HighLow21

Think of it this way --> I was trying to send you a message by specifically not responding to you because you have repeatedly demonstrated to me with your arrogant, dismissive, flippant comments towards me that one person who does NOT merit a response from me is you. And now, this is the last time I will reply to anything you have to say. Sorry, Phil, for hijacking your post. Now, back to the hand.

I like all of your reasoning. I still like 3♠, but only because I seem to have an aversion to trying anything new. ;)

Well you have to admit, I was dead on about this hand, albeit luckily, but I'm glad to see my 6D bid was the right one! :-)

Several options: 1. 6♦, pick a red slam. 2. Which ever convention is ace-asking for you in this auction. I would prefer 4♣, which I assume would have to be Gerber here. If partner has two, then a diamond king inquiry. 3. 6NT, semi-gambling. Since this is teams, I don't care for this one. Personally I like (1) the best, because partner is very unlikely to hold all 3 cards I need to bid a grand. It would be unfortunate if he had only one.

Good one. I would do the chicken dance, but I'm not sure how that would help the auction. I would guess 4♦ if that is invitational or 3♦ if that were stronger than 4♦. Or I might take a view and bid 5♦. After all, I have strong support and controls in each side suit.

I like it. But then how do you show an actual splinter?

UGGH. ONE of these days Mikeh is going to say something that isn't spot-on, but I'm still waiting for that day to come.

100% agreed. And by the way, 3♠ is my vote for correct call, not 4♠, because in my mind this hand is not strong enough to demand game opposite a perfect minimum response. But it is enough to strongly invite it and responder should then find 4♠. I realize I am "late-intermediate" to "early-advanced," but I'd love to hear how closely my opinions align with those of legitimate experts. Anyway, the only potential question in my mind that is interesting to discuss is south's first rebid (and whether north should bid game if south invites it).

Umm, 6♦?

18 reasons to take out of 3nt and not one to leave it in. If you think passing 3nt is a potential matchpoint victory, you need your head examined.

Hey! Another hand showcasing the occasional ridiculousness of 2/1.

I rarely use language like this here, but 2NT rebid by South is selfish, dangerous, and absurd. With 2 half-stoppers in the minors and a major suit fit, playing the hand in NT is ridiculous.

In fact, a good defender as West would probably cough up 6♥ by South on the theory that an aggressive opening lead is called for and clubs is the best aggressive lead. Club ruff, spade ruff, hearts from the top, planning to rise A♦ if one is returned once A♥ is taken; draw trumps, run spades, making 6 easily.

My vote was 4♥, which as I stated originally I thought should be natural, for the exact reason that this hand probably belongs in a major (not NT) and it's either hearts or spades. Both games make and the heart slam is fair. it makes on anything but a diamond lead, and even then, it still has misdefence chances.

And with regards to part A, relying on a misdefense is just bad strategy. Anyway we agree that 3NT isn't a good call in our opinions. I would guess that 4S and 4H are both about 90% to make and 3NT may be as low as 60%. And the percentage of hands where 3NT makes and 4(major) doesn't is close to zero, IMO.

True, and in most cases your trick count in NT and ♠ will be the same. However if one of the red suits is unstopped or only stopped once, the trick tally in spades might be much higher than in NT. Just look at AKQJxxx xx x KQx opposite the South hand given. The opponents could easily rattle off 4-5 diamonds in NT to start, plus the heart ace, while there are 11 tricks on top in spades on reasonable major suit breaks. Even if one of the majors is 5-1, the spade game makes. Sure, you can construct South hands where there are exactly 9 tricks in both NT and spades, but at IMPS, clearly 4♠ is more likely to make. (The 10-point score difference in the scenario that there are as many NT tricks as tricks in spades may swing the decision to passing out 3NT.) Here's my problem with 3NT, though: since most of North's hands worthy of a 3S rebid will have at least 7 HCP in spades, there may well be entry trouble to North's hand to establish and run the spades. Even though partner's strength is likely concentrated in the suit that we are void, isn't it still usually better to play a powerful misfit in a suit? Especially when it could be that EITHER major is a sufficient trump suit opposite little or no support? For me, 4H > 4S > 3N. If I reverse the red suits, then 4S > 3N > 4D > 4H.

Sounds like the add-on upgrades the modem into a dual-purpose device: both modem AND wireless router.

Note how much easier the bidding on this hand is with SAYC. (I'm going to get flak for this...)

Sounds like a dream partner, relative to some that I've had...

Because it's more convenient than anything.

Who the heck would bid 6D?? As long as partner has at least 2 hearts or A♥ blank, 4H should make. I'm worried about getting rid of my diamond losers, and entries to dummy, but I'll just have to wait to see his hand. If he rebid 4S I'm passing like a shot.

Only if HCP count is a good basis for knowing how to respond, which it isn't in many cases. Obviously the bid will include a decent to great 6-card suit, but it tells you absolutely nothing about the rest of the bidder's shape, where his side values are, and therefore which shortness and non-Ace honors in responder's hand are valuable and which ones are worthless. If you've got a maximum pass with aces and/or a side suit with a source of tricks and/or great support and a ruffing value, fine. But this treatment won't help much if some or all of these aren't the case, e.g., which of these hands will make a game: Responder Hand 1: KTx♠ J8♥ A7xxx♦ JT3♣ Responder Hand 2: A7xxx♠ J8♥ KTx♦ JT3♣ Does the 2♥ opener have: Opener Hand 1: QJ8♠ KQT954♥ xx♦ AK♣ or Opener Hand 2: xx♠ KQT954♥ QJ8♦ AK♣ ? R/O Hands 1 and R/O Hands 2 when paired will nearly always make game, but Pair R1 with O2 or vice versa, and game depends on finesses and/or guessing and/or some luck.

Point granted. Replace "the best" with "one of the best" or "a good" or some such synonymous phrase.

I tend to agree with you Wyman; this seemed like a different situation. I had already played 5 or so hands against this guy and he seemed very nice; there had been some pleasant post-mortem discussion prior to this hand. He also was at least Intermediate skill based on his prior play and bidding. So I thought I'd give it a stab because he obviously has a hole or two in his understanding of the game (don't we all). He didn't respond kindly to it, but people tend not to when they blow 12 IMPs on this type of hand. Anyway he turned into a bit of a jerk from this point forward, as you can imagine, but not as bad as so many other people would. Besides: I'm a bit militant on this. I won't take it very kindly if people start bawling their partner out even when they're right. But if they do so when they are DEAD WRONG, you can rest assured I'm going to say something...

I knew Patrice O'Neal, just like I knew Greg Giraldo, from my days scouting the comedy club circuit in NYC. Both guys were really nice and extremely funny, and both died way too young. Such a shame...