mikestar13

It's been done--Reese's Little Major from the 1960's was structured precisely this way.

Has no one on this thread some knowledge of bridge history? The rule of 2/3/4 postdates Culbertson's rule of 2 and 3. The latter, which was old news when he published his Blue Book in 1930, suggested overbidding the playing strength of the hand by 2 tricks vulnerable and 3 tricks vulnerable with no consideration of the opponents' vulnerability.

What's the harm? How do play 3♣ here? If it's weak, you may miss a game--how can you be sure that it's their hand when many 2/1 players will open a flat 11 or a shapely 9? (Not saying that's good strategy, but it happens.) If it's intermediate, maybe the solid 5 carder will make up for the sixth trump, but the shape is poor. In either case, why are you worrying about shutting them out? 2♣ over anything but 1♣. I'm interested in JLOGIC's reasons for pass. He is a much better player than me and his idea sounds interesting.

On the first hand, better opening lead methods would tell if partner has the queen at trick one. Playing Journalist, you lead the T from QT9+ but the 9 from T9x+; playing zero or two, you lead the T from T9x+ and the 9 from QT9+. In either case, you know whether the Q is held at trick 1: if partner has the Q, you can lead hearts whether or not the J drops at trick 2 and whether or not you trust partner to drop the Q under your K when it does.

3NT asks little of partner. A single heart stopper and ♦Q makes it a certainty--and the ♦Q may drop even if pard is void. Plus this auction doesn't exactly scream for a heart lead. This is even more obvious if partner is a passed hand: in this case there is no chance of missing a slam. Even wih an unpassed partner, the chance of stealing 3nT when it could be set is greater than the unlikely slam chances.

No way Jose.

Interesting that you say that LOTT is wrong but reach the same conclusions. The law indicates that it is wrong to bid 3 over 3 with less than 17 total trumps--so far as this hand knows there are only eight spades and no reason to think they have nine diamonds; additionally, ♦Q suggests defending--the trick total is likely to be low.

DDD

I assume that you got to 2♠-1, tough luck. But would 1NT have made if partner had left you there? 19 HCP and five card suit will make 1NT most of the time, especially when you have surprise fit.

I like 1NT better than 2♥, but I can accept it. Now it is a totally obvious LOTT decision--we figure partner for five (if he has six he will bid 3♥), giving us eight; and there is no reason to think that they have nine clubs. Further, all adjustment factors suggest the trick total will be less than 16: (1) empty hearts,(2) minor honors in both their suit, (3) that absolutely evil 4-3-3-3 shape. Double might work but is quite a gamble--they might easily have 22 points to our 18 and have better shape than we do. Would 3♣X making 4 really be a surprise if partner is minimum?

1♠ wtp; if playing a system where I can't open this hand at the one 1evel, 3♠. if I open 2♦, 3♠ now: LOTT says I have enough to bid 4♠, but with them passing throughout, I have a fair chance to buy it at three.

3♦. I am tempted to add wtp. To my mind, the only rational alternative is pass--but if they have slam values, they usually won't stop to hit 2♠. No one asked, but if 2♠ were an undisciplined weak two, then it's 3♦ omgwtfp.

South should raise to 4♠. North can't have a balanced 6 count here--he will have a little extra in strength or shape. Particularly, notice that partner's stiff ♦ is gold while he thinks it is wasted--and a stiff is hardly unlikely opposite a six carder.

5♠ is right at MP and an absolute no-brainer at IMPs. There are 21 total trumps and a double fit for both sides. I would think that a double game swing is far more likely than the actual result--and you only need one game to make to show a profit.

If South rebids 3♥ instead of 2♥, North is worth RKCB. 100% South.

1. 3NT. We do very well rejecting a possible 5-3 major fit when both hands are balanced and stoppers are adequate. 2. 3♠. I feel closer to 2♠ than to 4♠, splinter is out of the question. 3. 1♠ is enough for me at these colors, but it depends on your partnership style for preempts.

Agree with pass, though it's close: put ♦K in clubs and it's a clearcut opening. Having passed, this is a limit raise (presumably 3♥), but this hand is closer to 2♠ than 4♠. No alternatives come to mind.

I expect that 4♥ gets reached only when it is opened. Partner is much too strong at these colors.

4♥ unless unfavorable vul, then 3♥.

Both of them are underbidders, South get the majority of the blame as he had the last clear chance.

The correct way to do it depends on your system, but East must bid ♣ at some point. Otherwise West can't know that ♠K is worthless while ♣K is golden.

2♠=limit raise or better in hearts.

Partner is closer to a pass of 1♥ than to 3NT over 2NT; he gambled on you not having this good a hand and he lost, so he must make his weakest possible bid now: 3♥. Did you call the men in the rubber truck for him after the hand? You should.

Hamman's rule: in a competitive auction, if 3NT is a possible bid, it is the best bid.

I like pass and gamble a penalty X if they come in; I might try 3NT if greedy for a swing, but ♥ game is so unlikely that its not worth trying for.