TWO4BRIDGE

And with NO 3rd Rnd ♥-Ctrl, what is the " negative " reply ? ..... I suppose it would have to be 6S or 6NT ( and the "asker" [ North ] knows there are 12 tricks at 6NT before he "asks" ) .

duh... that's right.... East is end-played in ♣ if he discards the ♠Ace: ♥9 ♣ 10 x So, as you say, he would have to blank the ♣10 ... IF he has it: ♠A ♥9 ♣10

I got my trick #'s incorrect in my post #20 ... fixed now. I think if Rodwell pegged East with the ♠Ace and East didn't discard it right after Rodwell discarded the ♠ K from dummy ( North ), then failure to do so, and previously discarding a ♣ instead, seems a "mistake" by East..... unless East doesn't know if Rodwell has the ♠3 or not in hand ???? If East had ♣ 10 x , then his final last 3 cards ( after discarding the ♠Ace ) could have been : ♥9 ♣10 x

I too think the ♣3 discard by East was unusual ( at trick 7 trick 8 ) when East had a "safe" discard of one of the ♥. Of course the lead of the ♦K next ( trick 8 trick 9 ) "forces" East to then discard a ♣ coming down to the 3 card ending . EDIT: This is where East discards the ♠Q, now coming down to 4 cards which could be: ♠A ♥9 ♣10 x Now on trick 10, Declarer leading the good ♦9, and discarding the ♠K, East could safely discard the ♠Ace ( if he has ♣10 x; but since he doesn't discard the ♠Ace but a ♣ instead, that seems to be the clue. [ End of EDIT ] . So, Rodwell's thinking goes: Which discard scenario is more likely for East holding the stiff ♣10. I think I remember watching this hand ( can't remember one day from the next ) and was amazed he found the ♣10.

Win; low ♦ toward Q .

Perfect ! ( Now I know why you were voted best theorist by BBO ) . What better use for 2NT than for Responder to agree that there is an 8+ card fit ( Responder holding MORE than 4 cards M ). If Responder only had 4 cards M and invitational values s/he could have bid 2NT directly over 1NT: 1m - 1M 1NT - 2NT Now my question is should 2NT ( after NMF and a fit ) show the GF or 3M be forcing ( slammish as per kenRex .. ) as in my original auction ? Because it has been put to me by an expert that an invitational bid is needed by Responder ( after NMF ) to show 5 cards M and an say an 11 count. So, maybe 2NT might be better used for the invitational hand with a fit and 3H as GF , asking for cuebids. Summary: 1m - 1M 1NT - 3H = 6 card M, invite 1m - 1M 1NT - 2om! ( NMF ) 2M - 2NT! = 5 card M, invite 1m - 1M 1NT - 2NT = 4 card M, invite 1m - 1M 1NT - 2om! ( NMF ) 2M - 3M! = 5+ card M, slammish, commence cuebidding

1m - 1M 1NT - 2om 2M ( 3 cards M ) - 3M = forcing or just invitational ? ? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - m = minor om = other minor M = Major - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I think 3M is forcing showing at least 5 cards M because an invitational sequence would go: 1m - 1M 1NT - 3M Also, I thought that ANY Responder rebid that goes BEYOND 2NT AFTER NMF is forcing. However, I can't find any examples on the above NMF sequence in the few references that I have. I also think that if 3M is non-forcing after NMF , the problem could be solved with 2-way check-back where 2C! ( always ) are NF or invite auctions and 2D! ( always ) are GF: 1m - 1M 1NT - 2D! 2M - 3M ( GF, asking for cuebids ) What say you ?

@ 32519 Looks like I don't agree with Paul Thurston. 1D - 2C! (2/1 GF ... let's assume at least 5 cards ) 2D - 2H/2S are NOT considered reverses as far as strength is concerned . I agree with you... there would be a problem if Responder could not show his 4 card Major unless reverse strength.

For one thing, if you used 2NT! as some kind of GF raise w/4+ card support, then Opener would be able to show ♦-shortness on the 3-level instead of the 4-level: 1S - 2NT! 3D! - now you can start cuebidding on the 3-level : 3D! - 3H! 3NT! - 4S ( denying ♣-Ctrl or ♦-Ace, or another ♥-Ctrl ) PASS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Also, the reply to the ♠Q-ask with NO outside King is 5NT! , but it doesn't keep you out of slam since you are too high already.

