mfa1010

Maybe so because you care so little about right-siding here. I would prefer 30 push-ups to 1N with ♠xxx and would hate it also with Axx, Kxx etc.

Double should be the 15-17 NT or equivalent. It is intolerable to bid 1N here with xxx in spades.

A little better to use the diagram. I misread the auction too. Anyway, I don't see that we can bid anything now.

Very cute. Pretty sure declarer would have had AKJxxxxxxx, A, A, A if it had been me. My reasoning was: I agree with Zel that ♦ is declarer's most likely suit. So that is out. When declarer redoubles then there is a chance he has missorted his red cards, making ♥ second worst ;). Between spades and clubs I thought that the instinct to shoot for a notrump contract is greater with a minor suit than a major suit, and that this might twist the odds a tiny little bid in favour of declarer having a long minor. But I like your inference that partner didn't open a weak 2M, didn't think of that.

♠ > ♣ >> ♥ >>> ♦

3♦ did not deny a stopper, it just showed a minimum hand suitable for playing in diamonds. Over 3♠, fishing, we have a very strong hand in context, so I would bid 4♠ showing shortness. 4♣ is also an option.

It is unclear to me why west would be inclined to cash ♥A holding ♠K. We are playing notrumps. ♥A would still stand up later, if declarer takes a spade finesse. I wouldn't read much in to that inference. On the other hand west has a fine 1♥ overcall with AT9xx and ♠K. I like nate's line, accepting an "unnecessary" spade finesse with ♣Qx dropping in return for good squeeze chances with ♠K onside.

No, I have no other perception of you than being a player with very good judgment.

I have a personal theory that players who currently don't play so much but talks a lot about bridge tend to go conservative. I have no idea if it applies to posters on bbf, since I know few irl. But I have noticed that it seems to apply to some extend to commentators on bbo vugraph. Commentators who I know play little themselves tend generally to advocate a conservative style, calling conservative bids "sensible" and frown at aggressive bids when they lose out. Same thing on our national bridge forum where I know the posters quite well. However so often the aggressive approach is the winning one, because the opponents will have a much harder time when we are aggressive. I think that is easy to forget if one rarely plays. Well, maybe it is just me and my pocket book psychology :rolleyes:

It is a takeout double.

I agree. A big upside with 1N is finding games. At matchpoint we have -200 looming as a disaster, which is just a scratch at imps. I would bid 1N at both scorings though.

Auto 1N for me.

South may be too good to just bid 3♥. After 5♣ there is no force, so the limited hand can't be too good, X just shows good defense.

Agree with mikeh. Pass on the first one, and reopening double on the second one.

Would try a diamond. Friday night ♠J.

Yes, the relay system is mostly after the Grötheim book with small improvements here and there.

Couldn't opener have 7 hcp less for that sequence?

A. 3♠. It is 3♠ or 3♥. 4♣ is a huge overbid with this mirrorish, crappy hand. I know the theory about getting both suits in, but this is too extreme imo. Bidding 4♣ with this little will also kill our slam bidding on other hands, where partner has extras, and we have a real 4♣ bid. B. ♠J. But this is about style I suppose, I can live with the 6. Good hand for partnership discussion. C. I would try a small diamond. As Rainer says, partner might have continued ♥Q, if a diamond shift is wrong.

In my system: 1♣ (precision) - 1♠ (heart positive) 1N (relay) - 4♦ (6-6 minimum hand) 4♥

No we are not. 3N could easily still be the only winning game, if partner's hand is (also) balanced. In the Friday night duplicate this is an easy 3N, but in real bridge I wouldn't do it. Give me a few minor suit quacks to boost partner's stoppers, and I'll be there.

He doesn't know about the ♣J, though, which is useful when ruffing all those spades.

Mine neither, I was just making a general point. Anyway, OP is asking how to bid the club slam. The way to do it is for responder to show his clubs. As the bidding went responder was guessing that 3N was the right contract opposite 18-19 bal. He will be right a lot of the time, but slam is certainly possible so he should involve partner. Responder could perhaps bid a natural 3♣ over 2N, that will make opener unstopable with his max and nothing but working values.

7♣ is bad since it requires trumps 2-2 or diamond length together with the trump length. If responder plans to never show his 5-card support for clubs, then these boards become impossible.

Noone would, but the point is taking the percentage action.

Pass. I prefer to play in clubs.