S2000magic

The choices are problematic because they're not mutually exclusive: if you bid 2♥ you don't double (answers 2 & 3); if you do something else you don't double (answers 2 & 4).

3♠. A good rule of thumb over preempts is to discount your first two tricks (or 6 - 8 points), assuming that partner's already bid those values. After deducting the average of 7 points I have nothing but a crummy 5-card spade suit.

At the two level, this is a bit light for a negative double. I pass, unhappily.

Chuck Goren.

More likely 13-18 HCP. Anything stronger would require a strong jump shift (19+ HCP). It's not at all likely that it's 13-18 HCP. I looked at my copy of Goren's Bridge Complete before I wrote my answer; it's 13 - 16 points, not 13 - 18. What did responder do to raise opener with 17-18 HCP? ". . . hands that are valued at 17 and 18 points in support of partner require delicate treatment. While they are not strong enough for a jump shift, they are nevertheless too strong for the double raise, and their strength must be described in a series of bids. Best results will usually be obtained by bidding two suits before supporting partner's bid."

But it is a relevant authority for "once upon a time", to which I was responding.

More likely 13-18 HCP. Anything stronger would require a strong jump shift (19+ HCP). It's not at all likely that it's 13-18 HCP. I looked at my copy of Goren's Bridge Complete before I wrote my answer; it's 13 - 16 points, not 13 - 18. What did responder do to raise opener with 17-18 HCP? I don't recall. What responder didn't do was make a double raise.

More likely 13-18 HCP. Anything stronger would require a strong jump shift (19+ HCP). It's not at all likely that it's 13-18 HCP. I looked at my copy of Goren's Bridge Complete before I wrote my answer; it's 13 - 16 points, not 13 - 18.

The word "forcing" in "forcing Stayman" doesn't apply to the 2♣ bid; it applies to the final bid in these sequences: 1NT - 2♣ 2♦ - 2♥ and 1NT - 2♣ 2♦ - 2♠ If you agree that the final bid in each of these sequences is nonforcing, you're playing "nonforcing Stayman"; if you agree that the final bid in these sequences is forcing, you're playing "forcing Stayman".

I think that the phrase may have come into being in the US. Once upon a time, double raises were GF and unlimited. I don't recall double raises (of a major suit) ever being unlimited; in Goren, for example, they were game-forcing and showed 13 - 16 points.

East: 80% West: 0% The universe: 20% East should bid (at least) 3♠ over 3♦; 4♠ wouldn't be out of line. Both sides have undisclosed double fits, so LOTT doesn't apply (without adjustments that the players cannot know are necessary); that's the universe's 20%.

deleted.

2♦; partner's asked me to choose a red suit; I don't really care, and I don't want to encourage partner.

I chose 4NT for minors, but I'd rather have 3NT for minors available. Partner's 5=2=3=3 or 5=1=4=3 or 5=1=3=4 or, possibly, 6=1=3=3 (though he might have bid 3♠ with a 6-bagger, instead of doubling); I love this hand.

Partner would have passed with even a decent 12 or 13 points, so it makes sense to do something here. If you double, he's unlikely to bid spades, and spades are likely to be your best route to game. I'd bid 4♠.

I believe that you're correct. My copy of Alfred Sheinwold's Five Weeks to Winning Bridge describes five-card majors in the chapter on Modern Bidding Conventions, and mentions the one no-trump forcing treatment. It was published in 1960, and five-card majors (with the forcing NT) were recommended to all players. At the time of publication, five-card majors and the forcing NT had already been around for quite a while, and were key in Roth-Stone.

Chose North as your partner? ;) I agree with ahydra that 2NT is a better first bid than 2♠ (see this thread), 2♠ is certainly reasonable. I disagree that it should show 5 spades; change your hand to: ♠ A Q x x ♥ x x x ♦ A x x ♣ x x x and 2♠ is the only sensible way to describe this hand, despite the 4-card suit. aguahombre's right: your bidding was fine, and your partner's probably never had a partner bid correctly.

In his book Doubles for Takeout, Pentalties and Profit, Bob Ewen recommends 7-10 HPC for 1NT and 11-13 HCP for 2NT; by extrapolation, I'd imagine he'd say 14-16 HCP for 3NT. I'd say that anything close to these ranges is probably playable; what's most important is that you and your partner agree on the ranges.

Such good advice! There are a few players I know who would benefit from heeding it.

If the person who needed to find the play were the one asking, I would consider it a request for a lesson, and explain to them how to recognize the situation. But in this case, since it was their partner you have to be diplomatic. Which may entail a white lie. Excellent points all around.

I do. When I get back to my apartment tonight I'll post it. (I don't know how to use the really cool hand display gadget here. If you do, I'd appreciate a PM with a primer. Thanks!)

That'a a good response in general. (Here, it's a lie, alas: the ♠ 10 stands out.)

What would it be if you were playing with Ken: a transfer to diamonds? (To ensure that partner is declarer.) As for the rest of the world: cuebid.

This may well be ACBL where many clubs do not have pre-dealt hands or hand records. It was ACBL. I know. Double dummy (as the hand record shows), I make three notrump. The opening lead would be . . . you guessed it! . . . the ♠ 10, so they get their four spade tricks, but I drop the doubleton ♣ Q offside.

Live.