Edmunte1

Easy pass for me

I think i'm the only warped mind here bidding 4♠ anti-cue-bid :), and i think partner should understand this :) . Engage, commander Data :) !!!!

Agree

My points of view: -3♥ is an opthimistic call with 7 1/2 losers hand, and partner will take too often the wrong decision, throwing us over board; -double may work well in many boards: partner has an average of 4+ spades and may be trapping, our aces and minors suits intermediattes will work well in defense, though partner maybe expects a little more. Even if partner will bid 3NT, opps frequently will have no comunication and our length in hearts will provide the necessary tricks if partner has some liaison in hearts. But of course sometimes it may work out badly. -pass - nobody died from an small gain. I think at table i would have bid pass.

Obvious pass for me

2♠ for me, agree with Michael

Is this, in fact, true? Playing Stayman, when responder has four spades and opener has four hearts, the opponents know about both. Playing Puppet Stayman, in a style where 1NT-2C-2D merely denies a 5-card major, they know about responder's spade suit but they don't know about opener's heart suit. What about normal: 1nt-2c-2d-3nt vs. puppet: 1nt-2c-2d-2h/s-3nt

I was just talking recently with one of the top romanian bidding theorists about a similar position. He suggested a better treatment. Let's just put in partner's place. Consider you pass and partner doesn't hold ♥Ace or singleton, but the King. Let's consider for the sake of discussion that he holds smth like KQxxx Kx J10x xxx. What would he do? He'll bid a clueless 5♠. My friend sugetion was to play xx for showing the Queen and not enough strength for moving on, and a 5NT+ bid with the Ace and grand slam hand. This treatment has some sense for me .

Pros: -can play 2♦ -finds quickly 5-3 fit -can stop in 2♠ with invitational hands Cons: -offers more informations to opponent than regular NT; -bad continuations with 5m+4M; -loses the ability to describe other types of weak/inv hands like 1nt-2c-2d-2h, 1nt-2c-2d-2s.

There are pretty similar strategic aspects in bridge as "pot odds" in poker. In IMP's you can refer to win/loss raport. I define the win/loss raport as R=(IMP won x % expected to win)/(IMP lost X % expected to lose). You should take the offensive action if R>=1 For example you have 3♥ in the hand (there is a big chance of making 3♥) and you think if you should bid game or not. In non vulnerable the win/loss raport will be: Win=420-170=250 -> you win 6 IMP's if the game makes Loss=-140-50=-190 -> you lose 5 IMP's if the game fails For R to be >=1, the expected percentage for bidding the game should be bigger than 5/(5+6)=45,45% In other words if the percentage of success is 45,45% R=1, W=L W=45,45% *6=2,73 L=54,55%*5=2,73 In vulnerable W=620-170=450 -> you win 10 IMP's if the game makes L=-140-100=-240 -> you lose 6 IMP's if the game fails For R to be >=1, the expected percentage for bidding the game should be bigger than 6/(10+6)=37,5% Im matchpoints, you should refer to the concept of par. Par means the best result that can be reached by best bidding and best play. In fact there is more than one par: there is a par for N-S, a par for E-W, an absolute par, and we can talk even about "room par". Many strategic decisions can be taken related with the par. For more informations about this issue i recommend you the book "Winning card play" by Hugh Kelsey.

Agree with defensive lead. Anything may blow a trick, but the heart lead seems to have the smallest chances to do it.

I'll take ♦A and play ♣Q, then ♥K-♥to 9, ♦K(discarding ♣), ♣10. I'll try to pick up 9x or 6x in clubs with East using my 4 entries.

2♣ for me

What Josh and Gonzalo said, adding that 3♠ can be sometimes last landing spot.

I think 3♠ is the first normal option, pass second. Sometimes normal things fail, sometimes badly. That's not a reason to stop making the bid with highest chance of success.

I don't play double as penality on this position. I consider that double should be played as penality as long as it cannot be used in other frequent purposes, and it's obviously not the case here as long as using double as values showing bid here it's a useful tool.

1. Pass or 1♦, close. South was afraid that maybe he won't have a second chance of entering the bidding (i doubt that due to vulnerability), or maybe that a later bid won't express such a big playing potential. 2. All other bids up to 4♦ are forced by the methods. After that both players should try to put some breaks. South succeeded in expressing his shape, and now his low number of controls (3) and minimum strength should make him push the 5♦ break. Anyway, if partner has the right nuts probably he'll push forward. 3. North is guilty too. He has minimum values for slam, and just noticed that his spades are not working. He has good holdings in ♦+♥, but Jxx in clubs means that partner needs a lot of points here. He should have constructed some average hands according with partner's bidding, and would have realised that slam chances are pretty bad. 4♠ is a real bad bid, 5♦ would have been a much better one. 4. It seems that both players have problems in evaluating slam hands. Thus i consider both 50% guilty.

I'll just pass.

My options are: 1. 4♠ 2. Pass 3. 4♠ In real life only bidding on first board was a big winner, as long as 4♥ and 4♠ were both cold. On second 4♥ got punished for -800 (yes, preempts work), and on third 4♠ got doubled for down one (4♥ was down one too)

Here are 3 boards from recent IMP tournaments. On all boards you're South, and all three your courage is tested. How brave are you? 1.[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sk10972h3d92cak1093]133|100|Scoring: IMP (1♥)-pass-(4♥)-?[/hv] 2.[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sk10972h3d92cak1093]133|100|Scoring: IMP (1♥)-pass-(4♥)-?[/hv] 3.[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sk10972h3d92cak1093]133|100|Scoring: IMP (1♥)-pass-(4♥)-?[/hv]

I agree with Frances, this is NOT a B/I problem, but an expert one.

I've played Transfer Lebensohl, as Michael sugested, losing only invitational hand with clubs. I also saw people who play 2NT Leb, 3m - invite, 3♥ forc, slow shows, just not bidding the long minor when forcing.

Reject, completely agree with Adam's post.

Pass

I'd double, followed by 3♥ (forcing).