dave_beer

2♠. I don't like jump-shifting into a 3-card suit but I don't think I have any choice. 1♠ is not forcing and partner should pass it with any hand that was just trying to escape from 1♦. As little as 5 small ♥ has some play for 4♥.

Why is it a virtual certainty that W has the ♣K? I would consider it at least as likely that W led from a worthless holding and that E has ♣K109. It would be better to say that since there is almost no chance of a squeeze if E holds the ♣K, then we assume that W has it.

There are two relatively recent books by David Bird and Taf Anthias - one on leads against NT contracts and the other on leads against suit contracts. The advice they give is based on simulations of what the opponents' hands could be given the auction and how different leads work with a given hand (or hand type). Their conclusion is that certain leads work better on average than others but that is no guarantee that they will work better on any given hand.

Pass (and lead ♥) = 10, 3♠ = 9, 4♦ = something a lot smaller than 7. How can we belong in either minor at the 4-level if partner is 5=2=3=3?

Partner's double can be one of two hand types depending on how you play it: Action: Partner thinks we have the balance of power but has no obvious bid. That usually means he doesn't have either 4-card ♣ support or 5-card ♦ suit or 6-card ♠ suit. In those cases he can have a singleton ♥ if he is 5=1=4=3 but will usually have a doubleton. If 3♠, 4♣ and ♦ are forcing then responder has to pass or overbid with invitational values. If they are not forcing then he has to either take a unilateral action (bid game) or make an ambiguous cue-bid and hope we muddle through. In this case I pass and lead a trump Takeout: This solves the problem you have if simple rebids by responder are not forcing. Responder can easily have a singleton ♥ and/or 4-card ♣ support. Opener has to show extra values relative to his pass over 2♥ or responder can pass his rebid. In this case I bid 3♠.

When a minor suit is agreed you can play that auctions that would normally be game-forcing are only forcing to 3NT or 4 of the agreed minor. That is a matter of agreement. If I have a hand with 4 cards in one major and a longer unbid minor then there are situations when I want to take the responsive X route because neither 2M nor 3M is right. If I have an a hand that is GF if we have a major suit fit but might not be if we have a minor suit fit and I don't know if 3NT is playable then why should I have to bid 5m when we might be able to figure that it is a favorite to go down?

Any number of ♦ is wrong, so the choice is between responsive X, assuming it doesn't guarantee both majors, and 3♣. 3♣ is forcing to agreement and yes, I may miss 3NT, but at least I will have come close to describing my hand. X followed by 3♦ is at best ambiguous. I think I could have 4 cards in the unbid major (even if it is ♠) and longer ♦ with only invitational or competitive values. If I had equal lengths, I could bid 2♠ over 2♥. That means I may have to follow X with 3♣ which is still ambiguous. Maybe I am saving my ♦ suit for the post-mortem.

Declarer can't make 4♠ on a ♥ lead even if he finesses the ♠9. That only gives him nine tricks and no way get a tenth as long as the defense leads more ♥ whenever it gets in the ♦.

Sort of off-topic but in those rare cases when you have two short suits with a loser in one and not in the other, you should splinter in the one where you have the loser. Whatever you do isn't going to describe your hand but you want partner to have the A to cover the loser and don't much care about the "fragment" without one. You might even get the chance to cue-bid the fragment later.

I disagree. The key to possible slam is being able to take at least 4 ♦ tricks in addition to 6 trumps in responder's hand plus 2 more without having 2 fast losers in the rounded suits. Kxxx-x-AJxx-Axxx (or Kxxx-Axxx-AJxx-x) Kxxx-x-AJxxx-Axx (or Kxxx-Axx-AJxxx-x) Kxxx-Ax-AJxx-Axx (or Kxxx-Axx-AJxx-Ax) The first two pairs of hands are clearly not worth 3♠ in K-S; the 3rd pair might upgrade because almost all of its HCP are in key cards. Once ♠ are raised responder's reevaluates to an opening bid and, if he has a way to make a mild slam try that focuses on being able to take ♦ tricks, then maybe he should make one. I think that 3♦ does that. With any of the example hands opener can almost drive to slam. Once we know about ♦ tricks we have to worry about trump solidity. If opener has ♠KQ I don't think he can have 1st or 2nd round control of both rounded suits and we should be able to find that out; if he has ♠QJ then it is probably a 4 or 6 hand on the ♠ finesse; if he has just the ♠Q then we should stop in 4♠.

Some comments on the auction and your comment about cue-bids: First, I would have rebid 2NT with opener's hand not 3♣. I have no problem raising with only 3-card support but will do so when the other options are flawed. With this shape I would raise with a small doubleton in one of the unbid suits and a hand where I couldn't rebid 2♥. Second, after 3♣ on the actual auction new suits at the 3-level are not necessarily cue-bids but should be assumed to be features/stoppers for 3NT. What is responder supposed to do with xx-xx-KQxx-AKJxx or KJx-xx-xx-AKJxxx? Based on that, I think the auction should start: 1♥-2♣-2NT-3♣. At this point opener can and perhaps should make a key-card ask intending to bid 6♣ if we are missing one or to tell responder that we have all of them and the ♣Q and let him bid the grand if that is enough information.