If I definitely have a GF hand with a 4 card ♣ suit and 4 card Major, I'll show the GF immediately with a 2C Response ( not denying a 4 card Major ). Does your source mention that Opener's 1st priority is to rebid 2D with 5+ cards ? (... not denying a 4 card Major ) . If Opener bids 2H/2S instead, it shows 4 cards M and less than 5 cards ♦ . Even after a 2D rebid, you still have the rest of the 2-level to uncover a 4-4 Major fit if it exists. In this day and age of opening "all elevens" ( and sometimes less ), I'm wary of making a GF w/12 ( heck even 13 may not be enough for game ), but I'd still bid 2NT w/12 and 3NT w/ good 13 .

Thx... I overlooked the RDBL.

I have a feeling from the replies that I should be playing TRANSFERS over a T/O DBL . Looks like all that is given up is the little used ( I think ) natural 1NT bid.

I like to bid a slam as much as anybody, but I'm not sure I'd get there on this one. I do think opener needs to show his solid ( or near solid ) ♥ suit, though, with a 3H-jump over the 2/1 GF : 1H - 2C! ( 2/1 GF ) 3H! - 3S ( cue ) 4C ( cue, any of top 3 in partner's suit ) - ?? ( ask RKC for ♥ ) ?? ( showing 2 + ♥Q ) - ?? ( K-ask ) 6H ( no outside K's ): Responder not too happy with Opener's no-show of kings ....

1H - ( DBL ) - ?? ♠A J x ♥A 9 x ♦K ♣J T x x x x If you don't play Bromad, how do you show this hand ? [ I consider it a 3 card limit raise ] . It is my understanding that: 1) a new suit on the 2-level is non-forcing: 1H - ( DBL ) - 2C/2D/2H are not forcing I consider: 1H - ( DBL ) - 3H as preemptive . 2) a RDBL shows 10+, but denies a fit; 3) Unfortunately, the Jordan-2NT is a 4 card limit raise. 4) Likewise a fit-jump is a 4 card raise . Are you stuck with the RDBL and then raise ?

Yes, you all got it.... the Q is correct. It's "damned if you do and damned if you don't" for East. If East takes or ducks, you have a 2nd ♠ stop with the tempo to knock out the ♣Ace .

Although the 1C bid could be anything, how often would you lead INTO the Club bidder holding the ♣King ?

5♣

I have to admit that I found this interesting ( from a newspaper bridge column today ). Maybe it is too easy for you, but I had to think about it for awhile . West North East South - - 1D ( 1S ) 1NT ( p ) 3NT all pass The ♠ 7 is led. You can get 9 tricks including ♣ and one ♠.. but the ♣ Ace is out ( and West has it ) . Which card do you play from dummy ? Q, 10, or 6 ? [hv=pc=n&s=sk52hdc&w=s73hdc&n=sqt6hdc&e=saj984hdc]399|300[/hv]

When Opener has denied a 4 card Major, that means he has at least 7 cards in the minors. I've always thought it is better to lead a major in this case. Sooo, I'll lead my 4th best ♠. If we can take 3 tricks in ♠, my 2 red Kings may prove to be the set. If I initially lead a 4th best ♦, the tempo may be lost for clearing the ♠ as well as possibly providing an immediate 2nd ♦ trick to Declarer. [ Declarer might take 5c, 2d, and 2 major Aces ] .

Does the following look familiar? It is from a recent post ( Expert Class forum ) : http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/index.php?app=forums&module=post&section=post&do=reply_post&f=6&t=54311&qpid=650640

Part of the Neg-DBL convention is to DBL when partner has NOT made a Neg-DBL... However, at these colors, if pard does have a trump stack, do you really think you can make 800 at 1♠X ( 10 tricks for your side ) because you probably have missed a Vul game.

I think the hand is at least worth game in ♥, and since there is room below game to make a more descriptive raise by a passed hand, I'll make a fit-showing-jump of 4D!

With no inferences, the Bridge Encyclopedia states that " the finesse is a 50% probability of success holding 8 cards, while the drop has a 53% holding 9 cards ".

Since in 2/1, a 3 card limit raise is 8,9 exact, then pard was too strong for 2H ( I agree with mfa1010 ) . Had it gone: ( p ) - 1H - ( p ) - 1NTF ( p ) - 2C - ( p ) - ?? ( with the double-fit, he might just bid 4H now )

Why didn't you lose 4 tricks : 2s, 1h, 1d