Statto

Swap ♣K and ♣Q between the hands (we're told 1♦ only promised 10hcp), and ♠ at trick 4 still works whereas ♥ gives defenders a chance. (Or maybe West sheds ♣K when you ruff the ♣, tho this probably gives the game away anyway.)

Pass, smoothly. Partner can still do something (tho did not act before). If not, defending 4♠ may be best - it could be a value raise with as little as 2 card support. 5♦ second choice (placing partner with some values in a balanced hand) but it doesn't look like the hand I have.

East could possibly be 3244 with West 4513, though the distribution does seem to be fairly marked. You don't want to play a 2nd round of ♥. After ♣A, ♣ ruff, ♥A, next I think small ♠ to the Jack is best. I admit to being influenced by playing it through a DD Solver :) It would make an interesting play problem... B-)

The declarer play to make 8 tricks seems inspired. I doubt many would find it at the table...

We play a natural 1♦ and 12-15 1NT. 2♠ is a range enquiry which might be invitational in NT, weak take-out to a minor, or interested in some slam. 2NT is still free for another use. It seems perfectly playable B-) I think to make best use of an invitational NT bid the 1NT range should be at least as wide as standard. If you can roll 12-13 counts into 1♦..1NT and have 14-15 1NT (or vice versa) then you don't need invitational bids. Maybe a 2½ point range is playable with no invitation available other than by round-the-houses/constructive methods. If a 3 point range didn't need an invitational bid then it would surely have been dispensed with by now in some partnerships, though perhaps it has...

The double was why I'm underleading ♠, expecting to find partner with ♠K, and hoping neither opp is void. ♠8 should clearly call for a ♦ switch.

To defeat the contract. Some passive action seems to be called for, ♣4 is unlikely to give anything away, and may even find declarer with ♣xxx.

Double and hope to take a nice plus if partner has something in ♥ or even just has their bid. If partner pulls to 5m, I don't mind, it should have every chance of making...

Total tricks is at least 19, probably 20, maybe more, so 5♥ seems clear. Not sure we're forced after a mini splinter, but can't imagine often wanting to pass in this situation.

2♠ mini-splinter. Though it allows LHO to double to show ♠. 4♥ if there's no R in the month.

Definitely 2NT then. Even if it was MPs, as there may be a few collecting 300 defending, looking for a thinner game could be value. If pard has ♠AQxxx-♥KQ10xx-♦x-♣xx, 4♠ has good chances and 3NT some. 2♠ looks a bit like a weak preference, so partner might pass with an even better hand. Surely $1 for the 1st trick and $2 for the next (having hoped for a reopening double)? B-)

3♦ is also tactical, but if it were a description, I think it would be more fitting than 2♦. Also, I don't want to start with e.g. 2♦-(x)-p-(2♠) then think "I wish I'd started with 3♦." And pre-empting partner is not a big concern here as I have no interest in playing anywhere other than ♦, so I may as well stake that claim now. Partner should be prepared for a barrage-type bid at these colours, even from 2nd seat. As to having an ace, well it is in my suit :rolleyes:

2♦ seems tame to me. I appear to have an extra ♦ which I don't plan to introduce later B-)

D'oh. Yes of course. I overlooked a ♥ finesse due to not wanting to be in grand on a finesse. But the chance has to be counted, and may take us past the magic 66%, but may also depend on whether we get a trump lead (e.g. stiff ♦J in dummy).

5 playing tricks is about right for a 3 level pre-empt at these colours, tho a stretch in 2nd seat the 987 bolster the suit a bit. I have values in ♦ and nowhere else. I don't even have a 3-card side suit.

I can upgrade later - if P attempts to sign off in 2♥, I can raise to 4♥. Probably not at MPs (but then I'd have opened 1NT), but red at teams wild horses wouldn't stop me. The OP said it's 6+, but I play it as 6+ or 5+ with a 4 card major, which a 2♦ enquiry would discover. Maybe that makes a difference, or maybe it's totally irrelevant. I was thinking of almost exactly that hand (my AKx was in a major) as one where I'd definitely upgrade, as it has much greater playing strength. Maybe I'm in the dark ages but our range for 2♣ is 11-15 (not 10-15).

Surely makes no difference in that respect. Partner is just as likely to hold ♥Q when we have x as they are to hold ♥J when we have Q. It does however improve 2♣, for one thing opps are less likely to compete in ♥.

Agree 6♦ seems to be the a priori best punt (needs ♣Q, ♥A, ♠A+♦J, or some others = >61%), though I'm half expecting nothing to be learned because opps bid up to 4M before my next bid, I still start with the system bid. Assuming 4NT-5♥ also denies ♠A, it needs either ♣Q, ♥K or something good in ♣. 56% for the 1st two, don't think ♣ ruff or dropping is making up the gap tho... I thought you have a method whereby you would later be able to bid 6♣ to ask about ♣Q for a grand...?

It's some way short of 8 playing tricks for a normal upgrade, I'd much rather have K Q in the same suit (+ x) to open 1♣, or that my suit was a major. If opps are white they might be a nuisance after 1♣, otherwise it may be closer, but still 2♣ at IMPs (as voted). After a 2♦ enquiry, 3NT will show exactly this type of hand. At MPs, 1NT looks better - the major suits are 1-no-trumpy, and long running minors are usually good value for NT.

1) 3♦ seems to be some kind of slam try, possibly without ♦, or maybe opener is 4045 and a ♦ slam is staring at us. I haven't shown my excellent 3 card ♠ support yet so I'll do so now, with some trepidation of a misunderstanding later... 2) Partner wouldn't play 7 from 872, so declarer has another ♠. Don't think can cut off the ♠, but ♥A forcing dummy to ruff and lead ♦ looks most attractive, though probably makes no difference. 3) I'd raise an opening 4 card 1♠ with this hand, so I'd bid 2♠ here.

Usually wouldn't raise ♥ here with only 3. Probably most likely to with 2353 and poor ♠, or perhaps 1354 at MPs, white v red. As well as honor location, it may also depend on whether partner is a passed hand (so won't go leaping off to 4♥ when 3NT may be better), the scoring (at MPs 2♥ may more often be preferable to 2m), and/or the vulnerability (might opps still enter the auction? - this cuts both ways).

How does this board work out? BTW, congratulations on the Gold Cup and international selection, now do us proud in - oh, not the Olympics?! - Bali in 2013, or the WMSG in Manchester (TBC?) next August... :D

I double for a ♠ lead. This seems to be the most common treatment of the double of 3NT from the non-lead hand when opps have arrived there directly (in other cases it's lead directing too, but might be dummy's first shown suit, or the highest ranking unshown suit, and if our side have bid may be different still, depending on agreements). If the double is removed by either side, I'm more than happy to bid 4♥.

Maybe it's pronounced "ess ay why see" when children are around...

I don't know why folks are contemplating the Grand when off 1 key card ! ( not knowing which key card is missing ). I was talking in general terms here, as 6♣ in the OP's system would have been a grand try asking for ♣Q. I can recall occasions where having a method to discover whether a specific queen is held would have allowed us to find a grand. Interesting question. I can't recall ever offering (or being offered) a choice of suit slams after an uninterrupted bidding sequence, but them I'm more likely to notice when our methods don't work so well...