Partner's auction doesn't make a lot of sense unless he has a void (I would expect it to be in ♥) and two fast losers in one of the other suits. He doesn't want to show his featured side suit because he is afraid it will give the opponents the information they need to beat game. My construction is something like xx-(void)-QJTx-AKJxxxx. So I bid 6♣ hoping we are on the same wavelength.

In an old-fashioned universe: 3♠ = natural slam try with both majors. 4♣ = natural with 5+♣ and unknown 4-card M. If the major is ♥ responder is telling about the potential source of tricks for slam purposes and has to make immediate return to ♥ to clarify. Responder can also raise ♥ directly with no side suit worth showing and no shortness if you also play some kind of splinters.

Or even 3♥X, since I think that PASS is the correct action at equal or favorable vulnerability opposite what could be a relatively balanced hand with at least 9 HCP. Yes it would be nice if all of partner's stuff was in ♣ but he is a strong favorite to have wasted values in ♥.

This is precisely the kind of hand on which I think partner should have made an imperfect negative double. The hand is playable in 3 suits and may even belong in NT but you are committing to ♥. You could have reasonable play for slam on hands where partner has to pass. The disadvantage is that we will not find ♥ if opener has only 3 of them and may not find ♥ if he has a minimum balanced hand with 4 of them.

Pass. If partner has a good hand that could tolerate alternative contracts he could have made an imperfect negative double. On the other hand if just has lots and lots of ♥ he had no choice. I have 4 tricks for him; he may have none for me.

And if he had a slightly different hand he might have bid 4♠ and we regret having made the takeout double.

I think that 2♦ is also forcing but shows a different hand than 3♦. Even if it isn't forcing partner bid only 1♠ and you are inviting game opposite a maximum or a hand improved by ♦ fit.

I think it is very close to a 1♦ overcall and would do that if partner was not a passed hand. Once partner passes he is a lot less likely to have a hand that is going to bid 4♠ when I make a takeout double although he could still have one. Having doubled I like 3NT. 3♦ describes my hand but may force partner to raise ♦ when we belong in 3NT. He may be able to hedge with 3♥ but may have a hand that can't do that. I think 3♦ is forcing since I have shown an old-fashioned strong jump overcall and partner is supposed to have a little somethng for 1♠. I don't like 2♦ because it doesn't show a suit that is this good.

How is partner supposed to know that you have a ♦ void instead of ♦A if he has ♦KQ instead of ♦AH..?

I open 2♣ intending to rebid 2NT over a negative response. Opening 2♣ and rebidding 3♣ requires a slightly better hand. Having opened 1♣ and gotten a 1♥ response I am forced to make some least of evils choice: 3♣: underbid as I would do this without one of the major suit aces 3NT - OK on playing strength but no semblance of ♦ stopper and ♥ support too good (this usually has shortness in ♥) 2♦ - would leave me worrying about who has ♦ stopped for NT purposes 2♠ - could easily get me into trouble if partner raises and I don't have an agreement about immediate removal from ♠ showing I don't really have them. Some people have a gadget for this hand. I have seen 3♦ mentioned but have no details as to follow-ups. Failing that I rebid 2♠ and hope to survive. I don't like jump-shifting in non-suits which is why I chose to open 2♣.

Alternatively you can play Kickback where 4♠ is the key-card ask when ♥ are trump. After the 5♥ response (2 keys + trump Q), a new suit response (as in Kantar's books on RKB) asks for 3rd round control but 5NT substitutes for the suit of the ask. This would also allow you to bid the grand opposite hands like xx-AQxxxx-x-Axxx or xx-AQxxx-x-Axxxx.

Conditions are that the only forcing bids are 2♠ & 3♣. I think that 2♠ is only forcing to 2NT or 3♦, while 3♣ is forcing to 3NT or 4♦. If I am going to force to game, as I am here, then I make the bid that shows where my features are and I would bid 3♣ on the given hand. If I have a game-forcing hand with nothing in either black suit, then I have a problem. My preferred version of inverted minor raises allows me to raise with a 4-card major and longer ♦ but you can do this only if you either play weak NT or do it with game-forcing hands. With other hands that don't have a singleton, I might have made a strong jump shift (if playing them) or I might rebid 4♦ here. I am aware of two approaches that probably do better: "The Bourke Relay" by David Bird & Tim Bourke (Bridge World July 1996) or "TSAR" by Jeff Rubens (Bridge World web-site under Esoterica). They both use the cheapest new suit bid as a relay.

You don't have to cash only one ♥, you just have to lead up to them the 2nd time so if W ruffs it is a loser. You do have to lead ♣ before playing the 2nd ♥ to break the entry for a 2nd ruff and you can't play 2 rounds of ♠ before the 2nd ♥ or E can overruff dummy.

(1) Why didn't I bid 2♥ over 1NT? (2) ♥2. I think it is more important to lead ♥2 against 3NT since opponents may have fewer than 25 or 26 HCP and being trying to run long suit in which case we have to take our tricks before they take theirs.