Statto

I'd ruff the ♥ return then run ♦7, covering if West plays the 9. I'm hoping to endplay East somewhat, but what I really want to do is get to table to play ♥.

Ok, I'm sold. After 1♦-1♠;2♣-2♥;3♠, 4♣/4♦ cannot be a cue - it's saying that in light of further information, this is the denomination we should be playing in, having now rejected 3NT; now decide if you want to try for slam (by control-cueing something), or just play in game there. Many thanks to both of you for posting :)

3♠ can be used to show 5 ♠ and 4 ♥; such a hand may be hard to deal with otherwise.

If 3♣ shows something, and ♣ length, then perhaps North should take further action...

Surely you should alert according to the regulations, whatever you think of them, not your opponents (whatever you think of them). I've never heard of a 3+ card suit being alertable; there are plenty of possibilities in old-fashioned systems where it might be a utility bid, e.g. DGR. In any case, in 2/1 if 1♥-1NT;2♣ could be a 2 card suit it should be alerted. Otherwise not (opps got the alert from 1NT, yes?). And to hell with announcements B-)

I don't think it can be here, tho I'm inclined to pass 2NT (an awful contract as it often is) because 3♣ may not be any better, and I don't want to risk partner removing it (except to 3♥), as I'm near minimum for the sandwich overcall. It is rare that we'll find a 3NT game after LHO has opened 1st seat and RHO has found a responding bid. It sometimes happens, but it doesn't look like being this time B-) Edit: changed 'absolute' to 'near'; more than happy with 2♥, but after 2NT with opps now silent, it feels like a misfit in which case we really are minimum. Sure, 3♣ is probably to play, but it gives too much opportunity for partner to upgrade their hand and decide upon 3NT, which they'll be doing on the basis of our ♣ holding being rather better than it is.

I think even in Acol-land against reasonable opps it would tend to be a preemptive raise these days B-) If I understand correctly, you concluded that 6♣ would be better if partner's return ticket is good, but if they're calling with a used tram ticket from 1974, then perhaps not. I think that says something, and thanks for dong the analysis :) I would have, probably wrongly, bid 5♣ even if I knew partner was allowed to travel B-)

But I don't like South's 4♠ bid either, unless it was a non-GF auction and slow arrival hadn't kicked in. If it was GF, then South should be able to predict that their values are working, in particular there is unlikely to be wastage in ♥Axx, so they should make some slam attempt.

I guess, like many things, some aspects here depend on your agreements, styles, and understandings B-) Assuming it's GF, I think a more common usage is to say: We're going to game... but I'm not sure where. If responder wants to say that, and they've already chosen the denomination as one of your minors, they could simply jump to 4♣/4♦ (assuming that's natural, forcing and agreeing suit) instead of 2♥, tho I know this misses out on some information gathering on the way B-) With this hand, responder has various options, including 2NT or 3♦ instead of 2♥; or 3NT over 3♠ after 2♥. It works fine, it's invitational+, and helps find the right contract. I play it this way and have not had a single instance where I've thought "if only our FSF had been GF" :ph34r: The right contract might often be a partscore on a somewhat misfitting hand, so it's a huge advantage on some hands if you can find the right strain of partscore when there is no game. This could be worth 5-6 IMPs. If FSF is not GF, then 3♠ is forcing to at least game, suggesting a slam try in ♠. If FSF is GF, then 3♠ is forcing to at least game, suggesting a slam try in ♠. So I think North should bid 3♠ B-)

And the trumps are not that great either. I think if I was going to bid on I'd choose 3NT.

I think so too, so I'll pass for penalty before bidding 4♥.

Ok, but I see about 7+ playing tricks, and a possible defensive trick (and adjusting for partners ♠ support still only 8/9 playing tricks and a probable defensive trick), so I don't arrive at an ODD of nine, though I agree the hand has a huge ODR making 5♠ standout :)

For a thread (still ongoing): http://www.bridgebas...574-forcing-nt/ :rolleyes:

I've also come across 2♥ as a double negative or a postive response with ♥. Which it is should in theory become clear with subsequent bidding (or lack of), though I don't know the structure, having only encountered it from opponents.

I'm curious, how do you calculate this? I've not come across a numerical scale for ODR, so I'd be interested to learn...

Could 2NT be used as a forcing invitational+ asking bid where opener shows a three card major with a good hand if they have one?

I think any further action should be constructive or competitive, except 3♣ to play with a 6 card suit and no interest in ♥. So perhaps otherwise we let it stand with a stiff, void or small doubleton in ♥, until opps act. Just curious, do you play 2NT as an invitational+ forcing enquiry after this?

I'd have either opened 1♣ or not at all - that way I should either get to show both of my suits, or have more information to "take a view", and won't mislead partner as to the defensive capabilities of my hand. If I'm going to open ♠, I'd do so at a higher level, probably 4♠, since I may never really be able to show the ♣.

The partnership playing it. And I'm not even being flippant here. I've seen arguments that Acol is no good and Std Am or 2/1 or Blue Club or whatever must be better because that's what the world champions have been playing. I don't buy that. That they're very good players who know their system inside out is what makes them world champions.

I'd rather have 1NT to show a 5-5, and cue bids of opps suits to show 4-6 and 6-4 respectively, because the chances of any of those bids being useful naturally is slim. Within the system given, I think the choice is between 2♥ and 2NT. We are vul and the ♥ suit is so much better, so I'll just bid it.

Interesting, I thought limit raises came from Acol, which developed from the 1930s in the UK. In the US in the 1950s the Goren system was popular, where 1M-3M was forcing. Though you may be right about where the term "limit raise" came from... :unsure:

If available, you could transfer to ♥, then ask for keycards in ♥, and if the response showing 3 is 5♣, pass it. If partner shows 4+ keys, bid 6♣ and/or 6NT, depending what 6♣ means and whether partner passes it. If the response showing 3 keys isn't 5♣, this probably won't work B-)

I think that's fine, as long as RHO doesn't have a small ♣...

A ♠ lead would probably devastate our chances of setting up the ♥, and it seems most likely. If partner has pre-empted with an opening hand, I'll find another have words B-)

I'm tempted for a shot at 4♥ or 3NT after the X - I've got overcards, partner has shape / values in the other suits and a max pass, should have some play... Small ♥, what else?