HighLow21

4♠=10, Pass (intending to bid some number of spades later)=9, 3♠=8, 2♠=0, 1♠=-10. You have a 5-loser hand, the opponents are unlikely to double you because of a spade stack, and if partner has anything in the blacks you might make 4♠X when 6 or 7 of a red suit is on for them. This is not a preempt in my mind as much as a gambling bid: gambling because a lot of the time I'll make the contract and get doubled and make a gigantic swing. I like 4♠ better at IMPs because it's a fairly safe bid and also a fairly profitable bid on an expectation basis. To me the only major negatives are when partner has a ton of red points, or when partner is short spades and they are ruffing partner's high clubs (e.g., 5♣ making with 4♠ in the toilet. Also, technically, this is 2 voids rather than 3. A 3-void hand has a guaranteed grand slam. ;-)

Wouldn't 2♠ be forcing given that it's a reverse? Or is this some weird aspect of 2/1 that I don't fully understand yet?

What is there not to understand? This is a hand about trump control. I have more trumps than East and I have to keep it so that I have more than he does until the A♣ gets knocked out.

I like that treatment. I think I'll add it with trusted partners. And to answer the other post yes, it seems 3H is game-forcing, but I've had too many GF bids dropped in my lifetime. It also could be a 4 OR 5-card heart suit. So I guess the right auction would be: 1NT-2H-2S-3H-3NT-4H-(Pass or 4S) OR 1NT-2H-2S-3H-4(S or H)

Maybe. I would bid game because I play with a lot of randoms and don't want a confused partner to leave me in 3H. :-)

Heck, I would. Partner has great support so I will have play for no heart losers (or 1 heart loser but none in diamonds). If partner has his 4H bid, then 5H will be laydown and it asks exactly the right question to find 6H.

Right, again, I can't see a partnership being sophisticated enough to incorporate this but not have some form of splintering. I see from your edit that you agree. :-)

Partner asked for dummy's first bid suit, hearts. I would lead the JH, personally, hoping to find partner with AQT or AKT.

I realize this is a bit of a hijack, but for all but the most sophisticated partnerships I truly despise minor suit stayman.

You want game forces and Lebensohl and all that in a system without splinters? Hmm.

The best auction would be 1NT, 2H (transfer), 2S, 4H. This shows an insistence on a major suit game and asks partner to choose which major, via pass or 4S.

I agree that 2H is better, but also agree that that's only the case with a weak hand and a fit. Plus, some scientific bidders insist on describing everything. Which is horrible in many cases because we need to get across the most important things first. With a hand worth only one bid, the most important thing to show is support for partner if he has a major. Add so much as an outside A or K or even the spade Q (same shape) and I think 1S followed by 3H is best.

Can you feel the love? I think all your points are fine and I think mine are too.

I don't get bidding 2S. 4H is good enough. There is nothing to suggest that slam is on unless partner can guarantee QH, or six hearts, and one of the minor suit aces. I also disagree that the north hand is too strong for a splinter. I've never heard of such a thing. If splinters were in use I would bid it, and if partner signs off I would try again with a 4S cuebid. Partner should now cuebid his AC and we're in 6H. But since splinters are not allowed, I also don't think it's relevant for this discussion. So, my auction begins 1C-P-1H-2D, 4H-P. If I were South I would then bid 5H obviously asking about a diamond control. Got one. 6H.

To me 3♣ is not a good bid. It implies more playing tricks in a club contract, with or without the 17+ HCP. It also tends to imply an unbalanced hand. Here, we're semi-balanced with 18-19. 2NT rebid. What's the problem? That said, North's failure to pass 3♣ is unforgivably bad. To me it is typical of weak players who REFUSE to believe the evidence of the auction thus far.

I would love it if any expert could offer any cogent argument to me as to why anything other than 1♥ is OK.

Thought about it some more and I seriously think 3D is a mistake here. There are some benefits (namely taking up space and pressuring the opponents) but to me the disadvantages are huge. (1) There is nothing to suggest they will necessarily bid game here. They probably will, but a major suit game is unlikely if partner has some decent spades, which is as likely as not. (Corollary: any major suit game is going to break badly in both majors for them) (2) Partner could have 2 defensive tricks and enable us to beat a game. We could have as much as 20 HCP combined. This hand might even be passed out! (3) We might get creamed in 3D doubled without a game on for them. Also, the marked defensive diamond lead might help them assess their hands better. (4) Opponents tend to bid aggressively Vul at IMPs, and they tend to bid TOO aggressively against preempts. They are more likely to bid and make a thin game by accident because I pushed them so high. (5) If partner is on lead I don't want to demand a diamond lead. It will probably be a waste of timing. Either major could be better. Heck, clubs could be better. (6) If a sacrifice is appropriate, partner will misjudge the number of losers we have in diamonds (as well as the length of my diamonds). It may lead to a sacrifice worse than their partscore, game or slam. So my bid is 2D. Pass is next, followed by a psychic 1D or 1H. The one bid you will NOT see me make is 3D. I would be much more likely to bid 3D with: x JTxx QJT8xx xx Because now I KNOW they have a game or slam and diamonds could be a great sacrifice. Heck I would consider 4D.

You said originally that entries were not a concern... anyway, T to the A is the equivalent of low to the A then running the T if entries and timing are adequate, if I'm not mistaken...?

I would go 3D if I had the T. But it's too rich for me without it, and with only 8HCP. There could be 3 losers in trumps alone.

I take it 1NT was weak? Yuck (my humble opinion). If so, then double should be for takeout but the hand isn't worth a fight. W/E have at most 23 HCP and no guarantee of a fit from East's perspective. He's took weak to show his hand. There is very unlikely to be a game. If 1NT is strong, then I would play doubles by responder as penalty, end of discussion (for me). It's debatable whether the double by the 1NT opener should be for takeout or penalty; I prefer takeout, because partner knows my hand and 1NT opener doesn't know his partner's. But there's a lot to be said for natural bidding (including doubling) after interference of a strong 1NT.

Also I think if the suit were AK876 opposite T54, A then low to the T is best.

Lemme see how accurate this is: 5 tricks are child's play if they divide 3-2. This is 68%. Cashing AK loses to any singleton on either side, however. Either Q9, J9, or QJ will remain for 2 defensive tricks. In theory, a double finesse against QJ is better than the drop, but it fails to pick up some QJ combinations with West, and obviously loses to QJ or QJx with East. If East has QJxx there is no chance. If West has QJ9x(x), leading the T, covered by W/N, then finessing the 8, works. But this is less than just playing for the drop. West has QJ9x(x) only 2% + 14% = 16% of the time. If East has the singleton 9 (3%), leading the T intending to run it forces a cover from West. But it fails to pick up the single Q or J with East. This is 6%. So I would cash the Ace then run the T as a safety play. This makes 5 whenever the suit is split 3-2 OR East has the singleton Q or J. 6% + 68% = 74%.

Ya, the West hand is far too powerful to rebid 2D, especially after partner's spade bid. 2.5 losers outside of spades. Even slam has play. 1♦-1♠, 3♦-3♠, then either game or a slam inquiry.